Gaar, Why show me? I advised you to present your evidence to the proper authorities. Am I the proper authority? Get on it lad, times a- wasting, there are evil-doers to be exposed. Jump on it, y vaya con Dios.
On Oct 2, 5:29 pm, Gaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2008/10/ohio_vote_fraud.php > > Early voting is taking place in Ohio. Through the end of the week, > people can register and vote on the same day. The Ohio Secretary of > State Jennifer Brunner argues that they are merely "casting their > ballot" rather than "voting" so the fact that Ohio statute requires 30 > days between registering and voting would not interfere. > > So here is what is happening today. People are showing up to register > and vote. There is no affirmative evidence that these people have not > registered or voted somewhere else. There is no control. Normally in > an election, partisan election monitors are allowed into polling > places so that they can police each other. But not in two counties, > Franklin and Montgomery, in Ohio. Brunner also issued an advisory > opinion to counties saying that they are not required to allow > election monitors. > > Here you can see an election observer be turned away. > > (Video at Link provided) Which I believe is empirical evidence, of > the First Order. > > On Oct 2, 3:19 pm, Hollywood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Gaar, > > > Why wait? Turn your evidence in to the appropiate authorities right > > now. They can at least issue an emergency restraining order and put a > > stop to the practice right now. Go, run, hurry. Do your duty as a > > citizen. > > > On Oct 2, 4:39 pm, Gaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Yeah, I heard that this last night... > > > > The bad thing is, there will not likely be a Court challenge to this > > > until AFTER they have stolen the Election. > > > > On Oct 2, 2:35 pm, Zebnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Democrats in Ohio are rounding up homeless people and paying them to > > > > register and vote for Obama. Pitiful and completely illegal. Not that > > > > it bothers Democrats to commit election fraud. > > > > > On Oct 2, 2:03 pm, Gaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > I am starting to believe that the Liberals around here don't give a > > > > > shit... > > > > > > All they want is to get the Presidency and both Houses of Congress, no > > > > > matter what. > > > > > > And then we wonder how we get into the shit we do... > > > > > > On Oct 2, 6:30 am, "Keith In Tampa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > I don't know if this helps or not, but to try and clarify or to at > > > > > > least add > > > > > > to the history of how this debacle started; > > > > > > > First, the "Fannie Mae" that was created in 1938 by President > > > > > > Roosevelt is > > > > > > not at all the same Fannie Mae that was created in 1968 by Lyndon > > > > > > Johnson, > > > > > > nor does the 1968 "Fannie Mae" resemble the Fannie Mae that was > > > > > > created in > > > > > > 1996-1999 by the Clinton Administration. Just a quick "Reader's > > > > > > Digest" > > > > > > abridged version; In 1968, President Johnson privatized Fannie Mae > > > > > > in order > > > > > > to remove it from the national budget. At this point, Fannie Mae > > > > > > began > > > > > > operating as a "quasi-governmental" corporation, (called a > > > > > > "government > > > > > > sponsored enterprise") which generated profits for stock holders > > > > > > while > > > > > > enjoying the benefits of exemption from taxation and oversight as > > > > > > well as > > > > > > implied government backing. Freddie Mac was created in 1970 in > > > > > > order to > > > > > > prevent any monopolization of the GSE market. > > > > > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fannie_Mae > > > > > > > The Fannie Mae that we are talking about in 2008, was in fact a > > > > > > creation of > > > > > > the Clinton Administration, and the 105th and 106th Congress. One > > > > > > of the > > > > > > biggest changes to Fannie Mae, as well as the overall banking > > > > > > industry came > > > > > > in 1996 when Alan Greenspan issued a ruling allowing bank investment > > > > > > affiliates to have up to a quarter of their business in investments. > > > > > > >http://www.nerepublican.com/index.php/2008/09/22/mules-rinos-and-very... > > > > > > > In particular, President Clinton, in essence, repealed the > > > > > > "Glass-Steagall" Act, and as I am sure most group members recall, > > > > > > (as I do) > > > > > > the theory was, that America's financial competitiveness was being > > > > > > hampered > > > > > > in comparison to Europe's and the emerging economies of Russia and > > > > > > China. > > > > > > That we needed the "Gramm-Leach-Bliley" Act, in order to make > > > > > > America's > > > > > > lending institutions viable and competitive. > > > > > > > If you go and look at other posts in this thread, by me, and other > > > > > > members, > > > > > > I think the rest of the history falls into place.- Hide quoted text > > > > > > - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
