"Voter Fraud" = "We Will Suppress the Vote"

And right on cue - even since the anti-voter voter ID laws that were recently passed in Indiana (and almost passed in Missouri), we are seeing, as my good buddy dday is referring to as the “new battleground” - that big bad boogyman of “voter fraud”.
So, now that this is out of the way, I’ll refer to a 2006 DOJ memo that I discussed over the weekend:The first and larger issue here is the way that this issue is being presented and argued - whether it be “voter ID” laws, whether it be voter roll purges, whether it be voter registrations or whatever else. The issue should be to make sure that people that have the right to vote can actually vote, not that people that are not eligible to vote should not be voting.The US Department of Justice put out a release regarding the “massive” voter fraud that they have uncovered and investigated. And there was lots to be “proud” of:The issue of the voter going to the polling place in order to personally cast a vote that is fraudulent is, based on the DOJ’s own numbers - basically nonexistent. And the one high profile case was that of Ann Coulter, someone who conveniently wasn’t charged.As a result of the Initiative, nationwide enforcement of election crimes has increased dramatically. At present, 195 investigations are pending throughout the country. Moreover, since the start of the Initiative in 2002 over 300 investigations of possible election crime have been opened, and over 125 election crime matters have been closed after investigation; 119 individuals have been charged with ballot fraud offenses and 86 individuals have been convicted of these crimes; and 48 individuals have been charged with campaign financing fraud and 42 individuals have been convicted of these offenses.In over four years, only 42 individuals have been convicted, and under 50 have been charged with campaign finance fraud - now if we think of those who have been heavily lined to campaign finance fraud, one party comes to mind in a big way - and that isn’t the one who keeps pushing “voter fraud” laws. Only 86 people were convicted of “ballot fraud” (of course, Ann Coulter was cleared after calling in a favor from her well connected boyfriend), out of 300 investigations.But the issue of voters without proper ID is one that is potential gold for the party that (1) wouldn’t likely get these votes anyway and (2) can eliminate a possible 10 million plus registered voter (or vote) advantage.
Still don’t believe me? OK, fine. Let’s just look at the tens of thousands of Floridians who were disenfranchised in 2000, or the hundreds of thousands of Ohio voters in 2004 who were disenfranchised for a contrast to the 150 or so individuals who the DOJ is touting.
Yes, both are true, but the 2nd part - about people voting who shouldn’t vote, or people registering to vote illegally is a very minor issue - as noted by the DOJ report linked above. The flip side of these 50 people, or even 150 people who committed so called “voter fraud” or “registration fraud” is that hundreds of thousands of people in Florida were illegally disenfranchised, tens of thousands in Ohio and countless others in states that have enacted voter roll purges or ID laws.
And we are already seeing it again - as dday states in his post linked above:
With an uninspiring candidate, an enthusiasm gap and a host of fundamentals against them, obstruction and suppression is really all the Republicans have left. You can see exactly where they're worried from this story:We have already seen three instances recently where this fear mongering has reared its ugly head.As Barack Obama tries to draw hundreds of thousands of new voters to the polls, Republicans are beginning to scrutinize registrants' eligibility as both sides draw a major battle line over voting rights.Read: we're going to lose Virginia and Pennsylvania unless we invalidate hundreds of thousands of legal votes through bogus voter fraud claims. Both of the Secretaries of State in these commonwealths are Democrats, but of course the county boards of elections have more local control, as we've seen. And be prepared for this meme that the stress of all these new voters may break the system.Republicans are moving to examine surges in voter registrations in some states. A Republican lawyers group held a national training session on election law over the weekend that included campaign attorneys for Sen. John McCain and other Republican leaders. One session discussed how party operatives can identify and respond to instances of voter fraud.
Republicans said they are particularly worried about prospects for fraud in Virginia and Pennsylvania, and are beginning to comb thousands of new registrations in those states for ineligible applicants. In some cases the huge numbers threaten to swamp their efforts -- and those of state and local governments to verify and process applications.
The WaPo recently shot down the Virginia State republican Party Chair’s baseless allegations of “coordinated and widespread voter fraud....throughout Virginia, since there was no fact to back up these assertions. In Connecticut, the republican state party Chair made unsubstantiated allegations and calls for investigation into non-existent voter registration fraud, based on a video made by Election Journal, which is run by Mike Roman, a man who happens to be McCain’s Director of Election Day Operations and was the RNC’s Director of Election Day Registration in 2006.
Of course, the Connecticut allegations and hysteria has nothing to do with this:
Democratic voter registration is up sharply in southwestern Connecticut's 4th Congressional District, and political analysts said Friday thatAnd from the hysterical to the ridiculous, there are unsupported allegations (with “a report forthcoming”) in Alabama with respect to votes being sold for crack. This is very similar to the same story that was put out in 2004 in Ohio, and even if true, requires prosecution of the offending individual - not sweeping law changes that will suppress thousands of other voters rights.In fact, if city Democrats in Bridgeport, Norwalk and Stamford show up on Election Day in a tide of anticipated statewide urban support for Sen. Barack Obama, Shays' narrow 5,747-vote margin of 2006 could evaporate into a forced political retirement.
[...]
Since Jan. 1, 11,329 new Democrats have registered in the 17-town district. Only 3,462 Republicans have signed up so far this year and only 8,299 unaffiliated voters.
It is happening again - actually, it has been happening all along. And as more and more new voters are registered, there will be more challenges and hurdles thrown up by the republican party to make sure that less people can vote, not more people.
If a few hundred thousand likely Democratic voters get caught in the crossfire and don’t get to vote, then the republicans will consider it “Mission Accomplished”.








Off topic - looking for a place to post this
- Email this page
By f u bush2August 18, 2008 - 11:33amDems are going to need the
Dems are going to need the votes of illegals and dead people to win, how dare anyone challenge the dead vote??
You guys certainly get pissy whenever this topic comes up. Could it be because you know illegals will vote for more freebies every chance they get? Dead people tend to heavily favor democrats too, probably because there is no blood supply to their brains.
- Email this page
By tropicaltoadAugust 18, 2008 - 12:34pmProvide proof that voter fraud
is a major problem. You cant. You are lying again.
- Email this page
By hufflarry2000August 18, 2008 - 12:42pmThere is NO major "voter fraud" problem in the US
...unless you're counting Ann Coulter. Where is s/he registered to vote THIS year?
There is, however, a rampant ELECTION fraud issue. Here are some key words the RepubliCANTs want shouted down at all cost: Diebold. Premier Election Systems. Decertification. Ohio. Missing votes. Jennifer Brunner. LAWSUIT.
This "voter fraud" screed is nothing more than the RepubliCANTs playing sleight-of-hand again. "Nobody pay any attention to the big purple elephant in the room...this little shiny coin I'm holding up over here in the corner is MUCH more important!"
If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error. ~~~John Kenneth Galbraith
- Email this page
By nonexistent manAugust 18, 2008 - 3:52pmWhy do we get "pissy"???
Perhaps because repubs make a big deal about a problem that is virtually non-existent, but refuse to deal at all with vote-rigging. Provide some proof about the number of vote fraud prosecutions there have been. I'm betting it would amount to a few dozen cases nationwide at the very most, and that is probably an overestimate. On the other hand, the vote rigging and tampering we see from electronic voting, from caging of voters, and illegal voter list purges has affected literally MILLIONS of people. Why no repub complaints about THAT? Because they're the ones doing it!!
- Email this page
By UffdaguyAugust 18, 2008 - 12:46pmONE OF YOU LEFTIES TELL ME
ONE OF YOU LEFTIES TELL ME WHY IT IS OKAY TO HAVE TO SHOW A PICTURE ID WHEN BORDING AN AIRPLANE, WRITING A CHECK,USING A CREDIT CARD, BUY ALCOHOL OR CIGARETTES, PURCHASE AUTO INSURANCE, ETC. BUT IS SUCH A PROBLEM TO HAVE TO SHOW ONE WHEN VOTING? SEEMS TO ME YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET THE VOTING PART CORRECT. WHAT IS THE HARDSHIP ON BLACKS OR THE ELDERLY TO HAVE TO SHOW A PICTURE ID?
- Email this page
By bebeholmesAugust 18, 2008 - 1:57pmSome people dont have picture IDs
I dont expect you to understand because that would take thinking about other human beings, something a stinkin cracker like you is incapable of.
- Email this page
By hufflarry2000August 18, 2008 - 2:16pmWell you know what, dumbass?
Well you know what, dumbass? I didn't have one either until I got one. Geeez, how hard was that. Hell, you defeatocrats have those "get out the vote" vans rolling all the time. Why not do a "get out the picture ID" gatherings and take the elderly whose families are too sorry to take their relatives to get one? As far as the blacks, what is the problem there? Is it some how harder for a black person where you live to go to the motor vehicle office and get a free government ID. Or is it a case of being too damned lazy to do it and just want to have something else to bitch about? Every elderly person I know that cares to vote has a photo ID. And everytime I vote here in Georgia, the lines are full of blacks as well as whites with picture IDs in their hands. Maybe it has something to do with the liberal mindset. Maybe it has something to do with being too stupid to know how to acquire a photo ID. That being the case, perhaps they are too stupid to vote.
What it is is called personal responsibility. If you want to exercise your "right" to vote, if there is such a right, then do what is necessary to do it lawfully.
- Email this page
By bebeholmesAugust 18, 2008 - 2:33pmHey bebe,
Don`t sing it bring it. Come and try to say that I can not do my civic duty and see what happens. All you have to do is google pipeline crossroads of the world and that is my hometown, and I vote at the Deep Rock Elememtry school, and bring your buddy toad with you. Just for your infomation though I am friends with the Payne County sherrif, and most of the local police.
The last time that you creeps tried this not only was they escorted out of the polling place ,and also told not to come back. And if they did they was the ones that was going to JAIL. So please try me. I DO NOT FEAR OR WILL BE INTIMADATED BY THE LIKES OF YOU TWO.
FREE LEONARD PELTIER
www.aimovement.org
www.layoffinhofe.com
www.autismrocks.org
www.andrewriceforoklahoma.com
- Email this page
By rlm_dcbAugust 18, 2008 - 3:00pmLOLOL....what the fuck is
LOLOL....what the fuck is this pussy going on about!
- Email this page
By bebeholmesAugust 18, 2008 - 3:05pmIf you have to have it explained to you...
...you'll never understand it.
Hey, did Jukebox Johnny ever find out what part of Atlanta the Russians were invading? Or was he too busy calling his wife a "cunt" and trying to enter her in topless beauty contests? Keep in mind, he's the guy YOU want as President! The rest of us just want to know why he was taken off his Abilify.
If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error. ~~~John Kenneth Galbraith
- Email this page
By nonexistent manAugust 18, 2008 - 3:48pmYou are right, some people
You are right, some people don't have picture identification, they are called illegal immigrants.
It is not the least bit unreasonable to ask that people prove they are eligible to vote before allowing them to vote. But the concept of proof is something you know little about.
You are against ID's for a reason, and it's not the reason you claim it to be because you are against it even when ID's are offered for free as part of the deal. You are against it because you are for cheating when it works in your party's favor, huff "I knew I was lying." larry.
- Email this page
By tropicaltoadAugust 18, 2008 - 2:34pmProvide proof of the rampant voter fraud.
There is none. Registrations are verified before they go into the voter roster. Your signature is your ID. Why all of a sudden do we need voter ID when no significant voter fraud is happening? It is because you right wingers are so out numbered that you will do anything to exclude voters. Cheating and lying is the only way you can win.
You immoral demons make baby jesus cry.
- Email this page
By hufflarry2000August 18, 2008 - 2:49pmAre you really that stupid?
Are you really that stupid?
- Email this page
By bebeholmesAugust 18, 2008 - 2:52pmCare to explain?
Exactly how many different pieces of identification does one need to vote? I already have my driver's license and my voter registration card, neither of which have changed in the past six years. Why add another redundant and unnecessary expense to an already overburdened government bureaucracy?
I also have my passport, renewed just last year. Will that now become the required level of identification for voting?
Do try to think these things through instead of just spouting the Official Talking Points. The ability to back those Talking Points instead of just calling people "stupid" when they poke holes in them makes you look somewhat higher on the evolutionary ladder than the average g0p sheeple-troll.
If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error. ~~~John Kenneth Galbraith
- Email this page
By nonexistent manAugust 18, 2008 - 6:24pmBy nonexistent manAugust 18, 2008 - 7:24pm
I guess in the future we could use our national health care card to identify ourselves at the polls.
- Email this page
By f u bush2August 18, 2008 - 6:36pmNobody here is saying we
Nobody here is saying we need ANOTHER picture id, just A picture id. A driver license or a passport is perfectly acceptable, the ability to scribble a name is not. Huffy says your signature alone is enough identification and that is ridiculous. We all know he is an idiot though.
- Email this page
By tropicaltoadAugust 19, 2008 - 8:18pmLet's extend that thinking a bit
Okay, we have the driver's license, which just about anyone can obtain. Then we have the voter's registration card, which NOT just anyone can obtain; convicted felons can get a driver's license, but in most cases are not eligible to vote. It's the job of the Board of Elections to verify that a potential voter is in fact eligible to vote under the laws of the particular geopolitical area where they have jurisdiction, and issue (or not issue) a voter registration card accordingly.
Do you find it an odd coincidence that applications for driver's licenses in most states also have a tear-away portion of the form which is used for voter registration? Or that every state now issues driver's licenses that bear the photograph of the person to whom it was issued?
And just to top it off...most states' Departments of Motor Vehicles now issue non-license photo identification, which is perfectly acceptable for all uses requiring government-issued photo ID, to include identification to poll workers at polling places. In combination with a typical voter's registration card, it verifies both identity and eligibility to cast a ballot. And I can think of one reason where a person would hold such a photo ID card instead of a driver's license right off: medical disqualification from driving, e.g. a person with what's known as "brittle diabetes", or perhaps a seizure disorder.
Now, with that combination of driver's license/non-license identification and voter's registration card, where's the logic in requiring potential voters to go out and obtain yet ANOTHER form of identification before they can cast their ballots? Especially when the push from the g0p is to make the voter bear the cost of such identification? It's tantamount to a poll tax, which was made illegal several decades ago.
Oh, and huffer's not an idiot. Obsessive-compulsive to the point of unbalance, perhaps, but not an idiot. Get him off the topic of Billary and he's quite astute with the questions he asks, albeit less than tactful.
If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error. ~~~John Kenneth Galbraith
- Email this page
By nonexistent manAugust 19, 2008 - 10:36pmBy bebeholmesAugust 18, 2008 - 2:57pm
Can one of you righties tell me where in the US you can vote without showing id?
Jesus Christ this is a non issue.
- Email this page
By f u bush2August 18, 2008 - 2:18pm.
.
- Email this page
By A GAugust 18, 2008 - 2:57pmHuh?... Wha?
I'm sorry, beebeebrain... Did you say something?... I was busy ignoring you.
- Email this page
By A GAugust 18, 2008 - 2:40pmI have never had to show a picture ID to do any of those things
with the exception of boarding a plane and THAT only started after9/11. The fact is that voters have been turned away because they didn't have a picture ID, even in places where one is not requires. It's called disenfranchising. Repubs know that if EVERYBODY votes, THEY LOSE so they have to discourage turnout any way they can.
- Email this page
By gt6August 18, 2008 - 5:12pmBy tropicaltoadAugust 18, 2008 - 1:34pm
frogg is full of lies and greed. what other commandments has he broken? probably his neighbors wife
- Email this page
By f u bush2August 18, 2008 - 12:47pmI guess with you, bush2, the
I guess with you, bush2, the commandment would be your neighbors husband, huh.
- Email this page
By bebeholmesAugust 18, 2008 - 2:00pmBy bebeholmesAugust 18, 2008 - 3:00pm
Are you coming on to me?
- Email this page
By f u bush2August 18, 2008 - 2:17pmUhhh... that pre-supposes beebeebrain has a dick.
The smart money is betting against it.
- Email this page
By A GAugust 18, 2008 - 2:59pmJust DAM. Another lefty
Just DAM. Another lefty queermo worried about my dick. LOL. My dick is just fine, thanks. Just go ask your wife the next time you're interested AG
- Email this page
By bebeholmesAugust 18, 2008 - 3:02pmGee, you sure showed me.
What's it like to go through life with a double-digit I.Q.?
Seriously, It must be wonderful addressing all issues based on mindless emotion and your reptilian brain responses, without regard to logic or analytical thought.
It must be great having puppet-masters like Karl Rove punch your emotional push buttons and yank your "fear-strings" so he can watch you dance like a marionette...
You only THINK you're living.
- Email this page
By A GAugust 18, 2008 - 3:21pmYea bebe and your exwife
Is glad that she got with a liberal man that fullfilled her desires and needs.
FREE LEONARD PELTIER
www.aimovement.org
www.layoffinhofe.com
www.autismorocks.org
www.andrewriceforoklahoma.com
- Email this page
By rlm_dcbAugust 18, 2008 - 3:36pmBy tropicaltoadAugust 18, 2008 - 1:34pm
At least 4100 who died because Bush lied us into a war for oil profits.
- Email this page
By f u bush2August 18, 2008 - 12:50pmEvery soldier lost is bad,
Every soldier lost is bad, but how many died in Korea or Vietnam?
- Email this page
By bebeholmesAugust 18, 2008 - 3:10pmBy ibeamoronAugust 18, 2008 - 4:10pm
What do American casualties in Korea & Vietnam have to do with anything, idiot?
Btw, Obama is out fundraising McSame by a 6:1 margin amongst military stationed overseas. They understand that his presidency would be just as bad, if not worse, for them & their families than Dubya's disastrous administration.
Support the Troops.
End the Occupation.
- Email this page
By Guy FawkesAugust 18, 2008 - 3:21pmGallup Daily: Obama at 46%, McCain at 43%
http://www.gallup.com/poll/109639/Gallup-Daily-Obama-46-McCain-43.aspx
plus 10 for McCain via Bradley Effect – Hello President McCain.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_effect
“Obama – the judgment to promote the abortion of the least of his brothers”.
- Email this page
By its_so_overAugust 18, 2008 - 12:52pmBy its_so_overAugust 18, 2008 - 1:52pm
Good. Let's get McCain in there and start some more wars. You want to fight Iran right? You want to suit up and be on the front line this time? Come on boy. Show us you're not a pussy.
- Email this page
By f u bush2August 18, 2008 - 12:57pmMan, you are at least one war behind the times!
Didn't you know that McCain is now more anxious to go to war with Russia over Georgia? Maybe it's because his foreign policy advisor is a paid agent of Georgia, or maybe it's just a massive coincidence.
- Email this page
By UffdaguyAugust 18, 2008 - 1:02pmBy UffdaguyAugust 18, 2008 - 2:02pm
That makes it easier. Let McCain in office and the chicken hawks don't have to suit up. They can stay at home and be on the receiving end of a Russian ICBM.
Way to go right wing kooks!
- Email this page
By f u bush2August 18, 2008 - 1:17pmI have yet to hear McCain or any of the other hawks give
a plan, coherent or not, about what THEY would do about this situation. Even Gates says there is no military option here, so at least there is one person in power who isn't totally irrational. We have absolutely no troops to send to Georgia, even if we wanted to, because they and their equipment are all tied up in Iraq, as they have been for over 5 years now. Even if we had the troops, the last thing a rational person would want to do is send those troops into Georgia, because it is almost inevitable that the Russians would call the bluff and start advancing into Tbilisi. That would force our commanders on the ground to either give way without firing a shot, or fire the first shots of a Russian-American war.
None of this would matter one bit if it weren't for oil. With 4 pipelines passing through Georgia, it became a vital link in western energy supplies. Russia was always pissed that those lines were built from Baku through Georgia specifically so Russia wouldn't control them. Now they have that control, at least implicitly, and short of war, there is nothing that can be done about it. So, the only choice left is to make Georgia irrelevant in terms of supplying our energy. Until that happens, we are not only held hostage to the Middle East, but now to Russia too.
- Email this page
By UffdaguyAugust 18, 2008 - 1:27pmAhh, just assume that we
Ahh, just assume that we would fire the first shot. You blame America first even when dealing in hypotheticals!
I say we respond to Russia's temper tantrum by fast tracking Georgia's membership to NATO and follow that up with Ukraine. Russia wouldn't have fucked with Georgia in the first place if they were a member, and the only reason they invaded is because they are a western friendly democracy that is looking into membership.
I am a bit surprised that you guys aren't defending Russia on this. I guess you are making a little progress.
- Email this page
By tropicaltoadAugust 18, 2008 - 1:48pmGeorgia started this against
it's own citizens who are Russian. So you are lying again.
- Email this page
By hufflarry2000August 18, 2008 - 1:52pmLol, you are just adorable,
Lol, you are just adorable, huff "I knew I was lying" larry!
So who do you idolize more, Putin, Lennin, Stalin, Castro, or Mussolini?
- Email this page
By tropicaltoadAugust 18, 2008 - 2:05pmSo again
You have no proof to back up your claims because you are a dirty liar. Do you have any shame or self respect? Of course not. You are a ward of the state.
- Email this page
By hufflarry2000August 18, 2008 - 2:13pmWhenever you put troops into a country to prevent
agression by one of its neighbors, you are pulling a bluff that you hope the other country won't call. You are explicitly telling that country "If you cross this lines, there will be consequences, consequences that will be dispensed by our military forces". Therefore, if we put troops into Georgia or Ukraine, we are drawing a line in the sand that we are telling the Russians not to cross. If they do, we are forced to shoot, or the whole thing is exposed for what it is, a colossal bluff. Example: Korea. We have thousands of troops there to prevent an attack from the north. What if they invaded? Wouldn't our troops necessarily be forced to shoot? If they are there to prevent invasion, and yet they fail to respond if the invasion occurs, what good are they/
Neither side in this conflict is lily white. Georgia made a large incursion into South Ossetia, ostensibly to retaliate for some artillery rounds being fired into Georgia by Ossetian separatists. In other words, they made an assymmetrical response to the initial provocation, overreacting to a rather minor act. In response, Russia crossed into South Ossetia and then Georgia, also a massive overreaction. Now both sides have done and said things that will be tough to forget, and even more difficult to reverse without a major loss of face.
Kennedy got it right during the Cuban Missile Crisis, giving the Soviets a way out that didn't embarrass them on the world stage more than absolutely necessary.
If you want to make Ukraine and Georgia instant members of NATO, you must be prepared to risk all of NATO, for if Ukraine becomes a member, and we then fail to respond with force, then the whole justification for NATO evaporates.
- Email this page
By UffdaguyAugust 18, 2008 - 2:18pmSouth Ossetia belongs to
South Ossetia belongs to Georgia, it is their territory to police. Russia had no business meddling in Georgian business.
Let's say there were some hispanic seperatists in Texas that were lobbing rockets into oklahoma and our military responded. Would Mexico then have the right to invade Texas as a response? According to you and huffy's posts they would.
- Email this page
By tropicaltoadAugust 18, 2008 - 2:57pmBy tropicaltoadAugust 18, 2008 - 3:57pm
LMAO
frogg you do not know what you are talking about.
Let's say Mexico invaded Texas wanting it's former territory back. The US would retaliate into Mexico beyond Texas.
- Email this page
By f u bush2August 18, 2008 - 3:00pmNo answer to my question?
No answer to my question? Didn't think so, numbnuts. And my comparison is much closer to what happened between Georgia and Russia, there aren't even any similarities in yours.
Russia had no right to invade Georgia, and Georgia had every right to police it's own territory.
- Email this page
By tropicaltoadAugust 18, 2008 - 3:41pmBy tropicaltoadAugust 18, 2008 - 4:41pm
LOL
You are clueless. Peope in Ossetia have Russian passports you dumb ass.
- Email this page
By f u bush2August 18, 2008 - 3:45pmOk,let's use your example
Ok,let's use your example then. When did Georgia invade Russia then, dumbfuck??
- Email this page
By tropicaltoadAugust 18, 2008 - 3:47pmBy tropicaltoadAugust 18, 2008 - 4:47pm
My god you are fucking stupid.
I am not in favor of Russia's methods. But Ossentia belongs to Russia, not Georgia. The reasoning behind Russia's RESPONSE to the Georgian attacks is much more clear than the the reasons the US has given for invading Iraq.
The people of Georgia will be patriotic for a week or two and then they will be pissed at their leader for having started this mess. The Georgian leader was a pompous ass who felt those people in Ossentia had no business not wanting to be part of Georgia. And the US built up his ego making him think he would have the backing of a super power.
Now Bush has even fucked up in his promise of aid. He said in public that military ships were on their way and the pentagon said it wasn't possible in the time frame Bush gave. In other words Bush was talking out of his ass.
- Email this page
By f u bush2August 18, 2008 - 4:01pmDipshit, the territory in
Dipshit, the territory in question is South Ossetia, which is Georgian territory, not Russian. You dumb bastard, just because some Russians live there does not mean the territory belongs to Russia.
The artillery was being launched by Russian seperatists from the Georgian territory of South Ossetia against Georgia, the Georgian military went into the Georgian territory of South Ossetia in response to the seperatist attacks. Then Russia invaded the GEORGIAN territory in response. Russia had no business there, PERIOD. Seriously, you should at least TRY to gain some knowledge on the topic you are trying to discuss.
- Email this page
By tropicaltoadAugust 18, 2008 - 4:36pmOh My God
YOU trying to tell someone else that they don't have information! That's priceless!
1.) South Ossetia is culturally part of Russia. A vast majority of it's populace have russian passports and driver's licenses. Most of them speak fluent russian. Most of them have family deeper in russia.
2.) The Georgian Seperatists were, trained, equipped, and funded by Russian.
3.) Russian needs the Georgian oil and gas to survive. Getting into a pissing match with the great russian bear, in defense of rodina is a BAD move.
4.) Try turning off the neo-con propaganda chip for a day or so.
give me lever, and a place to stand...
- Email this page
By wrenchboyAugust 18, 2008 - 5:03pmBy tropicaltoadAugust 18, 2008 - 5:36pm
South Ossetia residents hold Russian passports for the most part dumb ass.
The region has been separate from Georgia since the 1990's. In 2006 the residents went to the polls and overwhelmingly voted yes on independence from Georgia.
So I guess that their opinion doesn't count right?
As usual frogg you are out of your league. If your daughter is as dumb as you she won't make it a year in college. Why isn't she over in Iraq fighting for Bush policy anyway?
- Email this page
By f u bush2August 18, 2008 - 5:12pmYou really are this stupid,
You really are this stupid, aren't you?
The residents holding Russian passports DOES NOT make the territory Russian property you amazingly retarded dumbass. It is Georgian territory that Georgia has the right to police, no matter what a resident's passport or driver license may say.
They may have voted in favor of separation, but that separation has not taken place so it's a non-point. The citizens of the Confederate states voted to leave the union, should their opinions have counted? Maybe Lincoln should have just let them go, afterall, they voted! Besides, did they vote just for independence from Georgia or to leave Georgia for Russia?
Are you really this pissed that the Soviet Union lost the Cold War?
- Email this page
By tropicaltoadAugust 18, 2008 - 5:36pmNeither does an assertion
by Georgia make it Georgian territory. The territories left the USSR in the 90s and Georgia claimed South Ossetia an Abkhazia but both republics have claimed independence. Their situation is very similar to that of Kosovo who we recognized not long ago. (over Russian objections)
- Email this page
By gt6August 18, 2008 - 5:50pmBy tropicaltoadAugust 18, 2008 - 6:36pm
Hmmm, it sure doesn't look that way to me. They overstepped their bounds & now they're getting severely punked. The Russians are even forcing them to clean up the messes in Ossetia that they caused.
Support the Troops.
End the Occupation.
- Email this page
By Guy FawkesAugust 18, 2008 - 5:51pmBy tropicaltoadAugust 18, 2008 - 6:36pm
Jesus Christ you are a retard. Your daughter is in college now. Try and leave her alone so she learns something.
Those people prefer Russian passports. That is their ticket to better jobs elsewhere in Russia. That is unless they don't take advantage of their opportunity and become minimum wage welders. Oh that was some other stupidity of yours.
You don't know a god damn thing about that region. So shut your pie hole. All you have is a talking point from the republican party that russia is the bad guy and georgia is the good guy. Well it isn't black and white and both nations have some negatives in this situation.
But to sit there and tell me that region absolutely belongs to Georgia is just wrong. You are WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!
Get over it dummy
I'll tell you what frogg. Everything points to the fact that Ossetia is more a part of Russia than Georgia. The culture and language, the will of the people and the holding of passports for example. Tell us why you think this region belongs to Georgia then. And don't point to world leaders just proclaiming it.
- Email this page
By f u bush2August 18, 2008 - 6:08pmLook at a map like I did,
Look at a map like I did, dumbass. Any recent fucking globe says South Ossetia is Georgian territory. Passports do not decide ownership, dipshit.
There are towns in southern portions of California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas where most residents have stronger ties to Mexico than the United States, Spanish is spoken more than English, and many residents are Mexican citizens, hell, they may even hold Mexican passports. Does this mean those towns belong to Mexico or are somehow no longer U.S. territory? NOPE! South Ossetia is Georgian territory, my globe fucking says so.
- Email this page
By tropicaltoadAugust 18, 2008 - 7:40pmBy tropicaltoadAugust 18, 2008 - 8:40pm
frogg
Thanks for showing us your ignorance. I'm not shocked really. This is nothing new for you.
- Email this page
By f u bush2August 18, 2008 - 7:52pmI guess you must take your talking points from Randy
Scheunemann and Crash McGrandpa. South Ossetia is officially still part of Georgia, but they voted to secede in 2006. There has been separatist action there for years, with Russian support. An uneasy truce has existed for several years, with Georgia agreeing to allow Russian peacekeepers to stay in South Ossetia to try and keep some form of peace. They have been fairly successful by all accounts, so it was a huge surprise that the Georgians suddenly reacted so forcefully to a fairly minor artillery barrage from the separatists. Now, if you want to see an example of what Georgia did in another setting, move over to the Middle East. Hezzbollah kidnaps two Israeli soldiers in 2007. The Israeli response is to start a full scale war against Hezzbollah and Lebanon, what the Pentagon would call an "assymmetrical response". Now, back to South Ossetia. Georgia makes an assymmetrical to the South Ossetian shelling by launching an major invasion into the territory, a territory that is crawling with Russian peacekeepers. As a result, Russia launches its own assymmetrical response, not only moving into South Ossetia, but also Abkhazia, (or Azkaya, as Crash repeatedly calls it), and into parts of Georgia. Bad move on their part also ---- unless you look at the bigger picture. Something this big, unfolding so rapidly, was most likely in planning for quite some time. The Russians are pissed about the 4 oil and gas pipelines that run from Baku through Georgia to Turkey, completely bypassing the shortest route, which is through Russia. So, in order to gain a stranglehold on a major energy source for the West, they move into Georgia under the pretext of protecting South Ossetia and the Russian peacekeepers.
Your globe can say all it wants, but if you depend on your globe to define how the world operates, you are as blind as the diplomats who divided up the Middle East after WWI in an arbitrary manner, ignoring religious, ethnic and tribal demographics in favor of random straight lines that "looked right" and helped western oil companies. Diplomacy and international relations are based on people, not just maps and globes. Grow up and act like an adult for a change. By the way, I still have yet to hear your solution for this whole situation. Cat got your tongue?
- Email this page
By UffdaguyAugust 19, 2008 - 9:27amHmmm... "Passports do not decide ownership, dipshit."
No kidding... I have maps too, dumbass.
Remember my debates with "mtmeggido" about "who owns Palistine"?
I'll tell you who owns South Ossetia... whoever can hold it... dipshit.
==================
Stop playing checkers. Start playing chess.
You want leverage? Rebuild a strong America.
Vladimir Putin could not possibly be LESS impressed with the bellicose blatherings John McCain vomits up for the domestic consumption of our local Contards... Really dude, he has your number.
- Email this page
By A GAugust 19, 2008 - 12:06pmI have a passport for a
I have a passport for a country that is not the US. You can be a dual citizen. Just because I am a dual citizen and there are a lot of dual citizens in the US doesn't give the other country that I am a citizen of the right to invade the US. Suppose I and the other dual citizens of the other country complained to that country that we were mistreated. Does that give the other country the right to invade the US?
I think the situation is far more complicated than you make it sound, but I also think that the Russians were the ones who invaded Georgia, and I think they did it for oil. Their reasoning was simple: If the US can get away with invading Iraq, we can get away with invading Georgia. Now Georgia doesn't have oil, but it has pipelines linking oil resources to the Black Sea.
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed." Dwight Eisenhower
- Email this page
By MichtouAugust 18, 2008 - 6:11pmBy MichtouAugust 18, 2008 - 7:01pm
Michtou
The people of Ossetia hold Russian passports because they have been separate from Georgia for years. That leaves them with two options. They can be independent or part of Russia. The people of that region would rather hold a passport that gives them access to more opportunity so they choose to be affiliated with Russia. They do not want to be part of Georgia and they prefer the benefits of being part of Russia than being autonomous.
Russia did not invade Georgia for no reason. The Georgian leader should not have tried to take back Ossetia. How many thousands have fled because of his arrogance?
- Email this page
By f u bush2August 18, 2008 - 6:13pmWow, you are really clinging
Wow, you are really clinging to this passport bull shit, aren't you? Too bad for you that passports don't decide which territory belongs to what country. It just doesn't work that way. Russia doesn't even claim ownership of South Ossetia, even they know it is Georgian territory. If it was Russian territory the news would be talking about the Georgian invasion of Russia instead of the Russian invasion of Georgia.
You may want South Ossetia to be part of Russia, but that doesn't make it so you dumbass.
- Email this page
By tropicaltoadAugust 18, 2008 - 7:20pmthey don't claim it
they do, however insist that it be allowed to be separate from Georgia. Just as we recognized the right of Kosovo to be separate from Serbia.
- Email this page
By gt6August 18, 2008 - 7:27pmBy tropicaltoadAugust 18, 2008 - 8:20pm
Clinging to passports?
frogg
Go educate yourself and before you come back here. You are embarrassing yourself. Seriously. You do not know anything about the region.
- Email this page
By f u bush2August 18, 2008 - 7:30pmLol, maybe we should have
Lol, maybe we should have just started issuing U.S. passports to the Iraqi people! Once they got their passports we could have claimed ownership of Iraq!! We could replace our military with passport printers and take over the fucking world!!!
Your stupidity is amazing fub2!
- Email this page
By tropicaltoadAugust 18, 2008 - 7:47pm