Thursday Highlights

Good morning.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

16 comments

  1. Plugging a worthy College. If you’re not going into Science/Math/Engineering, I can’t imagine a better education.

    Wait, what? Didn’t you just write about how those are the only subjects that matter?

    ACORN which is connected with Mr Obama’s past and it’s activities. Liberals will likely inform me why 105% voter registration is not just a good thing but necessary.

    You really are willing to believe anything as long as it reflects badly on Obama, aren’t you? I looked into this, by which I mean I spend ten seconds clicking the links back to the source, and here is the argument that ACORN did something wrong:

    1) There are more registered voters than eligible voters in Indianapolis.
    2) ACORN has an office in Indianapolis.

    I am not making this up.

    And I’m skeptical of #1.

    Imagine the reaction if this was Ms Clinton.

    Imagine the reaction if Senator Clinton had winked at the cameras several times during the debate like she was America’s cocktail waitress. (Can’t remember who had that line.) Or how Troopergate would be talked about by the right. Or how having a secessionist relative would be looked at. Or if she had sounded so ridiculous during interviews. Or if Chelsea had become pregnant at 17! The right’s heads would have exploded.

    I do agree those shots are a little inappropriate.

  2. More info on Indiana.

    Turns out that people who are registered twice (e.g. because they moved or filled out a second card because they weren’t sure they were still registered) never, ever vote twice. The GOP can’t point to a single example. Not one. They also can’t point to any dead registered voters voting or moved registered voters voting. The whole complaint is a sham.

    Every single presidential election, the GOP successfully suppresses some of the black vote. This is a fact. The photo-ID requirement in Indiana is not intended to fight the nonexistent voting fraud but to reduce the black vote. Okay, at least that’s legal. If the GOP really cared about voter fraud, they’d investigate the illegal purges of people whose names sound sort of like convicted felons’ names instead of orchestrating them. They’d investigate the illegal posting of flyers — almost always in black neighborhoods — that warn of nonexistent arrests for voters who have outstanding parking tickets, etc.

    ACORN is not the problem here. Whenever one of ACORN’s canvassers does something wrong, ACORN corrects it. In Missouri, ACORN caught a couple of their canvassers doing something wrong and they turned them into the authorities. They now have people call and verify every new voter registration. And every other GOTV effort has such canvassers. Every referendum push such as the anti-gay marriage ones also has such canvassers.

  3. Also, if the GOP cared about potential voter fraud, they’d get rid of paperless voting machines. It’s literally impossible to prove that they reflect an accurate count of the votes and it’s been demonstrated over and over again that they are vulnerable to tampering. I’d bet that either you and I, if we had no scruples, could significantly affect the vote in our districts if they use such machines.

  4. Boonton says:

    You know the rules my friend, you mention Ayers you lose. I hate to do it but I gotta take you down again.

    1. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/08/mccains-trumpets-endorsem_n_132954.html

    McCain has accepted the endorsement of Leonore Annenberg. Widow of the late ambassador and President of the Annenberg Foundation. There is no logical way to assert Obama was wrong to serve on the board of the Chicago Annenberg Foundation with Ayers while at the same time accepting the endorsement of the very Foundation that gave Ayers $50M to spend on Chicago’s public schools. The intellectual bankruptcy of the right is now complete and total.

    2. McCain failed to mention Ayers in his debate with Obama. There are only two explanations that make sense:

    a. He doesn’t really believe the line himself. The Ayers criticism is just fodder for the suckers out there.

    b. He does really believe it but thinks its more important to chide Obama for failing to vote for his pork filled energy bill from 3-4 years ago than it is to address a domestic terrorist while we are in a war on terror.

    If you opt for a then you’re being played for a fool. If you opt for b then McCain, whatever the merits of his Vietnam service, has demonstrated himself to be unfit for command.

  5. Mark says:

    JA,
    If you’re not going into science. Did you miss the “if”?

    And you on the other hand are ready to believe anything bad of Mrs Palin. Pot meet kettle.

    I see … if you’re a left leaning journalist, a wink means upskirt photos are now “journalistically allowed”. Gotcha.

    Also, if the GOP cared about potential voter fraud, they’d get rid of paperless voting machines.

    While the Democrats who apparently do not care about voter fraud have no reason do get rid of them? Huh?

    Boonton,
    On #2 surely you have more imagination that that. There are more possibilities … that perhaps there was no question to which bringing that up would not be a clumsy stretch and therefore inappropriate? There are certainly a large number of matters on which he disagrees with Mr Obama which didn’t come up. Are the only two explanations that he didn’t believe it or that it was more important to bring up a pork/energy vote? No.

    And gosh you didn’t even mention Mr Hanson’s objection or meet it so I’m unclear what your #1 point is?

  6. Boonton says:

    that perhaps there was no question to which bringing that up would not be a clumsy stretch and therefore inappropriate

    Now now, has not Mrs Palin demonstrated you do not have to answer the actual questions put to you in a debate?

    Mr Hanson’s objection or meet it so I’m unclear what your #1 point is

    Sorry I don’t follow this? Whose Mr. Hanson?

    There are certainly a large number of matters on which he disagrees with Mr Obama which didn’t come up.

    If McCain believes the rhetoric of his own campaign this is a very important one.

    I see … if you’re a left leaning journalist, a wink means upskirt photos are now “journalistically allowed”.

    I didn’t see any upskirt photos on the blog you linked too. The photos were of the front line crowd at a rally. You could see a woman’s legs from the knees down because she was standing between the photographer crowd. Could someone have made up a dirty joke based on the kid’s expression and the direction of he was looking (up, presumably at Palin’s or Cindy McCain’s face)? Sure but that doesn’t make the pic itself indecent.

    Anyway, isn’t a wire service a provider of raw photos and reports? The idea is that newspaper editors use the service to fill out their paper with material they choose from the material they want? There’s no shortage of material like this out there. Push the ‘media bias’ button when something more substantial happens….like maybe a major newspaper putting that pic on their cover page.

  7. Mark,

    You seem to have gotten less careful lately.

    Here’s what I wrote:

    I do agree those shots are a little inappropriate.

    Here’s what you implied I wrote:

    I see … if you’re a left leaning journalist, a wink means upskirt photos are now “journalistically allowed”. Gotcha.

    This is getting tiresome. If you want to engage with me, do so. It’s a waste of my time if you’re going to argue with what you think I wrote instead of what I really wrote.

  8. Mark says:

    JA,
    Sorry. I didn’t read your comment carefully enough. I apologize.

  9. Boonton says:

    Maybe I’m wrong but I think photo journalists take lots of shots and hope a few of them turn out to be noteworthy enough to sell. If you went through the raw wire services you’d probably catch plenty of odd photos catching canidates with strange mouth expressions, maybe picking their nose or whatnot. I think the photographer here was trying to capture the people looking up at their candidate and that was simply the best shot he could get from where he was positioned (and I don’t think he would have been positioned behind the candidate unless that’s where the even managers put him). I think it’s a bit much to assume your Sterotypical Liberal Biased Photographer said to himself “how can I take a shot that humiliates Palin”

  10. I’d also point out that the right has been making fun of Hillary’s legs/”cankles” for years.

  11. Mark says:

    Boonton,
    I agree that photo-journalists take a lot of shots. They however, also don’t put them all across the AP wire. They also have editors. I do think that putting across the wire was done with the intent of “here’s a

    JA,
    I’m not sure what your point is. I don’t think those things “on the right” are good either. Do you defend Bill Clinton’s serial sexual harassment by noting that there have been others (even Republicans) who do it too?

  12. Mark,

    I thought your original point was that the media is treating Palin less fairly than they did Clinton. I’m arguing that it’s not true.

  13. Boonton says:

    Yea Mark, that was your original point….they would never have done this to poor Hillary and if they did the left would scream… you gotta work on consistency in your arguments and positions.

  14. Boonton says:

    Tracing back to the original source:

    According to STATSIndiana, In 2007, Indianapolis/Marion County had an estimated population of 876,804. Of that number 232,607 were below 18 years of age, for a total of 644,197 people in Marion County/Indianapolis 18 or over and thus eligible to vote. (Indiana allows felons to vote as long as they are not incarcerated). http://www.ogdenonpolitics.com/2008/10/voting-early-often-indianapolis-bloated.html

    Errrr, obvious problem there is no master list of people eligable to vote in Indianapolis/Marion County. If there was, registration would be easy simply check each application against that list. As you can what the author did was take the population and minus out the people under 18 years of age. But the problem is that he is using the 2007 ESTIMATED population. As one commentor pointed out, the estimate is 232,000 kids but there’s only 171,000 actual kids enrolled (in school I assume). Another commentor notes that Indiana does not purge their voter rolls when people die or move.

    Perhaps more important the most corrupt Justice Department in history, the one under Bush made a special effort to target voter fraud. They searched high and low and even though they found a few poor people to convict (one woman I recall was on probation and didn’t realize it was illegal to fill out a registration card) couldn’t find any systemic fraud to go after. Which shouldn’t be surprising, on a national level if doesn’t really make much sense. The places where such fraud would be easiest would be areas that vote overwhelmingly one way. But then those areas are already in the bag so what’s the point of launching a large fraud effort? NOt considered are the well documented counter attempts by Republicans to suppress voting….like sending fake letters to poor areas providing the wrong time and places for voting or letters advising voters to clear up traffic tickets because poll workers will be running warrent checks on voters etc.

    Keep an eye on this meme. Fox News is preparing a counter story to try to delegitimize what is looking to be both a record turnout at the polls and a landslide this year.

  15. Oh yes, Boonton, the evil Fox News is at it again. Sigh.

    Nice try on trying to portray Republicans as suppressing the vote. It’s old had and a tired line. The reality is that ACORN is doing the Democrats dirty work and everyone knows they’re trying to steal the election.

    As for whether the media are treating Hillary Clinton or Sarah Palin worse, I’d say it’s a tie. No one must be allowed to stand in the way of The One.

  16. Boonton says:

    Actually the fake letter stuff was well documented. JA’s analysis of the ‘105% registration’ remains unchallenged here as does the problem with the initial analysis (assuming 2007’s populatione estimate is accurate, registration lists not purged of the dead or those who moved….). JA had a very valid point, if you have 105% voter turnout that’s a very different story but it’s not much of a story that John Smith ends up in the registration rolls 3 times because during the course of a year he was approached 3 different times to fill out a registration card and did so. What matters is that John Smith only votes once.

    There’s three possible things going on:

    1. Improper voting – I don’t think anyone can dispute this happens. There are cases where people are essentially onthe honor system not to register (say for convicted felons in some states). Likewise there are cases where people are improperly scrubbed from registration lists because the county or state buys an imperfect list of felons and someone doesn’t get to vote because he has the same last name.

    2. Organized voter fraud – As I said the Justice Dept. has been documented not only launching their own politicized jihad against organized voter fraud but also firing prosecutors improperly because they did not see the fraud that partisans insisted was there. If it’s there by all means go after it but aside from very grassroots fraud efforts it doesn’t seem to be.

    3. Stealing an election – This only happens if the fraud is enough to swing an election and there’s no evidence of this.