It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

POLITICS: Sen. John Kerry criticizes election outcome at Martin Luther King Jr. Day breakfast

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 06:55 PM
link   
Election fraud and disenfranchisement have been covered extensively all over ATS, despite the apparently limited memory on display in this topic including the first post.

Where ya been, Kosmo? There's two search facilities right under your ATS search button; by and large the Google one works a little better. Kerry's campaign had a close look at what Jackson and Conyers were doing, and (strangely or not, depends on your perspective) knew the hard nature of the evidence backing them up, and decided to let 2004 slip anyway.

What Jamuhn said.

There is no semblance of democracy in the USA.




posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 06:56 PM
link   
This guy has really been hitting the sauce!

First of all, it would take more than a few thousand votes to get him in the
White House. He should have said "millions."


Second, many voters were disqualified because they didn't properly register! Just how difficult is it to register to vote?

Third, I'm 2005% Republican and I stood in line, in a Republican district, for nearly 3 hours, on the day of the election!

Geez!
Just when is this guy going to quit all of his lies!



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 06:57 PM
link   
If Bush stole the election, and Kerry is convinced of it, and does nothing, then Kerry is equally complicit in the 'fraud'. How can anyone say that democracy in the US was completely overthrown and derailed, but that they won't do anything about it?

A statement like that makes me feel quite a bit better a Kerry's loss. No one who can actually beleive that and be in the position he's in and yet do nothing should be the president.

In the words of bugs bunny, 'yeesh, whada maroon'.



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 07:05 PM
link   
As for Gore, 2000, when the corrupt Supreme Court appointed puppet Bush. You hit an immovable object, you cannot make it move, no matter how bad or corrupt the process that put it there.

Why did Kerry do nothing? That's an interesting subject for "Above Top Secret".

1. "Official explanation" - the votes weren't there to turn the result in the battleground states.

2. Skull & Bones pass to "Codename Temporary".

3. Kerry had no energy to contest.

4. Variables not incorporated in the above.

I submit (4) as the most viable explanation.


People might take an interest in this, but if this Topic is anything to go by, many members will continue to uselessly and habitually argue the partisan positions of two parties becoming less relevant to the future needs of the US with each passing hour.



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar
Election fraud and disenfranchisement have been covered extensively all over ATS, despite the apparently limited memory on display in this topic including the first post.


[sarcasm]
Oh Masked one your rhetoric never fails to provide a chuckle. No doubt we await your very utterance and approval for each and every post here on ATS. Thus I consider this thread duly anointed with your magnanimous proclamations [/sarcasm]



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
[sarcasm]
Oh Masked one your rhetoric never fails to provide a chuckle. No doubt we await your very utterance and approval for each and every post here on ATS. Thus I consider this thread duly anointed with your magnanimous proclamations [/sarcasm]



[extra bonus sarcasm]

No, I don't approve of that. Pull your socks up, be true to yourself and fellow members, keep the news current and newsworthy, and do your job with greater diligence. Whatever rewards you seek may come. Otherwise, people watching you may think you can't hack it.




posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 07:32 PM
link   
i dont think kerry stated that bush stole the election or even that there was fraud. The fact that the ohio secretary of state/Bush-Cheney'04 co-chair ken blackwell under assigned voting booths to democrat districts and selectively enforced election rules to steer the election one way i think is indisputable. But no laws were broken so there's nothing to challenge.



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 07:36 PM
link   
I should leave this to the big boys, but just for the record, English is my third language and i COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND every word that Masked Avatar is saying.

He is absolutely right
Both elections were stolen.Even more upsetting is that the sheep follow blindly amidst wars and more wars , lies and more lies and do not care what is happening to this country. Shame on you.

*sigh*



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 07:43 PM
link   
I agree that the elections were not very clear and it was to many problems and discrepancies to let go.

The last two elections has been to unclear to be sure about our electoral system, me for on one side I knew the 2000 elections were funny but I was to happy for bush to win that I didn't care.

Kerry has all the right to voice his feelings about the discrepancies on the last elections.

No matter what anybody said he has the right to talk about it.




[edit on 17-1-2005 by marg6043]



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 07:49 PM
link   

as posted by dgtempe
Both elections were stolen.Even more upsetting is that the sheep follow blindly amidst wars and more wars , lies and more lies and do not care what is happening to this country. Shame on you.



Okie dokie, dgtempe.
Btw, isn't it interesting that at least Mr. Gore put up a better fight than Mr. Kerry did? Whats up with that?
You say "shame on you" while I say shame on him (Mr. Kerry).
After all, this was for the Presidency of the United States, right, not some return to Senator position and a possible 2008 hopeful?



seekerof



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 08:03 PM
link   
Seekerof, Kerry is entitled to some comment about the elections. As i see it, this is the first time he said anything publicly. no? He knew what he was up against, i imagine, running against the Bushes. I was upset when he gave the presidency so easily to Bush, it bothered me. No backbone? maybe. Im not a Kerry fan. Im just not a Bush supporter. I've always voted for the best man, i dont care what party they're from. This man is starting to make Nixon look good



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 08:45 PM
link   
Theres an obvious problem with the Voting system in the US. The other problem is that we keep saying Bush stole two elections, and Kerry has no guts to stand with one thing, instead of discussing obvious problems on Both sides. The political process seems to have nothing to do with the citizens anymore, but dirty politics growing and growing each day. We need to make sure there is not one question about the 2008 election, but we will never get there by arguing sides, but rather coming together to make sure everyone is fairly heard.



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 11:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe
Seekerof, Kerry is entitled to some comment about the elections. As i see it, this is the first time he said anything publicly. no?

No. On Jan. 5 he sent the an email to his supporters which stated in part:

No American citizen should wake up the morning after the election and worry their vote wasn't counted. No citizen should be denied at the polls if they are eligible to vote. And, as the greatest, wealthiest nation on earth, our citizens should never be forced to vote on old, unaccountable and non transparent voting machines from companies controlled by partisan activists.

Tomorrow, members of Congress will meet to certify the results of the 2004 presidential election. I will not be taking part in a formal protest of the Ohio Electors.

Despite widespread reports of irregularities, questionable practices by some election officials and instances of lawful voters being denied the right to vote, our legal teams on the ground have found no evidence that would change the outcome of the election.

Prior to that, on 11/19, he sent an email which said:

Regardless of the outcome of this election, once all the votes are counted -- and they will be counted -- we will continue to challenge this administration. This is not a time for Democrats to retreat and accommodate extremists on critical principles -- it is a time to stand firm.


That was the email where he blamed Fox News and conservative talk radio for attacking him.

As I remember, Fox News invited him several times to come on the show. He opted for softballs, like GMA, instead.



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 11:37 PM
link   
Jsobecky, i get your point. I'm not in love with the man, you know.



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 11:46 PM
link   
First of all, Kerry was out of line using an honorary breakfast to further his already moot point(s). Yes, moot. Too much time has passed, the nation is too preoccupied with their thumbs to argue the continuing power of one exalted Bush. I for one believe it didn't matter who won the election, and the issues of intelligence and the "lack of communication" within the ranks are far more interesting. The only thing that might restore confidence in this hsyterical political parade is hearing Bush utter a 50 cent word.....I think the education of the people we look to for leadership should be talked about, not the irrelevant statements of a "could have been" who probably is glad that he isn't.



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 12:08 AM
link   
First, problem with this is the MLK holiday is the wrong time and place for these types of comments because it takes attention away from the reason for the day.


Last, if they ever want to win again, dems better start looking to the future instead of burying their heads in the past. Sure recipe for further defeats if they don't. Also, if they keep this up, Republicans will just up the ante next time. How does it end if the game keeps getting played this way?

[edit on 1/18/2005 by centurion1211]



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 12:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe
This man is starting to make Nixon look good


And a lot of people feel that Kerry would have made Carter look good.



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 08:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe
Seekerof, Kerry is entitled to some comment about the elections.


The point is not that Kerry is not entitled to comment. The point is that he is claiming there were injustices that he did not fight, after he had explicitly promised to fight for his supporters and have every vote counted. Logical consideration of Kerry's statement can only mean that he has abandoned those who had trusted him as their voice. Hence the shame on him.

I am trying to think about this objectively and I honestly believe this is how I'd feel even if I were a Kerry supporter, perhaps even more so in that case. He let "King George" as Democrats like to say, "steal" the white house and he didn't take a stand for our democracy. Then he has the audacity to complain to us at an event which honors a man who was killed for taking a stand?


EDIT: Just to answer two other points above... Nobody could ever make Tricky Dick or Peanut Head look good. Their claim to shame is absolute, not relative. Two wrongs can not make a right.

[edit on 18-1-2005 by The Vagabond]



posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 03:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by dubiousone



Did he tell them that his lawyers convinced him that he got his butt handed to him and any challenge would be futile?


"Butt handed to him"? Give it a rest! ATSNN members are too well-informed for that brand of B$.

You're sounding like those right-wing idols Hannity, Limbaugh, Coulter, and O'Reilly. Never mind the facts, just spout off!

Well, if you take away the anybody-but-Bush vote, Kerry probably got about 20% of the vote. Not too many people were fooled by him; mostly weepy college students and home-staters.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join