Democrats are maneuvering their way to a filibuster proof majority in the U.S. Senate.
Despite ballot counting irregularities that are still being reviewed by the Minnesota courts, liberal Democrat Al Franken maintains a slim plurality of votes over moderate Republican incumbent Senator Norm Coleman.
The process that afforded Franken this lead is quite questionable and it is why the results continue to be reviewed by the courts.
Although initial returns had Coleman leading Franken, many of the votes which turned things around were found days after the election and some of them were even counted twice.
In one case involving a heavily democratic precinct, 100 votes were discovered days after the election. They were all for Al Franken and according to the time stamp of the voting machine, they were all cast on November 3rd.
The election was held on November 4th.
Most recently, attorneys for Senator Norm Coleman were trying to insure that a few thousand contested ballots were allowed to be included in the vote tally.
For innocuous reasons these ballots were not included in subsequent counts. One blind man who signed his name on the wrong line appeared in court and swore to the fact that he did sign the ballot, that he voted for Norm Coleman and that he wanted his vote to be counted.
Just a few days ago, a three judge panel finally rejected the thought of counting these ballots.
But Coleman’s attorneys have also been arguing the fact that the recount process must accept one set of standards for the entire state. One disturbing part of the recount process has been the fact that less stringent standards were being applied to the counting of ballots in heavily Democratic districts than in Republican districts. Such a random application of standards allowed the same absentee ballot that had a signature in the wrong place to be counted for Franken but not for Coleman. It is a similar argument that was debated during the presidential election crisis of 2000.
All of these irregularities warrant legal scrutiny. It provides a rationale for Senator Coleman to continue contesting the election and taking advantage of every available avenue of legal recourse.
That means he can appeal some of the more questionable decisions regarding ballot counting procedures and irregularities to the Minnesota State Supreme Court and ultimately the United States Supreme Court.
According to Minnesota state law, no election can be certified until all legal challenges have been exhausted. That means Minnesota is left with only one senator representing them at this point in time. It also means that it could be a few more months before they finally have two senators.
But Democrats are foaming at the mouth to seat Al Franken now.
Their leader, Harry Reid, even thought about how he could find a way to seat Franken without certification by the state of Minnesota.
Now, they are trying to intimidate Senator Coleman into dropping his right to appeal some of the questionable judicial rulings made in this case.
They have come out and essentially told Norm Coleman that if he wins, they will make sure that he suffers. They are trying to convince him that he will be better off losing than winning.
Democrats are planning to drag Coleman through the mud if the election results do not go their way. They promise to bring legal and ethics charges against him. In one instance, since the election has taken place, they claim that a businessman with ties to the oil industry funneled $75,000 to Coleman’s wife.
Last month, Democrat campaign operatives even recruited a politically connected, liberal, former associate of that same businessman to repeat that same allegation in a separate civil court deposition.
On top of that, the partisan Minnesota Democratic-Farm-Labor Party has joined the battle against Coleman by filing charges with the Federal Election Commission claiming that he accepted soft money for his campaign.
But the liberal manipulation doesn’t stop there.
Another liberal front group, that hides their purpose behind a deceiving name, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, has filed charges with the senate ethics committee, claiming that Coleman breaks ethical guidelines by renting an apartment in Washington for $600. a month from a fellow Minnesotan who is a donor to his campaign.
Since the election, Coleman has become the most corrupt political figure in the world.
Since the election, Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has orchestrated a new campaign that would have you believe that Norm Coleman belongs in the same prison cell as New Jersey’s ex governor Jim McGreevey, New York’s ex governor Elliot Spitzer and Illinois’ former Governor Rod Blagojevich.
Some Democrat operatives have come right out and said that Coleman would be better off if he gave up and got out.
This is not democracy in action, this is an episode of the Soprano’s without a scene of the body being cut up in the back room of Satriales butcher shop. It is intimidation.
It is also a part of politics and a shame.
However, innocence has a way of revealing itself, and the trumped up charges created to deter Norm Coleman from contesting the questionable election results will eventually be seen for what they are. Hopefully, Norm Coleman will see this through to the end.
Hopefully, Coleman will continue to challenge the rulings which denied thousands of ballots to be counted.
But if he doesn’t or if he does and the final results do certify comedian Al Franken as the winner, what will Minnesotans be getting?
Apparently they will be getting a liberal extremist with a host of his own ethical breaches and illegal conduct. You see, Obama cabinet officials are not the only ones with an inability and unwillingness to pay taxes. Al Franken failed to pay some of his own.
Before his senate campaign, he neglected to pay the fees on workers compensation and other taxes for employees of his own corporation, called AFI, in 18 different states. But as we all know, cheating on your taxes is becoming a prerequisite for the new administration and the new congressional majority.
Losing the moderate leadership of Norm Coleman in the U.S. Senate would be a shame. Especially to the likes of a radical like Franken. It would also be incentive for Minnesota liberals to continue their despicable political tactics.
These are the same people who tried to defeat Norm Coleman in his first race for the senate by turning the funeral of his opponent into a campaign rally.
These people will sink to any level in their plight for power and they are doing so again. Hopefully their conduct will not be rewarded.
|
|
| |
|
|
Kemp I volunteered for Coleman in 2002 my first big election. I had the privilage of meeting him several times during the election and in DC. He is a good man who was overwhelmingly endorsed by the newspapers of MN which as I know because I lived in the state are mostly liberal. Coleman brough hockey back to MN and cleaned up St.Paul and let me tell you that was a thing of work because even McDonalds did not want to be in down town St. Paul. But he did it. I hope that he previals with his legal challenge and I dare Harry Reid to try and seat Fraken. Thank you Kemp for this wonderful Blog.
LOL!
Imagines song, "If I only had a brain"
Oh, so now we are appealing to emotion. Listen to yourself. If the baby is in the womb we can kill it. If it is outside of the womb you can't. What about being on the other side of the mother's womb makes a baby metaphysically and existentially alive? What other external factors make a human being nothing more than a lump of flesh?
If it is not born, it is considered unviable at 22 weeks. It can legally be aborted. Once its born, its possible, but unlikley that it will be able to frow and develop at 22 weeks outside the womb, but if it does, its too late. Its not a crystal clear answer Friday. But before you big government conservatives start trying to get the government involved with our medical decisions, walk a mile in someone elses shoes.
You said it. You said killing a baby at 22 weeks inside the mother's womb is ok, but killing a baby born at 22 weeks is murder. The only difference is that one is wrapped in the mother's skin. They are both "non-viable" even though they are both alive.
Holy fuck. What does being wrapped in skin have to do with being viable? You can wrap yourself in someone elses skin. You are still viable. Yu can wrap a 3 day old fetus in skin and it is still not viable. You need to take a science class or something.
How about death penalty for political dissidents? All we have to do is wrap you in someone else's skin and you are no longer human, right? Then we can remove you like a wart.
I am "pro-death penalty". You know what they say about assuming.
What about being wrapped in someone else's skin makes you not human? Would you be pro-death penalty if we wrapped them in someone else's skin first?
So the difference between being alive and being a lump of tissue no more morally protected than a wart is what side of the mother's skin you are on?
take out the second to last "not" in there. accident.
If a baby is younger than 24 weeks inside the mothers womb, it is not murder to have an abortion because the baby is not considered viable. If the baby is born younger than 24 weeks because an abortion was not performed and is living, it is murder because the baby is not living outside of the womb even though it is not considered viable. In my opinion anyway.
But if, as I just posted, a baby can survive before 24 weeks through medical and technological advances, is it taking a life to kill a baby on the inside of the mother's womb who is the same age as a baby who survives outside of the mother's womb? It's not a hard question.
Thats the age a fetus can live otuside of the womb. As far as I can tell from what I've read on the subject, only a huge variation in human biology or an act of God could change the viability time frame. This is not to say that some babies have not lived when born before 24 weeks. They have, but such a result is atypical.
http://www.justnews.com/news/11053141/detail.html
21 weeks. So, does that mean that after being born they could have killed this baby for three more weeks?
So you are saying that the definition of viability, 100 years ago, was 24 weeks?
The time of viabiliy does not change. You are siggesting that it does. Were I to answer you, I would be confirming that the time of viability does change. It does not.
You still haven't answered my question.
Go look up the definition of "viable". If you knew what words meant, you wouldn't have this problem.
If you were sober it wouldn't be a difficult question.
We have been able to keep babies alive at much earlier ages today than we could 100 years ago. If you killed a fetus 100 years ago that today would be considered viable, did you take a life?
Ask a clear question. I dont know what youre talking about the viable time frame changung and the future and technology and shit.
"approximate time given for viability". It changes. You didn't answer my question. Still.
Actyually, viablity is defined. 24 weeks is the approximate time given for viability.
You can't even define viability. They can grow babies in a testtube. Viability is starting earlier and earlier. I asked you about this one time and you couldn't answer. If you kill a baby today, who through technology would have been viable at that point in development in the future, is it not taking a life?
Reality is that life is not viable untill what, 28 weeks? But thats science, Friday. I know how you hate the liberal lie known as "science" though.
Imagine, you are pro-abortion because you are ignorant about life and you are blind to reality. It has nothing to do with a woman's ovaries, it has everything to do with the baby growing within her.
that is the status of our country imagine...
that is the status of our country imagine...
I dont see how a woman can believe the government should be able to force a woman to do soemthing with her ovaries. But I'm pro-choice because I'm for small government and I think medical decisions should be between doctors and patients, not government beaurocrats.
Don't put Romney and Jeb in the list with those other tools. Whats reality Kempite? That idiot Sarah Palin got her ASS HANDED TO HER in the elction by a black foreign born communist muslim. Goddam. How bad do you suck when the majority of Americans say, you suck. give us the foreign black communist muslim? hhaha. thats reality.
because you are a liberal and if you can deal with Romney or Paul then they will not be on our ticket. so because a woman is pro-life, she is wrong? My wife is pro-life, is she wrong. Is my wife no more than a woman than "stretch" Pelosi because she is pro-life? you can hate Palin, but answer me these questions.
Romney, Palin, Jindahl, Kasich, Sanford, Jeb Bush, Blackwell, Ehrlich, Hayworth, Cantor, Thune and an endless array of Republican figures give people like Imagine plenty of reason to throw mud. Names like those are like a silver bullet fired into the heart of their failed ideologies. Imagine's fairy tales regarding Palin is a perfect example. The limited defense of Imagine's ideology require people like him to stray from reality and facts. People like Imagine need to create their own reality to feel secure and to seemingly have a purpose.
You are such a bigot, Imagine.
Unlike Palin and her fucked up followers, I don't call people the antichrist for my own personal gain, and well, because I don't believe in the antichrist. what the fuck kind of woman is she? She ran with a guy that vited AGAINST equal pay for women. She said abortion should be illegal even in cases of rape. No respectable woman would vote for her. Only far right evangelical dumb asses like her. If you were saying how great Ron Paul or Mitt Romney were I wouldn't be saying these things, but youre supporting the most ignorant hick you can find.
lol...you are funny- she is the antichrist right? The hatred towards her proves that only liberal women have passage into the white house. I always have said- the first woman president will not be some liberal yenta woman and a closet homosexual (i.e. Hilary Clinton)- It will be a Margaret Thatcher-like conservative woman
I'm not scared a Palin. I hope she does get the Republican nomination. I really do. The truth is out there Rob. Only a minoirty of Americans are ignorant far right evangelical hicks. I hope she wins the nomination because she will surley lose. I know lots of conservatives who I disgaree with tey respect. Palin is retarded. But if she did actually somehow win the presidecy, I would be terrified. Only one thing could happen under the Palin adminstration. The world would literrally end.
haha scared already huh??? all liberals are scared of Palin...the untruth still spoken about her proves that...ironically her state is the only one in the union in the black...
I can't wait for the Palin/Jindal '12 ticket. Thats going to be the final nail in the coffin of the Republican Party.
Please dispute the fact that ACORN received federal funding from the liberal lieadership of congress and subsequently used that money to influence elections through ballot fraud. It just can be done. However, since it is a liberal front group I guess we should look the other way and ignore the fact that the incumbent powers that be are screwing them right now.
no they are sick of RINOs...but hey your man is in power now and his approval rating is dropping faster than Larry King's blood pressure....not Bushies fault now. Your guy will only be able to "fuck" them for 4 years...I cant wait till the 2010 elections
Acorn is one hell of a company. According to conservatives, they created 10 million undisputable votes for Obama, now they made Al Franken win. Goddam, they're good. Is it so hard to believe that the American people are sick of a party that fucked them for 8 straight years?
*cowboy
did the whole Dallas Coyboy team voted for Fraken too, like in Nevada, ACORN at its best. I cant blame them, they are just doing the job that Obama and Saul Alinsky have told them to do
I hope Minnesota falls into the ocean. Even though thats probably not very likely.
Yeah. The neocons stole the presidency so give Franken to the left. Franken won anyway.
" They didn't bitch about it in 2000" ... But the Democrats did!!
I think the Republicans need to stop whining about the election being questionable. They didn't bitch about it in 2000, but hey, thy're known to be inconsistent with their logic.
I agree trish
anyone win the blog conest thing yet?
Kempite should easily be declared the Blog King!!!
Can you say "Acorn"?? thought ya could!!!!! nother great blog kempy keep it up!!!!
|
<< Home