Election Protection and Election dishonor Issues Beyond Palo Alto, posted by Alice Schaffer Smith, a resident of the Green Acres neighborhood, on Oct 25, 2008 at 8:51 am Alice Schaffer Smith is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online
I am amazed to find just how disgusting this election has become. The dishonor to the integrity of America and American "values" can be witnessed by this website:
Posted by truth to power, a member of the Hoover School community, on Oct 25, 2008 at 11:27 am
In fact ACORN does promote fraud, they swamp the election offices with thousands and thousands of false registrations which need to investigated, this is expensive, time consuming and has overloaded the system in many many precincts.
This means that many fraudulent votes can be cast because due diligence cannot be done.
This is a nationally coordinated criminal racketeering by ACORN who got $ 800,000 from the obama campaign in this election cycle alone.
Posted by Maty, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Oct 25, 2008 at 11:49 am
Voter fraud is going on
"Thirteen campaign workers for Barack Obama yesterday yanked their voter registrations and ballots in Ohio after being warned by a prosecutor that temporary residents can't vote in the battleground state.
A dozen staffers - including Obama Ohio spokeswoman Olivia Alair and James Cadogan, who recently joined Team Obama - signed a form letter asking the Franklin County elections board to pull their names from the rolls. "Web Link
Posted by Alice Smith, a resident of the Green Acres neighborhood, on Oct 25, 2008 at 2:42 pm
First, I think that most of the comments on the smear site you should have linked to above, relate not to actual voting fraud, and disenfranchisement which are prevalent, particularly by Republican secretaries of state and county officials (well documented by the media and not subject to debate) have to do with remarks about Obama by racists, includiing statements about his ancestry and his allegiances. The real issue (and note: I sign my name to these remarks) is that people are not protesting the racism that is emerging on the Republican campaign trail, and I think that those who don't protest are cooperating in such disgusting and unpatriotic behaviour.
I think the degrading behaviour of the Republican leadership is the reason why so many leading Republicans have endorsed Senator Obama:
Posted by Other JLS parent, a resident of the Greenmeadow neighborhood, on Oct 25, 2008 at 4:38 pm
Frankly, there is plenty of nastiness to go around in this election, on both sides. If there has been racism on the Republicans' part, there has also been not so subtle derogatory comments of McCain relative to his age, and blatant sexism towards Palin. So, both Republicans and Democrats are involved in this exercise (I am voting for a 3rd party candidate)
Posted by Peter, a resident of another community, on Oct 25, 2008 at 5:35 pm
I'm sorry, but Senator Obama is not a socialist. Senator Biden was, as I am, exasperated by the obviously blatant attempt by a supposedely neutral newsreader to link Obama to Marx and socialism -- she brought this up at least three times. She sounded as if she were taking her questions from the Republican list of talking points.
For contrast, see her earlier interview with Sen. McCain in which she serves up slow-pitch softballs and doesn't ask a pointed question. It sounded like a campaign ad instead of an interview. It was reminiscent of Fox interviews with Palin -- soapboxes rather than interviews. Web Link
Posted by Threat to Democracy, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Oct 25, 2008 at 5:43 pm
Here's the Washington Post's Editorial entitled McCain's Threat to Democracy.
ACORN uses paid canvassers. ACORN itself flags fraudulent registration, but in many states ACORN is required by law to submit these forms. Bad registration forms does not mean fraudulent voting. To my knowledge, Mickey Mouse has not voted.
But the opposite danger of disenfranchising valid voters or discouraging voting by voter intimidation represents a much greater threat to democracy. When Republicans seek to challenge all early voters in Cincinnati or remove voters from the registration list without notification shortly before an election, this is a much more serious attack than submitting Mickey Mouse registration forms.
Posted by but seriously, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Oct 26, 2008 at 8:13 am
Sue, do you actually have any experience with a real cult? I posted these characteristics of a dangerous cult (below) from expert Margaret Singer, on another thread. Jonestown was a huge tragedy. Do not trivilaize it by attempting to liken it to election of a popular figure. Was Reagan a cult leader?
1. The cult is authoritarian in its power structure. The leader is regarded as the supreme authority. He or she may delegate certain power to a few subordinates for the purpose of seeing that members adhere to the leader's wishes and roles. There is no appeal outside of his or her system to greater systems of justice. For example, if a school teacher feels unjustly treated by a principal, appeals can be made. In a cult, the leader claims to have the only and final ruling on all matters. (Palin is closer to this than Obama)
2. The cult's leaders tend to be charismatic, determined, and
domineering. They persuade followers to drop their families, jobs, careers, and friends to follow them. They (not the individual) then take over control of their followers' possessions, money, lives.
3. The cult's leaders are self-appointed, messianic persons who claim to have a special mission in life. For example, the flying saucer cult leaders claim that people from outer space have commissioned them to lead people to special places to await a space ship. (Again, Palin, with her "god is on my side" approach, would appear to be closer to this than Obama, who continually tells his supporters "What am I going to do for YOU?")
4. The cult's leaders center the veneration of members upon themselves. Priests, rabbis, ministers, democratic leaders, and leaders of genuinely altruistic movements keep the veneration of adherents focused on God, abstract principles, and group purposes. Cult leaders, in contrast, keep the focus of love, devotion, and allegiance on themselves. (Enthusiastically supporting is not hte same as top-directed adulation)
5. The cult tends to be totalitarian in its control of the behavior of its members. Cults are likely to dictate in great detail what members wear, eat, when and where they work, sleep, and bathe-as well as what to believe, think, and say. (Nobody in the Obama campaign is telling me what to think. However, many of their messages resonate with my values. That's why people support different political figures).
6. The cult tends to have a double set of ethics. Members are urged to be open and honest within the group, and confess all to the leaders. On the other hand, they are encouraged to deceive and manipulate outsiders or nonmembers. Established religions teach members to be honest and truthful to all, and to abide by one set of ethics. (Need I invoke Palin, Bush/Cheney, et al again?)
7. The cult has basically only two purposes, recruiting new members and fund-raising. Established religions and altruistic movements may also recruit and raise funds. However, their sole purpose is not to grow larger; such groups have the goals to better the lives of their members and mankind in general. The cults may claim to make social
contributions, but in actuality these remain mere claims, or gestures. Their focus is always dominated by recruiting new members and fund-raising. (Yes, Obama raises mondo funds. He's a successful candidate. The funds re being raised for a campaign so he can become president and implement policies that many -- in fact, at this point most -- believe would improve our country.)
8. The cult appears to be innovative and exclusive. The leader claims to be breaking with tradition, offering something novel, and instituting the only viable system for change that will solve life's problems or the world's ills. While claiming this, the cult then surreptitiously uses systems of psychological coercion on its members to inhibit their ability to examine the actual validity of the claims of the leader and the cult. (Obama's who point is inclusiveness.)
Posted by Perspective, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Oct 26, 2008 at 9:16 am
The "disenfranchisement" comment totally cracks me up.
Not one case found in the last 3 elections of any disenfranchisement, at all, of voters.
Multiple cases of convicted fraudulent voter registration fraud.
Multiple cases of dead people and more people than are registered voting..for Democrats.
I know where the election theft is going on, and I am appalled.
I want photo ID at registration time by licensed voter registration people, I want photo ID at vote time, I want one day for elections AFTER all the campaigning is done, I want traceable paper ballots, I want people to have to show up and show ID for absentee voter registration cards and I want it done in plenty of time for verification, and I want to have to re-register to vote every few years to lower the number of dead and absent people from voting.
Posted by but seriously, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Oct 26, 2008 at 9:41 am
Excuse me, but I was speaking of disenfranchisement in the broader sense of people's feeling like they were not fully part of their country.
I am fine with showing IDs to vote -- we do it practically everywhere else to conduct any transaction and it would minimize the problems with people like you claiming later that the votes (not the registrations, the votes) were fraudulent. I would also like to see better protection for the voters so they did not have to wait in line for 8 hours to vote etc. becaue these are subtle ways in which people are discouraged from making their voices heard as is their Constitutional right.