Democrats vote on November 5!

[Jeff Corey]

Like the guy who burned a watermelon in front of the Obama campaign headquarters in Portland Conn?

 

[WildCat]

Ah, eff 'em if they can't take a joke.

 

[RandFan]

IT BORE TWO LOGOS INVOLVING DEPARTMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE STATE GOVERNMENT OF VIRGINIA.

1. I'm not making a Tu Quoque argument.
2. I'm saying that it is typical of satire.
3. The above video uses McCain's logo.

You actually think that the video changes something, doesn't it?

You have not demonstrated that there was an intent to defraud.
I've demonstrate that it is an old joke as Wildcat has stated. I've found lot's of evidence of this type of joke on the internet.

Republicans can vote on November 5. You good democrats be sure and vote on November 4.

 

[Lonewulf]

Name the pranks that you can get away with as long as you say "It's just a joke!"

We have forging money and passing out fake fliers bearing official logos above.

What else can we get away with?! Have fun!

 

[RandFan]

Like the guy who burned a watermelon in front of the Obama campaign headquarters in Portland Conn?

What? Talk about out of left field.

 

[Lonewulf]

[*]I'm not making a Tu Quoque argument.

No, but Wildcat is. Certainly seems like you are, though.

[*]I'm saying that it is typical of satire.

This goes pretty far for satire. -.-

I really do think that you people will defend anything at all. Now we're giving forgery a free pass. I just don't understand this sliding down the slope we seem to be doing...

We're pushing satire so much that one can't differentiate from a legitimate attempt to defraud, and then giving it a free pass because, hey, it could be satire.

[*]The above video uses McCain's logo.

Yeah, although a lot of joke movies have been having the whole "I approve this message" and logos.

Regardless, I do not support this video. I still find it in poor taste.

You have not demonstrated that there was an intent to defraud.
I've demonstrate that it is an old joke as Wildcat has stated. I've found lot's of evidence of this type of joke on the internet.

Republicans can vote on November 5. You good democrats be sure and vote on November 4.

Alright.

So I can forge documents all I want to.

I'll get to work on it.

 

[RandFan]

Drudge Retort (left leaning satire)

Republicans Vote November 5

Keep in mind if you want to vote for the McCain/Palin ticket that you vote on November 5th. Was changed so that there's no fighting in the polls.

 

[RandFan]

So I can forge documents all I want to.

I'll get to work on it.

Not a problem so long as you don't intend to defraud. Do you intend to defraud?

 

[Jeff Corey]

Is it an attempt to dissuade voters? Is the above video a crime?

• You've not made a case that it was an attempt.
• You've not made a case that it succeeded at dissuading anyone not to vote.

I don't have to demonstrate those. It was a counterfeit, allegedly official state document that was disseminated in Virginia. It violated a federal election law passed in 2007. Fact.

 

[Lonewulf]

Not a problem so long as you don't intend to defraud. Do you intend to defraud?

Actually, can you give me a cite in law, please?

Tell me precisely where the United States law, or Virginia law, states that falsification of legal documents is legal in case of satire.

Then please tell me how the law defines satire.

Stop giving me your personal definitions and let's get to the hard facts of things.

 

[Boo]

Do any of you really believe that this is some “joke” that a few people thought up for this election?

These news stories don’t seem to think it is funny:

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/10/28/politics/horserace/entry4554416.shtml

http://hamptonroads.com/2008/10/phony-flier-says-virginians-vote-different-days

http://www.philly.com/philly/hp/new...e-scam_fliers_target_black_neighborhoods.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/28/AR2008102801450.html


http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/10/22/voter_supression_guide/



Nor does the Brennan Center which tracks voter suppression incidents.

http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/voter_suppression_incidents/

Misleading and intimidating information. A registrar in Montgomery County, Virginia, affecting Virginia Tech University, issued a memo giving incorrect and intimidating information to students about the consequences of registering to vote, including possible loss of financial aid and tax dependence status. Similarly, a county clerk in Colorado Springs, Colorado incorrectly told students at Colorado College that they could not vote at school if their parents claimed them as dependents on their federal tax returns.

Intimidation aimed at students. A flier recently disseminated on the campus of Drexel University in Philadelphia warned that undercover officers would be present at the polls, looking for voters with outstanding warrants or parking violations.

Philadelphia fliers. Deceptive fliers about the consequences of voting were distributed in a predominantly African American neighborhood in Philadelphia.

Both parties have engaged in activities in the past to keep voters from the polls; however, historically the attempts at disenfranchising or intimidating voters has predominantly been done by Republicans targeting groups that are perceived as being Democratic voters.


Now, can anyone explain to me how someone is supposed to tell the difference between a "joke" flyer and one that has been distributed with the intent to keep people from voting?


Boo

 

[RandFan]

Old joke that goes back a long way and involves both Democrats AND republicans.

Election Day Switch

Summary: Fraudulent emails and paper fliers sent out before Election Day tell Democrats or Republicans to vote on Wednesday instead of Tuesday.

I don't condone it. I don't laugh it off. I'm saying let's have some perspective.

 

[RandFan]

Actually, can you give me a cite in law, please?

Tell me precisely where the United States law, or Virginia law, states that falsification of legal documents is legal in case of satire.

Then please tell me how the law defines satire.

Stop giving me your personal definitions and let's get to the hard facts of things.

Intent is a component to prove fraud.

Why don't you cite law? You said it was illegal first.

 

[RandFan]

Now, can anyone explain to me how someone is supposed to tell the difference between a "joke" flyer and one that has been distributed with the intent to keep people from voting?

Common sense?

• Local billboards state that election day is the 4th.
• Television commercials constantly say that the election is the 4th.
• The news says the 4th.
• The state election pamphlet says the 4th.

Why would anyone ignore all the contrary evidence for some hokey flier? I'm just not buying that this would have any significant effect.

 

[RandFan]

I don't have to demonstrate those. It was a counterfeit, allegedly official state document that was disseminated in Virginia. It violated a federal election law passed in 2007. Fact.

Would you cite the law?

 

[RandFan]

These news stories don’t seem to think it is funny:

Neither do I. That doesn't mean it wasn't intended as a joke or that there was any malicious intent or that it is even effective.

 

[Lonewulf]

Wait.

Slow down here.

Look at the links above. One is a site that specifically seeks out voter suppression frauds.

It says:

Virginia. A phony State Board of Elections flier has been posted around the Hampton Roads area, stating that Republicans vote on Tuesday, November 4th, and Democrats vote on Wednesday, November 5th.

So, essentially, they do not take it as a joke.

Tell you what? Let's wait until the perps get taken to court, and let them sort it out.

I know, I know, I didn't prove anything, so therefore the document with the official logos are, as Wildcat said, "It's certainly not an attempt at vote fraud.

Sorry if the foreigners got confused."

Nothing like adding bigotry into a certain statement that doesn't come under any criticism at all, because hey, we can't possibly come to the conclusion that a forgery is a forgery, but they can come to the conclusion that it's what they claim it is.

Meh.

 

[Lonewulf]

Here is the copy of the PDF.

How can anyone view this document and think "satire"? Seriously? Everything about it is 100% official. It's got numbers printed on it. Logos. No hint of satire anywhere within it.

I don't care if it is satire. Something as complete as this should be treated as anything but.

 

[RandFan]

Here is the copy of the PDF.

How can anyone view this document and think "satire"? Seriously? Everything about it is 100% official. It's got numbers printed on it. Logos. No hint of satire anywhere within it.

I don't care if it is satire. Something as complete as this should be treated as anything but.

I'm not that cynical. I don't think Americans are that stupid. The 4th is everywhere. All over TV. On the news. On talk radio and cable shows. The official election pamphlets say the 4th. I hope people aren't that stupid. Perhaps they are.

 

[Jeff Corey]

GOD, why do I have to see Wildcat's posts after I ignored him? Sigh, can't help but note this again.



I love it how people point out "foreigners" so quickly.

Sorry if the Americans got confused (I'm not a "foreigner", by the way, sorry to disappoint you; I bet my family has more service to the United States of America in their collective finger than you have in your entire history).

However, this was a crime.

Yes, it was a crime.

They forged a document.

They published a forged document claiming something false about the voting system.

It was a crime. Period. End of question. Anyone that wants to argue the point are pretty much using dishonesty to justify whatever position they want to hold.

Next?

Thank you. I have posted links to the laws and some people don't get it.
Here it is.
http://www.electioncenter.org/elect...Voter Intimidation Prevention Act of 2007.pdf