Commit Election Fraud, Get a White House Invitation

[rjung]

Celebrity spotting (http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/1205polinsider05.html) at the Bush White House Christmas party:
Several of Arizona's leading GOP muckety-mucks secured treasured invitations to Bush's swanky Christmas party Thursday. Actually, Bush holds at least three of these parties to glad-hand with delegations of big donors and politicos from all the states, or at least the red ones.

...Also spotted, petition gatherer to the stars Nathan Sproul. Bush, it seems, doesn't have much of a problem with the allegations in several states that Sproul's employees misrepresented themselves as nonpartisan during a Republican National Committee voter registration drive and were accused of tossing out registrations from Democrats.
Yes, kids, you can commit "shameful" acts of election fraud (http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/1026montini26.html) and get your flunkies to covertly destroy voter registration forms, (http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/world/9915462.htm?1c) but as long as your horse wins the race, all is forgiven and you get to attend big-ticket state dinners on the taxpayers' dime.

This must be more of those "traditional values" them Red Staters keep crowing about.

[Hentor the Barbarian]

He'll probably get the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

I wonder what happens after the fox cleans out the henhouse.

[PunditLisa]

Gosh, it's too bad that the White House didn't check out that site before issuing invitations. It's obviously an unbiased and reliable source.

[Airman Doors, USAF]

*yawn*

You're pathetic, Reeder.

*looks again*

Ah, what the hell. It's not like there's any difference.

Oh, and before I get accused of not providing any substance to my post, I am a conservative, not a Republican, and in most cases (with the notable exception of Brutus) these people make us (conservatives) ashamed to have anything even remotely resembling the same ideology.

That being said, you're the Democratic Party's bitch. You are utterly incapable of thinking for yourself, instead depending upon Terry MacAuliffe (or whoever the new Democrat leader is) for your ideas.

Wake the fuck up. "Red Staters", indeed. :rolleyes:

[danceswithcats]

From the OP, the words "allegations" and "accusation", neither of which amount to the word "proven".

Had your man won, and I was pitting the "alleged" ineligible voters on the Democratic side of the equation, you'd be telling me to piss off.

When come back, bring proof.

[Squink]

...Also spotted, petition gatherer to the stars Nathan Sproul....
A reporter with a little more on the ball might have looked in the shrubbery and caught details of Bush's little tête-à-tête with Lyndie England: "Pull it tighter Lyndie, or no Medal of Freedom for YOU!"

[Reeder]

*yawn*

You're pathetic, Reeder.

*looks again*

Ah, what the hell. It's not like there's any difference.

Oh, and before I get accused of not providing any substance to my post, I am a conservative, not a Republican, and in most cases (with the notable exception of Brutus) these people make us (conservatives) ashamed to have anything even remotely resembling the same ideology.

That being said, you're the Democratic Party's bitch. You are utterly incapable of thinking for yourself, instead depending upon Terry MacAuliffe (or whoever the new Democrat leader is) for your ideas.

Wake the fuck up. "Red Staters", indeed. :rolleyes:

The charges are substantiated.

So you agree that a person who did his best to steal votes should be allowed to be invited to the WH?

You keep telling us that you aren't republican yet you post drivel like this.

As an aside..You agree with Brutus?

That clinches it.

[Airman Doors, USAF]

The charges are substantiated.

Really? Because you said so?

So you agree that a person who did his best to steal votes should be allowed to be invited to the WH?

Prove that he "stole votes", and try not to let the word "alleged" get in your way while you do so. I can allege a lot of things, but that doesn't make it true.

You keep telling us that you aren't republican yet you post drivel like this.

I'm not Republican. Nor am I a Democrat. I really loathe the wide paintbrush, however, and you and your clone here like to try to score points on people without even thinking that there are people that don't approve of corruption, that don't approve of people who claim to be "conservative" while thoroughly mismanaging everything from the war to ordering drapes for the White House.

As an aside..You agree with Brutus?

That clinches it.

When did I say that? Ah, I see where you're coming from. My statement was poorly written. Allow me to clarify with a restatement:

"Oh, and before I get accused of not providing any substance to my post, I am a conservative, not a Republican, and in most cases these people make conservatives (with the notable exception of Brutus) ashamed to have anything even remotely resembling the same ideology."

Better? I think Brutus is a stooge, too.

[rjung]

Bill O'Reilly claims to be an independent, too.

Not that it actually makes him one.

[Airman Doors, USAF]

Bill O'Reilly claims to be an independent, too.

Not that it actually makes him one.

Did Bill O'Reilly vote for Kerry? Nope, didn't think so.

Since we're talking stupid, I bet you voted for Bush and are just covering it up by talking shit on him. It's as likely as me being a Republican.

[Harborwolf]

Does seem a bit stupid to be caught hanging with a guy with so much crud hanging over his head.

I'm not saying that he's insta-guilty, but there is certainly enough there for a :dubious: and a good hard look at him. Having him at a Christmas party could come back for an ass bite if the allegations are proven true.

Wouldn't it be a smidge smarter to keep him at arms length?

[Squink]

Does seem a bit stupid to be caught hanging with a guy with so much crud hanging over his head. Well it certainly gives the appearance of impropriety. As you know, the president used to be death on that:
"No one in the White House should be afraid to confront the people they work for over ethical concerns, and no one should hesitate to confront me as well."

[elucidator]

....It's as likely as me being a Republican.

The more I listen to you, AD, the more I become convinced that you don't dislike liberals so much as you destest civilians. Weak, effete, undisciplined.....liberals are merely more civilian than civilians.

[Airman Doors, USAF]

Nope. I just think that the parties have devolved into total moral/ethical bankruptcy and I think that anyone who claims to be a "proud member" of a group that would sell their souls for power are fools.

It's far, far better that you ditch the whole labeling thing and try to make up your own mind, rather than having your mouthpiece chairman give you your talking points. It's worked for me, although in all honesty I've always been an independent.

[Harborwolf]

Nope. I just think that the parties have devolved into total moral/ethical bankruptcy and I think that anyone who claims to be a "proud member" of a group that would sell their souls for power are fools.

It's far, far better that you ditch the whole labeling thing and try to make up your own mind, rather than having your mouthpiece chairman give you your talking points.

Friggin hippie. :p

[threemae]

I actually thought this was one of Reeder's better threads, but all of you really might do well to realize that Airman Door's coming off as really rather reasonable, open-minded, and intelligent in this thread. Remember, these are the type of people you want to convince.

Or is it just more fun to insult them for not being an Uber-Liberal and wonder why they don't like you?

[Revtim]

Am I missing something here, or did a bunch of people just assume Reeder is the OP of this thread without actually looking who started it?

Airman Doors actually called Reeder "pathetic" before he even posted anything to this thread! And the funniest thing is the usual exchange just went on, as if Reeder actually was the OP!

[rjung]

For reasons I fail to understand, it appears Airman Doors still has a secret crush on me.

[Airman Doors, USAF]

Nope, no secret crush.

If the purpose of this board is "fighting ignorance" (hardy har, what a trite little phrase that has become :rolleyes:), then everybody shuld be looking out for you because the vast majority of what you post is bullshit and even worse than that you never change. Even after you get destroyed you can't admit defeat, you are incapable of changing your mind, and so you just continue to make everything an anti-Bush sausage fest whether you're right or wrong. Usually wrong. And then you play it off as a "reading comprehension" issue or a "joke" when someone calls you on it.

You're the joke.

[Lord Ashtar]

Am I missing something here, or did a bunch of people just assume Reeder is the OP of this thread without actually looking who started it?

Airman Doors actually called Reeder "pathetic" before he even posted anything to this thread! And the funniest thing is the usual exchange just went on, as if Reeder actually was the OP!
I think Airman Doors was joking that this thread sounded like something Reeder would've posted.

I find it funny that if you disagree with Reeder you simply must be Republican, because nobody else could possibly disagree with him or his position.

[Revtim]

Do'h! I guess I was wooshed.

[John Mace]

You was wooshed.

Look at the discussion starting with post 82 in this thread (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=296223&page=2). I want to know how much rjung is getting, too. From the right, that is-- for making the left look so bad.

[Airman Doors, USAF]

The amazing thing of it all is that people couldn't tell that it wasn't Reeder! All I did was invoke his name and everyone assumed it was him.

That's quite telling, if you ask me.

[rjung]

You're the joke.
Ooooh, now there's a stinger. ;)

[Talon Karrde]

So the allegations are unproven?

Is anything going to happen, like Sproul going on trial?

Anyway, even if they were it wouldn't matter. What would happen? A bunch of "liberals" saying how scandalous it is, but Fox News would just downplay it and everyone would forget.

[danceswithcats]

So the allegations are unproven?
At present, yes.
Is anything going to happen, like Sproul going on trial?
Without substantiation to the allegations, not likely.
Anyway, even if they were it wouldn't matter. What would happen? A bunch of "liberals" saying how scandalous it is, but Fox News would just downplay it and everyone would forget.
Here's a cry towel. Get over it.

Honest to Og-is it something about Minnesota that fucks up brain cell development and neural function? Or is your state animal the "Whining Loser"?

[elucidator]

Yes, indeed. All the more reason to stay away. Plus, its cold. All the time, bitterly, bitterly cold. Don't move here. Iowa is nice.