1. It's worse than that. In Oregon, where all votes are done by mail, county voting office employees are charged with the duty of checking the signature. They say that on election day things move fast, lots of votes come in, and they don't have time to convene a committee to study each vote. So it pretty much comes down to that one county employee's individual opinion about whether the signatures match. What happens if the local employee says that the signatures don't match? The ballot gets tossed, and the vote doesn't get counted. And they move on to the next one. And they don't tell you --they never tell you-- and so you the voter who got your ballot tossed go through life believing that you voted, never knowing that your vote was for naught, nor that they don't like your signature.

At least when you vote in person at the polling place you have an opportunity to prove you are who you say you are.

And here's the clincher: when they're sitting there in the backrooms away from scrutiny, busily checking those signatures, they obviously have your name, so it's very simple to see what your party affilitation is. Let the implications of all that set in. Think about ballot measures and tax levy measures, not just major elections. There's room for lots of monkey business.

Posted by: jaybird on October 7, 2005 06:15 PM

2. Maybe that's just the signature Wendy uses on her ballot envelope, and she has another signature that she uses in other situations -- when people might actually look to see if she signed her name.

Posted by: Micajah on October 7, 2005 06:17 PM

3. I'm gonna go with Sam Reed. He seems far less strident and partisan in his statements than Chris Vance.

Posted by: Unkl Witz on October 7, 2005 07:37 PM

4. So maybe Wendy took a walk on the wild side.I always wear a wig and use GA as the return address for my Magnolia ballot: if I want it counted.

Posted by: snagger on October 7, 2005 07:38 PM

5. I'm gonna go with Sam Reed. He seems far less strident and partisan in his statements than Chris Vance.

Yeah, I guess you would.
Hahahahaha

Posted by: Unifliter on October 7, 2005 07:54 PM

6. Put up or shut up half-Witz...

Posted by: alphabet soup on October 7, 2005 07:55 PM

7. Now, now, AS, don't pick on him.

There's something positively refreshing about a Democrat who is willing to forthrightly come out in favor of verifying obviously incorrect signatures.

With all the hypocrisy in the world, it's almost beautiful to see a Democrat publicly admit that he thinks it's OK to steal an election.

Bravo, Unkl Witz! Bravo!

Posted by: ScottM on October 7, 2005 08:02 PM

8. Since neither Reed or Vance have much
in the way of credibilty.Its hard to
really know who to take seriously.

Posted by: phil spackman on October 7, 2005 08:18 PM

9. Thanks for the kudos Scotty, but I'm a registered Republican. Honest, look it up.

And don't worry about soupy. He just can't think of anything intelligent to say.

Posted by: Unkl Witz on October 7, 2005 08:19 PM

10. Rich Witz Kiker -- you crack me up. What do you mean you're a "registered Republican"? Where are you registered?

Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on October 7, 2005 08:21 PM

11. I can think of plenty - just nothing that's flattering to you.

We have unfinished business half-Witz.

You challenged me and I've called you on it. Now put up or STFU and go away...

Posted by: alphabet soup on October 7, 2005 08:22 PM

12. Shark - it probably just means that it voted for one of the Republicans in the primary.

Beyond that half-Witz has never intentionally uttered even a half-truth (don't think it's in his nature)

Posted by: alphabet soup on October 7, 2005 08:24 PM

13. Shark:

When I moved up here from California some years ago and registered to vote (1987), you could declare your party affiliation. I marked R because I had been active in politics in college and worked on campaigns for local Republicans. It was a very different group back in those days, far more moderate and progressive than now. Before the "religious right" took over.

Obviously I've drifted away ideologically (or vice versa). I find the party truly frightening now. Actually, I find both parties truly frightening. I don't have high hopes for the future of politics in this country. We seem to like it more as blood sport and entertainment than a way of promoting the commonweal.

But I'm glad you all find me amusing. I find you all far more amusing than the Horse's Ass crowd.

Posted by: Unkl Witz on October 7, 2005 08:35 PM

14. What a load of manure half-Witz - you are the one who comes here to agitate, to insult, to disparage, and to disrupt.

If there is any element of politics that runs counter to "promoting the commonweal" it is phoney snobs like you....

Posted by: alphabet soup on October 7, 2005 08:55 PM

15. One would think that with computers these days that there would be software to quickly match your signature with the one on record. If the computer didn't like the signature, it could generate a postcard to the registered voter asking the voter to come on down and update their signature card for future elections. A committee could review rejected ballots.

Posted by: Tim on October 7, 2005 09:02 PM

16. Vance...or Reed...? Which one is the lesser of two weevils?
I'll take Vance for 500, Alex.
What does Reed mean by what he said? What does "control" over the ballot mean, exactly? How does the signature on a piece of paper (which may or may not actually get mailed in, or in on time, or...)exert more control over an individual ballot cast at a polling place? Does Reed ever try to actually defend his point, or is he just expressing a rather shaky opinion?

Posted by: pseudotsuga on October 7, 2005 09:40 PM

17. Witz, you're a liar. You have never registered as a Republican in Washington State. Not now, and not in 1987. I mean, geez, are you even registered to vote?

But I have to admire you, in a strange way.

Most people, having had their utter ignorance of the electoral system exposed, would slink away and hide themselves from the laughter of the crowd, rather than continue to pretend that they have any business commenting on the electoral system.

I have no doubt that you will continue to expose yourself to ridicule to advance your belief that representative democracy should be destroyed.

Bravo.

Posted by: ScottM on October 7, 2005 10:31 PM

18. I get the distinct impression that half-Witz enjoys exposing himself...

Posted by: alphabet soup on October 7, 2005 10:45 PM

19. Sam Reed sounds like a moron. His comments indicate that he just doesn't care about the validity of the vote- he's a brain dead bureaucrat, who's time is about up.

Half-witz makes sense with his assessment of politics as bloodsport for amusement - maybe the first time he has made it on this blog in his threads. But, since when do politicians care about the commonweal ?

This has become a selfish country, which is reflected in politics. The attitude in the US is looking somewhat like the decadence that was pervasive during the fall of the Roman Empire, which is disturbing to many, but not the leftist, liberal skallywags - who have a mental disturbance. The Horse's butt crowd is not amusing, mostly abrasive and immature - although I see that it has changed recently as the middle of the road and conservatives are as abundant as the lefties. What's the matter - are the leftists making themselves sick with their sicko logic - who echo the likes of Al Gore and Howard Dean ?

Posted by: KS on October 7, 2005 10:47 PM

20. Witz, you are not now nor have you ever been a registered republican in the state of washington. You couldn't declare your party affiliation in 1987.

Posted by: Jack on October 8, 2005 12:51 AM

21. Great, you all are arguing about the BS of party affiliation, which AFIK is nonsense. But that's NOT the problem here, THE PROBLEM is that voting by mail doesn't result in any assurance that if your signature is deemed not to match you are contacted. THE PROBLEM is it's highly unlikely any real kind of real effort in signature matching is actually taking place. THE PROBLEM is signatures aren't a good enough verification that the ballot in the envelope is actually from the person it's supposed to be from.

THE QUESTION SHOULD BE how do we fix this?

I don't give a flying leap what party you affiliate yourself with, or the political leaning of Sam Reed or Chris Vance, what I care about is that EVERY VOTE COUNTS, and that elections are conducted fairly and cleanly. That every legitimate vote is counted, and just as importantly no illegitimate vote is counted. And that the count is done accurately and that process is conducted openly and transparently.

Any recommendations?

My first is that we need a better voter authentication method. Perhaps a shared secret that you communicate to the registrar's office when you register, something that you will be asked to provide to verify you are who you say you are that can't be easily forged or guessed, basically a voter PIN code and that it be put INSIDE the ballot envelope, perhaps on the inside flap so that it's only visible when opened. That way you are not putting your signature on the outside of an envelope or any other forgeable information.

Posted by: John on October 8, 2005 01:39 AM

22. Vance isn't kidding the sig verification is a flat-out joke. Thank you Stefan for backing that statement up all too well.

Posted by: Michele on October 8, 2005 02:05 AM

23. ..and Witz, if you are registered in WA, then you are lying. Nobody registers by party here, so nobody can verify anything about what you just said. If you hate republicans so much, you wouldn't claim to be one. I know I wouldn't affiliate with any group or even claim to be if said group 'frightened' me. Nobody is buying it....

Posted by: Michele on October 8, 2005 02:10 AM

24. Michelle:

I guess I really don't see the problem with verifying signatures. How is it that all those banks can verify literally millions of signatures on all the paper checks written everyday? Because it's not that difficult, and frankly not that big of a deal when one slips through.

Now when and where did I ever say I hate Republicans? I don't hate them at all, or anyone else for that matter (well, maybe that guy who wouldn't let me merge on the freeway, and he did have a "Support Our Troops" sticker on the back).

You folks have a tendancy to attribute a lot of thoughts and emotions to me that simply are not there. I think you may be projecting your own feelings onto me.

At any rate, Sharky probably has the resources to verify whether I'm registered to vote in King County and whether one could declare a party affiliation in 1987. Have him look it up. I get the feeling he rather enjoys posting personal information about some of the participants on his blog.

Posted by: Unkl Witz on October 8, 2005 10:25 AM

25. Put up or shut up half-Witz

Posted by: alphabet soup on October 8, 2005 10:36 AM

26. Yes... in the past it was possibled to state your party affiliation on when one registered to vote in WA State. Not that it ment anything since it didn't even show up on the voter registration card or in the Poll Books. When I registered for the first time in 1977, I seem to remember the choices were Democrat, Republican, and Independant.

Such things are now long gone.

Posted by: RIGHT WING WACKO on October 8, 2005 10:45 AM

27. In response to the popular question "Why aren't these people being prosecuted for voter fraud" I see that NORM got the answer for us. From the Double Voter Dejour of Oct.3 involving Sundo/Sun Do Wong. It appears that, according to Leesa Manion at the KC prosecutors office, They will not investigate or prosecute any case "Not referred to them by law enforcement or an authorized investigative agency." They gave the information generated by Stephan and presented by NORM to the "Proper Elections personnel so that the matter can be appropriately reviewed/investigated." What is the Over/Under on King County Elections asking the prosecutor to file charges? Since when has King County Elections proven it can investigate itself? I realize it may be "authorized" but doesn't Elections recent record legitimately bring into question whether they should be ALLOWED to investigate themselves?

Posted by: Roscoe on October 8, 2005 10:46 AM

28. You're absolutely correct Wacko, the choices were Democrat, Republican, and Independent. And you're correct when you say it really didn't mean much. It certainly didn't keep me in the fold when they started putting up candidates like Ellen Crasswell and John Carlson. And judging from their overwhelming defeat, I wasn't alone.

And the "my country right or wrong" crowd who are willing to wreck the economy to support the war in Iraq, even though it's initial justification and most of the subsequent reasons for being there have be thoroughly discredited, truly do scare me. It seems we've learned nothing from Vietnam.

Mark me down as an independent these days. I don't hate the R's, I just fall into that 60+% of the nation who feel they are taking us in the wrong direction.

Posted by: Unkl Witz on October 8, 2005 11:28 AM

29. This is off topic, but I had to respond to Unkl Witz....

Just what the hell do you expect the Prez to do? Run from the war now, and prove, as Clinton seem to do in his tenor, that the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA is a wussy, and the USA has lost the Grand Power it Used to be?

We run now unkl, we lose any ground we have gained. The terrorist will have a hey day..... Think about it!!!!

We need to act United, as in USA. We have to drop the Political suicide that BOTH parties have begun, or our nation will be a WUSSY.

Just my .02

Posted by: Chris on October 8, 2005 11:40 AM

30. Chris:

Your point is well taken. What to do now. If we admit the whole thing was a terrible mistake and withdraw, how do we convince the world we are a “Grand Power”? I have to admit I do not know.

I do know that all of the former Grand Powers were “Grand” only in there own minds.

“The concepts of reality held by the masterful people have customarily been stupid or solipsistic in retrospect. Nobody has been remarkably secure, the masters have often ceased to be masters quickly. There have been tremendous messes to be cleaned up, ravaged landscapes dotted by shattered Earthlings and their machines.
Stupid.”
Kurt Vonnegut “Excelsior! We’re Going to the Moon! Excelsior!”

My question is this: Are the people who got us into this mess the ones who can lead us out?

Posted by: Unkl Witz on October 8, 2005 12:17 PM

31. Unkl posted
"Are the people who got us into this mess the ones who can lead us out?"

Well Unkl, you didnt quite get my point. WE, as a nation need to get it together, and then and only then, will this country become the Power it once was. You call the current War, a mess. I call it "About Time".

War's don't start over night, there was a long build up, and Bush cant be blamed for it ALL.

Posted by: Chris on October 8, 2005 12:31 PM

32. Chris:

This war started when we unilaterally invaded Iraq, without provocation and without a Declaration of War. And it was literally overnight. George W Bush personally made the decision to start this war.

As far as your point goes: yeah, I guess I missed it. Run it by me one more time.

Posted by: Unkl Witz on October 8, 2005 12:41 PM

33. "WE, as a nation need to get it together, and then and only then, will this country become the Power it once was."

This was my point.....

Posted by: Chris on October 8, 2005 12:50 PM

34. Define "get it together".

Posted by: Unkl Witz on October 8, 2005 01:07 PM

35. Unkl

You know my meaning. But if you need further explanation, "get it together" as in "UNITED".

You know, as in United States Of America. You know the country you apparently live in. The same country that is the "land of the free". The same country that has Service men/women in a war. The same country that should be SUPPORTING them. The same country that picked up the pieces after 9/11. That Country Unkl. The one that gives you the freedom to post on this blog freely without getting beheaded, for publicly ridiculing it's leader.

Posted by: Chris on October 8, 2005 01:27 PM

36. Gosh Chris:

It almost sounds like you mean we shouldn't allow dissenting opinions about public policy such as whether to invade a foriegn country. Perhaps you might be more at home in a land where they do behead people for ridiculing its leader.

It seems that perhaps you didn't get my point: that unwaivering support for a bad cause can lead to catastrophic results.

Posted by: Unkl Witz on October 8, 2005 02:16 PM

37. Unkl Witz--
You idiot--banks do not verify signatures on all checks...just those over a certain threshhold.
If you believe the bank actually verifies the signature on every single check(as you have stated) and are trying to use that as an anology with ballots (where EVERY ballot must have the signature verified), you are not only naive...but stupid too.
Maybe your next career after Safeco should be a bank signature verifier!!!!!
LEFTIST PINHEADS like Kiker are the clowns that make the whole world laugh!

Posted by: Mr. Cynical on October 8, 2005 02:30 PM

38. half-Witz - you idiot...

Pretty much sums it up.

Liar.

Fraud.

Coward.

Make a bet and then run away from it, huh witz.

Follow through or STFU and go away.

Name the time & place and I'll be there.

It's so easy half-witz.

Have no no honor at all?

Are you a complete POS?

Posted by: alphabet soup on October 8, 2005 02:51 PM

39. You are indeed correct Mr. Cynical. Banks only look at those checks over a certain threshold, and it's an amazingly high one at that. My point was they can do it when they need to and choose to, and it's not that difficult. Now if they can make it work at those volumes on an everyday basis, why can't it be managed in the electoral process?

Oh, and could we get beyond the name calling? It doesn't add much to the discussion.

Posted by: Unkl Witz on October 8, 2005 03:03 PM

40. We'll get beyond the name calling when you get beyond your obligations half-Witz....

Or should be just resign ourselves to the fact that you're a spineless weasel (oops - there goes those names again!)

Posted by: alphabet soup on October 8, 2005 03:17 PM

41. Unkl

You take alot for granted, including your freedom. Why don't you enlist in the Army and be all that you can be. Maybe you can convince some of the brave servicemen/women that they are fighting for a "bad cause can lead to catastrophic results" to go AWOL. I am sure you will be welcome.

Posted by: Chris on October 8, 2005 05:17 PM

42. I'm 54 years old Chris. I don't think the Army would have a spot for me.

Posted by: Unkl Witz on October 8, 2005 06:03 PM

43. Shame on you then.....I thought you were a 20 year old, with no "real life" experiences. No faith building experiences. Respect the country you live in sir. Or Move.

Enough Said

Posted by: Chris on October 8, 2005 06:18 PM

44. Well, there ya go Chris. Like a lot of things you thought about me, you were just dead wrong. Sounds like you don't read that well. If I moved up here and registered to vote in 1987, do you really think I could be only 20 years old?

Perhaps if you went back over some of my posts, you'd realize several other fallacies in your prior conclusions.

Posted by: Unkl Witz on October 8, 2005 06:28 PM

45. Hey soupy:

If you'll send me your real e-mail address, instead of the phony one you hide behind; and you can convince me you're over 21 (it's somewhat implausible given the adolescent nature of your posts), I will tell you where we can meet to settle our little bet.

Posted by: Unkl Witz on October 8, 2005 06:32 PM

46. No Witzy....I pegged you right....You just act like a 20 year old.

Please note that I called you Sir which was out of respect, because I was taught to respect my elders under any circumstances.

You lost my respect Uncky....For being 54 years old, you sure don't act it. Grow up, and move. This country doesn't need Middle Aged people like you influencing our future generations. No wonder this country has gone to shit.....

Posted by: Chris on October 8, 2005 06:35 PM

47. OK Trolls - We should have declared war on Afghanistan to fight the Taliban. We could not have declared war for foreign policy reasons on Iraq - as we would have been perceived as the aggressor. Its a hollow accusation to say that it was unconstitutional to fight in an undeclared war. First, that has never stopped us and probably never will ; Vietnam was never declared for similar reasons as Iraq - however - one big difference - we fought someone who wasn't going to invade us in Nam, but we are fighting an enemy who would invade with Nukes (Al Qaeda & the islamofascists) and I don't want to see that hypothesis tested by cutting and running from Iraq.

So why didn't we declare war on Bosnia ? (Clinton's war)

Posted by: KS on October 8, 2005 07:34 PM

48. Uncle Witz, you seem to hate Republicans because you always come in here taking potshots at everyone and putting down everything Stefan does, as though KCE's massive problems and dishonest vote-counting (puh-leeze, counting ballots where the signature is not even the same name as on the ballot?? having 800 more ballots than mail ballot voters with ZERO explanation for it?) means nothing. I wonder why you even come in here, if Republicans are so darned frightening to you. Because it seems to me that many of the commenters here are the kind of Republicans you say you are so afraid of. Why bother? Why not go over to the blog with the obscene name and swim in the sewage over there, where you won't have to be bothered with your scary 'religious right' types? I just don't wouldn't spend my time with scary people if I were in your shoes. I'd read a good book, instead. Maybe you could read Bill Clinton's book instead. Maybe that would make you happy. You seem to have more in common with him.

Posted by: Michele on October 8, 2005 10:31 PM

49. That's not the way it works half-Witz

You tell me a date, a time and a place and I'll show up and settle up. Nothing short of that.

What are you afraid of? I already know where you live. If spamming you was a part of my gig, you'd know it.

So why don't you act your age, and put up or STFU?

Posted by: alphabet soup on October 8, 2005 11:04 PM

50. Wow, Unkl--
your numerous barrages of late are like Mt St Helens burping for a time--quiet--then activity; pre-Haloween jitters? or more liberal magma of yours making its way up to a new vent?

anyway, back to signature verificatons--i haven't heard of any convincing system--like perhaps computerized image matching of signature points and portions--that would give me faith in an all-mail system; it's just too open to games; until i see that matching, (rather than eyeballing) I will oppose mail voting; the comfy lure of mail-voting convenience has its risks; just like that old lover's lane phrase--"...sure...I have protection...don't worry"

Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on October 9, 2005 12:04 AM

51. Jimmie & Michelle:

Thanks to both of you for getting back to the discussion and away from the name calling.

Why do I post on this site? It's because:

1. I'd rather have a discussion with folks who, for whatever reason, see things somewhat differently than I. We both may learn something.

2. With a few obvious exceptions, I find this group more intelligent and thoughtful than the H/A crowd.

I don't hate Republicans. Nor do I think KCE's problems are trivial. My message has been: Why are we arguing about how to arrange the deck chairs in King County, when the ship of state is sinking due to poor management at the national level.

Despite his pious and abrasive manner, Chris above does make a good point. We as a nation must 'get it together'. We must unite and say "stop the madness, end this war that is wrecking our economy and our national psyche."

Thanks for listening, even if you don't agree.

Posted by: Unkl Witz on October 9, 2005 08:40 AM

52. Unkl--
point taken; at least you are brave enough to join the fray; the name calling is self limiting; like a stain on your resume tie, it's a first impression; witness headless lucy--a flattus in the wind; no substantive points;

however, it all begins on the local level; sure, there is work to do everywhere, but these local pol's. are impacting your life more substantially and much harder than any far off detached Roman Senate; and we don't have the fix problems sequentially--fix them in parallel; just be vigilant and try for change; that's why i keep it to SP topics if i can; that's why i also have little sympathy for public figures who want my trust and then abuse it as well as wasting my money with no results; i don't buy the "it's always there" give up argument; so was malaria and polio; should we stop trying?

Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on October 9, 2005 09:12 AM

53. "..at least you are brave enough to join the fray..."

Gotta disagree with you on this one Jimmy!

What sort of courage would you ascribe to posting one-liners on the Internet? Half-Witz is exactly the same as the kids who throw rocks at the passing cars - would you call that furthering the debate? (If so, in what way?!!) At his most "sincere" (Yea, I know it's a stretch!) half-Witz's declarations have shown only that he stands opposed to each & every step that Stefan has taken to oppose election fraud & corruption and has tried, in his pathetic way, to disparage and insult any who wants to work with Stefan. half-Witz has yet to offer a substantive opinion about anything! Perhaps you're attributing bravery to his constant attempts to hijack the threads to issues that he wants to talk about rather than the topics at hand?

half-Witz has hansomely earned whatever names he has accumulated.

Let's see him display that bravery and stand up for his own challenge - name a date, a time, and a place!

Until he does that, nothing else that he has to say counts for anything!

Posted by: alphabet soup on October 9, 2005 09:56 AM

54. soupy you crack ME up.

all these exhortations of "bravery" from a guy who is such a coward he has to use a fake e-mail address.

you bad man, you bad, you really bad......

Posted by: Unkl Witz on October 9, 2005 06:35 PM

55. Witz: My name only has one L. You haven't yet noticed.
"Why are we arranging deck chairs in King County..."
Because if KC had decent leadership and elections office, Dino Rossi would be governor now. I firmly believe it. So do a lot of other people here, even if you don't agree or care.

Posted by: Michele on October 9, 2005 06:54 PM

56. OK half-Witz (AKA Rich Kiker), suit yourself

Let it be known that you won't stand true to your word. You're a coward, a liar, and a fraud.

I'm content with that....

Posted by: alphabet soup on October 9, 2005 08:12 PM

57. UW, you still don't get it regarding the banks. Because they generally only do careful verification of significantly large checks, the overwhelming majority of checks never get looked at. The do not have experience that would be relevant to checking millions of signatures on the current levels of budget and staffing enjoyed by our county elections officials, not by a long shot.

Posted by: Kirk Parker on October 9, 2005 11:29 PM

58. OOps, make that "the banks do not have..."

Posted by: Kirk Parker on October 9, 2005 11:30 PM

59. Soup--re: Witz:
point taken; thanks; guess one needs to take all postings as a whole & make a decision; rocks at cars made me laugh; guess you are right; posting per se means squat; sensible, difficult solutions (although not p.c. nor popular) take more thought;

critics are fine, except they are rarely called in to ACTUALLY FIX things; Stefan & others are walking the talk, not only pointing out faults; and you are right--Witz' alleged lack of concern for REAL voting reform says it all; funny thing, he is affected by lousy voting controls too, unless he likes the outcome;

Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on October 10, 2005 05:54 AM

60. "Despite his pious and abrasive manner, Chris above does make a good point. We as a nation must 'get it together'. We must unite and say "stop the madness, end this war that is wrecking our economy and our national psyche."
Posted by Unkl Witz at October 9, 2005 08:40 AM

Unkl...

You didnt get my point...and I am not a MAN, nor a hypocrite. I made no mention of Stopping the war, and by your twist of words, I see YOUR position Clearly now.

It's all about MONEY!!! National psyche ??? Do you really think this war has that much to do with our psyche??? As a nation our psyche had been "damaged" long before this war. We have been in a free fall for the past 20 years. Our National Psyche, is the result of a country that can't see past the colors of Red or Blue.

Posted by: Chris on October 10, 2005 06:59 AM

61. Chris - You know what they say; "Sometimes the best defense is a good offense". Well, there's fewer that are more offensive than half-Witz ;'}

Point is, he did "get your point" - he's just playing stupid (is it really play?!) to be contrary for the sake of being contrary.

Posted by: alphabet soup on October 10, 2005 10:38 AM

62. Or could UW be stuck on stupid period!Iv'e noticed that about these trolls.

Posted by: Laurie on October 11, 2005 06:56 AM

63. Good ole’ wise and benevolent "republican" everyman Unkl Fitz,

As usual, he eagerly openeth his mouth wide . . . and contentedly inserteth his left clog.

Fitz, besides being a dumb a$$ self-rightous weasel, you are exposed as a proven coward and shameless liar with no point.

Thanks (once again) for the many chortles and guffaws. You are a doozie.

Posted by: Amused by liberals on October 12, 2005 01:11 PM

Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:

Remember info?