Franken to join Burris in parking lot by whozit

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Franken to join Burris in parking lot

POSTED BY: WHOZIT
UPDATED: Saturday, January 10, 2009 05:15
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1319
PAGE 1 of 1

Saturday, January 3, 2009 8:20 AM

http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/cornyn-promises-filibuster-on-franken
-seating-2009-01-02.html And it gets funnier, and funnier, and funnier.....

I'm going to microwave a bagel and have sex with it - Peter Griffin

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 9:13 AM

RIVERLOVE

Frequently unhinged madman Al Franken has a long and well-documented history of getting into pushing and shoving incidents, as well as real fistfights. This one has the potential to outshine even Tina Fey.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 1:17 PM

DREAMTROVE

Al Franken is an unmitigated ass that just stole an election and if you look around you'll find he's even hated by his own party. In fact, I don't think he has a fan other than himself.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 3, 2009 1:18 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Al Franken is an unmitigated ass that just stole an election and if you look around you'll find he's even hated by his own party. In fact, I don't think he has a fan other than himself.

Bill O'Reilly seems to like him... ;)

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 4, 2009 11:02 AM

RIGHTEOUS9

Stole the election how?

would like to know your information.

I like Franken, by the way.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 4, 2009 11:39 AM

DREAMTROVE

Okay, first, politically, I see no difference between the two candidates. I don't like Al Franken as a comedian because he wasted my time by not making me laugh. Being unfunny is a sin, only as a comedian.

However, election fraud happens on both sides:

First, Coleman won by a slim margin (2500?)
Next, Franken demanded a recount. The recount did not include 1000 absentee ballots, and Franken ended ahead by 50.
Then, the democratic gov i think it was stepped in and said, there will be no more vote counts, and recounts, etc. it's over, Franken won.

That's just bogus.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 4, 2009 12:14 PM

WHOZIT

The election has not been certified, there are votes being argued over by Coleman that the court must look at.

I'm going to microwave a bagel and have sex with it - Peter Griffin

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 5, 2009 11:21 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN

Franken's people argued that damaged ballots in Democrat-heavy voting wards must be double-counted (counted twice), and absentee ballots in Republican-heavy wards must be disenfranchised (not be counted).
Most logical viewers would consider these dishonest and illegal actions to be stealing an election. But Democrats often consider this just part of the game they need to play to get ahead.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 6, 2009 3:53 AM

HERO

Quote:
Originally posted by Righteous9:

Stole the election how?

He didn't steal the election, it was stolen on his behalf.

Every decision of the Board favored Franken. When the orginal numbers favored him, they used the original numbers, when the recounted numbers favored him, they used the recount. Exactly the same problems and questions were decided in different ways for different counties with the only common factor being that the decision always favored Franken. They certified the results before a number of conservative counties completed their recount, which violated state law. They did not count the disputed absentee votes after being ordered to by the Court. And there are numerous situations where more ballots were counted then votes cast...all favoring Franken.

Coleman should sue, the people of Minnesota are being screwed. Unfortunately it appears that the vote totals may never be known for certain. If thats the case then neither candidate should win and a special election should be held.

I'm no Franken fan. It'd be like electing a crazy talker like PirateNews. But if he won, he deserves the seat. If not, then Coleman deserves the seat. If Minnisota has so botched this thing that we don't really know who won, then neither deserve the seat.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 6, 2009 8:38 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

What is really sad is that 14k or more folks who voted for the 3rd party guy, who had zero chance of winning, most would have likely voted for Coleman. Here in GA, Zaxby Chambliss (R) was forced into a run off election. With no Obama on the ballot, he won easily. If Minn had simply had a run off election, Coleman wins as easily.

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 6, 2009 9:10 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

None of you are correct.

Coleman is now saying that the only was to fairly decide is in court. However, his side already went through several courts and up to the Minn. Supreme Court, which ruled against him.

Coleman (via attorneys) argued to that court that ballots were double-counted, that there were more votes counted than people who signed in to vote, and that the double-counted votes all favored Franken.

Since there was NO evidence ANY of this was correct, the Minn. Supreme Court ruled against Coleman.

***************************************************************

Been there. Done that.

Move on.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 6, 2009 9:14 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
If Minnisota has so botched this thing that we don't really know who won, then neither deserve the seat.

It isn't necessary for a state to botch an election to get equivocal results. Every measurement has a certain amount of error built in. For example, punchcard counters have an error rate of about 2%. If the difference between two voting groups is "within the margin of error", then there are only two choices: go to a more accurate form of counting (hand counting) or hold another election.

It would be interesting to look into the exact procedures/ mechanisms used by Minnesota.

---------------------------------
Let's party like its 1929.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 6, 2009 9:17 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

538 has a statistical analysis:

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/minnesota-recount-number-of.htm
l

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 6, 2009 9:59 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
None of you are correct.

Since there was NO evidence ANY of this was correct, the Minn. Supreme Court ruled against Coleman.

Been there. Done that.

Move on.

The court ruled that way, but not because there was no evidence for it. The court simply didn't want to admit it, and being heavily Democratic, the partisan court ruled the way it wanted. Case closed. Theft in broad day light.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 6, 2009 10:41 AM

HERO

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
None of you are correct.

Since there was NO evidence ANY of this was correct, the Minn. Supreme Court ruled against Coleman.

Been there. Done that.

Move on.

The court ruled that way, but not because there was no evidence for it. The court simply didn't want to admit it, and being heavily Democratic, the partisan court ruled the way it wanted. Case closed. Theft in broad day light.

Your both wrong. There have been several Court rulings on a number of issues brought by both sides. However the issues now being raised have NOT been litigated and neither has the final result. State law allows Coleman a Court review of everything in these situations and he is availing himself of his legal rights.

There is evidence of double counting, more ballots cast then voters, and inconsistant ruling all favoring Franken. Perhaps an evidenciary hearing needed to sort it all out.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 6, 2009 10:56 AM

GRIZWALD

Regardless of who eventually takes that Senate seat, the sad fact remains that there are a LOT of Minnesotans who would rather have Al Franken representing them in Washington than... well, just about anybody else.

*sigh*

___________________________________________________
High Priestess of Pork and Ag-Related Activities of the MYTHICAL LAND OF IOWA

Click on my profile for my Annoyingly Long List of Firefly Links.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 6, 2009 11:04 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"There is evidence of double counting ..."

No. There is evidence that a few more votes were counted by hand than by machine. But, by 538's analysis, historically many votes uncounted by machine were correctly marked. The machines just glitched in counting.
The PURPOSE of a hand-recount is to go to a more accurate counting method (by hand) and catch the votes that were incorrectly missed in the first place. Which is what happened.

"... more ballots cast then voters ..."

Again, not true. There is no indication that there were more votes counted than people who signed the register. That was a complete mis-statement by the WSJ. And, using that erroneous argument as if it was fact is what happens when you mistake a slanted and factually-deficient editorial for objective news.

".. and inconsistant ruling all favoring Franken."

Again, not true. Time and time again, Coleman's lawyers made unsupported arguments like the ones above that weakened their case before the courts. They lost on the merits of their arguments, which, in those cases, weren't solid.

"Perhaps an evidenciary hearing needed to sort it all out."
Perhaps Coleman just wants to drag it out as long as possible.

Do you think the democrats will take it to the Supreme Court to get a ruling to stop the recounts ?

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 6, 2009 1:31 PM

WHOZIT

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D95HT0N80&show_article=1 Coleman is not going away quietly, he may not go at all

I'm going to microwave a bagel and have sex with it - Peter Griffin

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 8, 2009 5:46 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2009/01/09/franken/

The recount shows that he won the Minnesota Senate race. The lying liars who say otherwise have no evidence of cheating.

By Joe Conason

Jan. 9, 2009 | If Al Franken were not a longtime public figure -- and thus severely handicapped by American jurisprudence -- he could file a powerful complaint for libel or slander against several of the most prominent wingnuts in the United States. From Rush Limbaugh to Bill O'Reilly to Richard Mellon Scaife, a chorus of familiar voices is loudly defaming the Democrat whose razor-thin win in the Minnesota Senate race will now be tested in that state's courts. Ever since Election Day, on radio and television, on the Internet and in print, they've screamed that Franken is stealing, rigging, pilfering, scamming, thieving and cheating his way to victory.

These media figures, some of whom occasionally pretend to be journalists, have spewed such accusations repeatedly, without offering any proof whatsoever -- in plain contradiction of the available facts. Not only is there no evidence that Franken or his campaign "cheated" in any way during the election or the recount, but there is ample reason to believe that the entire process was fair, balanced and free from partisan taint.

For Franken's most famous adversaries, spewing lies about him may be a form of cheap revenge. A prime example is Fox News host O'Reilly, who has hated Franken for years, dating back to when the comedian and author berated him in a public debate, then exposed him in "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them," and ultimately provoked him into filing an ill-advised lawsuit that only generated vast amounts of free publicity for Franken's book before the suit was thrown out of court. Of course O'Reilly was preceded by Limbaugh, that "big fat idiot" whose deceptions and bigotry were featured in the comedian's first bestselling book way back in 1996.

So Limbaugh, quoting an erroneous editorial from the Wall Street Journal, has been ranting about the supposed theft of the Minnesota election for months now. "We did not elect Al Franken," he told a caller on Jan. 5. "He stole the race. They are stealing the race up there blind in front of everybody's nose. They are counting absentee ballots [which election officials are required to do by law]. ... They're counting votes twice -- votes that were rejected, all kinds of things [which election officials ordered after determining that some votes were rejected wrongly]. That's just -- the Democrats are stealing the election up there." Even the Journal's tendentious and sloppy screeds have never quite accused Franken of "stealing" the race or the recount. Rush just made that part up.

On Jan. 7, O'Reilly hosted an appearance by Dick Morris, the former Clinton consultant who lost his job for consorting with a prostitute and has gone into business selling himself to the highest Republican bidder. Aside from Fox News, Morris seems to appear with the greatest frequency on Newsmax.com, the popular right-wing Web site owned by Scaife and operated by Christopher Ruddy, a journalist known mainly for his fanciful theories about the Vince Foster suicide.

"Al Franken -- you think he's cheating?" intoned O'Reilly, as if he didn't know the answer.

"Yeah, I think there's funny business -- funny business going on in Franken's thing," replied Morris, as if he knew exactly what he was talking about. "Sure, he's cheating, and sure that Minnesota's doing it for him. I mean, there's no question that there's cheating going on ... This is outright larceny. This is just a total theft."

But he offered no evidence to support that incendiary accusation, on the O'Reilly broadcast or in the Newsmax column he published that same day, headlined "Stop Al Franken From Stealing the Election." (That column included a link to the Republican National Lawyers Association, which is raising money to assist Coleman's election lawsuit, with a direct endorsement from Morris.) Instead he complained about a few instances in which he disagrees with decisions by the Minnesota courts and election officials, and in particular with the special panel that oversaw the recount. How those disagreements amount to "cheating" or "stealing" by Franken he did not bother to explain.

All the usual suspects have echoed these false charges across the airwaves and the Internet. What they invariably neglect to mention is that the Minnesota Canvassing Board, whose decisions have so displeased the Republican right, was impeccably nonpartisan. Nobody in their right mind in Minnesota believes that the board was biased -- and, in fact, Powerline blogger Scott Johnson, no friend of Democrats or Franken, has specifically spoken up to defend it. "There was no noticeable partisan division among the board," he wrote. "Minnesotans are justifiably proud of the transparency and fairness of their work."

Two of its five members are Supreme Court judges appointed by Tim Pawlenty, the state's conservative Republican governor, each with a long record of loyal service to the GOP; a third is a nonpartisan elected judge; a fourth was appointed by former independent Gov. Jesse Ventura; and only one, Secretary of State Mark Ritchie, is a Democrat. At the outset, Coleman's own lawyers accepted the panel's membership, as did everyone else, including Franken, who might have protested that his own party had only one member.

Their decisions against Coleman, which led to Franken's provisional victory by 255 votes, were unanimous. It is this group, composed of distinguished judges with spotless reputations, whose hard work has been described in odious terms by the likes of Morris, Limbaugh and Ann Coulter.

Here's a challenge to all those lying liars. In essence, they have accused my friend Franken of a felony under Minnesota law. If they know of any evidence that would show he has stolen votes or violated any election statute, let them report it to the state law enforcement authorities. And if they don't, perhaps they will at last have the decency to shut up.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 8, 2009 7:11 PM

DREAMTROVE

Quote:

What is really sad is that 14k or more folks who voted for the 3rd party guy, who had zero chance of winning, most would have likely voted for Coleman. Here in GA, Zaxby Chambliss (R) was forced into a run off election. With no Obama on the ballot, he won easily. If Minn had simply had a run off election, Coleman wins as easily.
Quote:

Auraptor has a point. It would help our democracy a lot to have these positions voted for on off years.

I'd favor an amendment to that effect, and additionally, that the requirement for victory be raised from 1 vote to something decisive. If there is a situation like this one, there should be a revote.

If we could just move elections to 51%, we would have no more fraud accusations, and legitimate candidates would have more credibility. Also, likely to be swung by straight line votes in presidential years, could move to odd numbered years. Just some thoughts

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 8, 2009 9:57 PM

FREMDFIRMA

Actually I think instant-runoff is the only logical way to go with things in the modern era.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting
It'd damn sure put a stop to this crap.

As for the rest, I find in rather amusing to watch the very self-same people *caught* screwing with elections in Ohio, and extremely suspicious behavior in many other cases (See Also: Bev Harris+BBV) then have the nerve to scream bloody murder when a very open and transparent process doesn't go their way.

After all the brazenly criminal (See Also: Ohio, Butch+Hoppy, etc) actions on top of really bizarre "statistical anomalies" always FAVORING the same party, not to mention the fact that certain election officials in michigan win their post by the same *exact* count of votes every year despite massive public sentiment against them...

Do you really think joe average is going to have one whit of sympathy if the Dems DID resort to the tried and true Tammany Hall tactic of voting the cemetary ?

I find that rather doubtful, and even had they done so, with a process that open, it'd be caught out in short order - seems the only ones who scream when a vote count is nitpicked down to the last ballot, which in the interest of fairness, ALL close races should be, is the ones who've committed the most mayhem in the past ten years, and all that does to the average thinking person is scream GUILTY in letters of fire.

It's always been an annoyance to me...
Not that they're evil bastards, cause every modern politician is that, but that they're *incompetent* evil bastards!

Above all things, I loathe incompetence.

-Frem
It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 9, 2009 3:58 AM

DREAMTROVE

True

But I'm a fan of incompetence. If you look at what the govt. is trying to do, ie., set up a one world slave state, kill the people and destroy the environment, I think it should be done as incompetently as possible.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 9, 2009 6:12 AM

FREMDFIRMA

There's that, it just.. how to explain it, I find it repellent all the same, I mean, I can respect an evil scheme if it's pulled off with slick competence even as I dump sand in the gears and throw it off the rails, there's a certain respect there for the tradecraft, you understand ?

It's just the sheer ham-handed halfassery of it, it bothers me on a professional level, even as I am thankful they're no good at it.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 9, 2009 8:46 AM

HELL'S KITTEN

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
What is really sad is that 14k or more folks who voted for the 3rd party guy, who had zero chance of winning, most would have likely voted for Coleman.

Interesting statement to make. How did you come to this conclusion? As someone who actually lives in the state, I'd say your claim is unsupportable. And, for the record, Barkley received over 430,000 votes (~15%), not 14,000.

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
First, Coleman won by a slim margin (2500?)

Off by an order of magnitude, dear.
Approximately 215 votes separated the two.

Quote:
Next, Franken demanded a recount.

Ah, no. Franken did not *demand* a recount. Minnesota state law dictates that when an election is that close, a recount is automatic (unless someone concedes). What actually happened is that Coleman told Franken's campaign to forego a recount and just concede. Franken's campaign, in turn, within their right and in keeping with MN law, told Coleman to get fucked. Do you really think Coleman would have done any different, were the situations reversed?

Quote:
The recount did not include 1000 absentee ballots, and Franken ended ahead by 50.

So what? At the time the recount was mandated, the issue of absentee ballots simply hadn't been on the table. The absentee ballots have subsequently been reviewed, requiring *both* parties to agree on those that *should* be counted. And since that Court mandate and subsequent recount, about 900 of the 1300 ballots have been deemed "wrongfully rejected" by *both* sides. A significant number of the absentee ballots happened favour Franken, so *now* Coleman - even though he and his campaign agreed to count these ballots - wants them uncounted.

Quote:
Then, the democratic gov i think it was stepped in and said, there will be no more vote counts, and recounts, etc. it's over, Franken won.

That's just bogus.

Your facts are bogus. The MN State government has said no such thing. No one has been certified and general concensus around here is that it will go to court to be resolved.

Quote:
Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:
Franken's people argued that damaged ballots in Democrat-heavy voting wards must be double-counted (counted twice), and absentee ballots in Republican-heavy wards must be disenfranchised (not be counted).

Now this is just absurd.......
This, also, did not happen. See above re: absentee ballots.

Honestly, people, would it kill you to do some actual fact checking?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 9, 2009 8:56 AM

PENGUIN

Give'em hell HK!

Your friendly neighbor to the south...

King of the Mythical Land that is Iowa

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 9, 2009 11:38 AM

DREAMTROVE

Quote:

There's that, it just.. how to explain it, I find it repellent all the same, I mean, I can respect an evil scheme if it's pulled off with slick competence even as I dump sand in the gears and throw it off the rails, there's a certain respect there for the tradecraft, you understand ?

It's just the sheer ham-handed halfassery of it, it bothers me on a professional level, even as I am thankful they're no good at it.

Lol

I think that the incoming powers will not disappoint in sheer ham-handed halfassery. hopefully, they'll also spend a lot of money. While I'm against this in a govt. I support, this is no longer a govt. I support.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 9, 2009 11:38 AM

DREAMTROVE

Quote:

There's that, it just.. how to explain it, I find it repellent all the same, I mean, I can respect an evil scheme if it's pulled off with slick competence even as I dump sand in the gears and throw it off the rails, there's a certain respect there for the tradecraft, you understand ?

It's just the sheer ham-handed halfassery of it, it bothers me on a professional level, even as I am thankful they're no good at it.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 9, 2009 7:03 PM

KWICKO

Quote:

I think that the incoming powers will not disappoint in sheer ham-handed halfassery. hopefully, they'll also spend a lot of money.

I think that's a given - both the halfassery AND the spending an awful lot of money.

Given the last eight years, though, the bar has been raised (or should that be lowered?) quite a bit.

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 10, 2009 5:15 AM

PENGUIN

King of the Mythical Land that is Iowa

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER

POST DATE