Wednesday, August 03, 2005

But That's Not What The Media Told Me???!!!

Report:
More Democrat than Republican Operatives Involved in Voter Fraud

By Melanie Hunter

August 02, 2005

(CNSNews.com) - A report by a voting rights group regarding allegations of voter fraud, intimidation and suppression during the 2004 presidential election has found that "paid Democrat operatives were far more involved in voter intimidation and suppression activities than were their Republican counterparts during the 2004 presidential election."

The report by the American Center for Voting Rights Legislative Fund found that thousands "were disenfranchised by illegal votes cast and a coordinated effort by members of certain 'nonpartisan' organizations to rig the election system through voter registration fraud in more than a dozen states."

For example, the report noted, paid Democrat operatives were charged with slashing tires on Republican get-out-the-vote vans in Milwaukee, and an Ohio court order stopped Democrat operatives from calling voters and telling them the incorrect date for election and polling place information.

The report also found that a law enforcement task force found "clear evidence of fraud in the Nov. 2 election in Milwaukee" that included hundreds of felons, voters that voted twice, and even thousands more ballots that were cast than actual voters recorded as having voted in the city.

The task force also found multiple indictments and convictions of ACORN workers for voter registration fraud in several states.

Five cities - Philadelphia, Pa.; Milwaukee, Wisc.; Seattle, Wash.; St. Louis or East St. Louis, Mo.; and Cleveland, Ohio - were identified as "election fraud 'hot spots' which require additional immediate attention prior to the 2006 elections."

These cities were identified based on the report's findings and the cities' documented history of fraud and intimidation.

The group sent a letter to Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean and Republican Party Chairman Ken Mehlman urging them to formally adopt zero-tolerance policies against fraud and intimidation.

The group also asked both leaders to identify issues of concern in each election fraud "hot spot" by October 1.

"Until political parties and candidates are willing to adopt a zero-tolerance policy towards election fraud, the American public will have little confidence in other reforms," Brian Lunde, ACVR Legislative Fund board member, said in a statement. "There is no room for politics when it comes to the right to vote."

"It should be easy to vote but tough to cheat," said Mark F. "Thor" Hearne, ACVR Legislative Fund Counsel in a statement.

ACV suggested states adopt their "common-sense recommendations," which include requiring photo IDs at the polls, accurate statewide voter registration databases and a zero-tolerance policy when it comes to vote fraud and intimidation.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

Why ya gotta hate? :)

Something like voter fraud and intimidation should not be broken down into political parties, it should be promptly eliminated by a full investigation.

I don't agree with the point you're trying to make about the media. Media is generally conservative and is led by the money/power hungry people that control it (not liberals).

Johnny

B2 said...

(Pew Survey - May 23, 2004 - At national organizations (which includes print, TV and radio), the numbers break down like this: 34% liberal, 7% conservative. At local outlets: 23% liberal, 12% conservative. At Web sites: 27% call themselves liberals, 13% conservatives. This contrasts with the self-assessment of the general public: 20% liberal, 33% conservative.)

Anonymous said...

People that work in the media may be liberals privately, that doesn't mean that the business itself (what they're allowed or advised to report, the manner in which they're to report it, the topics which which they're provided, etc...) is liberal. I like when you pull surveys 'cause there are so many of them with many different hypotheses to prove. You don't think they're biased?

Johnny

B2 said...

I purposely posted the PEW Survey for you to prove a point. PEW is EXTREMELY Liberally biased and is hired by liberal groups to run polls and surveys all of the time. You should have seen the Conservative surveys. What you just read above is your arguments BEST CASE SCENARIO.

I did the same thing with the poll on abortion I posted. It was done by the liberal Planned Parenthood Organization. Want another from the liberally biased LA TIMES? (or are you honestly suggesting that the LA Times is conservative?! ;-)

Is Abortion Murder? L.A. Times abortion poll, June 18, 2000:

Yes: Women=61%, Men=52%, All=57%
No: Women=34%, Men=39%, All=36%
Don't Know: Women=5%, Men=9%, All=7%

Anonymous said...

My point on surveys, which we've discussed before, is that with a little research you can find a survey that backs any hypothesis.

Of course the LA Times is conservative. All media is conservative.

You're proving my point on liberals and how they feel about abortion. Most of us aren't for it, we just don't believe in it becoming a crime, rather we feel it should be mandated for women (and their respective men) to be given more education prior to their decision.

I personally feel that the fathers are too often left out of the loop. That should be a crime!

You can't seriously think that the fear that these young girls have on how they will be perceived by their parents (usually based on the grounds of religion) doesn't play a large role on their sneaking around to quickly get an abortion without consulting family or the father of the child.

I also think that adoption should become an easier process. I know you don't like government programs and think everything should be subsidized but it's currently too expensive to try to adopt a child suvh that a lot of good parents just can't afford to do it. I know a lot of time and money is put into ensuring the children are receiving madical care and the potential parents are fit, etc... but I say stop wasting billions of $ a year on the evolution of military weapons and put some of that money to work to help out these kids and the families that want to take them in. Hmmm... than the docs would have to take care of children for minimal $ and actually do it 'cause they care and for the betterment of society rather than for compitition for profit. That would lead to Socialism.

Sorry, scratch all that, let's just let the kids suffer :)

Johhny

B2 said...

Fear of parents perception is NOT grounds for murder.

I agree with educating and providing the pregnant women with all of the options and consevatives are pushing for it all of the time. Unfortunately...Hillary, Barbara Boxer, Feinstein and virtually every liberal out there opposes such action! Highly opposes it!!

I agree with making adoption easier, but putting it in government hands won't make it cheaper. It would just mean we are taxed more and most of the $$ would be wasted. It is better left in private hands and if you insist on bringing the positive aspects of socialism into our current system, then maybe you could push to regulate the privately owned industry. But put yet another aspect of our lives into governments hands?!...not a chance!!!