Obama/Holder DoJ Blinds Itself to Voter Fraud Concerns
A couple of things happened recently that deserve to be noticed in the same place. First, some Democrats pled guilty to felonies involving voter fraud — just another example of an increasing number of similar cases around the country.
A total of four Democratic officials and political operatives have now pleaded guilty to voter fraud-related felony charges in an alleged scheme to steal a New York election.
The latest guilty pleas expose the ease with which political insiders can apparently manipulate the electoral system and throw an election their way, by the forging of signatures of unsuspecting voters that are then cast as real votes.. . . .
Former Troy Democratic City Clerk William McInerney, Democratic Councilman John Brown, and Democratic political operatives Anthony Renna and Anthony DeFiglio have entered guilty pleas in the case, in which numerous signatures were allegedly forged on absentee ballots in the 2009 Working Families Party primary, the political party that was associated with the now-defunct community group, ACORN.
Funny how ACORN always seems to come up whenever we hear about voter fraud.
One way you might combat phony registrations like the kind described above would be to demand voters present proper identification at the time of registration and/or voting. And guess what? The Obama administration is invalidating a voter ID law in South Carolina, a move which seems to signal that DoJ will nix a similar effort in Texas. And Eric Holder seems to think the only reason to demand voter IDs is to keep minorities from voting:
At a high-profile speech in Austin earlier this month, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder echoed Democratic critics in arguing that in-person voter fraud is not a common problem and that photo identification measures may do nothing but suppress turnout of minority and low-income voters.
I guess if you’re not looking hard for voter fraud, you’re not going to see it. But in the story about the Democrats pleading guilty to voter fraud — interestingly, in a case investigated and prosecuted by state officials and not Holder’s DoJ — we are told that a Democrat operative believes such devious practices are a “commonplace and accepted practice.” (On both sides of the aisle, he claims, though no evidence is offered to support this claim.) Granted, the fraud in that instance was absentee ballot fraud and not in-person fraud — but that’s just a reason to tighten controls on absentee voting, not to shrug our shoulders at potential in-person voting fraud.
In addition, forging signatures on absentee ballots is only one source of potential fraud . . .
As I noted in 2010:
[L]et’s just take one likely rich vein of illegal votes: votes cast by illegal immigrants. What’s that, you say? Votes cast by illegal immigrants? Yes. Estimates say that there are anywhere from 10 million to 18 million illegal immigrants in the country. This means millions are of voting age. What’s more, many of them are experts at obtaining false documents, allowing them to work, drive, and participate in all other aspects of civic life. Do we really think that none of them vote? None? Let’s go with a conservative estimate of 10,000,000 illegal immigrants. If only one percent of them vote — just one percent! — that’s 100,000 illegal votes. That is voter fraud on a massive scale — certainly enough to tip a close election. This sort of thing dilutes your vote.
Now, I’m “bipartisan” about the issue of voter fraud, in the sense that I take up causes advanced by both sides. I want voter ID laws and greater investigation of voter fraud (causes typically pushed by Republicans) — but I also want to eliminate e-voting machines that are subject to hacking (a cause typically pushed by Democrats). In 2000, I was initally all for letting Al Gore do a full manual recount of all counties — but opposed the travesty that ensued when he sought a partial recount in Democrat-controlled counties whose officials manipulated the standards to achieve their partisan ends.
To me, it’s a matter of fairness. If your vote can be cancelled by an illegal immigrant, or an ACORN scammer, or an Anonymous hacker, then we might as well be a Soviet bloc style satellite state. It is unfortunate that election integrity, an issue of fundamental fairness, should become the province of partisans, scammers, and criminals. If our vote doesn’t mean anything, what does?
UPDATE: Thanks to Instapundit for the link. For those who have missed me, I am back blogging regularly — or at least trying my best! Please bookmark the main page and come back!
For some reason the phrase “hell in a handbasket” comes to mind…
Patterico (001b6c) — 12/26/2011 @ 11:35 amThe DOJ lawyer in charge of the Texas challenge is the woman who lied to three different investigations, and only came clean after being confronted with copies of her e-mails.
Davod (8bf616) — 12/26/2011 @ 11:39 amThere is no rational reason why voters shouldn’t have to present photo identification when they vote. Nearly every transaction one makes requires it and there is nothing dishonest or malicious about the requirement.
Along with rights come responsibilities and the soft bigotry of lowered expectations displayed by the fellow travelers of Holder, the heavily politicized DOJ and the Democrat party should be recognized for what it is.
Colonel Haiku (3a849c) — 12/26/2011 @ 11:44 amexcellent point, Davod. and there have been no notice taken by the DOJ, much less any consequences of this blatant dishonesty displayed by this admitted conservative-hating woman.
Colonel Haiku (3a849c) — 12/26/2011 @ 11:48 amAbsentee ballot fraud is the major avenue. People in nursing homes almost in a coma vote or are voted for. Voter registration rolls are combed for people who don’t vote often and they get voted by proxy.
Counties have more registered voters than their voting age population. Black Panther intimidation at the polls to insure Hillary supporters didn’t show for the primary to ensure an Obama win.
With all the issues with Fast and Furious,Solyndra,LightSquared and so many other policies of this administration it is not a leap to conclude sheer political gamesmanship is in play here.
As Pelosi has already said their tactics for this election cycle will be ‘by an means’.
This is only the beginning.
CommentGuy (ea6549) — 12/26/2011 @ 11:49 am“Granted, the fraud in that instance was absentee ballot fraud and not in-person fraud — but that’s just a reason to tighten controls on absentee voting, not to shrug our shoulders at potential in-person voting fraud.”
The difference is that absentee ballot fraud leaves a written ballot with a signature, a written record that can become evidence. In person voting fraud does not.
SPQR (26be8b) — 12/26/2011 @ 11:52 amThis is a critical concept. I think that it cries out for a Howard Stern style trick: interview people in heavily Democratic areas, and flip the parties. You will find, I am certain that Democrats are OUTRAGED when these things happen…except when it benefits them.
Kind of like our President’s thoughts on “signing statements.” Hated them when a Republican was President. Loved them when it benefits himself.
It’s going to be a nasty election. We will need to stand together. But I fear that the Right is incapable of that, which just helps the Left.
Simon Jester (cb7f1b) — 12/26/2011 @ 12:01 pm_______________________________________________
And Eric Holder seems to think the only reason to demand voter IDs is to keep minorities from voting:
Minorities that most importantly, and of course, are of leftist persuasion. Liberals like Eric Holder would sell their mother and soul down the river — and anything else, for that matter — in order to satisfy their liberal instincts.
Some folks on the right might be no less unethical and devious on occasion, but far more of those on the left, because they pray at the altar of liberalism, will be guilty — time and time again — of the most blatantly dishonest activity. After all, in the mind of such “progressives,” if one is supposedly guided by compassion, tolerance and humaneness, the ends justify the means.
Mark (411533) — 12/26/2011 @ 12:08 pmThey forged…absentee ballots in the 2009 Working Families Party primary.
Voter fraud happens with absentee ballots, not with in person voting. So they go propose something which will encourage absentee voting.
By the way, how did they know that they forged signiatures, or at least how did they prove that?
A. Besides personal testimony, because signatures are actually a very good method of identification – the only thing is that nobody pays any attention any more. Signatures are good enough so tat they can be used as a substitute for a password on a computer – in fact they are better than passwords, because they can’t be stolen or compromised.
Logging In With a Touch or a Phrase (Anything but a Password) by Somini Sengupta in the New York Times of Saturday, December 24, 2011.
The touch-screen approach of Professor Memon in Brooklyn works because, as it happens, each person makes the same gesture uniquely. Their fingers are different, they move at different speeds, they have what he calls a different “flair.” He wants logging in to be easy; besides, he said, some people find biometric measures like an iris scan to be “creepy.”
In his research, the most popular gestures turned out to be the ones that feel most intuitive. One was to turn the image of a combination lock 90 degrees in one direction. Another was to sign one’s name on the screen….
See also: I Sign on::signature protected security and privacy for your iPhone
Starting today, your signature replaces all your passwords. iSignOn combines ease-of-use with improved security and better privacy on your iPhone.
Finding the Unique in You to Build a Better Password by Nicole Perlroth in the New York Times “Bits” blog December 23, 2011, 9:25 pm
Google’s new Android 4.0 software, the Ice Cream Sandwich, inadvertently exposed its vulnerabilities. Ice Cream Sandwich uses facial recognition technology to match users to their devices, but clever hackers have already found a way to unlock the phones using a photo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=BwfYSR7HttA#!
You say maybe that can happen with a machine, but not with a person logging someone else in?
Well, it happened already at least once in Israel. I don’t have the reference but once somebody wrote an article that was never followed up. This was in their 1999 election I think.
Israel has proportional representation and also picture ID. So there was a small “religious” party that did the following: They collected IDs from people, most likely beneficiaries of government subsidies than ran through the party’s institutions. These people were close enough to trust them with their IDs. religion does count for something – there’s certain kinds of integrity, there.
They then assembled some 50 people let’s say, (this article was written by one of the people who were hired to vote) and tried to match people with the pictures. A man would look at the faces andte cards. This was all male here, males with beards actually.
They then made sure they memorized the national ID number, which everyone would know by heart, by making the proxy voter repeat it several times, and sent him to cote at a certain location. Then they went back to headquarters and each one voted multiple times at different locations with a different picture ID.
Now think: If the system did NOT require picture IDs or at least was not limited to one and only one unique picture ID, this would not have worked.
Since only one ID would work, once it was handed over (to be given back at the end of the day) they could be sure the voter would not take it into his head to vote by himself, and doing it this way of course made sure the votes would actually be cast (no turnout problem this way) and also presumably more reliably.
Now here with the Working Families party, the issue was not people who didn’t exist, or people who were not registered in the working Families Party but filling out somebody else’s absentee ballots.
Picture IDs won’t do anything about that.
Sammy Finkelman (b17872) — 12/26/2011 @ 12:14 pmWhen my sister in Diamond Bar went to her polling place in 2008, she was told she had ALREADY voted. Sure enough, someone else had signed her name and voted. My sister’s signature is distinctive and did not match the signature on the voting record. She was allowed to vote a provisional ballot, but has no idea if that provisional ballot was allowed. Without checking ID, someone could go from precinct to precinct voting multiple times easily. In my sister’s case there was another person with the same name in her precinct so it may have been an innocent mistake, but poll workers usually ask your address.
DTM
Doris Morrissey (216d51) — 12/26/2011 @ 12:15 pmAre white people not allowed to be poor now? When did this happen? Someone needs to send Holder The Wild And Wonderful Whites of West Virginia.
Ghost (6f9de7) — 12/26/2011 @ 12:19 pmBy the way something is wrong with the scanners now used in place of voting machines. They don’t alwys count all the votes.
Board of Elections Lost Votes in the Bronx and Doesn’t Care
EDITORIALS
Monday, December 19, 2011
Either the voters who go to the polls at Public School 65 in the South Bronx have a high propensity for filing defective ballots, or the city Board of Elections is disenfranchising hundreds of people.
Either way, New Yorkers who did their civic duty on Election Day last year have gotten the shaft — and the board couldn’t care less.
Data uncovered by New York University Law School’s Brennan Center reveals that up to 39% of votes cast for governor in election districts served by that polling place simply vanished.
For example, 71 voters in the 23rd Election District cast ballots, but the gubernatorial votes on 28 were ruled invalid by electronic scanners.
The Brennan Center has filed a legal challenge to New York’s method of handling so-called overvotes — ballots on which a voter fills in ovals next to the names of two candidates for a single office. A scanner screen shows a confusing alert and asks the voter if he or she wants to proceed. If the voter goes ahead, the ballot in that race is disqualified.
Across the city — as well as in neighborhoods surrounding PS 65 — the rate of supposed overvoting was less than half of one percent.
Two conclusions are possible: One, citizens at this polling place made the overvoting error 100 times more frequently than other New Yorkers. Two, the scanners there ran haywire.
The Brennan folks brought their PS 65 findings to the attention of the state and city boards of elections in October. The response was a big shrug.
Properly vigilant election officials would inspect the 900 paper ballots cast at the school to determine whether they include rampant overvoting or were misread by defective scanners.
The latter could point to technical flaws that may be more widespread than recognized — and certainly demand fixing. Should voter error be the cause, the city board would have the duty to flood the site with voting assistance next Election Day.
As of now, though, the board refuses to check the records. Someone must. And here is another matter to be taken up by the Department of Investigation as the agency plumbs the depths of the board’s incompetence.
Sammy Finkelman (b17872) — 12/26/2011 @ 12:20 pmComment by Doris Morrissey — 12/26/2011 @ 12:15 pm
#
When my sister in Diamond Bar went to her polling place in 2008, she was told she had ALREADY voted. Sure enough, someone else had signed her name and voted. My sister’s signature is distinctive and did not match the signature on the voting record. She was allowed to vote a provisional ballot, but has no idea if that provisional ballot was allowed. Without checking ID, someone could go from precinct to precinct voting multiple times easily. In my sister’s case there was another person with the same name in her precinct so it may have been an innocent mistake, but poll workers usually ask your address.
DTM
I think there’s a big problem here. It has to go on to huge scale before anybody notices. That’s true for too many things.
Most probably first of all, the affidavit ballot was ignored. I don’t think they’re even looked at unless it is a close election. Worse, even in a very closely contested election, I think most likely a judge would want to rule that the first vote was valid. Or that they can’t say and so – because there’s no way to trace it, it is treated as valid. Otherwise somebody has to admit a big problem.
At the very last a few candidates and the newspapers should have been notified. And of course the Board of Elections. Somebody let that impersonation vote through.
It is possible by the way that somebody just signed in the wrong place.
You see, though, this is catchable. The question is what does people do about it?
Nobody looks at signatures anymore. It’s not 1885, it is not 1912, it is not even 1960.
Signatures weren’t selected as identification for legal contracts and other things back in the 19th century,or however far back in goes, because it was a bad method of verifying who someone is. It is a very good method, if only people would use it.
Sammy Finkelman (b17872) — 12/26/2011 @ 12:31 pmAnd Eric Holder seems to think the only reason to demand voter IDs is to keep minorities from voting:
That gives him his legal grounds, as the Voting Rights Act apparently says any voting procedure that, intentionally or not, works to cut down the number of black voters as compared to white voters, can’t be used. If that’s the law they were thinking literacy tests probably.
Now apparently this does not create difficulties for the Democratic Party. Any political machine worth its salt will get voter IDS out to people – and also promote absentee ballots. What this really creates difficulties for is college students who normally reside in other states, or people who recently moved. Since the late 1960s and especially a 1972 Supreme Court decision their right to vote in the state they say they reside in has been upheld. There cannot be a more than 30 day residency period. If driver’s licenses are required, college students would have to change their driver’s licenses which might cost money in many cases because auto insurance rates are tied to place of residence and they can vary by a scale of magnitude or more.
Now a passport can also be used, but that’s not so common.
Sammy Finkelman (b17872) — 12/26/2011 @ 12:41 pmIn California, they are probably extremely careless or worse about things, and with few competitive elections, registration may indeed be pumped up in certain locations and even other things happen.
Sammy Finkelman (b17872) — 12/26/2011 @ 12:43 pmAttorney General Eric Holder echoed Democratic critics in arguing that in-person voter fraud is not a common problem and that photo identification measures may do nothing but suppress turnout of minority and low-income voters.
— Is it the opinion of the AGOTUS* that most minorities are either too poor or too dumb to be able to acquire a state-issued ID card?
RAAAAAAACCIIIIIIISSSSSSTT!!!!!
[*rhymes with “a goat bugger”]
Icy (7becc9) — 12/26/2011 @ 12:50 pmComment by SPQR — 12/26/2011 @ 11:52 am
The difference is that absentee ballot fraud leaves a written ballot with a signature, a written record that can become evidence. In person voting fraud does not.
No, it also leaves a signature, plus also, if it happens on any scale, voters who complain that already signed in their name, and in that case the complaint is made while the voting is still going on. While in the case of absentee ballots, especially if cast on behalf of someone who signs a blank ballot or never got the ballot and is too disabled to go out, it could be much harder to detect.
But somebody’s got to do something about it.
If somebody won’t check that a signature matches I daresay they won’t check that a face matches either, however it is true such documents are scarcer. However to do in person voter impersonation, you need t know a name and where to go unless the name is selected at random once there
Sammy Finkelman (b17872) — 12/26/2011 @ 12:51 pmi w*rked the last local elections here in LA, and voter fraud would be easy: you can look up polling places on line prior to the election, make a list, and then just drive from location to location.
at each one, there is a voter’s roll,. posted out in the front area, that is updated every hour with who has voted.
check the list right after it’s updated, pick a name and address, then go in and identify yourself by that name and address. tell the nice people you forgot your sample ballot, and away you go.
repeat PRN all day.
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 12/26/2011 @ 12:59 pmStedman is a c*nt.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/26/2011 @ 1:08 pmThis doj is so damn corrupt… How do Obama supporters not see that? Oh, yeah… The media.
Ghost (6f9de7) — 12/26/2011 @ 1:19 pmI think there’s a big problem here. It has to go on to huge scale before anybody notices. That’s true for too many things.
The question is, how many anecdotal incidents equal a huge scale – especially when a complicit media chooses to be fairly silent on the issue?
One of the most grating problems with Holder’s position for me is his essential soft bigotry of low expectations with regard to minorities: He does not see minorities as industrious enough or capable enough to get themselves identification; to problem solve if they are unable to physically apply for said identification; and to make it happen. The holey arguments defending Holder’s stand are not worth rehashing as we have heard them all before, but minorities everywhere would be insulted by this bigotry.
Aren’t we (speaking as a minority) as competent and self-sufficient as the white person next to us? And if minorities believe we are not, whose fault is that?
Dana (4eca6e) — 12/26/2011 @ 1:47 pmQuestion – most of the precincts that report late are minority precincts. One of the explanations is that it takes extra time to punch additional ballots after the polls close. Anyone with knowledge of this issue.
joe (93323e) — 12/26/2011 @ 2:57 pmFlorida 2000 – the easiest way to get dimpled ballots without stylus marks is to punch multiple ballots at one time. Does anyone know why this did not get more air time.
joe (93323e) — 12/26/2011 @ 3:06 pmWhen it comes down to a necrotic foot and obama I will vote for the necrotic foot.
Ron Paul is anti-racist anti-gay and anti-semite………….that reminds me of a certain religion of piece.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/26/2011 @ 3:08 pmFollowing up on the potential voter fraud in florida 2000 – There were three indications of fraud during the election 1) large number of dimpled ballots in certain minority precincts, 2) late reporting in those precincts, and 3)the margins separating the president vote and the senate vote was out or sync with the statewide margins in those precincts that reported late and also had the dimpled ballots.
joe (93323e) — 12/26/2011 @ 3:12 pmIt should be noted that there was a contemporaneous report that to enter the building where Holder was speaking in Austin, the presentation of a valid Photo ID was required.
AD-RtR/OS! (1acacf) — 12/26/2011 @ 3:40 pm“I ain’t a teacher no more. Get off my stoop” another Obama voter.
Mike K (9ebddd) — 12/26/2011 @ 4:10 pmNew democrap ad portrays republicans as wanting america to be polluted by coal.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/26/2011 @ 4:50 pmThere are no honest Democrats.
Ken Hahn (5a0cb9) — 12/26/2011 @ 6:06 pmRegistrations in more than one state are not cross checked. There is at least one small college in Mississippi that the students not only vote in their home state but maintain the dual registration long after graduating. County workers in voter registration offices can selectively purge voter rolls and game the absentee ballot system for people that get their ballot via the mail by delaying their response on one parties voters and returned ballots can get lost with a little help.
dunce (15d7dc) — 12/26/2011 @ 7:09 pmQuite surprisingly the New York Slimes sees it differently and has written a dishonest new editorial/valentine to Holder on the subject.
“Political leaders should be encouraging young adults to participate in civic life, but many Republican state lawmakers are doing everything they can instead to prevent students from voting in the 2012 presidential election. Some have openly acknowledged doing so because students tend to be liberal.
Seven states have already passed strict laws requiring a government-issued ID (like a driver’s license or a passport) to vote, which many students don’t have, and 27 others are considering such measures. Many of those laws have been interpreted as prohibiting out-of-state driver’s licenses from being used for voting.
It’s all part of a widespread Republican effort to restrict the voting rights of demographic groups that tend to vote Democratic. Blacks, Hispanics, the poor and the young, who are more likely to support President Obama, are disproportionately represented in the 21 million people without government IDs. On Friday, the Justice Department, finally taking action against these abuses, blocked the new voter ID law in South Carolina.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/27/opinion/keeping-college-students-from-the-polls.html?_r=1&hp
elissa (4959ae) — 12/26/2011 @ 7:53 pmSome have openly acknowledged doing so because students tend to be liberal
— A libelous ad hom from the Times editorial board?
*sigh* “All the news that’s fit to sh–” indeed.
Icy (7becc9) — 12/26/2011 @ 8:49 pmI wish to protest to the Holder DOJ that having to present an ID when I purchase a firearm is difficult, and disenfranchising me of my 2nd Amendment rights.
What? Oh, they are ok with needing an ID then? My bad…
MunDane (861704) — 12/26/2011 @ 9:17 pmThere’s a difference between “blind” and “wilfully/selectively blind”. Hack-in-chief Holder would be screaming bloody murder about fraud if there were the slightest chance it might benefit the GOP.
New Class Traitor (dbef38) — 12/26/2011 @ 9:20 pmI think no one has yet mentioned that the primary reason polls are ‘kept open’ by judges is so that the voter rolls can be checked and votes of those who have not attended generated from them.
luagha (72a2e7) — 12/26/2011 @ 9:30 pmMundane is damn right! If it weren’t for double standards, they’d have no standards at all.
Ghost (6f9de7) — 12/26/2011 @ 11:48 pm6 SPQR: The difference is that absentee ballot fraud leaves a written ballot with a signature, a written record that can become evidence. In person voting fraud does not.
In Chicago, each voter must sign a ballot application, and the signature is checked against the signature image in the registry book provided by the Board of Elections.
13 Sammy Finkelman: Sure enough, someone else had signed her name and voted.
It is possible by the way that somebody just signed in the wrong place.
Somebody else signed her name. That’s not an accident or mistake.
Nobody looks at signatures anymore. It’s not 1885, it is not 1912, it is not even 1960.
Banks don’t check signatures on checks anymore; haven’t for years. I’ve had unsigned checks be processed without anyone noticing. (OK, they were checks for utility bills, which means they were among hundreds of similar checks to a payee who is extremely unlikely to be forging checks.)
Rich Rostrom (155228) — 12/26/2011 @ 11:59 pmWhy just illegal ones? Legal aliens are perhaps even more likely to vote, because they have genuine ID documents, and many of them will have been signed up under “motor voter” laws. There is no verification whatsoever that a person registering to vote is a citizen! And as far as I know none of the recent laws in IN, SC, TX, WI, etc. make any attempt at such verification.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 12/27/2011 @ 1:00 amThe rnc should have been out ahead of this. But no, they happen to be the most unorganized group of turds in the toilet.
sickofrinos (44de53) — 12/27/2011 @ 3:10 amIf you’re old enough to vote but don’t possess a photo ID, it seems unlikely you care. You cannot be disenfranchised. The New York Times nonsense quoted above is classic redirection. The old standby: Rascist! The bit about out of state licenses is especially nonsensical. If you still consider another state as your official residence, shouldn’t you be voting there on an absentee ballot? Gosh, you don’t suppose some of these students are voting in two states simultaneously, do you. That would be illegal!
It would be interesting to see how voting patterns went if we eliminated fraud for a decade.
epobirs (6589c5) — 12/27/2011 @ 3:16 amWe should make Holder happy by just passing a law that says only blacks have to present a photo ID. That should make his day!
annecink (c1f245) — 12/27/2011 @ 3:16 amThe republican party has become a sideshow.
sickofrinos (44de53) — 12/27/2011 @ 3:31 amLike viewing a bearded woman in a three ring circus.
Well, and don’t forget a few weeks ago, I pointed out that voter fraud is raaaaaacist.
Aaron Worthing (73a7ea) — 12/27/2011 @ 4:19 amLet’s not forget the number of Republican the were convicted of similar offenses during the last Presidential election.
tadcf (ead2bd) — 12/27/2011 @ 5:47 amThat’s right, let’s not. And that number would be… zero, as far as I know.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 12/27/2011 @ 7:13 amLet’s not forget the number of Republicans who stole their property from animals
/Tadcf the idiot
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/27/2011 @ 8:40 amAnyone ever been to Troy, NY? I went to school there (RPI 1977-1986).
You have got to be real desperate to want to control that sewer. The running jokes were that the townies were called “Troylets”, and that while Albany was considered the a$$hole of the state, Troy was just a mere 10 miles upstream.
Dr. K (025286) — 12/27/2011 @ 8:50 amPresently selling at the dramatically reduced price of $3.54 in hardback, Hugh Hewitt’s 2004 book, “If It’s Not Close, They Can’t Cheat,” is a still-timely bargain through which you could contribute a few pennies to this website’s operation and maintenance at Amazon.com. Hewitt acknowledged, if I recall correctly, that his title is slightly off: They can and still will cheat even if it’s not close, but it won’t affect the outcome unless the election is close.
Beldar (50ef62) — 12/27/2011 @ 9:18 amObama party to trot out ad showing Republicans denying gorebull warming causing the polar bears to commit drive-by shootings on rival polar bear gangs to survive.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/27/2011 @ 9:22 am_________________________________________________
Well, and don’t forget a few weeks ago, I pointed out that voter fraud is raaaaaacist.
I notice 2 current links at the drudgereport.com to news reports on unruly or violent behavior yesterday at the Mall of America in Minnesota and a shopping district in London. I immediately assumed the general aspects of the instigators in one case wouldn’t have any similarity to the troublemakers in the other. Actually, based on the perceptions (or stereotypes) I have of those 2 locations, as viewed from a great distance, I truly didn’t believe any presumptions along demographic lines would be applicable.
Many of the readers posting comments at the websites featuring reports out of Minneapolis and London, and other similar types of news stories going back quite awhile, hone in on the racial angle of such incidents, but in too many instances they sidestep the ideological one.
When surveys indicate that around 90 percent of people in black America are of the left or often are mindlessly in favor of liberal politicians, it’s not painting an unfair broad brush to theorize the nature of that ideology has had a truly corrosive, destructive, self-destructive impact on the culture of that community.
If liberalism were a race or ethnicity, then it’s a “race” or “ethnicity” that — certainly in the context of the early 21st century — deserves a lot more attention and a lot of harsh criticism.
Mark (31bbb6) — 12/27/2011 @ 9:23 amGorebull Warming is a hoax and anyone who believes it is a willing dupe.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/27/2011 @ 9:23 amDon’t forget to consider the college students who are urged to register to be able to vote at their campus location– and if out of state still request an absentee ballot for themselves from their parents’ address where they had initially registered– and vote that way too. Yep, a twofer that is nearly impossible to catch under the current lax system. Does it happen? You betcha. One of my neighbors–a rabid Liberal of course–was openly bragging about it in 2008.
elissa (4959ae) — 12/27/2011 @ 9:37 amObama Holder should be kicked in the nutsack.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/27/2011 @ 12:03 pmTwo articles on the perils and pitfalls of voting machines, which I urge others to read:
http://www.itjungle.com/tfh/tfh092704-story04.html
http://www.itjungle.com/tfh/tfh102708-story04.html
A_Nonny_Mouse (57cacf) — 12/27/2011 @ 1:15 pm“Black people are stupid.”
Signed,
Eric Holder
Maximus (22397b) — 12/27/2011 @ 4:33 pmI recall a study done a few years back, pre-Obama, where they compared voter registrations in one county in FL, and then ran those names against IIRC PA voting lists, and came up with more than a thousand people in just one Atlantic-coast county in FL that were dual registered, because the FL registrars were just “too busy” to notify the other county/state that they needed to purge a name from their roles.
AD-RtR/OS! (e103ce) — 12/27/2011 @ 5:08 pmYes, but this isn’t a problem unless they vote in both places. Of the >1K double registrants, how many double voted?
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 12/27/2011 @ 5:12 pmThat information was incomplete, but as I recall, the info they had showed several score in the study voted in both FL and PA.
AD-RtR/OS! (e103ce) — 12/27/2011 @ 6:34 pmEven one is one too many.
Even one is too many, but one is not enough of a problem to justify spending huge amounts of money and/or attention to prevent it, let alone raising alarums of cheating and crooked elections.
Milhouse (9a4c23) — 12/28/2011 @ 12:20 amI learned early on in my career that if a company’s balance sheet doesn’t quite balance, but the discrepancy is only 19 cents or some such amount, then it makes no sense to spend any time trying to find the bug, let alone fix it. Just add or subtract the discrepancy as a one-sided journal entry and move on. Only when the sum is large enough is it worth investigating.
Milhouse (9a4c23) — 12/28/2011 @ 12:23 amVery true Milhouse. The issue I guess is when there are elections like Franken in Mn and the Washington governorship (I know it was in Wa state, not sure if gov) that are ultimately decided by hundreds of votes, even a thousand votes can be a big issue.
Paul Soglin, a multiple time very liberal mayor of Madison, Wisconsin, made his entry into politics as an anti-Vietnam protester who was elected to the city council from an area with a high population of students, FWIW.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 12/28/2011 @ 5:33 amWas it the 2000 election where Philadelphia’s voter turnout, exceeded the number of eligible voters
narciso (87e966) — 12/28/2011 @ 5:41 amIt has been reported that Newt submitted roughly 11,000 plus signatures and the election officials were unable to confirm at least 10,000 of these were valid qualifying voters (we don’t yet know how many actual signatures were determined to be valid or false).
That means at a minimum that 9 to 10% of the signatures Newt’s proxies gathered were non-qualifying or fraudulent
According to Fact-Check.org (the REPUBLICAN funded truth seeking site) they looked into all forms of voter fraud during the peak o the dreaded ACORN scandals and discovered the Bush Admin has aggressively pursued cases of any form of voter fraud …in fact this effort was behind the infamous firing of the Nine Federal US Attorneys.
**They discovered and prosecuted and convicted 70 people on voter fraud in the 2006 federal election cycle
**THAT’s a 0.000009% rate of REPUBLICAN PROVEN VOTE FRAUD nationwide.
**Other reliable voter advocate sources have put the overall conviction rate for voter fraud over the last decade at roughly half this rate – 0.000005% across over 550,000,000 votes cast.
If measured against the KNOWN rate of voter fraud, it suggests Newt’s minions engaged in massive voter fraud that is roughly
**111,111 times greater than the norm!!!
**3700 times greater that was alleged (but never proven) by partisan players was committed by the dreaded ACORN
WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE FROM THE “SELF-APPOINTED PROTECTORS OF DEMOCRACY? “
SteveE (d0f00f) — 12/28/2011 @ 7:59 amhttp://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/29/washington/28cnd-scotus.html
I thought SCOTUS had already settled this three years ago:
Rorschach (d62b54) — 12/28/2011 @ 6:36 pmBullshit. Annenberg Political Fact-Check, to give it its full name, is run by 0bama’s mates. 0bama got his start at another Annenberg-funded organisation, which Bill Ayers hand-picked him to run, and between them they spent over $100M in an attempt to turn the Chicago public education system into a political machine for the far left.
[note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 12/29/2011 @ 12:35 amThis is so silly it hardly needs refuting. And the strange layout indicates a cut-and-paste job from somewhere.
There’s nothing fraudulent about bad signatures showing up on petitions. It certainly doesn’t indicate fraud by the collectors, nor even by the signers.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 12/29/2011 @ 12:39 amThe justice department is claiming in South Carolina that 10% of registered voters (non-white) in SC do not have drivers licenses. That number seems extremely high. Does any one have any info on how that percentage was determined. I know numerous individuals that keep their DL long after the quit driving.
joe (d4f7fe) — 12/29/2011 @ 12:28 pm