-Caveat Lector- Samantha, You are citing exceptions to the normal rule. Note that they ran unopposed, not really requiring a primary. This usually just annoys the local election officials for having to print two ballots. So you have refuted me and proven that just as many Republicans run at the local level as Democrats in the South and always have. That is what you are implying and have proven conclusively. Obviously, I do not know what I am talking about, do I? From time to time, a local candidate will run as a Republican, just as I originally stated, but to vote for that candidate in the primary would require giving up the right to vote for the rest of the candidates, by far the majority, in the Democratic primary. It is encouraging to see more candidates running as Republicans on a local level. The fact that the majority of the counties went for Bush in the general election is different than the primaries. I usually vote a split ticket in the general election. I think Louisiana has the right idea of non-partisan primaries. Republicans running at the local level has only begun to happen over recent years. And why is Florida not the Deep South? Can't get much deeper. True, it has been over-run by "retirees" and the immigration population is very large. This has changed the make up of the population but many of the laws and traditions remain the same through the years. With the influx of people, it has made possible a "Chicago style" election apparently. They have always had problems in this area anyway. So where are your Democrats? If I am so wrong, why are they not at the DOJ right now demanding something be done? How foolish I was to waste my time trying to explain how this could happen when you obviously know far, far more than I do about what goes on in my own and surrounding states. What a fool I am to attempt to explain anything to one who knows everything about the subject! And can actually find a couple of Republican candidates in recent elections to proove it! The South has evidently always LOVED Republicans locally. How could I be so misinformed?? Thank goodness I have you and your "sources" to clear up all these years of confusion where I have been so very, very wrong! Your research did not show how many counties held only Democratic primaries. If I can keep my computer from locking up, I will see if I can find that information. One or two candidates from among, say, 50 is not equal representation of both parties on the local level. I do not care whether or not you "believe" me. I actually thought explaining this tradition might shed some light and explain to you why your beloved Democrats are not taking up your rally cry. Think whatever you like and continue your self-serving denial of the facts of the way things are done. How does one so resourceful as you explain this, do tell? Since my theory is so flawed, what is your correct one? In my vast ignorance on my own voting history, I should be informed by your superior knowledge on the matter lest I waste away in my ignorant conditio I certainly shall not waste any more of my time trying to explain why I think some things happen the way they do for you have a mind set and are intent on keeping it just that way. The fact that you would try to "refute" somebody trying to shed light on the lack of Democratic support is a rather strange thing to do. It is your right but do not be surprised when no Democrats come to the aid of your cause. It is my opinion and my life experience and believe it or not, I am entitled to have one, too. I was merely wasting my time trying to explain to you why this might be and how things have been done for a very long time. You are not required to believe anything that I or any one else posts. I know what I know and this is how it has been done in the three states in the Deep South where I have voted. I stated that there were exceptions but they are rare so jump on that and try to "prove" me wrong all you like. But watch and see what happens and how many Democrats turn out to be the poll workers cited in the incidents. Since you have "proven" me wrong, I shall take that as your statement that the poll workers were Republicans and we shall see. Besides, your Democrats will see that justice is done in this matter. Don't worry. And DO hold your breath until they do as you have "proven" there is no reason they should not. BTW, it is spelled "Chattanooga." Amelia ----- Original Message ----- From: "Samantha L." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 8:11 PM Subject: Re: [CTRL] Voter Rights Violations > -Caveat Lector- > > Amelia, > > I just don't understand these blanket statements you keep making, like, " > ALL local politics have been handled by the Democratic party..." and "all > local offices are run as a contest among Democrats" and "if I want to vote in > the sheriff's primary , or the district attorney or dog catcher, I MUST vote > in the Democratic primary." > > In the Chatanooga area, Bradley County, > > "Republican incumbent Stanley Thompson has known for a long time he has four > more years as assessor of property. > > He was unopposed in the primary and there was no candidate for the Democratic > nomination, so the assessor will have no opposition in the Aug. 3 general > election." > > and Bledsoe County > > "Democrat Phillip Winkey Cagle, 453 votes, and Republican Glenn Swafford, 338 > votes, were unopposed for their party's nominations for the assessor of > property seats." > > (see > http://chattanooga.about.com/citiestowns/southeastus/chattanooga/gi/dynamic/ of > > fsite.htm?site=http://www.timesfreepress.com/2000/MAR/15MAR00/NEWS0915MAR.ht ml > ) > ----- > Your statements are so strange.... but I spent the time to refute them. > Just for another example in the Deep South... in Bartow County, GA, the > primary runoffs had both Republican and Democratic candidates for sheriff, > school board in both districts, clerk of superior court, chief magistrate, > and surveyor. At the same site, one can click on each GA county to see who > the candidates were for primary run-offs. > (see http://www.accessatlanta.com/partners/ajc/vote2000/#bartow) > ------ > > I guess you don't know that Lousisiana has used non-partisan primaries for > all it's elections (except President) since 1975? > (see > http://www.kencollier.org/classes/PSC312/lectures_PSC312/Primary_Caucus.html ) > -------- > And then to the issue of poll workers. You say, "If Ms. Binion had done > her homework,she would have unearthed this little detail which would result > in something > like Headline: Democrat Poll Workers Deny Voting Rights." > > First, noboby I know thinks of Florida as the Deep South, so the whole > premise that local races are all run by democrats doesn't apply. More > counties in Florida voted for Bush than for Gore, and could be said to be > Republican counties in general (see > http://shazam.econ.ubc.ca/intro/votes.htm). And poll workers are not > necessarily chosen by the party in dominance: > > (In Florida) "Elsewhere, a precinct may be Democratic but the poll workers > are assigned by the Republican county machine. And so forth." > > (see http://prorev.com/votecount.htm) > -------- > I hope in the future you will qualify your statements and source them as > well. It's very tempting to refute outrageous blanket statements like these, > but it's very time-consuming. I won't be doing it anymore. > > Samantha > > > > > > > In a message dated 1/6/01 5:52:36 PM Central Standard Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > > As to the article asking where are the Democrats in this, I will explain > > > this for the second time very slowly. In the Deep South ever since the > > > War of Northern Aggression (you know the one where the rape of southern > > > women in New Orleans was declared legal and tens of thousands of women > > > and children and elderly starved to death, rendered homeless and having > > > everything they owned looted by the "morally superior") ALL local > > > politics have been handled by the Democratic party because these war > > > crimes were so horrendous and unequalled in this nation's history > > > (except maybe the slaughter and treatment of Native Americans), the > > > opposite party of the one that did this to the South is the only one > > > acceptable on a local level. > > > > > > Therefore, now actually read this, all local offices are run as a > > > contest among Democrats. In other words, if I want to vote in the > > > sheriff's primary , or the district attorney or dog catcher, I MUST vote > > > in the Democratic primary. Then in the general election, I can vote a > > > split ballot. If I want to select a Republican primary candidate, I > > > would be given a ballot with only those of that party which would be > > > locally blank. And of course one cannot vote in both. It would require > > > me to give up voting for any local offices to vote in the Republican > > > primary. So anyone with any local interest at all voted Democratic in > > > the primary. The local candidates of the Republican party are > > > practically non-existent. To this day, that is how it is done here in > > > the South. > > > > > > Now, how and where are polling places actually run? At the local > > > level--federal monitors excluded for they merely observe and do not > > > participate. Every polling place in the South is rnn by Democrats > > > because of the set up for local elections. There might be a few > > > exceptions but the number would be so small and I do not think there are > > > any. No local candidates run as Republicans any where in the South. I > > > guess it is part of the "Fergit, Hell!" symdrome whereby some > > > Southerners remain annoyed that their great-grandmother or other > > > civilian menbers of their family had war waged on them resulting in a > > > death toll higher in the civilian population than the military, etc. > > > and all the war crimes committed against this region but that is another > > > subject. > > > > > > Anyway, was it lost on you that all the canvassing committee members and > > > chairpersons were Democrats? Republicans like the judge with the > > > magnifying glass had to be recruited to even have obserers. This > > > creates a serious flaw in the claim that the wrongs were systematic as > > > it woudl require Democrats manning the polls to be doing the denial of > > > VRV and that is why the Democratic Party is not helping in this matter, > > > giving minimal responses, etc. If Ms. Binion had done her homework,she > > > would have unearthed this little detail which would result in something > > > like Headline: Democrat Poll Workers Deny Voting Rights. It messes up > > > the idea that it was those evil Republicans and would have been > > > defeating to their own candidate. > > > > > > Again and lastly, the indicents cited are most unfotunate and certainly > > > it is regrettable that they happened but they stop short of VRV which is > > > a legal term and as such has certain requirements.The one person being > > > deinied a second ballot probably meets the criteria for this but it > > > would have been a Demorat doing the denying so there goes the widespread > > > plot aspect. Bungling incompetence of this sort is not intentional and > > > not having enough ballots on hand is probably not something or which > > > charges are going to be made against people who are basically > > > volunteers. > > > > > > The anecdotal episodes cited should not have happened but many have > > > explanations (robbery in progress near the poll bringing police and > > > dogs, etc.) and trying to make them real VRV cheapens the effort sof > > > those who fought true VRV. Sadly, these things happened all over the > > > country and to only care about a select self-serving few is wrong. And > > > no party is going to accept a vote count after the other side has had > > > the ballots to slobber over and handle in this manner. That is why the > > > vote at the time of the election, before the end of a straightened paper > > > clip could be used to produce "thousands" of uncounted votes can occur > > > is the one which stands. Just as the rules cannot be changed after the > > > vote is made, the wrongs cannot be corrected during the count. This > > > needs to happen between elections and not as a part of the vote count > > > and done so as to favor one party over another. The popular vote is not > > > how the election was run before hand. It if had been, it is possible > > > hundreds of thousands more would have voted for Bush who did not because > > > getting enough votes for the electoral votes is all that was required, > > > at least until the Democrats did not like the outcome of the original > > > and legal count. Who is to say how many did not vote because they were > > > certain there were enough votes to swing the electoral vote the way they > > > would have voted. This is why the rules cannot be changed during the > > > count. > > > > > > I commend you on amassing all your posts and there is a site on the > > > NAACP article about little evidence being found from BET.com where > > > evidence can be sent. I encourage you and Radman to send your > > > collections of post on this as it might be helpful. Believe it or not, > > > while I do not believe they constutite real VRV, I would like to see > > > fewer people unhappy with their experience at the polls. Part of it > > > needs better education on the part of voters and training for poll > > > workers but some of this is intentional confusion on the part of the > > > powerful of both (the same) parties to enable manipulation. Also, the > > > DOJ has a website that is just www.DOJ.org or .gov and I encourage yu to > > > send it there, also. > > > > > > I hope this explains some of the reasons why I do not believe charges > > > will be brought becaue there was not the systematic VRV nor the severity > > > to constitute illegality. > > > IMHO, > > > Amelia > > > > > > P. S. No, I was not being picky about Radman using my name in the > subject > > as Kris has asked us not to do that as posts are listed by subject in the > > archives, etc. > > > > <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A> > DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER > ========== > CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic > screeds are unwelcomed. Substance-not soap-boxing-please! These are > sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'-with its many half-truths, mis- > directions and outright frauds-is used politically by different groups with > major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. > That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and > always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no > credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. > > Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. > ======================================================================== > Archives Available at: > http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html > <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of > [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> > > http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ > <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> > ======================================================================== > To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: > SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: > SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Om > <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
