The Seattle Times David Postman is posting live from the trial 9:44am:
Republican attorney Dale Foreman is about 15 minutes into his opening statement and hasn't mentioned felons yet. Instead the Republican case is opening with a strong emphasis on fraud within King County's election division.Go figure. So much for three months of misguided investigative reporting. Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at May 23, 2005 12:30 PM | Email This
I couldn't believe the Times article when I saw it on the newsstand yesterday.
I wanted to take the reporter, grab him by the collar, and shout in his face just to let him know what kind of an idiot he is. (The reality is that I'm sure the B@stard knows exactly what kind of crap he's pulling.
Thanks for putting it someplace where there's a chance he'll see it.
Posted by: thecomputerguy on May 23, 2005 12:34 PMYour side hand picked the judge, and now it's up to your attorneys to make their case. If you don't like how it's going, you have no one to blame other than your own attorneys.
Posted by: the radish on May 23, 2005 12:52 PMThe best parallel I can think of is WMDs--. It was the WMDs, only the WMDs, and nothing but the WMDs that caused Bush to invade Iraq. No WMDs? Bush lied, etc.
Now here, we have the idea of Felons, only Felons, and nothing but Felons that caused the Rep party to contest the election. No Felon problem? Then the Reps are just anti-democratic yahoos...
To discredit a Republician you only have to find one minor factual error, therefore the entire idea is discredited.
To validate a Democrat you only have to find one minor factual truth, therefore the entire idea is validated.
Bullsh*t. If 'our' side 'hand-picked' the judge, Chip Small would still be presiding.
Posted by: jimg on May 23, 2005 01:11 PMExcellent point. Democrats have a remarkable ability to fixate on one small aspect of any argument or topic and completely blank out any other contrary information.
This is a skill that is innate to the whole left leaning thought process. This is what makes leftism possible.
For example, one can easily justify socialism, if one fixates on the benefit to the have nots. But obviously in the larger sense, it brings society down to a least common denominator. That's the part leftists ignore.
Or, how about Castro. He's a great guys, great leader, and Cuba is a great place to live. That's the way it looks when Dan Rather or Sean Penn go to visit. But of course, there's the little detail of the detention camps, thought police, and the captivity of a people that are obviously dying to get to Florida.
Need another example, how about the Viaduct. Darn that will be a beautiful park when it's done. Of course ignoring the details about it costing billions, money that we don't have, a complete rebuild of the seawall. Years of intense tunnel construction, etc.
Yes, to the Dems, and especially those over at the Horses Ass, the Republicans don't have much of a case, and we are all just a bunch of "Wingnuts." A convenient dismissal, but when a tree falls in a forest, and there's no one there to hear it, it still makes sound.
Posted by: Jeff B. on May 23, 2005 01:18 PMThe article in the Times seems so suprised that the R's are talking about extra ballots, and dead voters, and compromised ballots and other shennangins.
They seem to think that the R's case rests entirely on felons. Felons are one part. The thing that's so funny is that's what they've been reporting all along. Several times, I've been scratching my head, wondering what's going on, and why that's all they talk about in the press. Now, the coolaid drinking moonbats at the times are suprised that we're talking about everything else, and acting shocked. If they read anything else besides their own propoganda, this would be NO SUPRISE!!!
Posted by: thecomputerguy on May 23, 2005 01:27 PM