Presidential Election Political Smackdown FFA

[WestSideBilly]

Crashing 3 planes is not an accident. But yes, this is contextual as a backdrop. Using your own standard, I see this:

A) Lousy pilot. Irrelevant today unless he tries to fly AF1.
B) Arrogant. Kinda goes with the territory (pilot AND politician). No big deal.
C) Frequent abuse of power. Very relevant, because it doesn't seem to stop with his return from Hanoi. He's mostly played by the rules since the Keating incident, but it's hard to imagine that 50 years of abusing your last name and family contacts isn't part of your core being.
D) Womanizer. Relevant if you want to talk about moral issues and legislate morality. Otherwise, between him, his family, and his choice of deity.

Would it change my vote if I was on the fence? Not really.

[rose-colored-coolaid]

[Charles Dean]

And again, she's the gift that keeps on giving:
http://donklephant.com/2008/10/13/more- ... oopergate/

The ethics board that the McCain camp was trying to pawn off the Troopergate thing to is taking them up on the offer and have hired an prosecutor.

That's OK. Once she gets fined and found that she broke ethics laws by this board, she'll just claim once again that the report vindicated her, and that the fine she'll be getting is actually a dividend check that Alaska owes her.

[rose-colored-coolaid]

[rose-colored-coolaid]

This might sound naive, but how damaging do people really believe ACORN is? I'm hoping for a fair answer on this, based on these facts (please correct any if they are wrong as I truly am not particularly knowledgeable about ACORN).

1) Clearly, some voter registration errors, which look similar to voter fraud, have happened due to ACORN. This is very bad.
2) It's difficult to tell from the news just how widespread these errors are.
3) It's a positive thing anytime more people vote, even if they all disagree with me.
4) ACORN appears to be doing a valuable service in reaching people who might typically blow off their voting rights (responsibilities?).
5) ACORN receives some government funding.

My take, is that the typical ACORN member is probably someone who wants to see more "disadvantaged people" voting, and preferably voting democrat. I see nothing wrong with that (or else we must rise against churches which are pro-republican for equal treatment). What might be wrong is if they are not-so-secretly a working for the democrats while receiving nonpartisan government funding; however, this is not so different (except ACORN's explicit goal of driving out votes) than Bush's grants of government funding to faith based organizations.

My take (so far), is that the voter registration errors are likely due to incompetence rather than intentional fraud. I see it as loosely organized, and I imagine the following happening.

ACORN#1 : You registered to vote?
DUDE#1 : Don't know.
ACORN#1 : Let's get you registered then (helps dude fill out paperwork and mails it in for him)
...
ACORN#2 : You registered to vote?
DUDE#1 (same guy) : Don't know.
ACORN#2 : Let's...

So, the typical Palin republican* response - outrage - appears to be at least overblown, and probably hypocritical to me. But the typical democrat response of paying little heed to the question seems a little too much like a neocon or Palin style of move, which is definitely cynical and also a little hypocritical.

[Robroy]

[Robroy]

[Robroy]

[Robroy]

[WestSideBilly]

RCC, I have some friends in battleground states (CO and OH in this case) and what you suggested seems to hit the mark. One noted that he had 3 Obama campaigners and 2 ACORN workers visit him in one week. Another had several "get out the vote" people show up in one day (they didn't identify themselves as affiliated to a campaign or ACORN). That seems ripe for potential to have multiple voter registrations.

[Robroy]

RCC, this Acorn thing is the biggest voter fraud scam to be uncovered in the history of politics. The number of states involved, the law enforcement agencies involved, the sheer volume of ALREADY UNCOVERED fraud is unprecedented by several magnitudes. It is a seriously big deal.

But I also must differ with you on a few things.

You put together this list:
1) Clearly, some voter registration errors, which look similar to voter fraud, have happened due to ACORN. This is very bad.
2) It's difficult to tell from the news just how widespread these errors are.
3) It's a positive thing anytime more people vote, even if they all disagree with me.
4) ACORN appears to be doing a valuable service in reaching people who might typically blow off their voting rights (responsibilities?).
5) ACORN receives some government funding.

Regarding number 1 and 5, I agree.

Regarding number 2, I strongly disagree. As someone who does not have TV, I get LOTS of information about this from various internet and print sources. It is HUGE and there is a plethora of information down to specific cases, number of fraudulent registrations, locations, names, etc. Again, it is massive.

Regarding number 3, I do NOT think it is a positive thing that more people vote. I think only informed voters should vote. Then, if their opinion is different than mine that is still a good thing. That audio of people "on the street" in Harlem should scare people on BOTH sides of this issue. Government is too important to be destroyed by people who vote with no knowledge of what they are voting for.

Regarding number 4, I also disagree. I WANT people who would blow off their "voting responsibilities" to not vote. It is not responsible to vote when you are not informed about the thing on which you are voting. The responsible thing to do is be an informed voter and then vote. The second most responsible thing to do is not vote. The least responsible thing to do is to vote uninformed. I don't want uninformed people taking part in decisions that affect me and the lives of my children. This is serious. Countries have gone to war over bad decisions by uneducated voters.

The only people I want to vote are those that are willing to put some effort into it - that understand the importance on themselves and future generations of the positions and qualifications of the various candidates and the consequences of the initiatives. Uninformed voters are the cancer that will (and already is) destroy this nation. In the long run it is inevitable of course. Democracy always collapses in the end, but it can be a positive thing for a while.

[Robroy]

One thing. I would like to change the voting laws as follows: You can only vote if you actually paid federal taxes and those taxes exceeded any money you received directly from the government.

[rose-colored-coolaid]

[rose-colored-coolaid]

[Robroy]