Republicans whine a lot about voter fraud. The ACORN controversy being one incident. Someone has pointed out correctly that at least in my state (California) I must turn in all forms, and that ACORN themselves flagged the suspicious ones. I hope that all these voter frauds are investigated, found, indicted and after a presumption of innocence, given a fair hearing. But with the Republicans committing all these known incidents, and Republicans having illegally fired US Attorneys for not abusing the prosecutorial power in pursuing bogus cases, can’t we just safely conclude that even though not all Republicans commit voter fraud, that all voter fraud is committed by Republicans.
Oh, and here is where the electronic voting machines are committing the voter fraud for the Republicans http://www.sundaygazettemail.com/News/200810180251 And here I thought that the droids were working for the Separatists. Of course, Palin is a Separatist and working for Republicans.
As a collorary to the original resolution, isn’t it true that the Republicans just haven’t yet figured out that they are their own worst nightmare?
“All” fraud ? Probably not, given human nature. “Most” fraud ? That’s to be expected, with their general philosophy of ruthlessness and amorality. I would expect the typical Republican to try to do whatever they think they can get away with, including voter fraud.
I’m not sure what the attorney thing has to do with showing that all voter fraud is the fault of the Republicans. Explain.
Have you looked into any Democrat voter fraud accusations? I’m pretty left, and it would surprise me to find out that all voter fraud is done solely by the Republicans.
The attorney “thing” was about firing attorneys who attempted to investigate claims of Republicans committing vote suppression and vote fraud crimes in the 2004 election. Alberto Gonzales was the one that took the fall for it, but it was pretty surely a widely known and accepted practice that the Bush admin in cooperation with lots of other Republicans accepted and/or aided in.
Normal people recognize that just because you’re allowed to usurp the normal role of government and legally suppress any attempt to bring those responsible to justice doesn’t make it the right thing to do. Lawyers don’t recognize any morality outside of what the letter of the law lets them get away with. I’ve expressed this opinion in the pit, and you didn’t understand there either.
Normal people also recognize the meaning of the word “illegally.” Normal people know that “illegally” means “against the law.”
Now, perhaps, Mosier, you are suggesting that the OP could have said something like “shamefully fired US Attorneys…” Certainly you should pass those wise sentiments on to the OP.
Not that simple. Ethics and morality gaps do not always send you to prison. He fired the attys he installed, presumably because they would not do what they were told. Some people believe there is a separation between the executive and judicial. It was obvious that the admin stepped over it. Iglasius says they were trying to force him to prosecute voter fraud cases that were not ready or were not true. They were politicizing the judges to help their elections. You do not have to break a law to do something wrong.
Just out of curiosity, what judges did you think you were talking about?
Quite true. But you do have to break a law to do something illegal, which is what is being discussed. So, either [ul][li]cite the law that Bush broke in firing the attorneys, or [*]leave those goal posts where they are[/ul][/li]
Regards,
Shodan
More clearly illegal, I think, is the Bush DOJ’s hiring practices. They’re not allowed to use political litmus tests for appointees to civil-service positions, and that is something they have been caught doing.
If people never go to prison for gaps of morality or ethics, then we’ve got the worst criminal justice system ever in history. That’s exactly what laws and their enforcement are supposed to be for, to stop immoral behavior.
Traditionally, appointments of US attorneys have been done with consultation with the senators from the state in which the US attorney would serve. This is practice that goes back well before Evil World Overlord George W. Bush.
I think that Brother Bricker is correct that the actual firings may not have been illegal, however, the hirings of fourth tier Regent Law school graduates, including the actions of the lovely Monica Goodling, based on their political affiliations was illegal and how I should have referred to it. It is interesting to note that this factual matter was the only objection to the resolution, other than a few flat assertions that it probably isn’t so. Accordingly, with the correction noted as requested, I declare the flat assertions to be of no consequence and the resolution not debated.