That isn't Clinton? Darn.
Actually, I used Edwards to point out that tons of politicians do the same thing these days. I guess I could have been more descriptive. You what happens when you assume, right? haha.

 The people in NJ are morons (not all of us) they keep putting libs or rino's in office. Corsine figures if he asks for the stars, we would be happy if only he charged us for the moon.

Good to hear from you, Carl. Your posts  are too infrequent for my tastes (it is good that we pm each other, though!). The reason Lee did not do "Escape from LA" was because he died in 89, and the movie came out in 96.

Speaking of great movies, today is the anniversary of the British aand her allies retreating from Gallipoli in WW1. The 1981 movie was the film Mel did between the first two Mad Max movies, and was directed by Peter Weir, who also directed "Year of Living Dangerously", "Witness", "Dead Poet's Society", & "Maaster and Commander" (thx, IMDB!)...

MSM spread rumors that if Fred didn't do good in Iowa he would drop out. They tried (successfully) to hurt his chances, now they have moved on the sabatage Mitt's campaign.......

They want Hellary or Hussien Obama....but they need to hedge their bet by putting their boy McCain on the Repub side

It's not Right vs. Left; it is Right vs. Wrong

It just goes to show a good plausible conspiracy theory can grow legs.  That's what makes them fun, however, did Hillary & Co. bus thousands of voters across state lines?  Surely someone would have noticed that especially at the voting places.  On the other hand, a high turn out "could be" a sign that an unpurged voter registration roll or people falsely registering at the door engaging in fraudulently voting.  Given the experiences of Chicago and Philadelphia, this isn't outside the realm of possibility.  Philadelphia being an outrageous example of Dem Machine Politics where more people are registered voters who vote than there are adults available to vote according to the Census Bureau! In other words 100% participation rate among adults, which is not in the realm of probablity (possible but highly improbable).  

But would someone be desperate enough to do this during a primary versus the general election thus attracting a public scandal maybe stretching it a bit.  It's one thing stuff the ballot box and have the Repubs cry foul when they lose as this is discounted as being a sore loser, it's quite another thing for one Dem to do it to another Dem where the MSM backing of candidates may make it in their interests to expose the whole affair to help their candidate and up their ratings in the process.  I guess the real question is Hillary that desperate?

Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. dscott's corollary: The line between malice and stupidity is called depraved indifference.

"Just the facts Ma'am" Sgt. Joe Friday:

Zogby/Rasmussen//actual:

McCain – 36/32//37
Romney – 27/31//32
Huckabee – 10/10//11
Guiliani – 9/8//9
Paul – 8/8//8
Thompson – 2/3//1

Obama – 42/37//37
***Clinton – 29/30//39***
Edwards – 17/19//17

Zogby and Rasmussen are reputable sources, and spot on ***except for Clinton***?

you be the judge...and don't forget the "high turn-out" and "shortage of ballots". Grew up in Chicago during hiz-honor Daley(Sr.) times, and he always had "high turn-out". Even people from the grave showed up!

v

"…you are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts." -the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan.

"Just the facts Ma'am" Sgt. Joe Friday:

Zogby/Rasmussen//actual:

McCain – 36/32//37
Romney – 27/31//32
Huckabee – 10/10//11
Guiliani – 9/8//9
Paul – 8/8//8
Thompson – 2/3//1

Obama – 42/37//37
***Clinton – 29/30//39***
Edwards – 17/19//17

notice the only one with a real discrepency? hmmm

v

lets start the vast-left-wing-conspiracy theory!

The biggest inconsistency is the 80% turnout. You can't get 80% of any American group to do anything! Also, remember that in NH they have open primaries, so anyone can vote for anybody. The statewide breakdowns that I've heard for NH are about 30% Dem, 30% Repub, and 40% indy. So if 80% of the voters turned out, you would expect to see a very unusually high number of republican votes in the same district, and we didn't. And with most of those extra votes going for Clinton, that would mean that she had a groundswell of support from Republicans, and I don't see that happening.

I'me guessing in those 80% precincts, you had about 35-40% turnout from real voters and 40% from "day" voters.

Roger, I think the correct term is "snow burka".

That would be cheating, right? And Hillary and company are completely above board, right?

v

Here's what a friend of mine said about the Hillary "scandal":
"Calling the ashtray chucking, lamp smashing, profane mouthed, cattle futures fraud investing, money laundering, perjury committing, justice obstructing, document hiding, adultery abetting, secret service abusing, Vince Foster cover up aiding, carpet bagging, lying political phony a bitch is too mild a term." November 15, 2007 - by mikej

cause I heard when they hit the stage they ate through the floor.

Appears somewhat correct with some liberties.  Nothing is really debunked, just put mildly aside.  Do you know for sure he used Bible in swearing in?  Does he recite the PLEDGE?  So, you can see where people go with this...  

Take a look at http://www.freedomsenemies.com/_more/obama.htm.

There's plenty of info there that raises enough doubt in my mind as to the fitness of BO as POTUS.

Killing them with kindness isn't working.  Time to get scrappy with the Donkeys.

It does create a bit of a problem doesn't it?

Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/ 

Shawn, given the electronic ballots in many states, the answer is they can't write Fred in if they wanted to.  That's the trade of paper versus electronic voting at this time. 

I've voted in two states with electronic voting over the past 10 years, neither state gave me the option of a write in.  In fact, when I think about it, I have voted with four different types of means, the oldest was the mechanical where you pull the lever for each candidate.  On the old mechanical voting machines you could write in a candidate and anyone voting after you would see that write in as an option and give them in turn the option of voting for the write in.  On the individual paper ballots, you could write in a candidate, but that basically meant, each and every person would have to physically write the same person in on their individual ballot, the same goes for the absentee ballot.  With electronic voting as I have experienced it, you are only given the choices of whom to vote for, no option for write ins are provided.  If they did, there is no guarantee that anyone else would see the write in as a viable choice much less be able to do so given the technophobic fear of screwing up and invalidating the entire ballot if you did so. 

In my experience, those who control the elections commissions must be watched very closely and challenged given that they can skew the voting results by merely deselecting people's choices.  An example, let's say you are voting for a number of judge's positions  say 5 and there are 8 candidates.  The election commission has the choice of giving you a yes/no option for each candidate, or forcing you to confirm 5 of the 8 choices before allowing you go move on to the next selection or allows you to come back and redecide but forces you choose 5 even though you might think that 6 of the 8 are scoundrels and shouldn't even have a license to practice law.  In one election with electronic voting I was in, Maryland, the election commission invalidated the person's entire vote for not selecting 5 of the 8 choices and you didn't find out about that invalidation until after the election.  In Florida, I was given the choice of abstaining, i.e. my vote was no to all the candidates offered.  An example of that was in 2006 in Sarasota where thousands of voters literally abstained on both the Repub and Dem candidates for a Congressional District.  The Dem candidate tried to claim there was something wrong with the electronic voting saying there was no paper trial to confirm who people voted for when in fact the problem was with the choices offered to the voters, they voted NO to both of them!  The Repub won btw in that election. 

My point here is a choice is not a choice when someone else chooses my choices.  It's like the card trick of someone telling you to pick a card and they tell you what the card is.  The choice they want you to make is always the easiest card to pull.  In other words they only allow you to pick the card which they know what it is, that's a false choice.  Democracy my friends is easily subverted, as Stalin was known to say, it's not those who vote who decide the election, it's those who count the votes who decide the election.

Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. dscott's corollary: The line between malice and stupidity is called depraved indifference.

I took that test, but it must be at several different sites because I'm sure it was a different link than the one you post. Anyway, I have to admit I agree with Fred on 99% of his principles and his stand on issues. I'm still looking for that 1% that I don't.

I understand exactly what shawn was getting at, and I know it creates a problem. However, by writing Fred in for the general election I accomplish two things.

1. I fulfill my civic duty to vote.

2. I keep my promise to myself to NEVER, EVER vote for a RINO again. 

Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/