Democrats Commit Political Suicide at Joint Session

[Cliche Guevara]

...selfishly, because I want to do dinner with SuzQ, and eat crow myself!

LOL! Good luck, chalice_thunder. I hope you get to eat your meal of crow. And I mean that in the nicest possible way.

 

[Anarchon]

It seems fairly obvious to me that the responsibility for programming electronic voting machines should lie with the legislative branch, the software should be open source, etc. To outsource to private companies is insane, and indicative of the direction all government takes.

 

[chalice_thunder]

LOL! Good luck, chalice_thunder. I hope you get to eat your meal of crow. And I mean that in the nicest possible way.

I know you do, bud. And I will gladly eat all of it - with a smile on my face

 

[chalice_thunder]

It seems fairly obvious to me that the responsibility for programming electronic voting machines should lie with the legislative branch, the software should be open source, etc. To outsource to private companies is insane, and indicative of the direction all government takes.

just highlighting the operative word here - well said, Anarchon!

 

[TheBear]

What is a "moonbat"?

 

[chalice_thunder]

What is a "moonbat"?

I think only Ditto knows...

 

[Sycophant]

I think only Ditto knows...

I am not entirely sure, but I think it has to do with political and world views - therefore, taking the Political Compass as a guide, I have mapped out where I thnk Moonbats reside.

The red dot is where Ditto resides on the Political Compass, and the blue area is the home to the Moonbats. At least that's what I speculate.

This is only an estimation.

 

[TheBear]

Like I mentioned earlier, voter irregularities, voter tampering and voter fraud occur in both major parties. This is nothing new.

Instead of getting into 'selective outrage' at an inappropriate time and place, a bipartisan commission is needed to take a serious look at the problems, and come up with viable solutions. This will probably take weeks or months in discussion and debate. They need their own venue, their own date on the Congressional calendar. It's not going to get solved in a one minute soap-box speech an a cerimonial event.

Decorum and dignity seem to elude many in Congress. Rehearsed temper-tantrums and fist-shaking, at a cerimonial event, (a formality), is as out of touch with decorum and dignity as one can be.

If they were serious about the issues, they knew as well as the rest of us, that it deserves it's own bipartisan hearings and commission. The 'in your face' attitude at a formal cerimony, really makes those who acted this way look immature and unstable. It had 'sour grapes' written all over it.

 

[TheBear]

Kerry won New Hampshire by only 9,171 votes out of 675,314 votes. Are Maxine Waters, Nancy Pelosi and the rest who mis-spoke at the Joint Session, rushing out to New Hampshire to make sure every vote was counted accurately?

What do you think?

 

[UberLutheran]

The event was nothing more than political pandering by the Democrats to the moonbats.

Almost every Democrat who spoke qualified their statements with "We are not going to change the results." Ect...


The "Savior of the Party" Barak Obama (D) said it clearly: "I have no doubt in my mind that the President of the United States, George W. Bush won this election." "I have no doubt that he got more votes in Ohio."

I haven't had a chance to read the commentary on DU yet, but the moonbats can't be pleased at that statement.

They really did think that they were going to overturn the election.

Fallacy: Ad Hominem
​

Description of Ad Hominem

Translated from Latin to English, "Ad Hominem" means "against the man" or "against the person."

An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting). This type of "argument" has the following form:

1. Person A makes claim X.
2. Person B makes an attack on person A.
3. Therefore A's claim is false.

The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made).

 

[Blemonds]

Fallacy: Ad Hominem


​

Description of Ad Hominem

Translated from Latin to English, "Ad Hominem" means "against the man" or "against the person."

An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting). This type of "argument" has the following form:

1. Person A makes claim X.
2. Person B makes an attack on person A.
3. Therefore A's claim is false.

The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made).

Based on your own information, it wasn't an ad hominem. An insult? Yes. Ad hominem? no

 

[jameseb]

Kerry won New Hampshire by only 9,171 votes out of 675,314 votes. Are Maxine Waters, Nancy Pelosi and the rest who mis-spoke at the Joint Session, rushing out to New Hampshire to make sure every vote was counted accurately?

What do you think?

Well said, my friend.

 

[Mr.Pious]

Democrats Commit Political Suicide at

The Dems commited suicide when this guy won the primaries....

 

[Cliche Guevara]

Kerry won New Hampshire by only 9,171 votes out of 675,314 votes. Are Maxine Waters, Nancy Pelosi and the rest who mis-spoke at the Joint Session, rushing out to New Hampshire to make sure every vote was counted accurately?

What do you think?

If that is true then people need to make a noise about it.

And it furthers my point that reform is desperately needed.

Personally, I liked Kerry - but if he won anything by unethical or illegal means, then that is NOT good.




So, how long before the partisan bickering in the US pauses long enough to create enough unity to fix your democracy? A week, a year, a decade? A few generations? How long, I wonder...

 

[MSBS]

Tell me something, and be honest, if kerry would've won would yoiu be crying for these investigations? I think not. And most importantly if Kerry won and republicans were complaining about irregularities would you be stonewalling...Yes you would and don't deny it! You political types are all alike, when you don't get your way you scream bloody murder but when things go your way your peachy and all smiles.

Just to butt in, this really reminds me of Jesse Jackson and the California Govenor's recall election. Early on in the results when it looked as if it were going to be close, Jackson was going on and on about voting irregularities in LA (strange how dems never seem to be concerned about irregularities in non-heavily democratic areas). A reporter that was interviewing him while he was firing off all of this rhetoric asked him point blank, "if Govenor Davis isn't recalled or a Democrat wins the race to replace him, will you still go to court and investigate the irregularities?" Jackson, without missing a beat, said "no, of course not." He then realized what he had just said, got a strange look on his face, and tried to change the subject. As the night wore on and the extent of the Democratic defeat became apparent, Jackson quit speaking to the press and had packed up and gone back home by the next day.

 

[chalice_thunder]

I am not entirely sure, but I think it has to do with political and world views - therefore, taking the Political Compass as a guide, I have mapped out where I thnk Moonbats reside.

The red dot is where Ditto resides on the Political Compass, and the blue area is the home to the Moonbats. At least that's what I speculate.

This is only an estimation.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Sycophant again.


Your moonbat habitat exposé is most enlightening!

 

[TheBear]

If that is true then people need to make a noise about it.

And it furthers my point that reform is desperately needed.

Personally, I liked Kerry - but if he won anything by unethical or illegal means, then that is NOT good.

Well actually, it was a rhetorical question I used to point out the obvious disingenuousness of those who participated in these embarrassing temper-tantrums. The phrase "Count Every Vote", really means "Until I get the results I want."

So, how long before the partisan bickering in the US pauses long enough to create enough unity to fix your democracy? A week, a year, a decade? A few generations? How long, I wonder...

LOL!!

Despite what pundits and bloggers may say about our democracy, it is the strongest democracy in the world. The number one reason we are so strong is the fact that these public debates flourish. There is nothing wrong with dissent. To the contrary, dissent is an invaluable asset to our strength. The Constitution protects dissent. Are we perfect? No. This isn't Utopia. It's the real world. Nevertheless, the result of public debate propels us forward, ever advancing as a nation.

And there will always be partisan bickering by individuals. But don't confuse this, with the state of democracy in America. There isn't a country in the world that even comes close. Many countries strive to emulate America.

 

[arnegrim]

However, the system is faulty as was discovered in 2000. Actually, given the Electoral College, your democracy is faulty at a fundamental level - it's not a democracy at all, but a plutocracy.

Interesting...

So... in 2000 the Democrats railed against the electoral college... because they felt a majority vote should decide.

Now... in 2004, the Democrats are railing against the idea of a majority vote and are relying on the electoral college to overturn the results.

Ummm... could you guys make up your minds please...

 

[The Shredder]

I think our election system needs to be overhauled. Forget Democrat or Republican, the system is just not run well. I think complacency with our voting standards at the moment is just wrong from private companies making voting machines without peer review, to variable standards for voting machines across the country for national elections. I think it is overlooked basically because we vote every two years on a large scale, thus they only try to discuss problems then rather than making a uniform system that is simple and easy for everyone to use.

I think to try and turn such a discussion into a partisan battle is ridiculous. The fact that people that voiced their concerns stated they do not wish to overturn the election, but get some changes made to improve the system should be the focus, not whether there is a (D) or (R) next to their name.

 

[arnegrim]

I think our election system needs to be overhauled. Forget Democrat or Republican, the system is just not run well. I think complacency with our voting standards at the moment is just wrong from private companies making voting machines without peer review, to variable standards for voting machines across the country for national elections. I think it is overlooked basically because we vote every two years on a large scale, thus they only try to discuss problems then rather than making a uniform system that is simple and easy for everyone to use.

I think to try and turn such a discussion into a partisan battle is ridiculous. The fact that people that voiced their concerns stated they do not wish to overturn the election, but get some changes made to improve the system should be the focus, not whether there is a (D) or (R) next to their name.

I agree the election system needs to be overhauled... BUT... they weren't just 'voicing their concerns'.

As someone pointed out earlier... there are better ways to make their points and open discussion... NOT what they did.