Forgive people if they don't accept your reassurances, Ouito. Some of us are aware of the corruption already inherent in the ballot-counting process, secret or not, and the vote-by-mail method only increases the stench.
When you have an elections director who takes home the databases prior to election night and possesses a program on his computer that exists only to alter balloting results (proven in court), this does not engender confidence in the system. When the system is investigated for fraud and the local political parties actively obstruct investigators obtaining said databases, people should indeed be concerned about the accuracy of the count. Finally, when the state's attorney general swoops in in the dead of night and confiscates the ballots, refuses to count the problem precincts identified by investigators and then calls a press conference to announce that nobody should be worried as he only found 68 extra votes, NOBODY should believe their votes are safe until these practices are eliminated and the guilty parties prosecuted. If you are truly a "Party Representative", you are part of the problem as nobody in your position could (or should) be oblivious to these facts. Either you lie through omission or your ignorance is such that you should never be allowed within a hundred miles of a legitimate election.
Your concern is misplaced. Once the signatures have been verified, the ballots are removed from the sealed envelope and placed in a large stack and the envelopes placed elsewhere and are discarded or recycled. The ballots are then transported to another location where they are fed through the machine. This all happens at a rapid speed. I have spent hours as a Party Representative watching the procedure to make sure all is above-board. You should be concerned that your ballot is accurately counted, but it is secret. The only reason for the signature is to protect you from someone else casting your ballot, a greater danger since it is not difficult for someone to get hold of your mailed ballot - perhaps you moved and it went to your old address or perhaps someone else requested a ballot in your name - all they need to know is your name and birthday. The signature is a protection for you, not an invasion of privacy.
Capitalism is a system where if you make money you keep it, and if you lose money, you are stuck with that debt for life. You, yourself; nobody obligated to help you with it.
Socialism, or communism (take notes, there will be a quiz next class) is where if you make money, it is taxed away from you to serve society and if you lose money, society is taxed to cover the losses.
Fascism is a system where if you make money you keep it, but if you lose money, the losses are transferred to the society as a whole.
Which system best describes America?
And you have no intellectual understanding of the world as it currently is, maryalice-you are stuck in a mindset from 50 years ago. Citing the Soviet Union and its horrors is pointless since you are comparing apples to oranges-when did the USSR ever bail out its bankers and businessmen? Never, since it had no similar economic system. Any comparison of the current situation to communism is willful ignorance; communists want to smash the capitalist state, not make it enforce its laws.
You are correct L. Wainwood, however, you will never be able to reach the leftists with reason. Leftism is their religion substitute. They have no intellectual understanding of what was wrong with the Soviet Union and they never will. It's like talking to the air.
No, Ms. Wainwood, the Occupy protesters do not "want bureaucrats to manage the economic shots". Rather, they want the laws of this nation regarding fraud and theft enforced against the economic terrorists who ran the economy into a wall while enriching themselves in the process.
This is not a "handout", nor does it demand the system be burnt down. Rather, it demands the system do its job and perform as advertised through equal application of the law. If you find this moronic, there's no need to wonder why the system is self-destructing: you provide the perfect example.
my mother died because of her daughter and son and son in law was good at stealing her money every month and fooled so many people as long as they stayed away and didn't look into strange things that were happening such as why did she need help with dental when she should have had 500 amonth going into her account and it would be enough to pay for anything she would need.I found out what extent they were abusing her when looking at her check book and asked questions of the person who was writting the amount of money out and just have mom sign the checks,yes very good,mom had terrible eye sight and was hard of hearing. What did her own Dr. say when I took her in to see her dr for the first time in over 3 years?My mother suffered at the hands of the very ones who knew better but the money was their first love and my mother was in the way. Now that she is gone,I wonder who they are stealing from now?
Even the few intellectual conservatives remaining among us tend to agree with the 99 percenters that the vast inequities in the country cannot continue or our democracy will collapse. I'm sure there are a few miscreants among the Occupiers, but the great majority are average Americans, finally exhausted with desperation at the state of an economy that has been slowly strangled over the past thirty years by the messianic followers of a hack novelist, Ayn Rand.
"Maybe if their brains were occupied with some perspective, we could get somewhere.
Lorin, their brains ARE occupied with some perspective - the perspective of folks who, after busting their butts at work (if they have a job), come home from work and realize they aren't getting anywhere, or the perspective of students who can't find work when they graduate, and yet are faced with tens of thousands of dollars in debt that they are struggling to pay without jobs. All this, while the upper 1% party on. Do you see no disparity in all this?
Peter Van Keuren
Thumbs up for Paul Cragle's comments concerning more votes for Obama. He is right on. So what if states are adding additional laws to help with curbing the influx of undocumented individuals. Don't the states have other laws that mirror the Federal Government? We as Americans turned our backs to influx of visitors when the economy was fat and happy. Now we are paying the price for allowing the illegals to storm across our Borders.
Mr Hicks...If you think that a person drinking a martini makes that person "highbrow" then you are kidding yourself. A drink does no such thing in and of itself.
Malone Ducklo is right about the 9/11 inside job and the danger of chemtrails. i didn't know there was even continuing debate.
So, Radmax, do you engage in any creative endeavor yourself? Or would someone have to write of you, "(no, this dude doesn't do anything fun)." While I am mystified as to the relevance of Jordan's band, I am just as curious how you conflate his concern with the rights of immigrants in Alabama with the infamous abuses visited upon African Americans in Alabama.
I guess I'll never know what James's band has to do with this issue, I'll venture a guess as to your strange equation of standing up for Latinos in Alabama with "burying civil rights workers in levees": You are an intellectually dishonest boob. No other explanation really makes sense...
Dear caliche meat Alabama guy; (yes, this dude is in a band) Sorry to hear someone stepped upon the sensitive toes of Alabama tradition. So rich and diverse. Why, it seems only yesterday they were burying civil rights workers in levees. You've come a long way Alabama. Let no judicial rulings encumber the new slavery of the south. Send us your teeming masses...
Why would anyone move within the flight path of an airport or air force base and then feel justified in complaining about it?
If you decide to live near an air force place don't be surprised that there will be loud planes flying over head. You people have no real reason to complain.
LOL. That's too funny. Someone told me that my letter was on here. I got the phone call asking for permission, but I missed the issue. Holy crap.....they SEVERELY edited my letter. You understand how important context is when it's taken away. It's an honor to be called crazy by an liberal rag. If Hugo Chavez calls you a bad human being, that's a good thing. You don't want those people on your side.
This is how liberals argue. Rather than an honest debate of the facts, they prefer to engage in smears, name calling, and personal attacks. It's much easier to call someone crazy, then actually debate them. You see this all over the place these days.
Pinhead liberals say:
1. "FoxNews lies", but when you press them for one lie, they can't come up with one. I actually saw a REALLY funny segment on Foxnews where they talked to people claiming Fox lies and not one of them could name one lie. FoxNews is a serious news outlet that gladly corrects any factually incorrect information, but it's easier for people to say that they lie than actually debate them.
2. "Glenn Beck is crazy". It's easier to call him crazy than point out where he's wrong. I'm honored to be called crazy like the communists do with Glenn.
3. "Rush Limbaugh is a racist"; yet they can't come up with any evidence. It's easier for liberals to try to smear someone than debate them; especially when it's someone with superior intelligence like Rush.
Everyone in Arizona knows how liberals approach the illegal immigration debate. If you're not in favor of mass amnesty, you must be a racist. This is how liberals debate and argue. You can't blame them. Liberals rarely have facts on their side. How else are they going to try to convince people of their point of view if they can't call them liars, racists, and crazy people. They sure can't simply speak the facts because the facts always prove the conservative point of view.
Now that I think about it, I'm a little disappointed that I was only the crazy letter of the month. Next time, I'll shoot for the craziest letter of the year. That would be an accomplishment.
Loughner absolutely was a liberal before he was crazy. That's indisputable. That was a big part of the controvery of Sheriff Dupnik's rant. Once the FACTS came out, it was shown that Loughner was a liberal. ALL of his former friends said that he was a liberal.
I didn't read anywhere where anyone said that liberals "like" Loughner (I know....stop with the facts already). If you look at the facts of Loughner's life, it's indisputable that he was a liberal. That already makes 3 people on this far-left newspapers' website (Bryan, Pupito, and Mike). I guess we're all the same person in delusional pot-smoking liberal fantasy world. How else could three different people all have examined the evidence in the Loughner case instead of taking Dupnik's "right-wing rhetoric rant" at face value? lol.
Everything's a vast right-wing conspriracy in liberal world. You'd think that the Nov 2010 elections would have woken them up to the fact that most people don't think like them. Most people look at the facts.
Here's an interesting story that made me come back to this thread. Obama has outlawed guns for pot smokers:
(then again, maybe lupito and the Washington Times are the same person...LOL)
Mr. Vargas, there are some concerns that simply can't be solved through mediation, and crime is one of them. Guns not only facilitate crime, they prevent it as well, though at a far higher rate for the latter statistic if the Department Of Justice is to be believed. I can attest to this personally, having used firearms to stop auto theft and violence against my person. No one was shot, shot at or hurt in any way (save possibly their pride) and all parties went home safely at the conclusion. Had I been forced to fumble with a trigger lock or open a gun safe, this would not be the case.
While I respect your opinion, I must also respectfully disagree with it. Neighborhood association meetings may increase local vigilance and decrease crime through common sense (i.e. locking your doors, leaving lights on when away, etc.), but once those measures have failed, you are left with two options-call the police or pull a gun. I leave it to readers' logic to discern which is the faster and more effective of the two.
I had a chance to shoot Ronald Ray-gun back when he was governor of California --
which would have been as important to the world as killing Hitler in 1928 would have been...
But I didn't.
I guess that means just having access to a gun wouldn't cause me to commit a crime...
Tucson Weekly |
3280 E. Hemisphere Loop, Suite 180, Tucson AZ 85706 |
(520) 294-1200 |
Powered by Foundation