More Disappointment for the Shower-Nuts
I don't have any official confirmation of this, but do have it on good authority that the petitions turned in last week by the Citizens for a Responsible Whatever were returned to them by the Montgomery County Board of Elections, who called the submission "untimely."
I don't know what they were thinking.
I don't know what they were thinking.
posted by JimK at 8:16 PM
62 Comments:
what disappointment?
now, the BOE can be sued for failure to support all MC citizens without discrimination
hey, kids
Joebama's lead is declining again
the 4 polls dated today have
Obama 8
Obama 5
Obama 5
Mccain 2
that averages to a 4 point lead by Obama which is down from yesterday and probably is not a win
Joebama's lead
Joebama's lead
Joebama's lead
Joebama's lead
Joebama's lead
Anonymous noted:
"Joebama's lead is declining again"
There's just no end of good news to feed your optimism, is there?!
Cynthia
I love the Orwellian idea that an anti-discrimination law somehow discriminates against bigots.
More anti-bigot discrimination, plz.
it's not the discrimination law per se, Lisa
it's the idea that the BOE gave false information to CRG that it relied on to the detriment of exercising its right to referendum
the subject matter is irrelevant
btw, including dead people in the denominator of that referendum percentage is ridiculous
such a law shoulkd have been invalidated anyway
Anon complained:
"btw, including dead people in the denominator of that referendum percentage is ridiculous"
Then why were "dead people" included in the numerator? I don't remember the exact number, but wasn't it at least a couple hundred? How did you get those zombies to sign in the first place?
Cynthia
I didn't take the petitions, C.
I'm a dispassionate observer.
I do know, however, that invalid signatures in the numerator were removed but invalid dead people in the denominator were added by the judges.
Sound fair?
I do know, however, that invalid signatures in the numerator were removed but invalid dead people in the denominator were added by the judges.
You don't know anything, you got it wrong, again.
"Invalid" signatures were removed by Judge Greenberg from the numerator, however, he included over 800 "inactive" voters' signatures in the numerator as "valid" even though "inactive" voters were not included in the denominator. Does that sound fair to you?
The Court of Appeals corrected Greenberg's error and said that "inactive" voters must be included in both the numerator and denominator.
Anon stated:
“I do know, however, that invalid signatures in the numerator were removed but invalid dead people in the denominator were added by the judges.”
Inactive voters’ signatures were included in the numerator as long as they were valid. The law stated “registered voters” not “active voters” long before the petition drive ever started, and even longer before judges had to point out to the BOE what the law actually clearly stated. You are comparing two different things and trying to make them carry your point.
Trying to claim that all inactive voters are dead when that is obviously not that case is a pretty obvious case of spin. If a person oft derided as “mentally ill,” a “sexual deviant” and a “confused guy in a dress” like myself can see through this façade, how do you expect “normal” people with half a brain not to?
Your kind of “logic” may work on the right-wing propaganda sites where people eat up large spoonfuls of this kind of tripe and savor every bite, but you’ve been blogging here long enough to know that I’m not going to let that kind of bogus rhetoric slide without pointing out the obvious flaws.
Peace,
Cynthia
Good news
polls today are showing voters blame Democrats for the failure of the bail-out plan and are incensed that they left town before they had passed some plan
Republicans now are seem as party best suited to manage the economy
a few weeks ago, even the most partisan Republican thought it would take a miracle to return the Congress to GOP control
we may have seen a miracle this week
What, did you look in the mirror and conduct a "poll"? With a polling sample of one and a margin of error of plus or minus 100%?
Your analysis lately is far more wishing and hoping and far less actual description of what's going on. Go away.
http://webcenter.polls.aol.com/modular.jsp?resType=7&popup=yes&pollId=152526&channel=aol_us_news9&view=152251&template=1381
poll today showing Americans trust Republicans over Democrats 58-23% to take care of the economy
ouch!
the buzz on Capitol Hill is that Pelosi got 95 Democratic congressmen to vote against the bill and then launched a partisan attack on Republicans when introducing the bill just to make McCain look bad
sounds like her strategy backfired
where in the world are you getting 800 inactive from bea ?
that is about 4x too high.
And...to make matters worse - she spoke TRUTH!!!
I've already stated that I feel for you guys, Wyatt. The BoE messed with both of us. It was a comedy of errors all around, and work will progress to see that it doesn't happen again.
That being said, neither you nor we have a case against a government agency -- it's called estoppel. Caveat emptor. You should have had a lawyer to clarify what "registered voters" means.
An AOL internet poll? The kind that has the disclaimer saying:
Poll results are not scientific and reflect the opinions of only those users who choose to participate.
That's your miracle? A clearly freeped poll? Bwahahahahahahahahahahaha.
Your desperation is amusing. FWIW, you'd have had more accuracy with the mirror.
Well, I'm suggesting the law on this should be corrected.
EM Md sued the BOE. Why can't CRG?
I think you misuderstand the concept of "estoppel" and are using "caveat emptor" incorrectly.
"That's your miracle?"
No, the miracle is that an event occurred a few weeks before the election that clearly demonstrates the incompetence and self-seeking nature of the Democratic-controlled Congress.
Republicans now have a shot at flipping control of the legislature.
Of course, this is merely the second miracle. The first is that we also have a good shot at the Presidency.
In a year the Democrats should have run away with, the polls remain close because Democrats nominated a guy without any meaningful achievements or experience or ideas to be President.
The stupidity of Democrats is an all-purpose miracle!
I think you misuderstand the concept of "estoppel" and are using "caveat emptor" incorrectly.
No, she's not.
"Equitable estoppel is the effect of the voluntary conduct of a party whereby he is absolutely precluded both at law and in equity, from asserting rights which might perhaps have otherwise existed, either of property, of contract, or of remedy, as against another person, who has in good faith relied upon such conduct, and has been led thereby to change his position for the worse and who on his part acquires some corresponding right, either of property, of contract, or of remedy."
Hill v. Cross Country Settlements, LLC, 402 Md. 281, 936 A.2d 343 (2007).
This is what CRG is claiming.
"Ordinarily, the doctrine of estoppel does not apply against the State."
ARA Health Services, Inc. v. Department of Public Safety and ARA Health Services, Inc. v. Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services, 344 Md. 85, 685 A.2d 435 (1996).
Next question.
we also have a good shot at the Presidency.
Haha. Actually, no. Polling shows that Obama's lead has increased, AGAIN. Even the outlier GW Battleground tracking poll moved 4 points in one day, moving from McCain +2 to Obama +2.
All below numbers are based on polling through yesterday, 9/29.
Rasmussen Obama 51, McCain 45 (+6)
Gallup Obama 49, McCain 43 (+6)
Hotline Obama 47, McCain 41 (+6)
GW Obama 48, McCain 46 (+2)
Average used by one of the anon-idiots earlier has now moved from +4 to +5, in one day.
That's why you were reduced to citing a bogus freeped AOL poll. All the trends are running (fast) in the opposite direction from what you want. All of your blah blah blah is just nonsensical whistling in the wind.
Republicans now have a shot at flipping control of the legislature based on An AOL internet poll...that has the disclaimer saying:
Poll results are not scientific and reflect the opinions of only those users who choose to participate..
AOL polls consistently show McShame ahead because losers like Anon have nothing better to do than vote for their DumnamicDuo in the Straw Poll AOL posts every day.
Is that the kind of cooked bookkeeping they pay you to do all day?
"That's why you were reduced to citing a bogus freeped AOL poll."
Actually, it's the only one available. If you've got other polls, post them.
The polls bounce day-to-day.
McCain will win.
No, the miracle is that an event occurred a few weeks before the election that clearly demonstrates the incompetence and self-seeking nature of the Democratic-controlled Congress.
Republicans now have a shot at flipping control of the legislature.
I don't know about miracles, but I do know about the facts. RealClearPolitics shows a 9.5% preference for Democrats over Republican.
Oh and look at that at the top of the page -- Obama's average lead has increased to 5.1% and all of the most recent polls agree Obama's ahead.
"Polling shows that Obama's lead has increased, AGAIN. Even the outlier GW Battleground tracking poll moved 4 points in one day, moving from McCain +2 to Obama +2."
Sorry, Obama's lead is shrinking.
The estimable Gallup poll had him up 8 points two days ago and now his lead is 6.
You shouldn't base your whole argument on a poll that you call an "outlier".
The American people saw McCain try to help negotiate an agreement while Obama did no-thing.
"I don't know about miracles, but I do know about the facts. RealClearPolitics shows a 9.5% preference for Democrats over Republican."
Dated information.
Taken before Pelosi got up to speak without putting on her make-up or washing her hair.
What possible effect do you think you're having with your pathetic "I can find a poll that says what I want it to" nattering?
Do you think you're actually creating the (un)reality you so desperately yearn for? Or do you think you're discouraging the liberals around here?
Either choice makes you a pathetic loser, because neither result is happening, but I really have to wonder how lame you have to be to get so desperate as you have recently.
On the merits: yes, Gallup was at 8, but that's too high right now. It was a high outlier. Now, there's three separate daily tracking polls at Obama +6, increasing exponentially the likelihood that +6 is a pretty accurate read right now. The fact that the low outlier, GW, is moving quickly in the direction of the consensus +6, is further validation of this fact.
Moreover, as noted by pollster.com yesterday, movements in the national polls have a tendency to lead movement in the state polls. That is, because there are more national polls than there are state polls, it takes some time for national trends to be reflected accurately in state by state polls, which are done less frequently and by fewer organizations (outside the FL/OH/PA triangle, there is usually one reputable pollster per state, and other than PA, I believe, no one is doing daily tracking).
So what you see nationally is going to show up in the state polls in the next week or so, thus blowing yet more holes in your Swiss Cheese Theory of Polling (SCTP).
Moreover, the polls aren't "bouncing all over the place." They're trending to Obama, fast, faster than I've seen in over 30 years of paying attention to this stuff.
Finally, if you want to know who the electorate thinks is better able to handle the economy, use your friend teh Google. The general spread is 15-20%, and it favors the Democrats. Nothing that has happened in the past two days has changed that.
aunt bea must mean DumnamicDuo as in Duchy and Dana? Now that's a sorry pair that uses taxpayer money like true democrats. Working on outside organizations while on government time.
Ok, if now the Gallup poll is an outlier, what can anyone say? I guess you can't trust a brand name anymore.
btw, why do you keep arguing if you're so sure Obama's lead is solid?
Well, let's live in TTF's state of denial until the first week of November.
Let's all make a guess on McCain's electoral total and revisit in November.
I say 273 for McCain.
The anti-gay anon is funny. He's clearly messing with people with empty, obfuscatory arguments. It's good to read the genuine responses that the real people who post here leave, though, so thanks to all of them.
Do y'all remember the Huckabee prediction. Here's a scenario: McCain dumps Palin, Huckabee is nominated for VP, McCain resigns, Huckabee is president.
Hehe. I read somewhere else about how Pelosi got the democrats to vote against the bailout so she could blame the McCain campaign. I think the Post article said the Mc-ites were saying that. Right. Even paranoids have enemies, but really!
Such good fun.
rrjr
ABC/Washington Post Poll says:
Among registered voters, 44% blame the Congressional Republicans -- that is, the ones who actually voted against the bailout -- compared to only 21% who blame Congressional Dems, and 17% who blame both equally.
Also, Obama is now leading in Florida.
Anon-freak said "McCain will win.".
LOL, nice try but we remember all too well how your past predictions went:
President Huckabee's going to do this and president Huckabee's going to do that. The Republican's are going to clean up in the 2006 elections. Huckabee's going to be Mccain's running mate. Condoleeza Rice is going to be Mccain's running mate. Colin Powell is going to be Mccain's running mate. There's a conspiracy to make Huckabee president and Mccain's in on it. The CRW will collect enough signatures to force a referendum on the addition of trans people to the anti-discrimination law and it will pass. Despite the appeal court ruling the CRW has 10 days to collect the missing signatures and then the referendum will be on and will pass.
Based on past history your naive predictions of certainty for the future are a guarentee that Mccain will lose.
aunt bea must mean DumnamicDuo
No Anon, but by all means, keep grasping at straws. Let's see if you can come up with a better guess of which "DumnamicDuo" I was talking about in my original sentence, which was
AOL polls consistently show McShame ahead because losers like Anon have nothing better to do than vote for their DumnamicDuo in the Straw Poll AOL posts every day.
Have you got another guess?
Here's another hint.
Last I heard Dana works for Duchy, and Duchy is smack dab in the middle of her four year term of elective office so she won't run again -- meaning no one can vote for her -- until 2010.
And who has the CRW got to run against her? Peter ... John ... Michelle? Whoever it is can join the long list of other MoCo GOP elected officials in the unemployment line!
Government time? That's a laugh! I'm a part-time employee.
Sorry to disappoint you.
And I know full well what estoppel and caveat emptor mean.
"The anti-gay anon is funny. He's clearly messing with people"
You know me, Robert. I love to watch these guys lose their cool over a few words.
You gotta wonder what gets them so hyped up. They must feel pretty insecure about the race and think if anyone gets away with saying a negative thing about Obama's chances, the whole house of cards will tumble.
Maybe they're right.
After all, the emperor has no clothes. Let's hope it doesn't take until January before someone has the guts to say it.
People get energized about their opinions, especially politics. Today in class we were discussing weather in the ancient world, and my student who heads the young republicans shared his views on global warming (as I knew he would). Within moments, there were shouts of "McCain" "Obama."
To be honest, I think it's great that so many people care so much. I'm glad my students do, even though I remind them that the most important thing in the world is Latin grammar.
"Government time? That's a laugh! I'm a part-time employee.
Sorry to disappoint you."
wasn't the usual anon, Dana
"And I know full well what estoppel and caveat emptor mean."
I'm not a lawyer but I did go to law school part-time for a while. I've erased most of the knowledge from my mind but I think I remember the concept of estoppel.
Last I heard, "estoppel" was when an individual accrues rights because they've been led to rely on someone else's actions.
For example, if I starting letting someone live in my basement rent-free and they quit their job because I told them I'd support them while they went back to school, I might not be able to pull the rug out from under the deal because they had relied on my promises in good faith.
"caveat emptor", buyer beware in Latin, is a term used in business to refer to a situation where a sale is made without any guarantee.
I don't see how they apply to government misleading you to deprive you of your equitable rights.
hey aunt bea . . .Duchy works for Dana. Let's get it right. Dana is the stronger of the two (being the he). He needs her to promote what he wants and she complies.
What a disturbed duo.
You see anonymous, that is your problem. When faced with reality you get rude and nasty. No one here is shocked by your comments. I myself am amused by your attempts to either flame this post or just be plain ugly. Never mind about winning friends, you aren't even interesting enough to gain enemies, only pity.
Dana is a fine lady, and a finer human being than you will ever be.
Shame on you.
FYI, Anon, you slid one past me, but if I see personal slurs of the type you just posted I am going to delete them. We can have a civil discussion here without that.
If you persist I will simply block you from commenting.
JimK
I used "caveat emptor" as a phrase devoid of any business meaning, more in the colloquial sense. If you decide to "buy" government information for free, you have to be willing to accept that it may not be correct.
That is not often the case, but it does happen, which is why when people go to court they generally hire their own attorneys.
As for the government being protected from estoppel claims, well, that's just the way it is. As I said, we suffered from bad action on their part as well. Neither of us has a claim, and I don't think you're going to change the American legal system, however much you'd like to do so. We're all stuck with this reality.
Well, I guess it's a tangent we're off on. Regardless of the meaning of the words, the idea that government decisions can't be challenged is wrong. If not, we'd be having the referendum now.
btw, I'm quite certain I'll never be as wonderful a human being as you but the strange comments by the above anon are not from the usual anon.
Also strange that Jim didn't delete them, huh?
Oh no, Mr Bill.
ABC/Washington Post, the poll that gave Obama the 9 point lead last week has a new poll out tonight and Obama's lead has dropped to 4 points.
That's a serious trend and Palin's on TV for Thursday night.
We all remember what happened when she gave that speech on TV in August.
Obama is about to become an answer to a future Jeopardy category, "Also Rans".
This candidate's presidential hopes ended when he refused to try to help his country overcome a major economic crisis.
Who is Joebama?
The difficulty with being a nameless troll is underscored when you have to refer to yourself as "the usual anon."
Robert
Obama's lead is dwindling and what is the cause?
Hint: the new Washington Post used sampling taken entirely after the debate that Obama didn't win.
Also strange that Jim didn't delete them, huh?
Jim didn't delete it because Jim didn't see it. He is on the other side of the world, where your day is his night, and he sleeps when you are awake. He also has been spending his days in a conference, not always on the Internet.
Further, by the time Jim saw the ugly comment, other people had already responded to it. But I don't suppose these kinds of explanations are nearly as fascinating to you as the implication that somehow Jim didn't delete the comment because of some secret agenda, perhaps a covert alliance between Jim and this "other" Anon, or perhaps because Jim only deletes your comments mwaaaahahaha.
JimK
Some people really either don't get it, because of their poor education, or don't want to get it just to be difficult. With our Anons it is probably both.
Government decisions may be challenged; what you cannot challenge is the fact you're in a mess because the government gave you information that turned out to be wrong.
If you call the IRS with a tax question, they give you an answer and you use that information in filing your return, and it turns out the information was incorrect, you have to pay the correct tax, plus penalties and interest. It does not matter that the IRS gave you the wrong info in the first place.
"If you call the IRS with a tax question, they give you an answer and you use that information in filing your return, and it turns out the information was incorrect, you have to pay the correct tax, plus penalties and interest. It does not matter that the IRS gave you the wrong info in the first place."
Tax law is different than other law, Dana.
Under tax law, the burden of proof that an individual hasn't broken the law is on the individual.
In other areas, the burden of proof that you are guilty of a crime is on the government.
All of which is irrelevant to whether the government has the power to manipulate elections by giving out false information.
An example which counters your view is when the government fails to give you correct information about your rights under Miranda, you cannot be found guilty even if you are.
"Further, by the time Jim saw the ugly comment, other people had already responded to it. But I don't suppose these kinds of explanations are nearly as fascinating to you as the implication that somehow Jim didn't delete the comment because of some secret agenda, perhaps a covert alliance between Jim and this "other" Anon, or perhaps because Jim only deletes your comments mwaaaahahaha."
Actually since you want to discuss it further, Jim, here's my theory:
You didn't delete it because you thought you were getting some mileage out of the statement and you thought it would make all pro-family supporters look bad.
Previous concern about leaving offensive comments to Dana up were either feigned at the time or have now taken a back seat to other considerations.
You can come back now, Jim. The economic crisis is over.
btw, when you get back, check out this week's Time magazine. Apparently, Adelaide is a new world food capital.
"Anonymous" Troll:
"Pro-family" ranks right up there with "Gay agenda"...meaningless unintelligent blather, devoid of any significence...except as a tool of propaganda intended to demean and dehumanize anyone who doesn't subscribe to your particular "Christian" agenda.
CRG lost
YOU LOST
YOU LOST
YOU LOST
YOU LOST
YOU LOST
YOU LOST
YOU LOST
Lost What?
actually, we won
because we had fun
Isn't that telling?
Calling decent citizens "predators and pedophiles" was "fun"? Lying through your teeth, having your national friends bombard the young staffers at the Council with hate mail was "fun"? Sending death threats to Duchy and me was "fun"? Sending hate mail to my sons was "fun"?
You have no shame.
To all "Anonymous" CRGers and Trolls ~~~
Karma: Losers always lose.
Diogenes
"Calling decent citizens "predators and pedophiles" was "fun"? Lying through your teeth, having your national friends bombard the young staffers at the Council with hate mail was "fun"? Sending death threats to Duchy and me was "fun"? Sending hate mail to my sons was "fun"?"
There were few doing anything like that. And those on your side joined in as well. I remember one of your posters here saying they felt liking killing me. As I recall, the individual was one of your posters who had conceded having a history of mental instability.
I didn't try to blame it on all of you.
Trying to associate everyone with the actions of a few is a typical rhetorical device of extremists.
And, yes, just watching your displays of hype and apoplexy has been highly entertaining.
Including the one above.
"Karma: Losers always lose"
If karma was a fact, all of us in the human race would be in trouble.
That's the problem with religions like Hinduism.
They don't account for the imperfection of man.
There were not just "a few" doing it -- it is the core of your strategy. "Notmyshower.net," remember?
I don't know who sent the death threats to my sons and me. It was more than one person. I'm not speaking of you, but the culture you created. Your group either asked for or encouraged the national deluge of hate mail and phone calls; it wasn't a spontaneous outpouring. You could have stopped it; I managed to get one slanderous website posting pulled. If I could do it, you certainly could.
Take responsibility. You were still fear-mongering last week for no purpose other than to harass. And none of your leaders has yet to take me up on my offer to sit down and talk. That says volumes.
"Anonymous" - It matters not whether you are Hindu or not - a truism is a truism. Losers always lose. You lost.
Diogenes
I am glad you "had fun" playing with the civil rights of others. That is not too "Christian" of you now, is it?
Judgement day will come, my neighbor. We'll see who St. Peter let's in.
Truth wins, lies lose. You lost.
(Just like Palin will lose tonight!)
Post a Comment
<< Home