I love how you subtly remind me that the whole braying crowd is on your side.
Unless you’re confessing to hosting intestinal parasites.
Or are secretly royalty.
Let’s see if “we” got this straight. Some important leaders (incl. an ex-Governor) of the political party you love are now known to be liars. The debate is over whether they were lying before (when they said voter suppression was intended to stop fraud) or are lying now when they claim that higher-ups (who’s higher than a Governor, BTW? Limbaugh, Rove, and the Koch Brothers?) instructed them to suppress for partisan purpose.
That your noble party leaders are now certain to have lied, either now or earlier, doesn’t bother you. You defend your leaders because … they’re criminals and therefore lie as a matter of course. :smack:
And you call “us” the braying crowd.
Do me a favor, Brickhead. Lay off the mushrooms for a few days; then look at your own logic with objective eyes, if you can. Try to imagine what you would have thought of such “logic” long ago, in your salad days, when your brain still functioned.
So are you trying to say that the only thing that “we” have here is Argumentum Ad Populum?
Is that the sum total of your rebuttal?
It might be the Editorial We
But I think it’s really the Peruvial We.
Two disgruntled ex-members of a party.
“Important leaders?” Please.
If that’s the standard, then let me point out that you’re accusing these guys of lying – not a crime, just an unethical thing to do. Meanwhile, your party boasts stalwarts like Salvatore DiMasi (D-Convicted Felon), Pedro Espada (D-Convicted Felon), Mike Easley (D-Convicted Felon), Don Siegelman (D-Convicted Felon), and of course the star of the show, the epitome to which all your party undoubtedly aspires, Rod Blagojevich (D-Convicted Felon).
And that’s just off the top of my head. Governors or statehouse leaders, all. Convicted of felonies all. Democrats all. But I repeat myself.
Guardian fallacy?
Are you saying that this Greer wasn’t germane?
Oh and Hentor, I suppose they figured few people would be motivated to get an ID immediately after an election. That’s the most generous interpretation I can think of, anyway.
Isn’t there a bit of a taboo in the legal profession for claiming certain people have committed crimes when they haven’t?
So let’s follow your logic here…
Some Democrat politicians have been convicted of felonies.
They did things that are worse than merely lying.
It follows then that we can discount what was said by Greer et.al.
THEREFORE: One can conclude that the voter ID laws that Republicans want have NOTHING TO DO WITH limiting the number of Democrat voters.
Your powers of logic amaze me! Tell me again how sheep’s bladders may be used to prevent earthquakes.
No, you are accusing these guys of lying.
I like the part where state reps are “important leaders” while a governor is not. 
There is no limit to his capacity for self-parody, is there?
Bricker: I think there’s some circularity in what you’re saying. So assume for a moment that at some point there were some Republicans who agreed that they would push the voter ID issue with the aim of suppressing vote. And then later on one of those Republicans had second thoughts and decided to leave the fold and go public with an account of what happened. Well, at this point that guy is, kind of by definition, disagreeing with and feuding with his former compatriots.
So saying that you dismiss his claims because he’s now on the outs with the Republican establishment, and thus has a motive to fabricate claims, means that you can dismiss any such claim, because no one would ever make those claims who wasn’t on the outs with the Republican establishment.
Now, to be fair, he has yet to accuse the other Republicans who expressed dismay and opposition to this plan with anything at all. :Point of fact, in his rigid honesty and integrity, he even refuses to name them!
So you can’t say he has accused other Republican dissenters with lying, because he hasn’t even discussed them at all!
One gasps to imagine how effective these techniques must have been during his career as a Public Defender (noble and underpaid work, I will add, and a credit to him sorely needed…)
“Look, Lefty, we got you dead to rights! Why not 'fess up and save us all some trouble?”
“Up yours, copper, you got nothin’!”
“Well, OK. Your PD will be Bricker…”
“It was me, where do I sign?..”
Apparently, Jon Husted is now trying to find ways not to count provisional ballots. Why didn’t I see that coming?
Keeps going and going. Kinda like the energizer bunny, but predatory.
Or he’s still in the Karl Rove “We haven’t lost Ohio yet” bubble mode.
In Florida, actor Christian Slater stood in line for five hours to vote on Election Day, only to be forced to cast a provisional ballot because his DMV information was out of date.
No.
The circularity you posit would only exist if the specific scenario you suggest happened: the speaker was rejected by the party for the reason that he decided to expose the vote shenanigans. If the speaker was already ousted or on the outs with the party for other reasons, my observation of bias is relevant.
Not an “observation”. An allegation, a suggestion, an insinuation. Your usage hopes to imply an objectivity it does not deserve.
Huffington Post chimes in:
So the DMV screwed up. Then the board of elections couldn’t match his signature and called him by a girl’s name, Christina. Nice.
Piece then has the following slide show:
10 GOP Legislators Who Helped Mess Up Florida Elections
So the Party you worship is led by lying Scum who, when rejected (for not being Scummy enough), promptly join the Party’s worst critics, in what you allege are lies. Got it.
… And you wonder why most of us think you’re a blithering idiot.
Well, women tend to vote on the side of the crypto-Islamist baby killers, so of course any self-respecting tax-hating Florida poll worker would reject such a signature.
Had the white-colored Slater signed with his real Christian name, like any normal Christian would, he’d have been allowed to vote. Even as is, his vote would probably have been acceptable if he’d shown the poll worker that he was voting for the White Man.