 sj |
||
|
||
BS: recall on hold
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: recall on hold From: GUEST,Claymore Date: 24 Sep 03 - 02:21 PM No MTed, that was sex they were talking about, not voting. It was the Episcopalians who were called "the Republicans at prayer", and as an Episcopalian we were taught you could do anything you damnwell pleased, as long as you were polite when you did it... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: recall on hold From: M.Ted Date: 24 Sep 03 - 02:03 PM Only because they've been told how to do it by the folks on the 700 Club-- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: recall on hold From: curmudgeon Date: 24 Sep 03 - 01:49 PM Actually, McGrath, two presidents have been impeached, Johnson and Clinton. Impeachment is a formal accusation by the House of Representatives and is similar in nature to an indictment by a Grand Jury. However, neither of the accused were found guilty of the charges by the Senate. In both cases the bills of impeachment were driven by spite and had nothing to do with "high crimes and misdemeanors." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: recall on hold From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 24 Sep 03 - 01:38 PM "we *do* have a 'recall' procedure for Presidents. it is called "impeachment" " But over 200 years and not one of them has actually been impeached. In practice, it seems, the more customary recall procedure is assassination. I suppose that's why most Presidents seem to ensure that their Vice-Presidents don't look too much to write home about. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: recall on hold From: GUEST,Claymore Date: 24 Sep 03 - 01:35 PM The Dems now have an impossible task: 1. They have to ensure that their voters can recognize the written form of the name of the person they want to vote for. 2. They have to remember that name for at least 15 minutes (longer if the lines at the polls are well attended). 3. They have to be able to locate that name from a list of 135. 4. They have to push a pointed object through the hole next to the name. 5. They have to examine the paper ballot to ensure the hole (with no hanging chad) is directly next to the name they memorized. 6. Finally they have to be able to fold the ballot and slip it through the ballot box hole. (Republicans can do this by age 6.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: recall on hold From: GUEST Date: 24 Sep 03 - 01:07 PM So did Clinton ...*burp* |
|
Subject: RE: BS: recall on hold From: GUEST,heric Date: 24 Sep 03 - 12:35 PM That's good quote. You know, he does have some personality. It's hard to see it, especially behind that washed out misterrogers-from-the-basement / boo radley look about him. (I'll refrain from saying he looks like a child molester.) The strange thing about the guy is its hard to see what drives him. He doesn't seem to be in it for personal wealth, or glamour, or a burning drive to effect social reform. He just seems to be a very successful government equivalent of the "middle manager." He just works the system that we gave him. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: recall on hold From: GUEST,MMario Date: 24 Sep 03 - 12:32 PM McGrath - we *do* have a 'recall' procedure for Presidents. it is called "impeachment" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: recall on hold From: GUEST Date: 24 Sep 03 - 12:26 PM "We have someone from every planet on earth"- recent quote from Gray Davis, California governor who will be evicted by recall on October 7. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: recall on hold From: GUEST,pdq Date: 23 Sep 03 - 12:22 PM IT'S BAAAAAAAAAAAAACK! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: recall on hold From: GUEST,pdq Date: 17 Sep 03 - 04:34 PM Sorry, McGrath, but both the U.S. and California have constitutions. California's constitution also allows for the recall of members of the Suprme Court (state, that is). (BTW, is Harlow in Scotland or England?) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: recall on hold From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 17 Sep 03 - 01:48 PM The simplest thing would be for them to go ahead with the "recall" vote, whether to sack the governor or not - a paper and pencil ballot would do for that, put your cross against Sack or Back. Then if the governor only gets 49% of the vote, they can have a full-scale election with a couple of hundred candidates next March, when they have fixed up some system that can cope with hundreds of candidates. But I suppose that would be too simple. Rather a shame you don't have a "recall" provision for Presidents. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: recall on hold From: GUEST,pdq Date: 17 Sep 03 - 12:52 PM Gypsy, are you also opposed to the California State constitution? open mike, you have the right point but the wrong perpetrators. Can you imagine what Richard Daly or Huey P. Long could have done with paperless baloting. The computer nerd who fixed the machine would found dead in an alley the next day. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: recall on hold From: Gypsy Date: 17 Sep 03 - 11:32 AM I'm thrilled...........was totally against this recall to begin with. The only question.........whats gonna happen to the two propositions that are tacked on the end of the ballot? Will they go thru, be ignored, or what? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: recall on hold From: Bev and Jerry Date: 16 Sep 03 - 02:09 PM Bill Mahr was quoted recently as saying, "The Republicans will do anything to win an election ..... except get the most votes." Bev and Jerry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: recall on hold From: kendall Date: 16 Sep 03 - 08:48 AM It's hard to see the humor when it is so obvious that the republicans are stealing our rights. Democracy is on its way out, and incumbents like Gephart, helped by not standing up when it would have helped. Clearly, all they want is another republican governor and the influence he can bring to bear in the next election. They are without scruples. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: recall on hold From: Bev and Jerry Date: 16 Sep 03 - 01:59 AM The plan in California is to convert all voting machines to opical scanners. You mark your ballot with ink and when your finished, you slide it into the scanner which tallies the votes. When the polls close, the scanner transmits the tally to the county seat over phone lines and, voile, you have the results in a few minutes. The paper ballots are also transmitted to the county seat so that a permanent record is available for posterity, recount or whatever. We used that system in our little (ie low population) county in 2002 and it seemed to work flawlessly. Bev and Jerry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: recall on hold From: open mike Date: 16 Sep 03 - 01:42 AM i wonder how they will recount ballots when they are all computerized... I would rather have a paper ballot-- hanging chads and all available for counting than rely on the tricky mechanics of a computer to keep all the data....sheesh.. and who owns, programs and keeps security programs on all those computers? yikes! scary thought...it is probably the bushites... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: recall on hold From: Bev and Jerry Date: 16 Sep 03 - 01:12 AM You'll get to vote again but the choices won't be any better! Bev and Jerry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: recall on hold From: Mudlark Date: 16 Sep 03 - 12:59 AM I sent off my absentee ballot on 9/11...voted against recall as a commemorative gesture. Now what will happen to my absentee ballot, I wonder??? Will it be held for future election or will I get to vote twice? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: recall on hold From: John Hindsill Date: 15 Sep 03 - 08:07 PM Hey gang, I've got a great idea; we don't need to have us dumb boobs vote...we'll just turn over all of our elections to courts of appeal. They're smarter than we are; they know what we need. They'll take care of us---and how! |
|
Subject: BS: California Recall Put on Hold... From: Bobert Date: 15 Sep 03 - 08:01 PM Well, danged. Fact is stranger than fiction! Yep, a three judge panel has halted the California recall election on the grounds that voters, predominently from poorer voting districts that still us the old "dimpled Cahd" voting machines would be "harmed" (disenfranschised). Now this ought to be real intersting, specially since we all can figure this one is gonna end up with the Supremes, who stopped the Florida recount on the grounds that counting the votes would "harm" the dcurrent Resident. Okay, just a little review. Yep, the Supremes said that Bush would be harmed if the recount go forward. Right? Now three years after that theft, they're most definately going to be called on for an encore... Democracy: O, The Supremes: 2...... Hang on. This one is going to bring up some old feelin's 'bout the 2000 election before the smoke clears... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: recall on hold From: michaelr Date: 15 Sep 03 - 07:46 PM Good news. TIA! Hey kat, I live in California, and it doesn't look so alien from here! ;-) The Oprah appearance (which I didn't see) was clearly calculated to increase Herr Dickhead's appeal to women. Did it work? Cheers, Michael |
|
Subject: RE: BS: recall on hold From: katlaughing Date: 15 Sep 03 - 07:37 PM Amazing! Arnold was on Oprah, today...interesting to see him and Maria and hear them speak about family, politics and fame. California is like aanother planet sometimes, I think.**bg** |
|
Subject: BS: recall on hold From: TIA Date: 15 Sep 03 - 02:20 PM This just in (look anywhere for the full story). Appeals Court Delays Calif. Recall Vote 41 minutes ago By DAVID KRAVETS, AP Legal Affairs Writer SAN FRANCISCO - A federal appeals court postponed California's Oct. 7 gubernatorial recall election, ruling the historic vote cannot proceed as scheduled because some votes would be cast using outmoded punch-card ballot machines. In what was the last of about a dozen legal challenges to the attempt to unseat Gov. Gray Davis, a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Monday it is unacceptable that six counties would be using outdated punch-card ballots, the type that sparked the "hanging chads" litigation in Florida during the 2000 presidential election. |
