Say Anything Blog

The real hypocrisy here is that the Dems do this kind of stuff all the time, but when a conservative does it back to them, they get their panties in a bunch.  They should man up and shut up already.

Leftie political philosophy, from a DU commenter:

It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. RUMOR IS TRUTH. The modern laws of media hype and political warfare have a useful tenet: Repeat ANYTHING or raise false concern over ANYTHING and it is likely to be planted in the conscious/subconscious of many voters.

The real hypocrisy here is that the Dems do this kind of stuff all the time

Since my conversion to Conservativsm after 9/11 I have noticed that Conservatives, Republicans in general, are way too nice when it come to dealing with the vicious Left.

As one who used to believe prior to 9/11 what my peers believed ie., that Rush was a right-wing nutcase out to destroy America (even though I never listened to him), I understand why the Left goes after Rush so often, he has the spine to take on the vicious Left.

syn, yes they seem to be unable to take it.  One difference is that they try to do their dirty work under covers so to speak like Teddy 1965 monkey around with our legal immigrant percentages.  When honest people point out these things, they get accused of being underhandedt!

Communism is evil

The Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that it is unconstitutional for any government official to question a citizen about who they voted for or why they voted as they did.

Loyalty oaths are also unconstitutional, anti-American, and extremely offensive in a free society. That must be why only the Democrat party has them.

Personally, I think the Democrats are rather dumb to raise a stink about this.

First, the most you’re going to do is get Rush fined and make him a bit of a martyr to his conservative audience. But even that is a long shot. 

Hahaha.

Yeah Rob, it’s “dumb” to expect people to be honest, and to respect the primary principle that our nation was founded on.

You are a classic representation of all that is bad with the American right.  Congratulations on supporting voter fraud and for not seeing anything bad in deception, fraud and destroying the democratic process.

You have proven to me that you are indeed an imbecile.

H: It’s not “voter fraud” to vote for whomever you choose in an open primary.  Anyone is entitled to vote for the Dem candidate of his or her choice in the Dem primary.  Your ignorance apparently extends to the Constitution as well.

Leftie political philosophy, from a DU commenter:

It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. RUMOR IS TRUTH. The modern laws of media hype and political warfare have a useful tenet: Repeat ANYTHING or raise false concern over ANYTHING and it is likely to be planted in the conscious/subconscious of many voters.

to respect the primary principle that our nation was founded on.

The ”primary principle”? Founded upon?  Have you been playing ”buzz word bingo” again, Hannitized? Please, please please show me where in the founding documents the ”primary principle” is invoked. (Or mentioned!)

Then, after that fruitless endeavor, tell me how it is bad for Obama to encourage Republicans to cross over (to the dark side) in the primaries, and vote for him!

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

There are organizations like Obama for President.  Are organizations like this illegal?

In Texas more Republicans vote 3-1 for Obama over Clinton.

In Ohio, it was evenly split.

H:

You have proven to me that you are indeed an imbecile.

Actually you’re both uncouth and an imbecile.

LOL, I meant Republicans for Obama for the link!!!  Making me an imbecile to.  At least with Rob one also, I’m in good company!

you’re both uncouth and an imbecile.

Speaking of ”imbeciles”, I’m still waiting to learn what the “primary” principle was as it relates to our Founding Fathers. Some pretty hotly contested primaries back in colonial times as I recall! Plus, they suffered under the handicap of not knowing when the Iowa caucuses were over, (not even knowing what an “Iowa” was!)

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

H: It’s not “voter fraud” to vote for whomever you choose in an open primary. 

Really?  Gee, thanks for clearing that up.

It is a FELONY to vote fraudulently.  Proving it, is another matter.  Supporting the idea is enough to judge character.

104.041 Fraud in connection with casting vote.--Any person perpetrating or attempting to perpetrate or aid in the perpetration of any fraud in connection with any vote cast, to be cast, or attempted to be cast, is guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

104.16 Voting fraudulent ballot.--Any elector who knowingly votes or attempts to vote a fraudulent ballot, or any person who knowingly solicits, or attempts, to vote a fraudulent ballot, is guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

Anyone is entitled to vote for the Dem candidate of his or her choice in the Dem primary.  Your ignorance apparently extends to the Constitution as well.

Yes but to do it fraudulently is a crime.

I’m still waiting to learn what the “primary” principle was as it relates to our Founding Fathers.

Only a complete drooling imbecile could say something so profoundly ignorant.

For the smart people: (not you)

http://www.constitution.org/cons/prin_cons.htm

Principles of Constitutional Interpretation

Constitutional interpretation, or constitutional construction, the term more often used by the Founders, is the process by which legal decisions are made that are justified by a constitution, although not necessarily correctly. Constitutional controversies are about whether an official act is consistent with, and authorized by, a constitution or constitutional statute or court decision. Since a constitution is a law, and the supreme law within its domain, and authorizes statutes and other official acts which have a textual expression, the principles of constitutional interpretation are essentially the same as the principles of statutory or judicial interpretation.

Most legal scholars recognize six main methods of interpretation: textual, historical, functional, doctrinal, prudential, equitable, and natural, although they may differ on what each includes, and there is some overlap among them.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Six_principles_in_which_the_US_Constitution_is_based_on

For the dumb people: (you)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jZ9dVVlhuE

Founding Fathers Primary Principle of Constitution #6

Equitable. Also called ethical. Decision based on an innate sense of justice, balancing the interests of the parties, and what is right and wrong, regardless of what the written law might provide. Often resorted to in cases in which the facts were not adequately anticipated or provided for by the lawgivers. Some scholars put various balancing tests of interests and values in the prudential category, but it works better to distinguish between prudential as balancing the interests and values of the legal system from equitable as balancing the interests and values of the parties. It arises out of the Latin maxim, Æquitas est perfecta quædam ratio quæ jus scriptum interpretatur et emendat; nulla scriptura comprehensa, sed sola ratione consistens. Equity is a sort of perfect reason which interprets and amends written law; comprehended in no code, but consistent with reason alone. Coke, Littleton, 24.

And that applies to Rush Limbaugh encouraging voters to cross parties in a primary...how?

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

And conversely, Barack Obama encouraging voters to cross parties in a primary?

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

It is a FELONY to vote fraudulently.

Nice Straw man! No argument, eh?

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

Most legal scholars recognize six main methods of interpretation: textual, historical, functional, doctrinal, prudential, equitable, and natural, although they may differ on what each includes, and there is some overlap among them.

That is what is wrong with the United States today. These academic constructs for interpreting the Constitution have so perverted the Constitution as to make it wholly meaningless and we have no human rights under it at all. I have a novel idea, read the freaking words and follow exactly what they say. Words have meaning and unless the words in the Constitution mean exactly what they say then we can never trust it to guarantee our liberties at all.

I get so angry over our bastardized, prostituted legal system in this freaking country, it is so obscene that we don’t even know what the definition of “is” - “is!” I say first cane most viciously every damn lawyer in this country until they stop perverting the law for partisan reasons or for their selfish economic interests.

No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

Neiman: Before you get all excited, H was just spamming; none of the stuff he posted had anything to do with what Rush advocated.  It’s not fraudulent to vote in an open primary, period.  H claimed a “founding principle”, but there is no founding principle having to do with primary “elections”; they are simply devices that the political parties use to determine the favorability of their prospective candidates.  They are neither legal nor binding, as the DNC/RNC can select anyone they choose, ultimately.
H is full of crap, as usual.

Leftie political philosophy, from a DU commenter:

It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. RUMOR IS TRUTH. The modern laws of media hype and political warfare have a useful tenet: Repeat ANYTHING or raise false concern over ANYTHING and it is likely to be planted in the conscious/subconscious of many voters.

Robert108: Thanks! I don’t understand a lot of that stuff, like spamming. I am naive in some ways!

No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

Rush is not going to go to jail for doing something the dems are the king of. It is not going to happen. It’s called freedom of speech.

Check out:
Goon’s North Dakota Red Neck
Goon’s World

Voter fraud, corruption, fabricated polls, character assasination.  That sums up the democrat/liberals.  Who else are the experts?  This is a democratic party tradition and character trait.  And to think Rush just invented this?? Democrats, truly are a chaotic bunch.

Neiman: Before you get all excited, H was just spamming; none of the stuff he posted had anything to do with what Rush advocated.

Oh brother.  Robert, you have no idea what you are talking about.  There are six basic primary principles of the constitution.  One of them being Popular Sovereignty. 

I do not have the time nor the will to continually educate bafoons like Proof and yourself who do not understand the methods of interpreting the constitution or its basic principles.  You clearly did not go to school worth its tuition fees.

Notice how proof ignored the material that was provided all of a sudden.  As if I made up the words Primary Principle as it relates to interpreting the constitution.

Yes Robert.  It was random luck.

Again, for morons like you, feel free to educate yourself with the mentality level you can relate to.

Heh.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jZ9dVVlhuE

H: Your faux intellectuality continues to amaze.  What does any of your spam have to do with the freedom to vote in an open primary?  Please connect the dots, if you can.  Your spam was true, but irrelevant to your claim of “voter fraud”.  Please explain the “fraud”.
Remember, there is no “loyalty oath” for voting under the Constitution.

Leftie political philosophy, from a DU commenter:

It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. RUMOR IS TRUTH. The modern laws of media hype and political warfare have a useful tenet: Repeat ANYTHING or raise false concern over ANYTHING and it is likely to be planted in the conscious/subconscious of many voters.

I do not have the time nor the will to continually educate bafoons (sic)

Or the brains, buffoon!
Nothing you presented, nothing, zero, zip, nada, applied to voters crossing parties in a primary.

You pulled the “felony” stuff out of your ass, knowing that it has absolutely nothing to do with this case. Poor straw man, but thanks for playing!
Those of us who are truly educated are tired of wiping your snot nose at every turn. Go back to the kiddie pool!

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

Still waiting to hear why it’s OK for Obama to encourage people to cross lines, for groups like Republicans for Obama to encourage people to cross lines, but not for Rush.

Hannitized:  If the Ohio Registration Oath ever makes it’s way to the Supreme Court - and the sooner, the better - the court will void it.

"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

“As a conservative, I will not be overly enthusiastic about voting for John McCain on November 4 - but I will be sprinting to the polling place to do so!”
Matthew May, conservative commentator, The American Spectator

H: Your faux intellectuality continues to amaze.

OMG.  And the fact that you can type is amazing to me.  I have no idea how you past the 6th grade with the type of ignorance you demonstrate.

What does any of your spam have to do with the freedom to vote in an open primary?  Please connect the dots, if you can.  Your spam was true, but irrelevant to your claim of “voter fraud”.  Please explain the “fraud”.

Oh, now my spam was true.  Before, it had nothing to do with what Limburger is doing, but now I hate to tie it in with fraud.  Fine.

Let me give you three words and you connect the dots, because I really don’t enjoy educating you, only to be harassed in the process.  I don’t want to educate you because I enjoy your ignorance.  I enjoy it immensely.  The fact that you think you know what you are talking about demonstrates to most educated voters that you guys are complete idiots.

Now, look up the words “basic tenants”.  Then see if you can tie them into the relevance of the basic trust that the founding fathers assumed would be honored by the people in a democracy.  To understand this basic trust you should have examined this throughly in school. 

Obviously you didnt go to a school worth the paper your degree is printed, if in fact you have one, or you would understand why one of the principles (for interpreting the constitution) is Equitable or ethical. 

I really don’t care to give you an lesson in law interpretation or its relevance to popular sovereignty and its relation to how the people are given authority to set up the rules for the election of the government.

For gods sake Robert.  Have you never read one single legal argument regarding BUSH V. GORE?

Remember, there is no “loyalty oath” for voting under the Constitution.

Fraud is fraud is fraud.  It is a violation of the basic principles the founding fathers entrusted us with. 

You should have your right to vote taken away, you aren’t smart enough or honest enough to deserve one.

Fraud is fraud is fraud.

Hannitized’s autobiography in five words!

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

You should have your right to vote taken away, you aren’t smart enough or honest enough to deserve one.

The fascist in Han-job surfaces! Would you reinstate literacy test for voting, Han-job? Or are you just bloviating in lieu of argument?

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

I’ll bet he calls himself a Democrat! Hee! Hee!

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

Now, look up the words “basic tenants”. Maybe you should be the one “looking up”, since a “tenant” is someone who occupies a property.  The word you were trying to use is “tenet”, but you still fail to connect your claim of Rush doing something fraudulent in this case to any legal tenet of any sort.  The simple answer is that no law was violated, and no fraud was perpetrated. Then see if you can tie them into the relevance of the basic trust that the founding fathers assumed would be honored by the people in a democracy. To understand this basic trust you should have examined this throughly in school.

There is no issue of basic trust here at all.  To repeat: there is nothing wrong with voting for anyone in an open primary.  End of story.
You’re completely wrong, and are trying to cover your crap up with an avalanche of irrelevant bullshit.
Go play with your toys; the adults are getting bored with your childish prattle.

Leftie political philosophy, from a DU commenter:

It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. RUMOR IS TRUTH. The modern laws of media hype and political warfare have a useful tenet: Repeat ANYTHING or raise false concern over ANYTHING and it is likely to be planted in the conscious/subconscious of many voters.

The fascist in Han-job surfaces! Would you reinstate literacy test for voting, Han-job? Or are you just bloviating in lieu of argument?

Oh gee....brain dead boy wonder picks the low hanging fruit to hit with his bat, in an attempt to make both a point and insult, and thinking he has hit one out of the park.

Felony voter Freud is a crime that takes your right to vote away you complete fool.

What you are hiding behind is the fact that it is almost impossible to prove the “type” of fraud that Limberger is encouraging and committing.

You idiot.

Here idiot boy...maybe you can learn from these...see if you can get the hints.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMPsA8M1tXw&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=arf8ceVV5kQ&feature=related

the low hanging fruit

Gee, Hannitized! I wouldn’t have characterized you that way, but you know yourself better than I!

Later, fruit boy!

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

BTW, nice job with the word “tenant” You are such a maroon!

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

There is no issue of basic trust here at all.  To repeat: there is nothing wrong with voting for anyone in an open primary.  End of story.

Robert,

There is nothing wrong with voting LEGALLY.  To vote fraudulently is a FELONY.

You are hiding behind what is possible to prove, not what is the reality of the situation.

The reality of the situation, and the legality of the situation is that Limburger is promoting voter fraud.  To have republicans vote as democrats for the sole purpose of creating chaos, IS FRAUD.  THAT is a violation of the basic trust that has been given to us by our founding fathers.  That trust, is a basic tenet of one of the primary principles of our constitution.

You just dont like the fact that I know what I am talking about, and you don’t.  You are purposefully being dishonest to win some sort of stupid, retarded, high-school point.

There are the Canons of Statutory Interpretation that were generally accepted by all in Western jurists and then came the Communist-inspired Critical Legal Studies form of Deconstructionism, whose entire purpose and intent is to tear down the existing legal infrastructure so that a New Communist Order can be built on its ruins.

So, don’t listen to this ambiguity, or Living Constitution crap—that’s just Commie BS in sheep’s clothing.

The way law is interpreted (or should be interpreted) is:

1) Plain language, and, in case of ambiguity;
2) Look to the Legislative history to elicit the drafters’ intent (travaux préparatoires when looking at foreign or international law)

This is greatly simplified, but that is the basic gist of how it should be done.  The alternative is to cede all lawmaking authority to those unelected and in-office-for-life judges, who rule however the hell they feel like ruling by torturing words and meanings until they fit the outcome they want to arrive at.

Thereafter a legislature (legis - law; slature - to write) will be complete surplusage, since we now have the functional equivalents of US-based Imams to rule over us.

Take that you smelly hippie bitches -
- you’ve been outed.

...for great justice

Felony voter Freud…

This is too funny!  The reason that it’s so hard to prove what you claim is “freud"(that’s actually “fraud”, btw), is because there has been no fraud on Rush’s part.  People legally registered, as they are free to do, and legally voted for the Dem of their choice.  They have a perfect right to do that, so no fraud of any sort was perpetrated.(or any “freud”, either) You continue to spew meaningless bullshit, completely devoid of any facts or truth.

Leftie political philosophy, from a DU commenter:

It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. RUMOR IS TRUTH. The modern laws of media hype and political warfare have a useful tenet: Repeat ANYTHING or raise false concern over ANYTHING and it is likely to be planted in the conscious/subconscious of many voters.

To have republicans vote as democrats for the sole purpose of creating chaos, IS FRAUD.

Hannitized:: We welcome your new found “principles”. We noticed they were conspicuously absent in the early primaries when Democrats crossed over to vote for Republican candidates.
We also notice the conspicuous absence of outrage when Obama calls for Republicans to vote for him!

Your attempt to co-opt principles you don’t have is hypocritical at best and… a laugh riot! You guys look so funny falling all over yourselves to gin up some mock outrage! A laugh a minute! I give it two thumbs up!

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

The ”primary principle”? Founded upon?  Have you been playing ”buzz word bingo” again, Hannitized? Please, please please show me where in the founding documents the ”primary principle” is invoked. (Or mentioned!)

Heh.

Do you see now, you complete baboon, what a imbecile you are?  Not only do you lack the high-school education that would enable you to have known what the primary principles are, but you also lack a more substantial, in-depth understanding of what our founding fathers created, and what it is they entrusted us with. 

Your ignorance is so profound that you actually thought primary principle is buzz word, and not part of any vocabulary for scholars.

Your constant ad hominems are merely a weak minded response to matters and issues you can not contemplate or comprehend. 

If I didn’t think you were such a dick, I would feel sorry for you.  But I rather enjoy the fact that you are the ignorant scoundrel that you are.

The reality of the situation, and the legality of the situation is that Limburger is promoting voter fraud.

You are absolutely wrong.  There is no fraud being perpetrated.  Party affiliation is voluntary, and can be changed at the whim of the individual voter.  You’re just wrong, and are trying again and again to cover it up with bullshit.  You’ve been schooled, and aren’t bright enough to absorb the knowledge.
Furthermore, Rush is simply expressing his opinions, and hasn’t coerced or deceived anyone.  I think that is a Constitutional principle; it’s called Free Speech, and is there somewhere, I think it’s called the First Amendment.  You can look it up.

Leftie political philosophy, from a DU commenter:

It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. RUMOR IS TRUTH. The modern laws of media hype and political warfare have a useful tenet: Repeat ANYTHING or raise false concern over ANYTHING and it is likely to be planted in the conscious/subconscious of many voters.

Your constant ad hominems…

You came on this blog spewing ad hominems in place of either facts or logic, and have rarely posted a comment without at least one ad hominem.  The principle of free Americans voting for whomever they please in an election is a basic principle; nothing you have said here involves any sort of basic principle; just bullshit.

Leftie political philosophy, from a DU commenter:

It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. RUMOR IS TRUTH. The modern laws of media hype and political warfare have a useful tenet: Repeat ANYTHING or raise false concern over ANYTHING and it is likely to be planted in the conscious/subconscious of many voters.

There is nothing wrong with voting LEGALLY.  To vote fraudulently is a FELONY…

H,

In a very real sense, you have no one to blame for your angst here than yourself and your fellow liberal Democrats.  Time and again your side has vehemently opposed the most basic control over voter fraud… a simple requirement for a picture ID.

If you are unwilling to support curbs on even the most fundamental form of voter fraud, you can hardly expect to be taken seriously now in this situation.

Furthermore, if your Democrat party sets the rules for their primary elections, as your side has been trumpeting to Democrat voters in Florida and Michigan of late, and those rules include so-called “open primaries”, you are hardly in a position to yammer about fraud when someone takes advantage of the very rules that your side set to begin with.

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

People legally registered, as they are free to do, and legally voted for the Dem of their choice.  They have a perfect right to do that, so no fraud of any sort was perpetrated.(or any “freud”, either) You continue to spew meaningless bullshit, completely devoid of any facts or truth.

I don’t need to keep explaining to you why dishonest voting is fraud.  You don’t give a shit anyway.

You keep playing dumb in order to make your little teenie-bopper argument.

These people have no intention of voting for Dems in the primary.  They are only disrupting the democratic process to cause chaos.  Thus, the name of the project Rush is heading up.

To do this is FRAUDULENT.

You are a dishonest man Robert, and the tiny, little, tinie bit of respect I had for you was lost in this post.

You are not a decent man.  And again, I take great pleasure being a better one than you.

Bat,

Before we begin to move this discussion to providing IDs at election time.

May I pleae have your agreement that changing party affiliation for the purpose of causing problems for the Democrats is Fraud and not the kindo of fraud that can be proven?

Welcome to the debate by the way.  A smart and honest fellow such as yourself is desperately needed.

These people have no intention of voting for Dems in the primary. They did, so you have no point here. They are only disrupting the democratic process to cause chaos. They voted.  Get over yourself. Thus, the name of the project Rush is heading up.

Not only do you have no sense, you have no sense of humor, either.  Rush is laughing at you, and you’re too stupid to realize it.  That’s not a crime, btw.  Dems should be laughed right out of business, until they come back to America.
I realize you want to quell any diverse opinions, like any other leftie fascist, and so you wish with all your might that you can trump up some bullshit that would silence Rush, but you and the Dems/MSM have failed miserably, like you always do.
There’s a simple reason for this:  Lefties are feelers, and conservatives are thinkers.

Leftie political philosophy, from a DU commenter:

It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. RUMOR IS TRUTH. The modern laws of media hype and political warfare have a useful tenet: Repeat ANYTHING or raise false concern over ANYTHING and it is likely to be planted in the conscious/subconscious of many voters.

Ah c’mon fellas.

The commies just have their panties in a knot because Limbaugh has torn a page from their playbook and is using it against them.

They’ve been doing this crap for years (see McCain 2000) , particularly in open primary States.  They did this to squeeze out true Conservatives in Virginia, leaving us in the Commonwealth in the same situation we now face nationally (a choice between openly-Left and Stealth-Left) .

Moreover, keeping an intercenine struggle going between different factions of your enemy is also a long-accepted form of warfare.  What do you suppose Ronnie Raygun was doing by ensuring there was no clear victor in the Iran-Iraq struggle?

By keeping Iraq propped up, the Iraqis and Iranians were slaughtering each other for at no real cost to the USA. 

a former official said that he personally had signed off on a document that shared U.S. satellite intelligence with both Iraq and Iran in an attempt to produce a military stalemate

All’s we needed to do was to keep it going, get a bowl of Cheesy-poofs and kick back the recliner and watch the fireworks.

We’re doing the same thing between the Obamination and the Hildebeast.  We know we’re going to get screwed in this election (unless a Third Party candidate like Jesse Ventura rides into the rescue just as we are about to get raped and scalped) —but we can at least enjoy the Calico Cat and the Gingham Dog fight in the meantime.

...for great justice

These people have no intention of voting for Dems in the primary.

It means no intention of voting for Dems in the General election.

Whatta maroon.

...for great justice

H,

You are atop that which is often referred to by your fellow liberals in other tenuous situations as a “slippery slope.” What you describe is likely invidious, but it is hardly fraud in the legal sense of the word.  No more so than “mis-speaking” about all the sniper fire that greeted you and your adolescent daughter on your arrival in Bosnia nearly a dozen years ago.

The problem with “changing party affiliation for the purpose of causing problems for the Democrats” is that there is no way to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the true intention of the person who changes their party affiliation.  Particularly with the intentionally lax controls put in place by the very Democrats who are no (delightfully, in my view!) screaming “Foul!”

I can sympathize with your frustration over this, but as I noted above, your side has no one to blame but yourselves.  If you opposed more basic curbs on more basic types of demonstrable voter fraud in the past, your self-righteous indignation over the issue now probably isn’t going to be taken very seriously.  You guys left the door open… deliberately.  Its a little late to complain about just who wandered in, and what their true partisan allegiance might be.

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

These people have no intention of voting for Dems in the primary.

They did, so you have no point

Hahaha.  Oh I see.  I missed the primary election already Robert?

Dude....I thought you were dumb, but I didnt think you were THAT dumb.

Game over...you lost.  C-ya bitches.

Well!!!  (Stomps foot and grimaces as eyes well up) If you won’t let me win, I’ll just take my ball and go home!  So there!

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Whoops...I meant the general election. 

These conservatives who are switching to vote for Dems, have no intetion of voting for Hillary in the General election.

Well!!!  (Stomps foot and grimaces as eyes well up) If you won’t let me win, I’ll just take my ball and go home!  So there!

No...thats not it Bat.

I used the wrong word.  I meant General election.

I thought Robert was saying that they voted for the general election because my brain had them switched.

I have lots to say about requirring voters to have an ID before they can vote.

Let me get down some pizza, before I get to that.

So Hannitized, do you think Obama should be charged with voter fraud since he is running commercials in Pennsylvania to change party affiliation and vote for him in the primary? 

I mean Obama is a start guy and he must know most of them will probably vote for McCain in the general election.  So, did Obama commit fraud for urging republicans to do just what Rush urged them to do?

A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers.

H,

Help yourself to the pizza… and take all the time ya need.  Its late here and I’ve had an unusually long and frustrating day.  I’m going to bed.

You have most of my thoughts on the matter, however disjointed they may be.  I’ll be glad to answer whatever sentient arguments you make… tomorrow!

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

These conservatives who are switching to vote for Dems, have no intetion of voting for Hillary in the General election.

Brilliant!  I voted for Romney in my primary, but have no intention of voting for him in the General election.  I guess I voted fraudulently, according to you, right?
I know it’s tough to get outsmarted time and time again, but get used to it; you’re a leftie.

I’m sorry I have to ‘splain this to you so many times, but all Americans are free to change their Party registration at any time, and for any reason.
It’s called “freedom”.  Get it?

Leftie political philosophy, from a DU commenter:

It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. RUMOR IS TRUTH. The modern laws of media hype and political warfare have a useful tenet: Repeat ANYTHING or raise false concern over ANYTHING and it is likely to be planted in the conscious/subconscious of many voters.

What you describe is likely invidious, but it is hardly fraud in the legal sense of the word.

There are laws that prohibit “voting fraudulent ballots” (scroll up), but what I said earlier is that is impossible to prove.

104.16 Voting fraudulent ballot.--Any elector who knowingly votes or attempts to vote a fraudulent ballot, or any person who knowingly solicits, or attempts, to vote a fraudulent ballot, is guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

If someone pays you to vote for Hillary, that is “voting a fraudulent ballot”.  If someone tells you to do vote for Hillary out of malice, that is also “voting a fraudulent ballot”, but it is one that is impossible to prove, unlike the exchanging of money.

No more so than “mis-speaking” about all the sniper fire that greeted you and your adolescent daughter on your arrival in Bosnia nearly a dozen years ago.

They are different it that there is no law for exaggerating or lying.  There are laws that prohibit voter fraud.  It really is that simple.

The problem with “changing party affiliation for the purpose of causing problems for the Democrats” is that there is no way to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the true intention of the person who changes their party affiliation.  Particularly with the intentionally lax controls put in place by the very Democrats who are no (delightfully, in my view!) screaming “Foul!”

True.

If you opposed more basic curbs on more basic types of demonstrable voter fraud in the past, your self-righteous indignation over the issue now probably isn’t going to be taken very seriously.  You guys left the door open… deliberately.  Its a little late to complain about just who wandered in, and what their true partisan allegiance might be.

Requiring an ID card before casting a vote puts elderly and the young at a disadvantage for voting.  So many elderly don’t drive and loose ID cards.  Hell, even some military don’t have state ID’s or drivers licenses.  This is vastly different from the intentional malice that is at the heart of Rush’s plan.  You know this.

Brilliant!  I voted for Romney in my primary, but have no intention of voting for him in the General election.  I guess I voted fraudulently, according to you, right?

I know it’s tough to get outsmarted time and time again, but get used to it; you’re a leftie.

OMG.  Robert, here is a hint.  Voting for whom ever you want, HONESTLY, is not a crime.  Changing your party affiliation out of malice, to cause Dems problems, is FRAUDULENT.

Do you know what that word means? 

In criminal law, fraud is the crime or offense of deliberately deceiving another in order to damage them – usually, to obtain property or services unjustly. [1] Fraud can be accomplished through the aid of forged objects. In the criminal law of common law jurisdictions it may be called “theft by deception,” “larceny by trick,” “larceny by fraud and deception” or something similar.

I’m sorry I have to ‘splain this to you so many times, but all Americans are free to change their Party registration at any time, and for any reason.
It’s called “freedom”.  Get it?

Robert,

This is the last time I am going to say this to you.

Changing your party affliation from R to D to purposefully cause malice to the Dem party fits the legal definition of FRAUD.  Even moreso if they plan to vote R in the general election.

Changing your party affiliation honestly is perfectly fine.  But of course that is not what Rush is doing.

This is why he calls it operation chaos.

Oh I see. I missed the primary election already Robert?

Are you referring to the nominating convention?  You just seem to get everything wrong, so I’m just asking; you might have written something that made sense, but it’s hard to tell.

Your ad hominems don’t work with me; I thought you might have caught on to that by now, but you’re not the sharpest knife in the drawer, I guess.

Leftie political philosophy, from a DU commenter:

It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. RUMOR IS TRUTH. The modern laws of media hype and political warfare have a useful tenet: Repeat ANYTHING or raise false concern over ANYTHING and it is likely to be planted in the conscious/subconscious of many voters.

"Intentional malice???” Is this your latest bullshit attempt, since you have been thoroughly refuted with the “fraud” nonsense?

Leftie political philosophy, from a DU commenter:

It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. RUMOR IS TRUTH. The modern laws of media hype and political warfare have a useful tenet: Repeat ANYTHING or raise false concern over ANYTHING and it is likely to be planted in the conscious/subconscious of many voters.

“Intentional malice???” Is this your latest bullshit attempt, since you have been thoroughly refuted with the “fraud” nonsense?

Robert,

You are delusional.

Read Bats comments....he is essentially agreeing with me, not you.

Im done dude.  I just don’t want to keep bothering with the basic fundamentals of honesty and dishonesty with you.

You obviously will make any excuse for deception, dishonesty and intentional malice.

Robert,

Is it illegal for me to pay someone to vote for Obama yes or no?

Is it illegal for me to pay someone to vote for Obama yes or no?

Do you really not know the answer to that question?  Do you have any evidence that Rush paid anyone to vote?  I repeat, he neither coerced anyone nor offered any inducement to do anything.  Those voters who legally voted in the open primary did so of their own free will.
Paying people to vote, like JFK’s dad did in the ‘60 election, is certainly not legal, so now you know.
You’re still spewing irrelevant bullshit.

Leftie political philosophy, from a DU commenter:

It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. RUMOR IS TRUTH. The modern laws of media hype and political warfare have a useful tenet: Repeat ANYTHING or raise false concern over ANYTHING and it is likely to be planted in the conscious/subconscious of many voters.

Changing your party affiliation out of malice…

Glad to see you have finally realized the idiocy of your “fraud” argument, but this one is no better.  Any evidence of this “malice” you claim?  Again, free Americans are free, in an open primary, to vote as they wish; that’s what “open” means.
Here’s a hint for you:  If you don’t want crossover voting, don’t have open primaries.  I think they’re stupid, anyway.  We have McCain because of open primaries, and for the same reason you hypocritically criticize Rush for.  We have been saddled with McCain because of crossover voting in open primaries; why aren’t you whining about that?

Leftie political philosophy, from a DU commenter:

It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. RUMOR IS TRUTH. The modern laws of media hype and political warfare have a useful tenet: Repeat ANYTHING or raise false concern over ANYTHING and it is likely to be planted in the conscious/subconscious of many voters.

Paying people to vote, like JFK’s dad did in the ‘60 election, is certainly not legal, so now you know.

But why is it illegal, you just said that people can vote for whom ever they want.  So why does it matter if I pay them for who they were going to vote for anyway?

Glad to see you have finally realized the idiocy of your “fraud” argument, but this one is no better.  Any evidence of this “malice” you claim? 

Haha.  Robert...you are deliciously ignorant.

Malice...is a result.  Malice can either be intentional or reckless as a result.  It can be implied or expressed.  Expressed malice is what Rush did.  You think I dropped the fraud claim, because you are dim-witted.  But Fraud can not be proven unless express malice has occurred and a cooperating party admits to the crime.

The evidence that you ask is all over the radio.  It’s in Rushs campaign title “Operation Chaos”.  The chaos that has been expressed is intended to cause the Democratic party harm.

Now, put all of those words together and what do you get?  Expressed malice that was intentionally trying to cause the democratic party harm.  That is the definition of Fraud.

I can’t believe I have to have these very simple arguments with you.  You are totally irrational and illogical.

Here’s a hint for you:  If you don’t want crossover voting, don’t have open primaries.  I think they’re stupid, anyway.

I don’t care about crossover voters.  I like the fact that we can bring Rs over to the Ds.  The difference is we want them to stay for the GE.  This is the American way.  What we don’t want is people swithching from Rs to Ds during the primary only to switch back during the GE, before Oct 25th.

We have McCain because of open primaries, and for the same reason you hypocritically criticize Rush for.  We have been saddled with McCain because of crossover voting in open primaries; why aren’t you whining about that?

Because I don’t believe that.  You have McCain because Republicans voted for him.  If they didnt, you guys are screwed because his numbers were half that of Dems.

Again, free Americans are free, in an open primary, to vote as they wish; that’s what “open” means.

Absolutely, but they can’t do it Fraudulently, that’s a felony.

You should have your right to vote taken away, you aren’t smart enough or honest enough to deserve one.

The fascist who expressed this thought (remarkably spelling all the words correctly this time!) tries to laugh off this distasteful, undemocratic expression as the “low hanging fruit” of an argument easily dismissed. Note: He does not disavow the sentiment!
Having revealed his true nature, he continues to try to obfuscate his position with a lot of cut and paste, talk about fraud (which is completely off topic!), attempts to insult other people’s intelligence (and failing miserably: calling them “bafoons” (sic) What a maroon!), and parroting language he has heard adults say here: namely, we are tired of trying to educate him. It’s so darned cute when Hannitized stamps his little foot and says he’s tired of educating us!
How are you coming with those ”tenants”, Han-job? You still a “tenant” of your Mom’s basement? Three initials, Han-job: G E D!

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

BTW, Hannitized, You Fraudian slip is showing!

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

So why does it matter if I pay them for who they were going to vote for anyway?

This is a deliciously ignorant answer from the troll who alleges fraud for encouraging some one to cross parties to vote.
Because paying some one for their vote, no matter who they intended to vote for, is against the law, fascist!

(I know you have no respect for democratic institutions,so why should I expect better?)

BTW, you do call yourself a ”Democrat”, do you not?

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

But Fraud can not be proven unless express malice has occurred and a cooperating party admits to the crime.

Wrong again; fraud does not require malice.  I notice you have failed to provide any evidence that either a fraud has taken place or that any malice has taken place.  It’s not “malice” to dislike the Dems; it’s just understandable.

Leftie political philosophy, from a DU commenter:

It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. RUMOR IS TRUTH. The modern laws of media hype and political warfare have a useful tenet: Repeat ANYTHING or raise false concern over ANYTHING and it is likely to be planted in the conscious/subconscious of many voters.

So why does it matter if I pay them for who they were going to vote for anyway?

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

Leftie political philosophy, from a DU commenter:

It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. RUMOR IS TRUTH. The modern laws of media hype and political warfare have a useful tenet: Repeat ANYTHING or raise false concern over ANYTHING and it is likely to be planted in the conscious/subconscious of many voters.

You obviously will make any excuse for deception, dishonesty and intentional malice.

There’s no deception; he announced it on the radio.  Duh.

There’s no dishonesty, since all qualified Americans are free to vote for anyone they like in an open primary.  Double Duh. I guess you don’t know what an open primary is, then.

There’s no “intentional malice"(as if there is any other kind) in taking advantage of an opening your opponent gives you.  It’s not illegal in any way to dislike the Dems.  Triple duh.

Leftie political philosophy, from a DU commenter:

It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. RUMOR IS TRUTH. The modern laws of media hype and political warfare have a useful tenet: Repeat ANYTHING or raise false concern over ANYTHING and it is likely to be planted in the conscious/subconscious of many voters.