From: (Dave=A0Hall)
On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 10:35:16 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote:
From:
prozac 625 wrote:
| What improvements would you like to have
done to your CB? | Would you want more
range?
(Buy a Dave Made!)
_
Haha,,I don't need a Davemade. I've dropped the maul on poor Geo's head
more than once without even knowing he was out there and completely on
accident.
What I find funny, is Lelnad's and Hall's illegal cb use is becoming
general knowledge. I have a new radio friend in Chi town.....: )

I don't live in "Chi Town".........


No one said you did.

What "illegal CB use" are you referring to?


Texas Star.

Please, be specific. Channels,


Channel 6.

modes,

AM

antics?


That's all for now. These answers were provided out of my continuing
extended courtesy, good nature, and friendliness. Any more answers you
seek from me grasshoppah, must first be atoned by answering those first
directed to yourself.


Dave

"Sandbagger"

http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj


Did you check out Michael Savage lately? He's slamming Bush, saying we
are hated by all in Indonesia because of his policies and that is the
new terrorist breeding ground.

On Tue, 4 Jan 2005 09:23:02 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote in :

snip
Dave

"Sandbagger"

http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj


Dave is still here? I thought he ran away to rec.boats after I
trampled on his propoganda-induced delusions about Kerry's service
record. Guess he was still lurking.

On Tue, 04 Jan 2005 08:01:47 -0800, Frank Gilliland
wrote:

On Tue, 4 Jan 2005 09:23:02 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote in :

snip
Dave

"Sandbagger"

http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj


Dave is still here? I thought he ran away to rec.boats after I
trampled on his propoganda-induced delusions about Kerry's service
record. Guess he was still lurking.


Frank,

You only managed to prove that you're as biased and open to
propaganda, on the left, as you accused me of being to the right.

Kerry has many big secrets to hide, and it may have saved him to lose
the election, as the quest to reveal them has lost much of it's
appeal.

I saw no further point in playing the "my website can beat up your
website" games with you. You want to believe the lie, then go right
ahead. I know better.......

Dave

"Sandbagger"

http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj

On Tue, 04 Jan 2005 13:41:45 -0500, Dave Hall
wrote in :

On Tue, 04 Jan 2005 08:01:47 -0800, Frank Gilliland
wrote:

On Tue, 4 Jan 2005 09:23:02 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote in :

snip
Dave

"Sandbagger"

http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj


Dave is still here? I thought he ran away to rec.boats after I
trampled on his propoganda-induced delusions about Kerry's service
record. Guess he was still lurking.


Frank,

You only managed to prove that you're as biased and open to
propaganda, on the left, as you accused me of being to the right.


What left-wing propoganda? I presented a -BIG- list of documented
FACTS that you shruged off as mere speculation. On the contrary, you
provided nothing -but- conjecture, most of which was contradicted by
the FACTS. And the FACTS don't care which side you are on.


Kerry has many big secrets to hide, and it may have saved him to lose
the election, as the quest to reveal them has lost much of it's
appeal.

I saw no further point in playing the "my website can beat up your
website" games with you.


Gee, and here I thought it was the "official military records can beat
up your website" game.


You want to believe the lie, then go right
ahead. I know better.......


Yeah, I suppose you're right -- those pesky facts are just a nuisance
when you know what the truth -really- is, right Dave?

From: (Frank=A0Gilliland)
On Tue, 4 Jan 2005 09:23:02 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote in :
snip
Dave
"Sandbagger"
http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj
Dave is still here? I thought he ran away to

rec.boats after I trampled on his

propoganda-induced delusions about Kerry's

service record. Guess he was still lurking.



Speaking of,,,check this out from truthout.org.......


_
Ohio Recount Steeped in Fraud
=A0=A0=A0=A0Democracy Week | Commentary
=A0=A0=A0=A0Saturday 01 January 2005
There is something you can do.
=A0=A0=A0=A0The presidential vote recount in Ohio is over - or is it?
The Green and Libertarian Party candidates who paid for the recount may
have a claim of fraud against election officials and at least one voting
machine company. If they can't get a new recount, they ought to at least
get their money back.
=A0=A0=A0=A0Here's what happened.
=A0=A0=A0=A0Any Ohio county did not have to do a full hand recount if a
random sample of three percent of the ballots in their county matched
the original count.
=A0=A0=A0=A0The first fraud count: Not all the counties, if any, pulled
the test precincts at random, nor did they allow the trained observers
to see how the test precincts were selected.
=A0=A0=A0=A0Rep. John Conyers, ranking minority member of the House
Judiciary Committee, sent a letter to all the presidential candidates,
in which he he stated: "At least one precinct in Medina County that
would not have voting anomalies was both carefully pre-selected and
pre-counted, so that the initial 3% recount that is mandated by the Ohio
Secretary of State would not return a mismatch between the initial tally
and the recount." [Read Rep. Conyers' Letter]
=A0=A0=A0=A0Once they selected the test precincts, some counties shared
that information with the voting machine technicians, who then made
adjustments on the machines and gave advice on how to create an exact
match. That would be the second fraud count. Technicians from Triad, the
company operating many of the counting machines, visited 41 of the 88
county election offices.
=A0=A0=A0=A0Triad technicians admitted that they helped the counties
avoid the full recount by faking the match on the three percent count.
[Read a transcript of the admissions].
=A0=A0=A0=A0When all else failed, election officials changed ballots to
make the count come out right. An election official stated that she "did
not want the hand count and the machine count to be different because
they did not want to do a complete hand count," according to a trained
observer quoted in Rep. Conyers=E2=80=99 letter. That would be fraud
count number three.
=A0=A0=A0=A0Mr. Conyers also wrote to Triad, asking them to provide
information regarding the company's ability to control the machines
remotely, which a Triad representative admitted. [Read Rep. Conyers'
Letter to Triad]
=A0=A0=A0=A0Fraud count number four would be that the Secretary of
State, who also served as Mr. Bush=E2=80=99s state campaign chairman,
refused to issue guidelines to the counties for the handling of
undervotes, overvotes and other issues, a clear violation of the
=E2=80=9Cequal protection=E2=80=9D ruling of Bush v. Gore. Counties used
wildly different rules during the count and the recount, depriving the
recount parties of true value for their investment.
=A0=A0=A0=A0The same Secretary Blackwell may have been a party to the
systematic violation of equal voting rights by shorting minority
precincts of voting machines, while over seventy extra machines
languished in a truck. The day-long lines in many minority neighborhoods
cost Mr. Kerry thousands of votes, by some estimates.
=A0=A0=A0=A0This article scratches the surface of what was done in Ohio
to suppress and subvert the vote and render the recount meaningless. For
in depth reporting, your best source is The Columbus Free Press.
=A0=A0=A0=A0What Can You Do?
=A0=A0=A0=A0Rep. Conyers has said that he will stand to object to the
acceptance of the Electoral College vote when it arrives at a joint
session of Congress at 1pm on January 6. Other House members will join
him. One Senator is needed to stand with them.
=A0=A0=A0=A0Senators don't want to look like lunatics. They need support
from home. The most effective thing Americans can do THIS MONDAY AND
TUESDAY is to print out the Conyers' letters from the links in this
article, write a quick letter to the editor as a cover letter, and hand
carry them to local newspaper editorial writers.
=A0=A0=A0=A0If a Senator with a concern for democracy can be found, then
the Ohio mess will become a major story as committees investigate and
the mainstream press piles on. The chance of it overturning the
presidential election is miniscule, but it will set the stage for
election reforms and for the punishment of criminals in high places, and
it will dissolve the notion of a present mandate.
=A0=A0=A0=A0A useful cover letter would state that, regardless of party,
Americans must insist on the fair and non-partisan administration of
elections, and that our Senators should stand with Rep. Conyers to
demand an investigation and a pledge of reform before this
year=E2=80=99s election is accepted by Congress. We are too great a
country to accept damaged goods instead of a reliably honest election
result, or else our claims of spreading democracy to other lands is a
sham. Your letter could remind the editors of how many people have
sacrificed and died for our freedoms, the emblem of which is, more than
our flag, our ballot.
=A0=A0=A0=A0After you hand deliver the letter to your newspaper, take a
copy to the field offices of your two Senators, if you live within
distance.
_
Also, what is going on with Nethercutt, now?

On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 09:25:48 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote:

From: (Frank*Gilliland)
On Tue, 4 Jan 2005 09:23:02 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote in :
snip
Dave
"Sandbagger"
http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj
Dave is still here? I thought he ran away to

rec.boats after I trampled on his

propoganda-induced delusions about Kerry's

service record. Guess he was still lurking.



Speaking of,,,check this out from truthout.org.......


_
Ohio Recount Steeped in Fraud


That's a wonderful story, if it's true. Is there any solid proof other
than these allegations and he said-she said testimony to back it up?

The paper never refuses ink, and politically motivated people have
incentive to lie.

Perhaps they should do a recount in Pa.. There were all sorts of
allegations of fraud in Philthy. Perhaps they may find that Bush
really won Pa. as well. Then Ohio becomes a moot point. Are you sure
you really want to go there?


Your guy lost. Get over it.....


Dave
"Sandbagger"

On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 10:31:16 -0500, Dave Hall
wrote in :

On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 09:25:48 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote:

From: (Frank*Gilliland)
On Tue, 4 Jan 2005 09:23:02 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote in :
snip
Dave
"Sandbagger"
http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj
Dave is still here? I thought he ran away to

rec.boats after I trampled on his

propoganda-induced delusions about Kerry's

service record. Guess he was still lurking.



Speaking of,,,check this out from truthout.org.......


_
Ohio Recount Steeped in Fraud


That's a wonderful story, if it's true. Is there any solid proof other
than these allegations and he said-she said testimony to back it up?


Since when would facts make any difference to your version of the
"truth"? Well, maybe there's hope for you yet, so here's the best
place to start:

http://freepress.org/departments/display/19/2004/1057
http://freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005/1064


The paper never refuses ink, and politically motivated people have
incentive to lie.


That's the point.


Perhaps they should do a recount in Pa.. There were all sorts of
allegations of fraud in Philthy. Perhaps they may find that Bush
really won Pa. as well. Then Ohio becomes a moot point. Are you sure
you really want to go there?


Your guy lost. Get over it.....


Pay attention, Dave: It doesn't matter who won or lost the election.
Kerry conceeded -- end of story. So quit invoking his name to distract
from the -REAL- issue which is the huge scale of the voting fraud that
happened during the election. This problem threatens the very core of
this democracy, and if presidential elections can be rigged then we
might as well throw in the towel. Future elections will be meaningless
and open to any power-monger with enough money to buy the election,
maybe even someone as diabolical as Hitler or Stalin. But I suppose
you wouldn't mind such a 'leader' or how he comes to power just as
long as you agree with his publically stated moral principles and
objectives..... but wasn't it you that said, "politically motivated
people have incentive to lie"?

Get a clue, Dave.

On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 09:54:02 -0800, Frank Gilliland
wrote:
Ohio Recount Steeped in Fraud


That's a wonderful story, if it's true. Is there any solid proof other
than these allegations and he said-she said testimony to back it up?


Since when would facts make any difference to your version of the
"truth"? Well, maybe there's hope for you yet, so here's the best
place to start:

http://freepress.org/departments/display/19/2004/1057
http://freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005/1064

Freepress.org is a leftist propaganda organization, so it does not
surprise me that they hype the negative issues to make it seem worse
than it is. But you seem to have a problem differentiating between
real hard irrefutable FACTS with biased editorial opinion.


The paper never refuses ink, and politically motivated people have
incentive to lie.


That's the point.


Perhaps they should do a recount in Pa.. There were all sorts of
allegations of fraud in Philthy. Perhaps they may find that Bush
really won Pa. as well. Then Ohio becomes a moot point. Are you sure
you really want to go there?


Your guy lost. Get over it.....


Pay attention, Dave: It doesn't matter who won or lost the election.

Sure it does. Would all these P.E.S.T. victims be screaming for a
recount in Ohio if Kerry had won? That was my whole point. There were
all sorts of allegations of voter fraud in Pennsylvania, particularly
in heavily democratic strongholds like Philadelphia. But nobody cares
because Kerry won the state, even if by less of a margin than Bush won
Ohio.

Kerry conceeded -- end of story.

No, it's not. There are all sorts of sore loser groups trying
everything from trying to throw out the electoral vote, to impeaching
Bush. They just can't deal with the fact that THEY LOST. Crying voter
fraud is just another attempt to deny the fact that THEY LOST. Denial
is the first step.

I wasn't happy when Clinton won, but I didn't accuse every state where
he won of fraud (Even though, in all likelihood, there was probably
some).

So quit invoking his name to distract
from the -REAL- issue which is the huge scale of the voting fraud that
happened during the election.

Tell me Frank, do you believe that there has always been voter fraud,
or do you think that this is suddenly something new?


This problem threatens the very core of
this democracy, and if presidential elections can be rigged then we
might as well throw in the towel. Future elections will be meaningless
and open to any power-monger with enough money to buy the election,

Like George Soros?

maybe even someone as diabolical as Hitler or Stalin.

Or Ted Kennedy?

But I suppose
you wouldn't mind such a 'leader' or how he comes to power just as
long as you agree with his publically stated moral principles and
objectives..... but wasn't it you that said, "politically motivated
people have incentive to lie"?

Yes, but you seem to think the whole issue of fraud is one sided. You
scream with righteous indignation because your guy lost, not because
you have a genuine concern over the voting process. Id be willing to
bet that had Kerry won, you wouldn't care if allegations of voter
fraud surfaced. You'd be saying to me, the same thing I'm saying to
you.

I also find it curious that those who seem the most opposed to putting
policies in place to lessen the chance of fraud are mostly democrats.
Mandatory voter ID, and a more secure voting environment have all been
shouted down by democrats. They used the lame "disenfranchised" and
"racism" arguments to hide their real worry that a truly fair election
would hurt them. No more buying votes with cartons of cigarettes, or
bottles of ripple.


Get a clue, Dave.

I would think that you need one as well.

Dave
"Sandbagger"
http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj

On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 16:02:28 -0500, Dave Hall
wrote in :

snip
Since when would facts make any difference to your version of the
"truth"? Well, maybe there's hope for you yet, so here's the best
place to start:

http://freepress.org/departments/display/19/2004/1057
http://freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005/1064

Freepress.org is a leftist propaganda organization,


Enough with the labels. You have also labeled the mainstream media as
being heavily biased to the left, yet it is the mainstream media that
refuses to cover the Ohio recount or release the raw exit poll data.
Your labels don't reconcile with the facts. As for freepress.org, I
suggest you read their "About" page which describes the organization
and chronicles it's history. I doubt you will read it because people
like you are too afraid to face facts that might conflict with your
biased opinions. You would rather slap labels on others instead of
admitting that there is a possibility you are wrong. But you really
-should- read it because people with open minds don't share your fear,
and they are the people you will be arguing with until you wake up and
smell the sheep-dung.


so it does not
surprise me that they hype the negative issues to make it seem worse
than it is. But you seem to have a problem differentiating between
real hard irrefutable FACTS with biased editorial opinion.


Are you suggesting that a 124% voter turnout is just an "editorial
opinion"?


snip
Pay attention, Dave: It doesn't matter who won or lost the election.

Sure it does. Would all these P.E.S.T. victims be screaming for a
recount in Ohio if Kerry had won? That was my whole point. There were
all sorts of allegations of voter fraud in Pennsylvania, particularly
in heavily democratic strongholds like Philadelphia. But nobody cares
because Kerry won the state, even if by less of a margin than Bush won
Ohio.


Read the transcript I cited. These are the same organizations that
cried foul when Gore tried to manipulate the recounts in Florida,
criticized the Clinton victories, and have members that are official
election observers for this and other countries. Yet you try and paint
them as hired guns for the Democrats. As you have demonstrated many
times before, your perspective is so slanted you are falling over.


Kerry conceeded -- end of story.

No, it's not. There are all sorts of sore loser groups trying
everything from trying to throw out the electoral vote, to impeaching
Bush. They just can't deal with the fact that THEY LOST. Crying voter
fraud is just another attempt to deny the fact that THEY LOST. Denial
is the first step.

I wasn't happy when Clinton won, but I didn't accuse every state where
he won of fraud (Even though, in all likelihood, there was probably
some).


"They" is not "me". Whether the current president makes you whine or
dine, voting fraud is the issue. The "Kerry-lost-get-over-it" routine
is getting old and you are sounding like a broken record. The most
important issue right now is voting fraud. Address the issue at hand.
Some day later we can address how your wool got sheared by Bush's
propoganda machine.


So quit invoking his name to distract
from the -REAL- issue which is the huge scale of the voting fraud that
happened during the election.

Tell me Frank, do you believe that there has always been voter fraud,
or do you think that this is suddenly something new?


Voting fraud has been around ever since voting was invented. But there
has never been fraud on a scale like what was seen Nov. 2. Nor to the
extent that, if left unchecked, could directly affect the government
of the most powerful country in the world. You aren't suggesting that
voting fraud should be ignored because it's going to occur no matter
what, are you? Because that's the same kind of excuse illegal CBers
use to justify their operation.....


This problem threatens the very core of
this democracy, and if presidential elections can be rigged then we
might as well throw in the towel. Future elections will be meaningless
and open to any power-monger with enough money to buy the election,

Like George Soros?

maybe even someone as diabolical as Hitler or Stalin.

Or Ted Kennedy?


Gee, I don't know..... did Ted Kennedy kill millions of people? Is
that the secret ambition which convinced him to enter the political
arena? I'm asking because the facts don't indicate anything of the
sort, but -you- know the -real- truth, don't you Dave? So polish your
lamp, gaze into your crystal ball, call the psychic friends network,
or do whatever it is you do to gain such pervasive insight into the
truth..... and tell me, what -are- Ted's secret ambitions?


But I suppose
you wouldn't mind such a 'leader' or how he comes to power just as
long as you agree with his publically stated moral principles and
objectives..... but wasn't it you that said, "politically motivated
people have incentive to lie"?

Yes


No kidding.


, but you seem to think the whole issue of fraud is one sided. You
scream with righteous indignation because your guy lost, not because
you have a genuine concern over the voting process. Id be willing to
bet that had Kerry won, you wouldn't care if allegations of voter
fraud surfaced. You'd be saying to me, the same thing I'm saying to
you.


Did you come to those conclusions after reading tea leaves or throwing
bones? Maybe you should read some of my previous posts regarding Bush,
how I defended him in the past. Maybe you missed my criticizms of Gore
for trying to manufacture votes by selective recounts. Maybe you
missed my many posts where I clearly stated that I only vote for
independents and/or third party candidates, and voted for Nader in
this election. Or maybe you just aren't paying attention to the facts.

It's so much easier for you to comprehend if you tell yourself that I
voted for Kerry and that I'm a sore loser, isn't it? Well, as usual,
you're wrong. I voted for Nader. And even though he lost the election,
I didn't have any expectations that he would win. But he and other
third party candidates -did- make a strong showing, which was my
intent with my vote, and for that reason I am -very- happy with the
outcome of the election.

Except for the fraud.


I also find it curious that those who seem the most opposed to putting
policies in place to lessen the chance of fraud are mostly democrats.
Mandatory voter ID, and a more secure voting environment have all been
shouted down by democrats. They used the lame "disenfranchised" and
"racism" arguments to hide their real worry that a truly fair election
would hurt them. No more buying votes with cartons of cigarettes, or
bottles of ripple.


Both Republicans and Democrats oppose those issues equally. And it
wasn't the Democrats who initiated the recount in Ohio; it was the
Greens and the Libertarians with cooperation from voting rights
organizations. Once again you have showed how skewed your perspective
is towards the Republicans.


Get a clue, Dave.

I would think that you need one as well.


What you think about me carries no weight since you have yet to
demonstrate that you are capable of thought that is independent and
rational; i.e, above the level of domesticated livestock.

On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 09:25:48 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote in :

snip
Also, what is going on with Nethercutt, now?


Beats me. He suffered a disgraceful defeat. He's probably off pouting
at some retreat for Republican losers, and Dino Rossi is headed there
soon. But I have a feeling both will resurface when the 2006 campaigns
get started.