THEY Can'ts HANDLE the Truth!
Find a Conversation
| Thu, 07-15-2004 - 9:30pm |
By ALAN FRAM, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - Think the passions from the 2000 presidential election have cooled? Certainly not in the House, which voted Thursday to strike a Florida representative's words from the record after she said Republicans "stole" that closely fought contest.
The verbal battle broke out after Rep. Steve Buyer, R-Ind., proposed a measure barring any federal official from requesting that the United Nations (news - web sites) formally observe the U.S. elections on Nov. 2.
Rep. Corrine Brown, D-Fla., and several other House Democrats have made that suggestion. They argue that some black voters were disenfranchised in 2000 and problems could occur again this fall.
"We welcome America to observe the integrity of our electoral process and we do not ask, though, for the United Nations to come as monitors at our polling stations," Buyer said.
"I come from Florida, where you and others participated in what I call the United States coup d'etat. We need to make sure it doesn't happen again," Brown said. "Over and over again after the election when you stole the election, you came back here and said, 'Get over it.' No, we're not going to get over it. And we want verification from the world."
At that point, Buyer demanded that Brown's words be "taken down," or removed the debate's permanent record.
The House's presiding officer, Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, ruled that Brown's words violated a House rule.
"Members should not accuse other members of committing a crime such as, quote, stealing, end quote, an election," Thornberry said.
When Brown objected to his ruling, the House voted 219-187 to strike her words.

Pages
You're right-the Democrats certainly CAN'T handle the truth-the votes were recounted several times by independant organizations and Bush came out the winner every time, yet some Dems still make blatantly false statements like Rep. Browns's.
Nobody "stole" anything, that's just the ranting mantra of those who can't accept the facts of the matter and can't move on.
~mark~
The important election is the one in the future.
Glassy
I have seen interviews (and I have a BBC documentary video on my computer but don't know how I could post it here) where people have found that although they voted for Gore, their vote was actually cast for Buchanan. It goes on to show how the whole process (including and especially the recount) was manipulated by the Republicans, one step at a time.
The only point the Dems are trying to make is that with an independent observation team, the fairness of this next election can be assured.
That's all we want, a fair election. If we can make sure El Salvador gets one, don't we have the right to expect one too?
So you're claiming that those ballot screwups on the butterfly ballot were due to Republican "manipulation"? Sorry, wrong. Those were due solely to voter idiocy and an admittedly poorly designed ballot (designed by a Democrat, if that matters), not Republicans.
As for the recounts, they were done as best as possible under the circumstances, those circumstances being a largely ignored state law, myriad different criteria by counties, and a Constitutionally-mandated set of election deadlines.
If you want to be taken seriously on this, try being a little more objective and a little less partisanly paranoid. This wasn't a "Republican conspiracy", it was a circus, largely the fault of long-established Florida laws and a bunch of counties which evidently didn't even know what Florida law had to say on the matter. What state law said, BTW, was that unless the chad was completely removed (not dimpled, not hanging, not pregnant or any other silliness) it wasn't a valid vote. So the different criteria used by respective counties shouldn't have been an issue in the first place. It only became that way with the endless recounts and the efforts of Gore & Co. to make sure "every vote counts", even those not validly cast according to state law.
~mark~
The question of UN supervision of the next Florida election goes much deeper than a poorly designed ballot or questionable hole punching. Need to brush up on your facts? Read "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy" by Greg Palast.
Yes, I do. I feel the lists should have been vetted with more care. I also feel that it's the responsibility of individual voters to be sure shortly before an election that they are properly registered to vote, just in case things of this nature happen. But I don't see that this was a conspiracy, Republican or otherwise.
Nor, BTW, does that issue relate to "people have found that although they voted for Gore, their vote was actually cast for Buchanan." which was the only specific issue you mentioned in the post I responded to.
"Would you care to check the laws of your own state regarding the rights of former internees to vote?"
Each state is free to set their own laws in regards to felons having their right to vote restored.
"Correct me if I'm wrong but anyone who has done time has fulfilled their obligation to the state and are returned all their former rights."
You're wrong. Convicted felons, even after serving their allotted time in prison, still don't automatically have all their rights restored. For instance, they (unless they directly petition the government for it) don't have the right to purchase or possess firearms... they still can't run for public office (federal and some states), and in many states they aren't allowed to vote.
"The question of UN supervision of the next Florida election goes much deeper than a poorly designed ballot or questionable hole punching. Need to brush up on your facts? Read "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy" by Greg Palast."
UN supervision? It's none of the UN's business. As for Palast's "facts", I haven't read the book so I'm unaware of just what he's presenting as "fact". If it's merely a list of partisan rhetoric of all the ways Bush "stole" the 2000 election, it's not worth the time or effort.
~mark~
Pages