Your Republican Primary Vote - Dec 27

[cybrsage]

Feel free to provide even one scintilla of proof that President Obama was personally involved in using fake signatures to get his name on the ballot, or stop throwing that particular tidbit into every discussion despite its falsity and obvious irrelevance. It's only alleged to have happened in one district, in one state, and there is no reason to believe the President had anything to do with it.

Never claimed he personally signed anything, but you cannot deny false signatures were used to get him on the ballot....well, you can, but then you are calling this guy a liar:

A former Democratic governor of Indiana says a petition to place Barack Obama on the state ballot during the 2008 Democratic presidential primary is not his, raising the question of voter fraud. Former Governor Joe Kernan, a Democrat, replied, “No, not at all,” when the South Bend (Indiana) Tribune asked if the signature, which helped qualify Obama for the ballot, belonged to him.

http://floydreports.com/election-fraud-watch-did-obama-submit-phony-ballot-petitions-in-2008/

It is true that it was done, you simply cannot say it did not happen. Obama, who is usually pretty glib about spouting off about things (at least if it involves a white police officer doing his job) is extremely silent on this issue. At least, if he has condemned the fraud that helped him become president, I have not seen it anywhere.

Maybe you can point it out to me?

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Never claimed he personally signed anything, but you cannot deny false signatures were used to get him on the ballot....well, you can, but then you are calling this guy a liar:


http://floydreports.com/election-fraud-watch-did-obama-submit-phony-ballot-petitions-in-2008/

It is true that it was done, you simply cannot say it did not happen. Obama, who is usually pretty glib about spouting off about things (at least if it involves a white police officer doing his job) is extremely silent on this issue. At least, if he has condemned the fraud that helped him become president, I have not seen it anywhere.

Maybe you can point it out to me?

It most certainly is not clear that this happened, regardless of what "floydreports" says - there has been no trial nor even any sworn testimony on the subject.

What possible benefit could the President derive from speaking out about this? He presumably had nothing to do with this extremely isolated incident (note that the article references purportedly false signatures were also collected on behalf of Hillary Clinton), and any comment by a President about a potential law enforcement matter could be construed as overreaching. Moreover, it would just draw attention to the specter of potential election fraud when he is obviously up for re-election next year.

Ultimately, there is no basis on which to conclude that this "fraud" (if that's what it was) made any difference in the 2008 elections anyway. Indiana is a late, open primary and Obama narrowly lost the state as a whole, but got about half the delegates. Obviously within a few weeks of the primary, he had most of the pledged superdelegates and Clinton had conceded. As you know full well, he won the general election handily.

This effort of yours to discredit the President based on what may have happened in a single district of a not-particularly-important primary state is as stupid as the birther controversy. What's more, it is completely, 100% irrelevant to the topic at hand.

By the way, that is some credible news source you've cited to. Some of their other recent headlines:

Did Holder Create OKC Bombing to Steal Americans’ Liberty?

Justice Dept.: Civil Rights for Blacks Means They Vote for Democrats

Video: Bozell, Obama Looks Like “A Skinny Ghetto Crackhead”

Video: Obama’s $15 a Gallon Fuel

Obama Admin: Taliban Isn’t the Enemy, so Let’s Fund Al-Qaeda!

Seriously - you are making more than 50 posts of day of this quality? Get it together man!

 

[davmat787]

I voted for her because she's got skillz....

Judging by the prices above her shoulder, she splurged for the foot long schlong. :thumbsup:

 

[Spikesoldier]

I voted for her because she's got skillz....

lol at creepy guy in bottom left

 

[davmat787]

Uber's Bachman pic reminded me of this oldie but goodie:

 

[micrometers]

There's really no contest here -- Romney is the one.

Basically, the man has led an exemplary life and has the right education and temperament for the job.

Gingrich is an intriguing figure in a way and he is very much like Winston Churchill, that is undisciplined and all over the map but also in many ways visionary and brilliant even. I especially like how he envisions space exploration as leading to a new age of human innovation -- which IMO is forward looking and optimistic. But -- he does have proven temperament issues in the past and is arguably corrupt due to Fannie Mae money. Though, to be fair, other congressional leaders have done the same, like Dick Gephardt.

Ron Paul isn't really worth considering. Libertarianism is really more about emotional statements than any measured or thought-out policy stances.

 

[cybrsage]

It most certainly is not clear that this happened, regardless of what "floydreports" says - there has been no trial nor even any sworn testimony on the subject.

It would have been much faster if you simply said "Yes, I am calling Former Governor Joe Kernan a liar."

Simple, easy, yet you did not do it for some reason. Why did you not say Former Governor Joe Kernan is a liar? He says the signature found on the Obama ballot petition is not his. You say it is not clear people forged signatures. Former Governor Joe Kernan says it is clear to him someone forged his signature.

Are you willing to put your money where your foot is (your mouth) and say Former Governor Joe Kernan is a liar, or are you going to recant and say it is obvious there are forged signatures? You really cannot have it both ways, no matter how much you want to.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

It would have been much faster if you simply said "Yes, I am calling Former Governor Joe Kernan a liar."

Simple, easy, yet you did not do it for some reason. Why did you not say Former Governor Joe Kernan is a liar? He says the signature found on the Obama ballot petition is not his. You say it is not clear people forged signatures. Former Governor Joe Kernan says it is clear to him someone forged his signature.

Are you willing to put your money where your foot is (your mouth) and say Former Governor Joe Kernan is a liar, or are you going to recant and say it is obvious there are forged signatures? You really cannot have it both ways, no matter how much you want to.

How would I know if he's a liar? You obviously don't, and can't know either. You are choosing to believe him because you want this story to be true, since you believe it reflects poorly on the President. In any case you have not identified any reason to think the President had anything to do with any of this, nor that this "fraud," if that's what occurred, made a whit of difference in the election.

More critically (to my central point), none of this has anything to do with the topic at hand - these posts are just chaff about an irrelevant subject you keep raising again and again, despite its irrelevance.

So do you also think Eric Holder orchestrated the OKC bombing?

 

[cybrsage]

How would I know if he's a liar? You obviously don't, and can't know either.

Wow, talk about spinning to try to get out of this!

I am choosing to not call him a liar. You are absolutely correct. I cannot find any reason to doubt the truthfulness of his very clear statement.

OK...lets try it again.

Former Governor Joe Kernan says it is clear there is voter fraud because someone forged his signature. For you to say it is not clear there is voter fraud you must say that Former Governor Joe Kernan is lying about his signature being forged.

He is either telling the truth or he is lying. He is positive it is not his signature. He is very adamant he did not sign it. Since he is a democratic governor, you cannot claim he is being partisan about it to hurt the DNC...him shutting up would be in his own party's best interest.

So for you to say it is not clear, you must also say Former Governor Joe Kernan is a liar, since he says it is clear.

While the cake is not a lie, you certainly still cannot both eat it and still have it.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Wow, talk about spinning to try to get out of this!

OK...lets try it again.

Former Governor Joe Kernan says it is clear there is voter fraud because someone forged his signature. For you to say it is not clear there is voter fraud you must say that Former Governor Joe Kernan is lying about his signature being forged.

He is either telling the truth or he is lying. He is positive it is not his signature. He is very adamant he did not sign it. Since he is a democratic governor, you cannot claim he is being partisan about it to hurt the DNC...him shutting up would be in his own party's best interest.

So for you to say it is not clear, you must also say Former Governor Joe Kernan is a liar, since he says it is clear.

While the cake is not a lie, you certainly still cannot both eat it and still have it.

I didn't say he was lying, nor (as you have) that he was telling the truth. I have no idea one way or the other. I have no idea what he saw, or thinks he saw, nor do I know whether he in fact signed the petition he says he didn't sign. I don't see how you can claim with a straight face to know whether what he is saying is true (which is a separate question from whether or not he is affirmatively lying - it's possible he is simply mistaken), since you have not seen any of the documents nor, I expect, ever even spoken to the Governor.

In any case, what possible relevance can any of this have to the topic at hand? (And while I'm at it, why do you keep posting the same link to Wikipedia, again and again and again?)

 

[cybrsage]

I didn't say he was lying, nor (as you have) that he was telling the truth. I have no idea one way or the other.

Yet you still claim is it not clear fraud happened. You cannot make this statement while also making the above statement.

The former governor says it is clear fraud happened. You claim it is not clear fraud happened. Your statement is contradicting his. One of you is wrong.

If a person says the signature he is shown is not his signature, he is not wrong about it - he is lying about it.

We therefor either have you saying Former Governor Joe Kernan is a liar or you are saying you are wrong. Which is it?

Does anyone here actually fall for your word games?

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Yet you still claim is it not clear fraud happened. You cannot make this statement while also making the above statement.

The former governor says it is clear fraud happened. You claim it is not clear fraud happened. Your statement is contradicting his. One of you is wrong.

If a person says the signature he is shown is not his signature, he is not wrong about it - he is lying about it.

We therefor either have you saying Former Governor Joe Kernan is a liar or you are saying you are wrong. Which is it?

Does anyone here actually fall for your word games?

This is absurd, childlike reasoning. I am not saying definitively whether what he is saying is true, since I don't have any firsthand knowledge and have seen no "evidence," other than secondhand reports on a wild-eyed conservative blog posted by an anonymous idiot on a message board. Perhaps what he's saying (assuming he even said it) is true, perhaps it isn't. Perhaps he is telling the truth, but perhaps he is mistaken or deliberately lying for whatever reason. Maybe fraud occurred, maybe it didn't. Maybe it made a difference (though it would appear it didn't), maybe not. I don't know, can't know (based on what I've seen), and don't really care.

I make my living proving and disproving things. I am not interested in editorial argument by a biased advocate (you). Arguments are not evidence. Without seeing actual evidence (about a topic I have little or no interest in), I have no way of knowing what the truth is. You have also seen no evidence and have no basis for forming an intelligent opinion (much less a definitive conclusion) about what happened. You are just adopting a phony confidence in your position because you really really want it to be true. I honestly don't care one way or the other whether it's true.

I will ask again, what does any of this have to do with the topic at hand? Are you capable of a post that does NOT link to the same Wikipedia post?

 

[cybrsage]

This is absurd, childlike reasoning. I am not saying definitively whether what he is saying is true, since I don't have any firsthand knowledge and have seen no "evidence," other than secondhand reports on a wild-eyed conservative blog posted by an anonymous idiot on a message board. Perhaps what he's saying is true, perhaps it isn't. Perhaps he is telling the truth, but perhaps he is mistaken or deliberately lying for whatever reason. Maybe fraud occurred, maybe it didn't. Maybe it made a difference (though it would appear it didn't), maybe not. I don't know, can't know (based on what I've seen), and don't really care.

You obviously care, else you would not keep replying. The rest of that is just pure spin to try and get out of your statement.

I make my living proving and disproving things.

Wow, someone pays you to be this bad? I am a little jealous that you get paid to do something you are so bad at.

Without seeing actual evidence (about a topic I have little or no interest in), I have no way of knowing what the truth is.

You sure you want this to be your requirement for things, having seem them firsthand yourself? Seriuosly? It ends most conversations before you can enter them. If you want, I will hold you to your own standard if you are going to say this is your standard.

There is a veritable host of things you accept without having to have personally viewed the evidence.

You have also seen no evidence and have no basis for forming an intelligent opinion (much less a definitive conclusion) about what happened.

I have a statement from Former Governor Joe Kernan that the signature is not his. You claim that does not mean the signature is not his. You claim it might mean it is not his, or it might not mean his signature is not his. You cannot know since you did not personally see someone else sign the form in his name...

Seriously, people pay you to reason this poorly? I really am a bit jealous of that. How did you manage to con your way into that job?

 

[cybrsage]

Is the Associate Press good enough for you, or do you stil need to have personally seen the person forge his signature?

Former Indiana governor: Not my signature on Obama petition

Posted: 10/12/2011 03:16:13 PM MDT
Updated: 10/12/2011 03:16:22 PM MDT​

By The Associated Press



SOUTH BEND, Ind. (AP) — Former Gov. Joe Kernan says a signature on a petition to place Barack Obama's name on Indiana's 2008 primary ballot isn't his, putting him among dozens of dubious signatures found in a newspaper's investigation.
Kernan, a Democrat who campaigned for Hillary Clinton during the 2008 primary, told the South Bend Tribune that he didn't sign the Obama document.
"No, not at all," the former South Bend mayor said when asked whether the signature next to his name on the Obama petition looked like his own. "Nor does the printing look like mine."​

Read more: Former Indiana governor: Not my signature on Obama petition - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_19098003?source=rss#ixzz1hrCIQmQT


​

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Not sure how many times I have to say this.

I have no idea whether there was some limited amount of election fraud in one district in Indiana, I don't particularly care, and I object to your cluttering this thread (and, for that matter, this entire forum) with your irrelevant posts and nonsensical arguments. Your numerous personal attacks are meaningless to me due to the source, so you might as well holster that weapon.

None of this has anything to do with this thread and thus I will endeavor not to respond to any more of your nonsense. I gather you will never let me or anyone else have the last word anyway - this is how you came to have more than 50 posts per day here without ever actually saying anything.

By the way, congrats on making at least a single post without linking to the Wikipedia article "Joe Kernan." That's something to build on . . .

 

[cybrsage]

Not sure how many times I have to say this.

I have no idea whether there was some limited amount of election fraud in one district in Indiana..

Then I will hold you to your impossible standard in your other posts. I still cannot believe you conned your way into your job. Pretty slick, I am impressed.

If you did not want to talk about it, why did you respond so many times? It is obvious to all you wanted to hold a conversation about the subject. Why pretend you did not?

 

[davmat787]

If you two can't stop bickering I will turn this car right around!

 

[Steeplerot]

This is a pretty sad list. But then the Big O again is not very thrilling either.

How long can this failed -utterly out of touch system last?

What is the point of voting for any of them I have no clue.

I guess if a nut like Ron Paul or Bachmann, or ugh..another GW Bush like Perry get the nod I will have to vote for a Dem, and hold my nose the whole time. Yuck.

 

[xj0hnx]

It most certainly is not clear that this happened, regardless of what "floydreports" says - there has been no trial nor even any sworn testimony on the subject.

LOL, but Ron Pauls racist news letters, and the claims by the guy that got fired from his campaign are all factual, and news worthy? lofuckingl

 

[Macamus Prime]

None for Rick Perry?!

Come ON! He man-grabbed Ron Paul on TV for God's sake!!!

I thought you pussies wanted a real man for a President!! Instead, you picked the man who keeps complaining that the nurse is taking his candy. And now he doesn't have any candy to give out to his visitors.

Like when Lefty came by the other day. Lefty is a good old friend from out west. When I'd head out there, root beer was no more than a penny. And a good plate of food would get you a biscuit, some gravy, corn on the cob and a heavy slice of roast beef with potatoes and some carrots.

Of course, you would spend your days walking about and talking to all sorts of folks back then. I once met a man who was divorced. He of course kept his voice down low and wouldn't want anyone around him to know. But, he let me know. I told him it was OK.

Now a days, you have all sorts of people getting married to all sorts of other people. And it's shame really. Hey, want to read some of my newsletters? The latest issue has some excellent secluded spots that would be ideal for hangings,... wait,... where are you going??

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

LOL, but Ron Pauls racist news letters, and the claims by the guy that got fired from his campaign are all factual, and news worthy? lofuckingl

The Ron Paul newsletters are real and were published under his name - you can read 50 of them at http://www.mrdestructo.com/2011/12/game-over-scans-of-over-50-ron-paul.html. His promotion of them is also real - you can see him talking about it at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eW755u5460A. This is the kind of evidence I don't have with respect to cybrsage's allegations about campaign fraud in Indiana - all I have is secondhand claims.

I never said the claims about him be the former staffer were true. When "anarchist420" said the staffer was crazy and a liar, I just pointed out that he had undisputedly worked for Paul for 12 years, suggesting that he was presumably not as flawed as a420 claimed.

None of these are disputed facts - they speak for themselves. I know they make you uncomfortable, and that you choose to love Ron Paul despite his background. That is your choice and I leave you to it. I disagree with you - I think he's a nut, a bigot and a liar - but you have a right to your opinion.

 

[xj0hnx]

I guess people can rationalize anything when we agree with it.

 

[cybrsage]

None for Rick Perry?!

He is suing Virginia, saying their rules for getting onto the ballot of harmfully restrictive when you have multiple candidates. While I agree with him, I think he is being a baby about it.

 

[cybrsage]

The Ron Paul newsletters are real and were published under his name - you can read 50 of them at http://www.mrdestructo.com/2011/12/game-over-scans-of-over-50-ron-paul.html. His promotion of them is also real - you can see him talking about it at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eW755u5460A. This is the kind of evidence I don't have with respect to cybrsage's allegations about campaign fraud in Indiana - all I have is secondhand claims.

You did not personally talk to Ron Paul about them, so how can you say you have firsthand knowledge. You only have secondhand claims here.

You set yourself a VERY high bar...one so high you will almost never be able to reach it...and here we have you believing the words of someone you did not talk to when, in the other thread, you refuse to believe the words of someone because you did not personally talk to him. A little consitency in your standards would be nice.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

You did not personally talk to Ron Paul about them, so how can you say you have firsthand knowledge. You only have secondhand claims here.

You set yourself a VERY high bar...one so high you will almost never be able to reach it...and here we have you believing the words of someone you did not talk to when, in the other thread, you refuse to believe the words of someone because you did not personally talk to him. A little consitency in your standards would be nice.

You're mistaken. What I posted is evidence that would be admissible in court, including Paul's own admissions about publishing the newsletters, and the newsletters themselves. The article you posted would not be admissible - it's strictly hearsay. Moreover, it doesn't address any number of alternative explanations for the allegation of fraud, or who might have committed the "fraud."

As I have said many times here, this "fraud" allegation is entirely irrelevant to this discussion anyway, which is why I think it's so silly for you to raise it again and again and again. This happened (if it did) four years ago and has nothing to do with the 2012 election season.