O'Reilly, Bachmann suggest ACORN unfairly "threw" MN election to Franken
October 07, 2009 10:24 pm ET
From the October 7 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor:
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
O'Reilly said, because of the vote count win (300 some votes), the fact that ACORN has MANY voter registration issues all across the country, that it should be looked at closer. I know good and well, the democrats would agree if the situation were reversed. Like maybe FL
In Minnesota the votes were counted and recounted several times. The recounts were overseen by a bipartisan board appointed by a Republican governor and there were numberous court challenges from both sides. So yeah: Those 300 votes were examined. A LOT. They're legit. You've got to have a screw loose to think otherwise, considering the amount of scruntiy and the time taken to certify that election.
There haven't been three hundered actual convictions for voter fraud in all of U.S. History. And there's yet to be a single conviction of voter fraud tied to Acron. Period. Voter Registration Fraud, as has been demonstrated countless times, is crime that Acorn itself was the VICTIM of! How can fraudulent registrations result in MORE votes for Franken?! They could only result in LESS, since there were no PEOPLE tied to those registrations to go and actually CAST VOTES! If there WERE any fraudulent reigistration in MN, then it can only be concluded that if the Acorn workers had done there jobs properly, and registered REAL PEOPLE, then it could only have resulted in MORE ACTUAL votes for Franken!
Again, you'd have to have a screw loose to conclude otherwise.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Logic FAIL
And if you're just going to throw a court decision at me and expect that to shut me up, I'm glad to know that you lot will stop questioning and trying to overturn Roe. v. Wade which was decided by the same 7-2 margin!
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Or would you mind explaining to me how you think EQUAL PROTECTION was in fact being violtated? In YOUR OWN words?
That was evident when the court said that their ruling should NOT be used as a precedent.
If you would like to read about it, you are free to do so.
It is the typical BS: "I'm not saying they did anything wrong, but..."
(OH MY FARQUIN GUARD! THE HORROR!)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nothing will get you on the Republican's sh!t-list faster than helping poor people vote. The Right HATES it when poor people vote!
Republicans aren't supposed to lose an election!
Not ever!
Should a republican candidate lose an election-they scream "voter fraud" right away!
That way......."when they win-they win" and when they lose they still get to win win!
Kind of a "win-win" situation for them-no matter how you look at it.
Apparently, the concept of losing-which is within their grasp (politically) is beyond their grasp-emotionally.
Interesting-isn't it?
The count of Presidential Votes (as amended)
Really? I know this is a waste of time, Stark. But, please show us where this is stated.
Starkcr31 was brain-dead in 2000, and remains so to this day.
http://acorn.org/?14281
And it is only irrelevant to those who do not wish to see the truth. If it were a right wing group you would be calling for their heads. Funny how your standards will change depending on the party involved.
There is no historical evidence that registration fraud has anything at all to do with election fraud. Nor have their been enough recorded cases of election fraud nationwide in any given election to equal the total ballot victory of Al Franken.
If you think this needs investigation, then you would most assuredly think there is enough evidence to investigate the 2000 Presidential election.
Investigating ACORN based upon such a thin precept would be a collossal waste of money. Why does wasting money only bother you when it is the Dems you percive wasting it?
Get over it.
ACORN most assuredly DID influence the election - by registering a lot of voters and getting them to vote. That is the American way, bozo.
ACORN does not have a "history of corruption" except in the minds of the Republican Party which has been after them for YEARS because they register voters who are not likely to vote Republican . . . the poor and minorities.
You are aware that a Republican group in California was INDICTED and CONVICTED of REAL voter registration fraud, right? Are you railing against them?
TURN OFF FOX . . . they are LYING to you. And, if you think that they are presenting "conservative news," you are mistaken.
WHAT "history of corruption"?! You whack-jobs making false accusations and conflating crimes that Acorn puportedly commited with the actual crimes that they themselves were the victim off, all in an effort to confuse the ignorant, does not constitute a "history" of ANYTHING except right wing distortion.
BUT... condidering THIS ORGANIZATION'S HISTORY OF CORRUPTION, I'm glad to hear that the DEMOCRATS can count on your vote from now on.
--------------------------------------------------------------
If any significant number of you losers started thinking for yourselves, your whole movement would fall apart!
And of course, you have evidence to back up that statement, right?
Gore's loss in Tennessee is meaningless. His loss in Florida is the issue - and it was a loss handed down by the Supreme Court in clear violation of state's rights as previously advocated by conservatives and Republicans.
This is precisely why you good Americans seem so able to imagine that ACORN has stolen an election: projection.
You can blame it on Tennessee all you like, but a single state swung the election - and that state was Florida, not Tennessee.
Liar.
BTW, you do know that neither the term "liberal" nor "conservative" are pejoratives, right? There is nothing inherently wrong or right with either ideologies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_election_recount
BTW, using Wikipedia as a source is bogus . . . you do know that, right? Wikipedia is unreliable because it can be edited by anyone. Irrelevant to this issue, but just thought I'd let you know.
Candidate outcomes based on potential recounts in Florida presidential election 2000
(outcome of one particular study)[9][clarification needed]
Review method Winner
Review of all ballots statewide (never undertaken)
• Standard as set by each county canvassing board during their survey Gore by 171
• Fully punched chad and limited marks on optical ballots Gore by 115
• Any dimples or optical mark Gore by 107
• One corner of chad detached or optical mark Gore by 60
Review of limited sets of ballots (initiated but not completed)
• Gore request for recounts of all ballots in Broward, Miami-Dade, Palm Beach, and Volusia counties Bush by 225
• Florida Supreme Court of all undervotes statewide Bush by 430
• Florida Supreme Court as being implemented by the counties, some of whom refused and some counted overvotes as well as undervotes Bush by 493
Unofficial recount totals
• Incomplete result when the Supreme Court stayed the recount (December 9, 2000) Bush by 154
Certified Result (official final count)
• Recounts included from Volusia and Broward only Bush by 537
Let me answer for you: because Bush did NOT believe he would win the recount, and was determined to be declared the winner regardless. Instead, Bush was more than willing to be inaugurated under a huge black cloud. Doesn't sound to me like someone who thought that he won legitimately.
Do you really have any sensible way to dispute either of those statements? I find it unlikely.
Suppression of the vote by fraudulent voter purges, deliberate jamming of phone lines, not enough voting machines in Democratic precincts, incompetent design of ballots, harrassment and intimidation of voters....the list goes on and on. This is the real story, not this doofus trumped up bust of ACORN.
And an attack upon ACORN--- has NOTHING to do with the Minnesota election.
You overlook facts in order to push your partisan and false beliefs.
And that one's not okay, Starkcr31. It's not okay to allow your political partisanship to color your world to such an extent that you cannot fairly evaluate reality.
There is where Bill O'Reilly always goes off the deep end. He cannot help himself. His ego continuously gets in the way.
O'Reilly has actually shown himself to be the moderate voice of Fox recently. But when it comes to Franken, who made O'Reilly look like an utter fool in public, he cannot let it go. He has to be a partisan nutjob. He has to become a Bachmann. The fact that only Fakeliberal and Stark are even able to remotely defend this Minnesota stolen election nonsense tells me all I need to know about where O'Reilly is coming from on this one. Pathetic partisanship at its worst.
Are you aware that the Constitution does not require a person to carry his home state? Did you know that the Electoral College doesn't have an asterisk pointing out the clause that gives the candidate's home state a veto over the national result?
Seriously, that argument has ZERO merit. ZERO. You are only making yourself look dumber than we already know you are.
"The people who knew him best.." elected him to Congress and the US Senate, each time by overwhelming margins. They voted for him for Vice President, twice. If they had rejected him for VP in 1992 and 1996, he would have been elected VP anyway, did you know that?
What an idiot!
The S.Ct. completely overstepped its authority by inserting itself into a non-federal issue. They handed GWB Florida on a silver platter.
Supremes giving the election to George Bush gave us a great 8yrs. and wonderful president too! Too sad!
Why hide her talents in one tiny Congressional district when she can share those talents with the whole state?
And, as a bonus, when Franken creams her, she already has her excuse in place....it was ACORN!
Wouldnt that be the race that Bachmann won to first become a congresswoman?
So Bachmann is only in congress because of voter fraud committed by ACORN (this would actually explain alot)
Darn ACORN Bachmann is their fault.
And is she blinking in this clip, you claimed in another thread she doesn't blink and looks drugged? Or did you just imagine that ?
I live in KY. The area where the census worker was killed is very remote, very redneck and a heavy drug area. The scuttlebutt by locals is that the census worker inadvertently happened upon a drug operation and was murdered. It doesn't appear it had anything to do with anything Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity, Bachmann or anyone else on the right may have said.
The motivation behind the drug killing would be to protect the operation. It makes zero sense to make a statement with the display of the body. What's the message, "don't accidentally stumble onto drug operations or this could happen to you"?
Are you so thick that you can't see how idiotic your statement is? How stupid does someone have to be to kill a census worker who stumbles on a drug operation and then put the body on display to warn people away?
You're just another teabagger defending the indefensible.
The actual story is that almost half of the people in Kentucky believe he was born outside of the USA, or have doubts.
If it were a drug-related murder, the body would have NEVER been found. They don't usually advertise their location. You know, the old "don't poop where you eat," axiom.
You seem to think that you are a "conservative," and you are not. Supporting Fox and hate talk radio does not make you conservative, just makes you a groupie.
The scenario presented by you is not plausible because the preponderance of the evidence would indicate that it would be EXTREMELY unlikely for a drug runner to alert the DEA as to their location by hanging the body of a man in an area where they are conducting their illegal activities. It's like a big sign saying "HERE WE ARE! COME GET US!" Has nothing to do with Glenn Beck, it's just totally illogical.
As for your continuing assertion that it would be extremely unlikely for a drug runner to have done this crime, why is it that you think you know more than the local law enforcement officials? They're the ones who have mentioned this as a plausible explanation.
Bush was criticized for things he actually did. You know, like torture, illegal spying, warmongering, things like that.
Obama's been in office 9 months. There's no hypocrisy.
I didn't vote for Bush even as governor of the State of Texas because of his history of incompetence . . . an EGGPLANT could handle the job of Governor of Texas which is primarily a ceremonial position. The Lt. Governor wields most of the power in our state. Bush should NEVER have held any public office. He is simply a screw-up in everything he does. He always has been. The current mess is evidence of that incompetence.
"The Buck Stops Here"
You're the naive one. Bush pushed through the tax cuts. Cheney talked Bush into a war so he could enrich his war profiteer buddies. And in case you forgot, the Republicans were in charge of ALL 3 branches of government from 2001-2006.
Don't you have ANY concept of history? Aren't the Republicans the self-professed "party of responsibility"?
It's utterly irresponsible.
Isn't that exactly what is happenning with ACORN? Arent the boneheads on the Right blaming ACORN instead of the individuals who are responsible?
I actually agree with Mr. O'Reilly, voting is a sacred right that preserves our democracy. There should be investigations that involve all allegations of voting irregularities starting in Florida where tens of thousands of legally registered voters were purged from the voting rolls illegally. We also need to study voting machines to make sure they correctly register everyones' vote. Too many people have died for the right to vote for any tom foolery.
Individuals within the Republican Party have committed adultery. Does that make the Republican Party guilty of adultery?
If she's so upset with criminal behavior, she should be asking to investigate the bigger fish, like KBR, Haliburton, The RNC and other big time criminal enterprises.
I wonder which of these Women of the Right is brighter. Can you really consider either bright or intelligent with their living IQs' hanging around 30. Without teats and make-up, you have Roseanne Barr.
They don't. You are listening to flat out lies and believing them. So very sad.
Now Wells Fargo bank has hundreds of branches and thousands of employees... and when a Loan Officer does something dispicable and defrauds or steals, it's a
Now by the Republicans logic, Wells Fargo should be shut down and no longer eligible for FDIC protection, Fanny Mae or Freddie Mac Loans, etc.
Wells Fargo probably has dozens, if not hundreds of cases where employees steal, embezzle, and defraud their customers or the government... it's a huge organization... but taht doesn't make them a target to have their ability to do business.
ACORN is an easy target from the right, plain and simple.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-malibu-wells11-2009sep11,0,740504.story
It's up to the lunatic-fringe likes of you to prove that ACORN engaged in voter fraud affecting the outcome of the Franken/Coleman race, it's not up to ACORN to prove that they didn't.
If you could, you would, but ya can't.
Make a note of it.
It drives me nuts when the right says that ACORN is committing fraud by registering either Mickey Mouse or Superman to vote. Show me where either of this fictitious characters have a voter registration card. I'm pretty sure that neither of them have a valid address or a valid social security number.
Merely saying the name ACRON does not suddenly upend all of that, requiring the entire process be repeated.
BTW, the State of Minnesota has already investigated this issue . . . they spent 9 months investigating it in the courts. They could find NO evidence of any sort of impropriety.
Who is being the blind ideologue here?
Also, this Minnesota recount has been investigated. Where in the world have you been? Your Republican fought every step of the way in the courts. You lost. And it did not even take a court to break all precedent by denying that their ruling could ever be used in any future court as precedent setting. If you don't understand that reference than you probably do not understand the FL recount nor the Supreme Court and its rulings.
How do you find out who they voted for. Do we not have secret ballots in this country?
Hmmmm, I'm glad this is NOT personal with O'Reilly!!
Unfortunately this pervert has a platform 'cause he is a very sick puppy!!