skradzione wybory

IP: *.nycmny83.covad.net 03.11.04, 18:25
America is screwed: Election stolen again
Helen & Harry Highwater 03 Nov 2004 15:23 GMT

Smells like another Diebold victory to us.


Virtually every act of the Cheney-Bush administration has been disastrous,
and every word of the Cheney-Bush campaign was a lie or a distortion. But the
Democrats ran a pull-string mannequin who made even the "Anyone But Bush"
vote waver.

We offer our apologies and embarrassment to the world.

But ... The nationwide consensus that election problems were scattered, that
glitches were few, far between, and quickly resolved, is total bull.

Everything was in place for fictitious election results, and that seems to be
what has happened.

In most states, the returns were pretty much as predicted by the last polls.
Florida seems the odd exception
    • Gość: Gomulka Re: skradzione wybory IP: *.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net 03.11.04, 18:29
      > Hell of a last-minute swing, eh

      Ty durny lewaku ...

      Last minute swing .. it means you never watched election. But go on believing
      in your fairy tales. And believe in Michael Mooore's propaganda too ...

      • Gość: harold Re: prezydent wybrany przez ignorantow IP: *.nycmny83.covad.net 03.11.04, 18:48













        It isn't often that right-wing journalists astonish me. The devil, in my
        experience, hasn't given them a new tune in years. As politics goes, they do
        paint-by-numbers, generally in shades of black. Peter Oborne was hardly of the
        sunniest disposition last night, but his analysis of American presidential
        politics was stunning.
        This was less because of the argument, powerful as it was, than because the
        speaker is one of the most intensely conservative hacks there is. To put it
        another way, if the likes of Oborne are alienated from the American way, the
        Americans have more than fromage-munching surrender simians to fret about.
        "The greatest democracy in the world?" he inquired. "They have to be kidding."
        In Oborne's account, a campaign based on fear, lies and black propaganda would
        be decided by a small, decisive, yet "largely ignorant" group of manipulated
        voters. He even provided numbers.
        As Oborne put it, 200 million Americans may be entitled to vote, but only 6.5
        million are undecided. Of those, only the unconvinced in the swing states will
        be instrumental in choosing a president. In other words, one-half of 1% –
        perhaps one million souls – will elect the next resident of the White House.
        Just to add to the fun: "These target voters are ignorant beyond belief."
        None of those interviewed could find Iraq or Afghanistan on the map. Asked to
        identify Britain, one man pointed to west Africa. Another, with his finger on
        North Korea, said: "Afghanistan is over here, where Russia used to be."
        Granted, you probably couldn't find many people in Bearsden or Portobello who
        could tell you where the Black Watch are currently being shelled. Oborne,
        nevertheless, was making a different point. By his account, American ignorance
        is being pandered to and deepened by a political system that is – his word – a
        sham. Both sides peddle lies – whether it be John Kerry appeasing the gun nuts
        of West Virginia after voting for gun control 55 times, or Bush using front
        organisations to plant his smears – and both lie about their lies.
        The Dirty Race for the White House was, to repeat, a remarkable assault by a
        British conservative on "a debased and degraded political system". It was also
        touching. When Oborne went to Cleveland, Ohio, in a state that is at the heart
        of the election battle, he was moved almost to tears by a makeshift memorial to
        900 youths killed by guns. African-Americans could decide the entire race, but
        with one in four living in poverty, and half with no health insurance whatever,
        they see no obvious difference between two rich white men.
        I've made some of Oborne's arguments myself, and made them many times over, but
        that, apparently, is what you expect from lefties. He ended by remarking that
        America intends to spread democracy around the world. "Judging on how it works
        at home," he said, "we should all be very afraid."
        If the Bush dynasty ever runs out of candidates, meanwhile, they could do worse
        than Jon Culshaw. He does George W better than George W. Had the president been
        wearing a wire during one of his debates with Kerry? "My fellow Anna
        Kournikovas, there have been some frankly luminous claims . . . "
        Oborne's account made it clear that American politics is becoming difficult
        indeed to satirise. Dead Ringers did its level best, nevertheless. "Fox News –
        keeping America scared since 1996" – had a report on terror alerts becoming so
        frequent there were no longer enough colours to describe them all. Dick Cheney
        had, therefore, come up with a mixture of magenta and burgundy, magurndy, "the
        new and disturbing colour of terror".
        The team were even-handed, having noticed a fact to which haters of Bush are
        often oblivious: Kerry is no prize either. Why vote for the Democrat? "John
        Kerry knows how to stand on a hill next to a flag on a windy day."
        It used to be said that satire died when they gave the Nobel Peace Prize to
        Henry Kissinger. Back then, no-one had imagined the 2004 presidential election.
        The Dirty Race for the White House Channel 4, 8.00pm
        Dead Ringers US Election Special BBC2, 9.00pm

        It isn't often that right-wing journalists astonish me. The devil, in my
        experience, hasn't given them a new tune in years. As politics goes, they do
        paint-by-numbers, generally in shades of black. Peter Oborne was hardly of the
        sunniest disposition last night, but his analysis of American presidential
        politics was stunning.
        This was less because of the argument, powerful as it was, than because the
        speaker is one of the most intensely conservative hacks there is. To put it
        another way, if the likes of Oborne are alienated from the American way, the
        Americans have more than fromage-munching surrender simians to fret about.
        "The greatest democracy in the world?" he inquired. "They have to be kidding."
        In Oborne's account, a campaign based on fear, lies and black propaganda would
        be decided by a small, decisive, yet "largely ignorant" group of manipulated
        voters. He even provided numbers.
        As Oborne put it, 200 million Americans may be entitled to vote, but only 6.5
        million are undecided. Of those, only the unconvinced in the swing states will
        be instrumental in choosing a president. In other words, one-half of 1% –
        perhaps one million souls – will elect the next resident of the White House.
        Just to add to the fun: "These target voters are ignorant beyond belief."
        None of those interviewed could find Iraq or Afghanistan on the map. Asked to
        identify Britain, one man pointed to west Africa. Another, with his finger on
        North Korea, said: "Afghanistan is over here, where Russia used to be."
        • Gość: Gucio Re: prezydent wybrany przez ignorantow IP: *.bmts.com / 63.105.65.* 03.11.04, 18:50
          > w dodatku z gaciami pelnymi strachu!!!
      • Gość: harold and times Re: skradzione wybory IP: *.nycmny83.covad.net 03.11.04, 18:51



        It isn't often that right-wing journalists astonish me. The devil, in my
        experience, hasn't given them a new tune in years. As politics goes, they do
        paint-by-numbers, generally in shades of black. Peter Oborne was hardly of the
        sunniest disposition last night, but his analysis of American presidential
        politics was stunning.
        This was less because of the argument, powerful as it was, than because the
        speaker is one of the most intensely conservative hacks there is. To put it
        another way, if the likes of Oborne are alienated from the American way, the
        Americans have more than fromage-munching surrender simians to fret about.
        "The greatest democracy in the world?" he inquired. "They have to be kidding."
        In Oborne's account, a campaign based on fear, lies and black propaganda would
        be decided by a small, decisive, yet "largely ignorant" group of manipulated
        voters. He even provided numbers.
        As Oborne put it, 200 million Americans may be entitled to vote, but only 6.5
        million are undecided. Of those, only the unconvinced in the swing states will
        be instrumental in choosing a president. In other words, one-half of 1% –
        perhaps one million souls – will elect the next resident of the White House.
        Just to add to the fun: "These target voters are ignorant beyond belief."
        None of those interviewed could find Iraq or Afghanistan on the map. Asked to
        identify Britain, one man pointed to west Africa. Another, with his finger on
        North Korea, said: "Afghanistan is over here, where Russia used to be."
        Granted, you probably couldn't find many people in Bearsden or Portobello who
        could tell you where the Black Watch are currently being shelled. Oborne,
        nevertheless, was making a different point. By his account, American ignorance
        is being pandered to and deepened by a political system that is – his word – a
        sham. Both sides peddle lies – whether it be John Kerry appeasing the gun nuts
        of West Virginia after voting for gun control 55 times, or Bush using front
        organisations to plant his smears – and both lie about their lies.
        The Dirty Race for the White House was, to repeat, a remarkable assault by a
        British conservative on "a debased and degraded political system". It was also
        touching. When Oborne went to Cleveland, Ohio, in a state that is at the heart
        of the election battle, he was moved almost to tears by a makeshift memorial to
        900 youths killed by guns. African-Americans could decide the entire race, but
        with one in four living in poverty, and half with no health insurance whatever,
        they see no obvious difference between two rich white men.
        I've made some of Oborne's arguments myself, and made them many times over, but
        that, apparently, is what you expect from lefties. He ended by remarking that
        America intends to spread democracy around the world. "Judging on how it works
        at home," he said, "we should all be very afraid."
        If the Bush dynasty ever runs out of candidates, meanwhile, they could do worse
        than Jon Culshaw. He does George W better than George W. Had the president been
        wearing a wire during one of his debates with Kerry? "My fellow Anna
        Kournikovas, there have been some frankly luminous claims . . . "
        Oborne's account made it clear that American politics is becoming difficult
        indeed to satirise. Dead Ringers did its level best, nevertheless. "Fox News –
        keeping America scared since 1996" – had a report on terror alerts becoming so
        frequent there were no longer enough colours to describe them all. Dick Cheney
        had, therefore, come up with a mixture of magenta and burgundy, magurndy, "the
        new and disturbing colour of terror".
        The team were even-handed, having noticed a fact to which haters of Bush are
        often oblivious: Kerry is no prize either. Why vote for the Democrat? "John
        Kerry knows how to stand on a hill next to a flag on a windy day."
        It used to be said that satire died when they gave the Nobel Peace Prize to
        Henry Kissinger. Back then, no-one had imagined the 2004 presidential election.
        The Dirty Race for the White House Channel 4, 8.00pm
        Dead Ringers US Election Special BBC2, 9.00pm

        It isn't often that right-wing journalists astonish me. The devil, in my
        experience, hasn't given them a new tune in years. As politics goes, they do
        paint-by-numbers, generally in shades of black. Peter Oborne was hardly of the
        sunniest disposition last night, but his analysis of American presidential
        politics was stunning.
        This was less because of the argument, powerful as it was, than because the
        speaker is one of the most intensely conservative hacks there is. To put it
        another way, if the likes of Oborne are alienated from the American way, the
        Americans have more than fromage-munching surrender simians to fret about.
        "The greatest democracy in the world?" he inquired. "They have to be kidding."
        In Oborne's account, a campaign based on fear, lies and black propaganda would
        be decided by a small, decisive, yet "largely ignorant" group of manipulated
        voters. He even provided numbers.
        As Oborne put it, 200 million Americans may be entitled to vote, but only 6.5
        million are undecided. Of those, only the unconvinced in the swing states will
        be instrumental in choosing a president. In other words, one-half of 1% –
        perhaps one million souls – will elect the next resident of the White House.
        Just to add to the fun: "These target voters are ignorant beyond belief."
        None of those interviewed could find Iraq or Afghanistan on the map. Asked to
        identify Britain, one man pointed to west Africa. Another, with his finger on
        North Korea, said: "Afghanistan is over here, where Russia used to be."
        Granted, you probably couldn't find many people in Bearsden or Portobello who
        could tell you where the Black Watch are currently being shelled. Oborne,
        nevertheless, was making a different point. By his account, American ignorance
        is being pandered to and deepened by a political system that is – his word – a
        sham. Both sides peddle lies – whether it be John Kerry appeasing the gun nuts
        of West Virginia after voting for gun control 55 times, or Bush using front
        organisations to plant his smears – and both lie about their lies.
        The Dirty Race for the White House was, to repeat, a remarkable assault by a
        British conservative on "a debased and degraded political system". It was also
        touching. When Oborne went to Cleveland, Ohio, in a state that is at the heart
        of the election battle, he was moved almost to tears by a makeshift memorial to
        900 youths killed by guns. African-Americans could decide the entire race, but
        with one in four living in poverty, and half with no health insurance whatever,
        they see no obvious difference between two rich white men.
        I've made some of Oborne's arguments myself, and made them many times over, but
        that, apparently, is what you expect from lefties. He ended by remarking that
        America intends to spread democracy around the world. "Judging on how it works
        at home," he said, "we should all be very afraid."
        If the Bush dynasty ever runs out of candidates, meanwhile, they could do worse
        than Jon Culshaw. He does George W better than George W. Had the president been
        wearing a wire during one of his debates with Kerry? "My fellow Anna
        Kournikovas, there have been some frankly luminous claims . . . "
        Oborne's account made it clear that
        • Gość: sen.Tom Harkin Re: bedzie pobor do wojska IP: *.nycmny83.covad.net 03.11.04, 18:54
          Why Bush will restart the draft if re-elected
          A major terrorist attack could easily serve as the pretext for setting the
          draft in motion.

          By Sen. Tom Harkin


          resident George W. Bush may or may not have a secret plan to reinstate the
          draft. But this is besides the point. The deteriorating facts on the ground in
          Iraq, plus the Bush doctrine of acting pre-emptively and unilaterally against
          hostile regimes, will soon leave him no choice. If Bush is re-elected, he will
          have to restart the draft.
          Indeed, Bush has already imposed stage one of a new draft. Many soldiers whose
          enlistment period is up are not being allowed to leave the service, and those
          who left the service years ago are being forced to put on the uniform again
          against their wills. It is clear that we already have a back-door draft. Bush
          has effectively ended the all-volunteer military.

          And stage two of a reinstated draft would be easy to implement. Draft boards
          are already in place in every county in the United States, and young men who
          turn 18 are already required to register with their local draft board. A major
          terrorist attack could easily serve as the pretext for flipping the switch and
          setting this apparatus in motion.

          It is obvious that our armed forces are stretched dangerously thin. We do not
          have enough people in uniform to meet current needs in Iraq and Afghanistan,
          much less to deal with a confrontation with Iran or North Korea.

          Right now, total active Army and Marine personnel number approximately 655,000,
          and that includes support units, training units, headquarters personnel and
          others who do not see combat. In a long, drawn-out war such as Vietnam or Iraq,
          units sent to the front lines have to be rotated out periodically and replaced
          by an equal number of forces.

          Currently, we have 135,000 troops in Iraq, 20,000 in Afghanistan, approximately
          100,000 in Asia and more than 100,000 in Europe. Our armed forces have been
          strained to the breaking point. To fill the gaps and shortages, tens of
          thousands of National Guard and reservists have been called up, some for
          several years at a time.

          But there is a cost to all of this. Morale is suffering, as evidenced by the
          recent refusal of an Army Reserve platoon to carry out an order. Enlistments
          and re-enlistments are down. The Army National Guard fell 10 percent short of
          its 2004 recruiting goal. The regular Army has had to ease up on standards to
          meet its recruiting goals.

          What if all-out civil war breaks out in Iraq and we have to increase our troop
          strength to 200,000 or 300,000 to quell it? What if a newly re-elected Bush
          decides to act pre-emptively against Iran, Syria or North Korea?

          Today, people are hesitant to join the National Guard or reserves because of
          skyrocketing odds of being sent into combat or kept away from family and jobs
          for a year or longer. Morale, enlistments and re-enlistments are falling, at
          the same time that military manpower needs are rising dramatically.

          So where would a re-elected Bush get the manpower to pacify Iraq while pursuing
          the next phases of his doctrine of pre-emptive, unilateral war? There is only
          one viable option: a reinstated draft.

          It is probably too much to expect Bush to acknowledge this before Election Day.
          But we would do well to remember when President Lyndon B. Johnson was running
          for election in 1964.

          Voters were afraid he had a secret plan to escalate the war in Vietnam. He
          denied it, repeatedly promising, “I will not send American boys halfway around
          the world to do a job that Asian boys ought to be doing for themselves.”

          Johnson was re-elected. And sure enough, millions of U.S. boys were drafted and
          sent halfway around the world to Vietnam. More than 17,000 of those draftees
          got killed in combat.

          So Americans, today we have good reasons to fear the return of the draft. Bush
          might have avoided the draft when he was a young man. But if re-elected, he
          will not be able to avoid the draft as president.


          Tom Harkin is a Democratic senator from Iowa. Please send comments to
          letters@mndaily.com.
      • Gość: Tysprowda Re: skradzione wybory IP: 193.188.161.* 03.11.04, 19:00
        Ty durny buszolomie: bush off, go to hell i cheney youself, OK?
    • watto prawopodobne 03.11.04, 18:59
      Jeżeli Bush ma być prezydentem, to wolę, żeby Jankesi wzieli na siebie odpowiedzialnosc, a nie tłumaczyli sie pśźniej oszustwami wyborczymi.
      Jednak oszustwa najprawdopodobniej były. Po to są te elektroniczne maszyny, których nie można niezależnie sprawdzić.

      forum.gazeta.pl/forum/72,2.html?f=13&w=16167902&a=17167802


      A wyniki sondażów przy urnach wyborczych nagle w dziwny sposób różnią sie od wyników oficjalnych.

      www.bluelemur.com/index.php?p=388

      An exit poll involves asking someone after they walk out of the election booth who they voted for. While not a guide for proving results, it can be a mechanism for ensuring voting accuracy and flagging potential fraud.

      Perhaps more importantly, while exit polling is unreliable, the odds of President Bush having gaining an advantage from every exit poll in swing states is an extremely improbable coincidence.

      In Florida, Bush led exit polling by CNN of more than 3 million voters by just 5355 votes. Yet he led by 326,000 in the end result. This morning, CNN changed their exit polling to favor Bush, saying that had overweighted African American voters.

      In Wisconsin, where exit polls put Kerry up seven percent, Bush has a lead of one percent, an unexplained difference of eight percent.

      In New Mexico, Kerry led Bush by 3.8 percent, yet Bush leads Kerry by 3 percent in actual reported voting.

      In Minnesota, where a new law sharply restricts reporters? access to polls, Kerry led 9.6 percent in exit polling. Actual voting counts found that Bush trailed by 5 percent, with a 5 percent discrepancy favoring Bush.

      Exit polls put Kerry up by 8 percent in Michigan; actual results show Bush trailing by just 3 percent.

      New Hampshire, which has electronic voting but provides verified receipts, exit polling is within 0.1 percent of the actual vote. Kerry led by 3 percent in exit polling, and 2.9 percent in the actual vote.
      • Gość: a Re: bylo wiadome IP: *.nycmny83.covad.net 03.11.04, 19:05
        ze ktos tak uwiklany po uszy w 9/11 i zbrodnaich w Iraku nie moze przekazac
        wlkadzy komus innymu. Cyganstwo bylo do przwidzenia. Mielismy jednak zludzenie
        ze przyszly prezydent wykaze sie odrobina inteligencji. Cocby na poziomie
        Kerriego. Kerry mogl zakwestionowac cale wybory, ale starcilby glowe, lep[iej
        nie rezykowac zyciem majac tak bogata zone.
Pełna wersja