Comments on: Kanawha Table Games: Count all the votes… and count them again

By: John A.

John A. — Mon, 20 Aug 2007 16:04:45 +0000

B.K.
I’m still waiting for a non-liberal reason to avoid supporting a Bush/Cheney ticket (or Cheney/Bush) in 2008. Also, which liberal are you talking to? Or, are you just posing rhetorical questions to avoid my scrutiny?

By: B.K.

B.K. — Fri, 17 Aug 2007 19:32:00 +0000

Which American citizen(s) have had their phones wiretapped by the federal gov’t with no just cause?

Who has been tortured?

Which American voters have been disenfranchised?

Please provide examples to support your (even if they are disguised) accusations.

Imagine how ineffective it is to be called a “surrendercrat” by someone who never supported the war in the first place.

By: John A.

John A. — Fri, 17 Aug 2007 17:32:02 +0000

The constitution is always what the liberals say when they want to bash Bush.

NSA Wiretapping. Presidential signing statements “interpreting” Congressional laws. Disenfranching voters. Torture.

Liberals always whine “Oh, that’s unconstitutional!!”

What did the founding fathers say about presidential term limits? NOTHING. However, terms limits are a 20th century “addition” to the constitution, just like the “addition” to allow the federal government to tax income.

Thank you, BK, you finally showed your true “surrendercrat” colors.

Let’s all get behind a third Bush/Cheney term. This war on terror is too important to let people like BK discourage the true conservatives who see the importance of winning the war on terror.

By: B.K.

B.K. — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 19:37:15 +0000

First, let me start by apologizing to everyone who reads this blog because I must have been drunk and been posting on here at some point. I just don’t remember saying that the U.S. Supreme Court had nothing to do with ending the (many) recounts in Florida in 2000. However, we all know that John A. seems to have made picking my words apart his own personal crusade, so he must be right when he says I said it. Right??

Second, John A., I can give you a great “non-liberal” reason why a third Bush/Cheney term isn’t even being considered by me or anyone else. It’s called the Constitution of the United States. You may want to review it from time to time.

Third, and last, a sincere apology for apparently steering what was a discussion about the Table Games vote into a discussion about the 2000 election. I used the Tipper Gore analogy, and that stirred up the Bush-haters. It was completely unintentional on my part because I honestly (but naively) thought the 2000 election was history. Apparently it’s still a fresh wound on some Bush-haters’ behinds. I recommend a little peroxide and a band-aid to heal it so you’ll STOP HARPING ABOUT THE 200O ELECTION.

By: John A.

John A. — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 21:31:40 +0000

B.K.
I went back and checked my history: you are right! My apologies! As it turns out, the U.S. Supreme Court had *nothing* to do with ending recounts in Florida! It was all a myth created by the liberal media! You see, the liberals wanted to undermine the state’s rights platform of the Republicans, so they just made it *seem* that the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the Florida Supreme Court with regards to this specific state issue.
And would I have preferred a President Gore? Of course not! In fact, not only do I think that Bush//Cheney has been the best administration in the history of the United States, but I’m trying to lead the way in getting Bush/Cheney to run for a third term. (or at least Cheney/Bush). Not only would a third term send a strong message to terrorists that we won’t surrender and will continue to fight, but it would be a boon to conservatism.
And before any “surrendercrats” try to say that it isn’t constitutional, I’ll just say you’ve been drinking too much kool aid from the same liberal media who “said” that appointing Bush/Cheney in 2000 was unconstitutional! (Plus, that’s what signing statements are for, right?)
And before you say i’m being sarcastic, BK, please tell me if you are either FOR the third term of Bush/Cheney OR you want to cut & run. And I dare you to give me any good non-liberal reasons for opposing a third term for Bush/Cheney.

By: B.K.

B.K. — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 20:21:56 +0000

To Ed Taft:

Republicans only started saying that the 2000 election was over after the ballots had been counted several times, each time yielding the same result…a victory for Bush. The problem was that Gore & the Dems wanted to literally manufacture votes from, of course, Gore-friendly districts. I can’t believe we are STILL having this discussion in 2007. Amazing.

Back to the topic: Are the gamblers and their minions REALLY starting to attack Vera McCormick? REALLY??? What a sad and pathetic demonstration of just how desperate these people have become. Gambling advocates, ask yourselves the following two questions:

1. What is Kent Carper’s position on table games?
2. What is Vera McCormick’s position on table games?

If your answers are anything other than “for” and “I don’t know”, in that order, you are not being honest with yourselves or the rest of us.

Would that such a large segment of the population were so passionate about REAL economic reform such as tax cuts & elimination, tort reform, and tax law reform. Instead, they get hopping over…gambling. Folks, aren’t we even a little bit better than that???

By: Tired of it all

Tired of it all — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:53:40 +0000

A “mistake” was made by not advertising the election to get this over with months ago, a “mistake” was made by not counting the 64 votes, and now another set of “mistakes” were made by not counting hundreds of other votes. Hmmmmm…………

By: olfrt

olfrt — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:13:03 +0000

To the No Name above, Vera was and is smart enough to keep her opinion to herself. Un-like some others that publicly express their support for the expansion of gambling, and now have compromised their creditability, Vera remained neutral.
Your implication was stated only to place doubt, try again!

By: Ed Taft

Ed Taft — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:38:32 +0000

I agree that every vote should be counted, even if it takes a recount or more than one to do the job right.

BUT where were these Republican voices during the infamous Florida “recount”? As I remember, the mantra then was, “The votes have already been counted. The election’s over. Period.”

Not exactly logically consistent, is it?

By: B.K.

B.K. — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 12:43:54 +0000

Joy, excuse me if I don’t trust Kent Carper on this issue. He’s only been shouting from the mountaintops about how great gambling expansion is and letting everyone know how fervently he wants this bill to pass. Does that sound like someone who should be overseeing the counting of ballots?? Why don’t we just get Danny Jones to come in and count few?

And John A., once again your history is flawed. No matter how many times the FL votes were counted and no matter who counted them, Bush won every time. …and that’s a FACT. I suppose you’d have been more comfortable with President Gore?