Wednesday, January 25, 2006

On the other hand...

While I did not support Ophelia Ford in the District 29 Primary for the Senate, and I, like 3/4 of everyone in Shelby County, happen to be curious about the election that she won over Terry Roland, I have no problems supporting her in her battle to be seated in the State Senate.

First, the Republican Party stole at least one and possibly two Presidential elections. Second, if this election is declared null and void, the Republican-controlled County Commission will almost certainly appoint Terry Roland to the seat.

It has been said that you can't hold speaker elections in mid-session; however, if Roland gets that Senate seat, I wouldn't put it past them to try. Then, Democrats lose their chairmanships and any Democratic agenda (such as REAL TennCare reform) goes into the toilet.

This also would create gridlock as the Senate killed bills by the Democratic-controlled House.

Do I wish Ophelia Ford would have primary opposition this year? Yes, because her candidacy drove a lot of hardcore Democrats to vote for Roland (and not just in the white community, bubba!) because they simply do not believe that this seat is anyone's property other than the voters.

However, the risk to the Democratic control of the State Senate is too great not to hold your nose and support the fight, because, in the long run, this is about a hell of a lot more than any one person.


Spectra said...

Partisan politics at it's worst. Vote for any democrat, no matter who or what.

I guess you haven't read the newspapers about all of the groups of people who recounted the 2000 ballots and all agreed, Bush won. Do you not trust the liberal media types who participated in the recounting? It's time to get over it. You democrats sound like broken records.

Now, I understand where you are coming from since you think Ophelia should be supported irregardless of voter fraud. Win at all costs, dishonest or not!

LeftWingCracker said...

This is called guilty until proven innocent; you are attempting to force her to prove her innocence.

If you have actual proof that A) there was deliberate fraud and B) Ford's campaign was behind it, take it to judge donald, I'm sure she would listen.

Otherwise, your words mean nothing.

PeskyFly said...

Well, not to mention that Gore got more more votes PERIOD, not to mention findings that he got more vptes in Florida. Good god Spectra, bitch all you like (I happen to disagree with LWC on this one too), but the lie you are putting forth has long since been busted. You got your Bushman in office, be happy.

LWC, I don't want to see either one seated, and based on the turnout I don't think District 29 did either. I sure wish there was some way they could both be sidelined and a true nonpartisan could be seated until the regular election.

LeftWingCracker said...

So do I; however, the County AND State GOP will put so much pressure on the Rethug County Commissioners to appoint Roland, they won't have any choice.

That's why I am (EXTREMELY reluctantly) supporting Ford's seating. it sucks, but it's either that or watch the GOP try to ram crap down our throat in NashVegas.

If Henri Brooks had won the primary and had won by 13 votes, this would NEVER have gotten as far as it has....

thurbis said...

Oh, this is silly. Dead people didn't actually show up and vote on their own; they had to at least have help getting a ride to the polls because most of them no longer have cars, by gum!

While I loved the "night of the living dead" movies, this is a bit much! The dead seem to roam the earth not only when hell is full, but whenever there is an important election. Now, if they managed to elect a fellow zombie, that would be one thing; but they always seem to vote for candidates in close elections and that makes me madder than a hungry lion gnawing on a skinny christian (to borrow a phrase from Ed Anger).

In all seriousness, as for the concept of someone being "guilty until proven innocent", President Bush has never been given the benefit of the doubt from those who accuse him of stealing two elections, adding arsenic to the drinking water and everything else under the sun. Day in and day out the president is accused of a lot of things by people who have no problem considering him guilty until proven innocent. Now that may seem like a vote winning scheme to some, but it has essentially backed a lot of good and decent democrats into a corner because, by virtue of being against anything President Bush is for, they've inadvertently aligned themselves with anyone who is against the President. . .including people like Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. When Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein say pretty much exactly the same things about the President as Howard Dean or Ted Kennedy does, there's something rotten in the state of Denmark.

Multiple recounts from everyone under the sun - including the New York Times - conclusively proved that George Bush won the 2000 presidential election. Yet, just recently, Paul Krugman wrote a recent article in which he claimed that Al Gore won the 2000 presidential election; like, does he not read his own paper?

While Krugman had to run a correction in which he stated that "the two stricter-standard recounts went to Mr. Bush", he also went into the patented excuse of "the recorded vote was so close that, when you combine that fact with the effects of vote suppression and ballot design, it becomes reasonably clear that the voters of Florida, as well as those of the United States as a whole, tried to choose Mr. Gore". Fools hate to be corrected and Krugman certainly falls into this category.

After all, Paul Krugman had to admit: "Compare me … compare me, uh, with anyone else, and I think you’ll see that my forecasting record is not great." To me it's not surprising that Mr. "my forecasting record is not great" Krugman is more often wrong than not or that, naturally, he has strong opinions!

As for the "vote suppression" mentioned by Krugman and others, it's funny how he missed all of this from the 2004 presidential election cycle:

Five Democratic campaign workers on trial in criminal damage case

Per this article: MILWAUKEE - Five Democratic presidential campaign workers, including the sons of a congresswoman and a former mayor, were wrongly implicated in Election Day vandalism by national political operatives from their own party, defense attorneys argued at their trial Tuesday. Prosecutors accused the five of slashing 40 tires on get-out-the-vote vans at a Republican campaign office in the early hours . . .testimony from the national campaign workers will show the five bragged about the vandalism when they returned to the Democratic campaign office early on Election Day. . . .Robin Shellow, the attorney for Sowande A. Omokunde, the son of Democratic U.S. Rep. Gwen Moore, said campaign violence had occurred in an "orchestrated way" across the country in the weeks leading up to the presidential election. Shellow said a group of "national professional operatives" sent to the battleground state of Wisconsin wrongly accused Omokunde and the four others in the tire slashings. "The violence that they're trying to put on these kids from Wisconsin had been happening in an organized way across the country," Shellow told jurors.

Trial set for activists accused of slashing Republicans' tires on Election Day

Per this article: While much of the country will be focused this week on the highly partisan battles expected during the confirmation hearings of Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito, five Milwaukee Democratic activists will be fighting their own battle: They are going to trial for allegedly slashing tires outside a Republican Party office during the 2004 presidential election. The sons of a first-term congresswoman and Milwaukee's former acting mayor are among the five charged with slashing the tires of vans rented by Republicans to drive voters and monitors to the polls on Election Day.

During the 2004 elections we were treated to any number of tales involving chicanery and intimindation, but not from the "usual suspects".

Protestors Ransack Bush/Cheney Headquarters In Orlando

Per this article: Local 6 News reported that several people from the group of 100 Orlando protestors face possible assault charges after the group forced their way inside the Republican headquarters office. While in the building, some of the protestors drew horns and a mustache on a poster of President George W. Bush and poured piles of letters in the office, according to the report. . .One of the protestors said she wanted to send a message.

Getting Physical

Per this article: Orlando's fracas was mirrored in Miami, where police reported that more than 100 union protestors stormed the Bush-Cheney office and shoved volunteers aside. No one was charged because most of the protestors left before the police arrived. In Tampa, about 35 protestors filled the local GOP office and intimidated the elderly volunteers working there. The AFL-CIO took credit on its Web site for similar demonstrations--apparently all coordinated--in Independence, Mo., Kansas City, Mo., Dearborn, Mich., St. Paul, Minn., and West Allis, Wis. In what could be a related incident, the Bush-Cheney office in Knoxville, Tenn., had its plate-glass windows shattered by gunfire on Tuesday morning before volunteers showed up for work. Another Republican office, in Seattle, was broken into and had computer files stolen. Esmerelda Aguilar, an AFL-CIO spokesman, says Republicans are "trying to politicize [the Orlando incident] and exaggerate the event." She maintains that all of the demonstrations "were peaceful protests" designed to call attention to new Bush administration regulations on overtime pay.

Shots fired into Knox Bush/Cheney headquarters

Per this article: According to Knoxville Police Department (KPD) officers on the scene Tuesday, it is believed that the two separate shots were fired from a car sometime between 6:30 am and 7:15 am. One shot shattered the glass in the front door and the other cracked the glass in another of the front doors. Bush-Cheney volunteer campaign coordinator Suzanne Dewar says she originally planned to be in the office early Tuesday morning. . .Dewar says she can't imagine why someone would fire shots into an office where people could have been injured or killed. "I don't even know what to say to the person that did this," Dewar says. "...Get a life. This is ridiculous."

Swastika Burned Into Grass On Bush-Cheney Supporter's Lawn

Per this article: Someone burned an 8-foot-by-8-foot Nazi swastika on a home's lawn near where Bush-Cheney signs were posted. The vandals used grass killer to spray the symbol. . .Homeowners are angry, but resolute in what they plan to do next. "I just cannot believe that someone would take the liberty to do this," said homeowner Rob Schaeffer. "We're appalled that someone would choose to destroy our property because they don't believe in our political views. My signs are going right back in the yard. This is my property. We live here. We have rights." Police are investigating the criminal damage and told the homeowner it will be investigated as a hate crime, which carries stiffer penalties.
hhhhhmmmmm. . .I am sensing a pattern here!

As Michelle Malkin noted, "How many hate crime anecdotes does it take before the mainstream media spot a trend? If the victims are politically correct, all it takes is one or two."

While people on both sides can act like yahoo's, there are a lot of actual reports of intimidation and violence that don't get much widespread attention.

Simply put, we don't have to accept such behavior from people in our own respective parties; we are, after all, often judged by the company we keep.

Had dead people showed up to vote for George W. Bush, and had the margin of defeat been less than 20 votes I wouldn't blame you one bit for being suspicious and wanting to get, as Paul Harvey would say, "the rest of the story".

Who can blame Terry Roland for thinking that something was rotten in the state of Denmark - or, in this case, Tennessee - especially when Ophelia Ford is in that seat because her brother was indicted - along with more than a few Democrats - for taking bribes?

It baffles me how Jackson Baker can write an article titled -

Riding Shotgun with John Ford

and not get a teensy weensy suspicious when John Ford says things like: "There's conflict of interest, and there's illegal . . those crazy-assed rules and everything? Shit! I won't be able to make a living". . .of course that was like, what? a week before the indictments came down the pike? Was Mr. Baker totally blindsided by what happened or was he playin' jack ass when he went on to write, "LET ME STIPULATE RIGHT HERE that I like John Ford, and make of that what you will". . .well, I'm not really sure what to make of it other than that his instincts are way off the mark.

All that being said, I have just two words for those pondering solutions for close elections: INTERPREPTIVE DANCE.

I have just two web sites for those who don't have a problem with dead people voting to go to to get their heads straight:

And, if you are indeed a brave warrior -

Of course this may sum it up best:

"The election is over, the results are now known; The will of the people has clearly been shown. Let hard feelings vanish -- yes, let them all pass; I'll hug your elephant if you'll kiss my donkey ass"!

Live Long and Prosper o sage of the left!

P.S. Am I to understand that Otis Campbell can't get elected in Mayberry? What is this madness??

SgtLarry said...

Thurgis, don't hold back!

I'm not sure which makes the left madder, losing to Bush in 2000 (and Gore did lose) or losing to him again in 2004 and losing by a wider margin.

As to Dist. 29, I think dead people voting is proof that illegal votes were cast. It doesn't need to proven that the Fords had anything to do with it in order to throw out the election.

At this point, the election should be voided and neither Roland or Ford should be appointed to the seat. Heck, I'd rather see Mongo appointed while the others get ready for the primaries in August.

PeskyFly said...

When you lose with more votes--- and Gore DID have more votes, it's not exactly a mandate oh victorious minority that's slipping deeper and deeper into minority status.

We'll see hoe loud you crow this year-- and then it's just a skip and a jumpt to 2008.

We haven't got a candidate, but who are you going to run, Bill Frist? Gov. Barbour?

I hear John McCain rolls over when you call him a sissy.

SgtLarry said...

Come on Cracker, you know the rules of the game. It isn't who gained the most yards, or who had the most first downs ... it's who has the most points on the scoreboard that wins. Bush had more electoral college votes ... he won!

I'm a third party guy ... my guy lost big both times! lol

Typically the party holding the presidency loses seats during mid-term elections ... but Bush has bucked that trend so far. And if the democrats don't change their gameplan, they're going to be shocked in November.

As for '08 ... Who will the democrats put up? Hillary??? That will just throw the race to the republicans ... even a weak republican can beat her. Heck, even the recent NY Times poll showed 51% who would NOT vote for Hillary.

I'm not a McCain fan, but as a fellow veteran, I really think you should withdraw your remark. I wouldn't call any man who spent time in the Hanoi Hilton a sissy who rolls over at the first sign of trouble.

Brad Watkins said...

I can imagine that primary opposition to Ophelia is all but assured. I have not heard anything yet, of course none of the legislators who ran last time can raise any money right now. "Well they can, as this is a special session, but to avoid any kind of confusion they are not." That would explain the delay, also I do not think the filing deadline is until April. I think there will be at least one or two suprise candidates by then.