Conquer Club

captain.crazy wrote:Al franken stole this election, it war wrought with fraud. Elections like this should be re-voted.

You've still yet to provide any facts to this point, just conspiracy theories.

Norm Coleman was unable to provide the courts with any evidence of fraud or votes uncounted votes, so I am am curious as to what evidence you have.

PricklyPear wrote:

captain.crazy wrote:Al franken stole this election, it war wrought with fraud. Elections like this should be re-voted.

You've still yet to provide any facts to this point, just conspiracy theories.

Norm Coleman was unable to provide the courts with any evidence of fraud or votes uncounted votes, so I am am curious as to what evidence you have.

lol... electronic voting... late and "mysterious" votes coming into the count well after the poles closed? give me a break. This is a coup. A massive socialist agenda. wake up kid... smell the fluoride...

captain.crazy wrote:lol... electronic voting... late and "mysterious" votes coming into the count well after the poles closed? give me a break. This is a coup. A massive socialist agenda. wake up kid... smell the fluoride...

Electronic Voting???? Minnesota has paper ballots; that's why they were able to recount the votes in the first place. People from across the state recounted each ballot one by one while being watched by election judges and anyone from the public who wanted to watch.

And again, if there were late votes and voter fraud, how come Norm Coleman, not only didn't provide evidence of any errors, admitted they had no evidence of any errors, just a theory?

Again, conspiracy theory (and an uninformed one at that); not fact.

PricklyPear wrote:[quote="captain.crazylol... electronic voting... late and "mysterious" votes coming into the count well after the poles closed? give me a break. This is a coup. A massive socialist agenda. wake up kid... smell the fluoride...

Electronic Voting???? Minnesota has paper ballots; that's why they were able to recount the votes in the first place. People from across the state recounted each ballot one by one while being watched by election judges and anyone from the public who wanted to watch.

And again, if there were late votes and voter fraud, how come Norm Coleman, not only didn't provide evidence of any errors, admitted they had no evidence of any errors, just a theory?

Again, conspiracy theory (and an uninformed one at that); not fact.[/quote]


All of Minnesota has paper voting? I don't think so...

http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/appel/optical-scan-voting-extremely-accurate-minnesota
http://www.ceimn.org/news/minnesota_officials_arent_fretting_about_new_voting_technology

As for voter fraud... this is old news...

Pawlenty said he especially wonders about an election worker who carried absentee ballots around in a car when they were supposed to be counted, as well as Franken and Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama each getting 100 votes more in Mountain Iron than were reported election night.

http://www.slate.com/discuss/forums/thread/2107327.aspx

The vote should have been re-done...

captain.crazy wrote:I have an ounce of lead for you, just one... in a well placed grouping around your major organs... come and take it.

I bet that you physically had a boner while you typed that, didn't you?



But seriously, watching you harp on about how badass you'll be with the guns that you won't dare to fire at a police officer is totally hilarious. Pray continue your empty posturing.

Good for Al Franken. It's always nice to have one more senator who has little to no idea what he or she is doing.

thegreekdog wrote:Good for Al Franken. It's always nice to have one more senator who has little to no idea what he or she is doing.

He will be referred to as the horse in the senate.

captain.crazy wrote:sure... suppose what you wish, but the fact of the matter is that it is going to happen, and I would rather just get on with it and get it over with. I would much prefer that the federal government disband all of its ridiculous offices, and allow people to thrive in accordance with their own abilities. But you know that won't happen.

so lets just cut to the quick already and get it over with. Welcome to your new office Al Franken... We have been waiting for you.

What you gonna do big man...troll his inbox
Dont you just love these internet Rambos

targetman377, and all those others who can't resist calling others names or attacking them...keep the flames out. They are not welcome on this site any longer.

Woodruff wrote:So why are you venting YOUR psychopathy here? I'm just curious.

um in what way am i psychopathic

ps: being impolite doesn't count

captain.crazy wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:Good for Al Franken. It's always nice to have one more senator who has little to no idea what he or she is doing.

He will be referred to as the horse in the senate.

Are you saying he has big...feet?

SultanOfSurreal wrote:

Woodruff wrote:So why are you venting YOUR psychopathy here? I'm just curious.

um in what way am i psychopathic

ps: being impolite doesn't count

Truthfully, you appear to me to be far more psychopathic than he does. I'd say half of your posts almost scream of it.

Woodruff wrote:

SultanOfSurreal wrote:

Woodruff wrote:So why are you venting YOUR psychopathy here? I'm just curious.

um in what way am i psychopathic

ps: being impolite doesn't count

Truthfully, you appear to me to be far more psychopathic than he does. I'd say half of your posts almost scream of it.

You have been reading captain crazy's posts, right? I mean, one of them is batshit insane, another can be a douche at times. No comparison

Woodruff wrote:

captain.crazy wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:Good for Al Franken. It's always nice to have one more senator who has little to no idea what he or she is doing.

He will be referred to as the horse in the senate.

Are you saying he has big...feet?

umm...

jonka wrote:finally a comedian has achieved office.

Nah, we've had lots of comedians in office -- well, clowns anyway. What's one more?

thegreekdog wrote:Good for Al Franken. It's always nice to have one more senator who has little to no idea what he or she is doing.

haha, as if norm coleman was the best legislator to ever live. franken would have to eat a baby on the senate floor before he could be called worse than coleman (and that's probably why coleman lost an election to al motherfucking franken)

here's coleman being verbally raped by british mp george galloway after coleman committed libel against him:

part 1
part 2

SultanOfSurreal wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:Good for Al Franken. It's always nice to have one more senator who has little to no idea what he or she is doing.

haha, as if norm coleman was the best legislator to ever live. franken would have to eat a baby on the senate floor before he could be called worse than coleman (and that's probably why coleman lost an election to al motherfucking franken)

here's coleman being verbally raped by british mp george galloway after coleman committed libel against him:

part 1
part 2

As I said, it's always nice to have one more senator who has little to no idea what he or she is doing. I'm bipartisan in my contempt.

thegreekdog wrote:

SultanOfSurreal wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:Good for Al Franken. It's always nice to have one more senator who has little to no idea what he or she is doing.

haha, as if norm coleman was the best legislator to ever live. franken would have to eat a baby on the senate floor before he could be called worse than coleman (and that's probably why coleman lost an election to al motherfucking franken)

here's coleman being verbally raped by british mp george galloway after coleman committed libel against him:

part 1
part 2

As I said, it's always nice to have one more senator who has little to no idea what he or she is doing. I'm bipartisan in my contempt.

well if you're right about franken, it's not one more, it's just one swapped out for another. and the lesser of two idiots got the job, in my opinion.

besides, franken knows that all eyes will be on him and the gop is just giddy to use him as the posterboy of the democratic supermajority, so if you're lucky that should keep him "in line" (read: too terrified to act like an actual progressive)

SultanOfSurreal wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

SultanOfSurreal wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:Good for Al Franken. It's always nice to have one more senator who has little to no idea what he or she is doing.

haha, as if norm coleman was the best legislator to ever live. franken would have to eat a baby on the senate floor before he could be called worse than coleman (and that's probably why coleman lost an election to al motherfucking franken)

here's coleman being verbally raped by british mp george galloway after coleman committed libel against him:

part 1
part 2

As I said, it's always nice to have one more senator who has little to no idea what he or she is doing. I'm bipartisan in my contempt.

well if you're right about franken, it's not one more, it's just one swapped out for another. and the lesser of two idiots got the job, in my opinion.

It's always nice to have a different senator who has little to no idea what he or she is doing instead of the same senator who has little to no idea what he or she is doing. Yeesh... run on sentence. Is Franken at least knowledgeable about some things? I wonder what committees he will be on.

thegreekdog wrote:It's always nice to have a different senator who has little to no idea what he or she is doing instead of the same senator who has little to no idea what he or she is doing. Yeesh... run on sentence. Is Franken at least knowledgeable about some things? I wonder what committees he will be on.

I know for sure the Judicial Committee. Seems complete opposite of his nature.

On one hand, I don't like either party having a 60 to 40 advantage on the other hand I don't think it'll make a huge difference.

strike wolf wrote:On one hand, I don't like either party having a 60 to 40 advantage on the other hand I don't think it'll make a huge difference.

the democrats didn't gain this upper hand in a vacuum. why don't you ask yourself what factors led to the senate becoming a supermajority body (not to mention caused the white house to go to two northern liberals for the first time since... hell, 1940). and think about how these factors reflect on the opposition party -- who just a few years ago had been enjoying nearly three decades of basically unfettered power themselves.

SultanOfSurreal wrote:

strike wolf wrote:On one hand, I don't like either party having a 60 to 40 advantage on the other hand I don't think it'll make a huge difference.

the democrats didn't gain this upper hand in a vacuum. why don't you ask yourself what factors led to the senate becoming a supermajority body (not to mention caused the white house to go to two northern liberals for the first time since... hell, 1940). and think about how these factors reflect on the opposition party -- who just a few years ago had been enjoying nearly three decades of basically unfettered power themselves.

It's all very exciting.

Seriously though, where did you come up with the opposition party "enjoying nearly three decades of basically unfettered power themselves"? President Carter (D) had a Democratic Congress for his whole term. President Reagan (R) had a Republican Congress for 6 years and a Democratic Congress for 2 years. President Bush (R) had a Democratic Congress for his whole term. President Clinton (D) had a Democratic Congress for 2 years and a Republican Congress for 6 years. President Bush had a "tied" Congress for 2 years, a Republican Congress for 4 years, and a Democratic Congress for 2 years.

Therefore, of the 30 or so years between Presidents Carter and Obama, there were 6 years of Democractic control of both the presidency and the Congress and 10 years of Republican control of both the presidency and Congress.

thegreekdog wrote:

SultanOfSurreal wrote:

strike wolf wrote:On one hand, I don't like either party having a 60 to 40 advantage on the other hand I don't think it'll make a huge difference.

the democrats didn't gain this upper hand in a vacuum. why don't you ask yourself what factors led to the senate becoming a supermajority body (not to mention caused the white house to go to two northern liberals for the first time since... hell, 1940). and think about how these factors reflect on the opposition party -- who just a few years ago had been enjoying nearly three decades of basically unfettered power themselves.

It's all very exciting.

Seriously though, where did you come up with the opposition party "enjoying nearly three decades of basically unfettered power themselves"? President Carter (D) had a Democratic Congress for his whole term. President Reagan (R) had a Republican Congress for 6 years and a Democratic Congress for 2 years. President Bush (R) had a Democratic Congress for his whole term. President Clinton (D) had a Democratic Congress for 2 years and a Republican Congress for 6 years. President Bush had a "tied" Congress for 2 years, a Republican Congress for 4 years, and a Democratic Congress for 2 years.

Therefore, of the 30 or so years between Presidents Carter and Obama, there were 6 years of Democractic control of both the presidency and the Congress and 10 years of Republican control of both the presidency and Congress.

okay, you're right on this count -- i went too far in my assertion. however, the conservative movement has enjoyed far more support than its opposite number since at least 1980, a trend that only fully reversed itself (if only temporarily) in the last set of elections. even during the democratic congressional majorities of the 80s and 90s, the difference between the parties in the congress was, to charitably describe it, narrow. and clinton was far from a dyed-in-the-wool liberal, chubby chasing aside

what i'm getting at is that the american population has shifted to the left, and it isn't because of the machinations of godless heathens. it's because the people have become disillusioned of conservatism. that is why we now have a supermajority in the senate.

We have a difference of opinion on that. I don't think is disillusion with conservatism so much as disillusion with President Bush. If President Obama, et. al., continue to push their agenda, it will be disillusion with President Obama that turns the tide back to conservatism. We can sort of see that happening with the polls that I posted about a month ago. We'll see.