Limbaugh may have broken Ohio election laws

reply to post by Sublime620

---

No, the right-wing wouldn't be outraged. We've come to expect dirty tricks like that from the left.


You can't "idiot-proof" the voting process. There are a certain number of people who will be led by a disc jockey - how are you gonna change that?

You're tilting at windmills.

lol!!

I should have seen the bipartisan garbage coming. Care to cite some of those "dirty tricks" or are we just going to mudsling?



I guess a good start would be idiot proofing our news sources. People listen to Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh as if they actually have factual and representative ideas.

These are the craziest of the crazy, the fringe republicans who have actually found a niche and people are starting to buy into it. Kind of scary.

Anyway, if Imus can't call people nappy headed hoes, then Limbaugh certainly can't tamper with elections.

reply to post by Sublime620

---

What? You should have seen it coming??? You should have seen it coming! After all, *YOU* started it, sally, you and xmotex!


Trying to lure me into defending O'Reilly, eh? Won't work.

But since you brought it up ... which news commentator would you consider to have integrity?

reply to post by Sublime620

---

When I was a kid, it was common practice on election day for jitneys to drive around and give people, mostly men, a ride to the polling place. They always had several bottles of whiskey and/or a handful of $1 bills in those jitneys, to go along with the free voting advice.

I don't follow you, unless you are saying that us talking about this is a dirty little trick.

Oh you sneaky devil, you!



I like the guys over at the Daily Show, they don't pull any punches when talking about any politician or news organization.

Honestly, I get my news from reading and I get facts. I don't listen to the opinions of any TV news hosts.

If I watch any, it's Bill O'Reilly because it helps me see the types of people that I will have to be arguing with later on... and it gets me a little fired up which I like.

So... I'd have to say, none. I don't like any of 'em. None of them do what they should. Every news station uses buzz words. They all say the same damn thing and somehow put different spins on it.

I don't like any of them.

So you admit starting your post with an ad hominem attack against my political party, but when I post factual information about Limbaugh's distinct lack of credibility that's an ad hominem attack in your eyes? What kind of world do you live in?

Rush lies to you, and admits it. And you eat it up and support him for it. I'm amazed at the blind adherence to "party over country".

But anyway, as for the topic at hand, yes, it's underhanded tactics. Just as bad as using the Justice Department to try and dig up dirt on Democratic candidates before the 2006 elections, and firing federal prosecutors because they refused to be used as political tools. Just as bad as Ann Coulter's vote fraud. Not quite as bad as rigging voting machines, but still pretty damn bad. Yeah, real ethical, those Republicans. "We're right so we have to break the law to make sure we win". Boy, I'm impressed.

Face it-conservatism is a failed philosophy that serves only the rich at the expense of the working American. More and more Americans are waking up to that fact. There's going to be a Democrat in the White House come January, and they'll have a strong Democratic Congress to back them up and fix the mess Georgie made. Face it. You've already lost, and I'm laughing my ass off.

I disagree - only neo-conservatism fits this description in my eyes. True conservatism holds water and has ideas that really mean something.

How it strayed so far off from its base is still a wonder to me.

Yesterday, while driving, I happened to turn to the Rush Limbaugh show, while he was bragging about his Operation Chaos. When he started talking about his "secret delegates" that he would unleash at the Democratic convention, the word association that came to mind was CHILDISH. He sounded like a 10 year old boy from the 1950's who had just gotten a secret Flash Gordon decoder ring, and was going to rule the universe. When he discussed the encrypted messages that he would send to delegates, that had secret decoder devices that look just like regular cellphones, I couldn't hold in the laughter.
Rush is so far out of touch with reality that to spend any time talking about him just gives in to someone that has completely lost it. I know he certainly never had any liberal admirers, but believe me, most of the conservatives pay no heed to him either. Maybe the oxycotin has fried his brain.

Apparently Limbaugh safe from voter-fraud charges



He's safe from prosecution...

Oh really?

I didn't realize fraud, perjury, and the likes aren't crimes.

reply to post by Sublime620

---

Don't shoot the messenger . I think he's a moron, but I'm not sure that warrants jailtime. Bush lied to the American public about a few wars, but we don't see any prosecution happening for that (plus he's the most powerful man in the world).

Sigh...sadly so, sadly so...As I stated in a prior post, I grew up among a family of Republicans, Democrats, conservatives, liberals (and everything else!).
The saying was, "With Republicans you get depressions, with Democrats you get war." What a time we live in--with Republicans you now get recession and war at the same time! It was also a given that Republicans stood for businessmen and Democrats for the working class.

I remember watching William F. Buckley, Jr. on tv and reading Marx and Mao. In 1980 I listened to a regional talk show, on which the hostess was interviewing an elderly Republican woman attending the Republican National Convention. She was great, and I kept saying, Right on! But then she sighed and said, "...but our voices are not being heard, not being listened to."

From 1980 on, things changed. The press grew meek. The social issues (third leg) of the Republican Party included not what that elderly woman talked about but included being a "born again Christian" (and anti-gay, anti-abortion). The social fabric of America tore into two sides of good v evil, you're either against us or with us, enemies.
Instead of intellectuals like Buckley to spread conservative ideas, anti-intellectuals like Rush and Coulter became the voice. Intellectuals were viewed with suspicion, the "Eastern intellectual elite". Thus, you have by 2000 citizens voting for a president based on someone they could have a beer with at a barbeque.

Funny how both sides of the political spectrum could use the "ends justify the means" rational. Communists could overlook ruthlessness, as one could, as in this case, advocate being deceitful in voting to help elect a Republican candidate.

reply to post by desert

---

I don't know how my post inspired such an eloquently put summation of the times we live in... but I'll take it.

I've never gotten to see true conservatisim, I was born in '83. I just know from the definition itself that conservatism has switched.

It's weird, it kind of seems that liberals have taken many of the conservative's traits, and conservatives have gone off in a different direction all together.

[edit on 29-3-2008 by Sublime620]

reply to post by Sublime620

---

Thats the truth. Those two parties ( I almost said both parties, implying there are only two) have merged ideals..Mostly the worst of both.

And have morphed into some sort of Ringleaders that consider their constituents to be the Circus animals that perform at their command.
I guess thats why they always claim that there is still room under their "Tent".

I agree - I don't mean to let the Democrats off the hook, while I tend to favor them after eight years of Bush, I am a registered Independent and have voted for as many Libertarians as I have Democrats. Philosophically I am closer to a classical liberal (libertarian) than I am to the Democrats.

I was trying to point out that this is more of the kind of shady politics we have come to expect from the core of both major parties, who are far more alike than either would care to admit.

And that if the Democrats did the same thing, the Republicans would be up in arms.

You know it's true.



[edit on 3/29/08 by xmotex]

reply to post by Sublime620

---

Aha! I think I caught you smiling! Good - let's leave it at that.



Same here - I like their irreverence.

reply to post by The Nighthawk

---

I disagree. True conservatism is made of rock solid values. The current administration does not reflect true conservatism.

You may very well be right about a Democratic victory in November. No personal loss, btw. I always classify myself as Independent. What makes me appear to be rightwing is the fact that I'm not afraid to defend rightwingers here. Many people cannot - it's not part of the liberal line, and they may lose friends if they do the right thing.

I'm sorry, what part of giving billions of tax payer dollars to the billionaires, taking more from the bottom 20%, killing thousands of Americans for Halliburton profits, child sex ring in Texas, rigging elections, perverting justice by sicing Karl Rove on innocent people to eliminate rivals, wire tapping American citizens AND torturing them or anything the Republicans have done for the past 8 years in any way remotely Conservative?

The Democrats are more conservative then the Republicans. Why us real conservatives can't stand the Republicans or the millions, and millions, of people who call themselves conservative but are just Neocons. See their reaction? "It's ok to commit election fraud if the Republicans do it!" That's not conservative that's Neocon. Why do you think they hated Ron Paul so much? HE WAS ACTUALLY CONSERVATIVE! The only thing the Republicans hate more then a Liberal is a Conservative.

So please don't lump real conservatives like RP or myself with these, chuckleheads, who consider torture and treating certain humans worse than animals a good thing. After all you don't see dogs being hung or dragged to death behind a car just for being dogs...

reply to post by Sublime620

---

Thank you for your kind words.

Oh, yes, by today's standards, Nixon is a flaming liberal And, honestly, Clinton was part of the "Republican wing" of the Democratic Party.
On a political spectrum, anyone to your left can be said to be "liberal"; hence, from a neoconservative viewpoint, the world is a terrifying place of horrifying "liberal" values, enough to bring down a nation, even a nation as great as America.

I remember the Cook county "dead voters". Any attempt to rig an election is a crime against American values and ideals, whether it be by employing fraud, dead voters, rigged election machines, etc.

You are young. Good! I am sorry you are inheriting a world made more frightening by war and bad economic decisions. Resist the temptation to lump everyone, every idea, every institution together as no good, because of failed attempts on both sides.
We must evaluate things separately. If we don't, that is like saying, my sister has cancer and someone else saying yeah but mine has a cold so they're both ill. No, there are differences. Glynda asked, Are you a good witch or a bad witch?
Earmarks, for example, are now "bad". "Special interests" are labeled bad. But if your road was paved because of an earmark, you wouldn't think it bad, nor if your job was saved by a special interest group, i.e. a union, you wouldn't think it bad.

People are waking up to the fact that all aspects of the world nowadays, not just technology, but trade, for example, are much more complicated. Simple statements, bumper sticker ideas, we find are really not that simple. Reagan was elected by many who simply wanted a new vision for America, but they were not told that his vision meant they would lose their jobs.

That is the world you will be guiding. You must elect a leader who understands these complexities and works with them. Personally, here is what I think about the current crop of candidates: McCain, as much as he tried to be bipartison, is a tape deck; Clinton, as much as I would love to say Madam President and who could be a force for good change, is a cd; Obama, OTOH, is an MP4 player, a leader for your time, not mine.

The biggest problem with America now is uniting the citizens for a Better America, not an America that longs for some "golden age" of times past but one that looks forward to a Better Age now. If the economy is a problem, then wrest it from the hands of economic anarchists. If war is a problem, then stop giving money to mercenaries and war corporations and give it to peace corp workers. If energy is a problem, then explore new ways of energy systems. Do not, do not, do business as usual!

This pettiness of getting citizens to vote fraudulently disgusts me. We are Americans, we stand before the world as caretakers of the light of liberty and freedom. America's light has grown dimmer in recent years, and we have no one to blame but ourselves.
Continue to fight, nonviolently, young people, for it truly is the fight for your lives, your livelihood. Life is a continuing struggle. Never give up, but don't expect the struggle to end. In America we have a bloodless revolution every four years, it is called voting.

BTW, part of my family were bombed by union activists in the early part of last century, but those who did the bombing could just as easily have been family members, too. That is the great weirdness of America, the fact that a nation can contain it all and still survive.
My dad never worked for a union business, but he always said that the benefits he did get from that business were there only because unions elsewhere had fought for them. And, I can remember those "profit sharing" checks he would happily bring home to share with his family at the end of the year. My God, nowadays, that's...that's...positively unAmerican...it's Socialism!!

What have we been reduced to nowadays?...not the profit sharing from a successful big business but a government "handout" to stimulate the economy! Truly weird.

Jitney? Now I understand!!
I'll bet 50beans that McCain uses the term JITNEY too!!!

[edit on 29-3-2008 by whaaa]

reply to post by spacedoubt

---

I agree with every word except the last one- ideals.
I believe, though, that your meaning is clear. Neither party has any IDEALS.
It is just one big happy family, out to get whatever they can for themselves, at our expense. Many have said it, but it is true- our Founding Fathers are turning over in their graves now, looking at these criminals.
Conflict between the Democratic and Republican parties are just a show, to make it look like there is a difference between them. In reality, there is not a hill of beans difference between them.
Whoever gets elected takes their orders from the corporations,the military, world groups like the Bildergerbers, the CFO and others.
Conflict is essential to their survival. They are part of Hegel's Dialectic. However, it is a false conflict(Democratic "ideals" versus Republican "ideals") resulting in a synthesis(that is, what THEY want to happen). The dialectic is rigged!