How they voted - UN Monitoring of U.S. Elections

Yep, my congresssnake, maurice hinchey, voted no.

21 posted on 07/17/2004 10:13:20 AM PDT by tioga

To: Indy Pendance

"Only 33 dems voted to prohibit his. Imagine if they controlled the house. The 161 who voted for this should be bannished from the house."

IOW, we have 161 members of the House that are ready and willing to sell out and surrender US sovereignty to the corrupt UN.

Traitors -- nothing but traitors.

22 posted on 07/17/2004 10:18:54 AM PDT by F16Fighter

To: listenhillary

23 posted on 07/17/2004 10:27:29 AM PDT by RasterMaster (Saddam's family was a WMD - We FOUND him and sons are DEAD!)

To: RasterMaster

24 posted on 07/17/2004 10:29:39 AM PDT by RasterMaster (Saddam's family was a WMD - We FOUND him and sons are DEAD!)

Dude, are you out of your mind???

25 posted on 07/17/2004 10:31:45 AM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist

I see Chet Edwards voted in favor. Figures. He knows he better show himself to be a "conservative" Democrat in order to win reelection.

26 posted on 07/17/2004 10:32:45 AM PDT by COEXERJ145

To: listenhillary

27 posted on 07/17/2004 11:15:06 AM PDT by RippleFire ("It was just a scratch")

I have to barf when I see both degenerate scum damnocrats from RI voted to surrender to the UN.

Vermin.

28 posted on 07/17/2004 11:17:37 AM PDT by the gillman@blacklagoon.com

To: listenhillary

The day we let the UN get their foot in the US election door is the day we lose our sovereignty. Of course this is just what the 'RATS want, to take us away from our roots and make us part of a one-world government. It's THAT scary.

29 posted on 07/17/2004 12:12:28 PM PDT by Blowtorch

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

Dude, are you out of your mind???

Only occassionally. As I should not have used the word "agree" in the post...
as every literalist (and I understand that literalism is about the only mode
one can use with typed communication) would let me have it between the eyes
for being human.

What I inarticulately was driving at was this: there was passable evidence of
voter fraud (in the Democrats' favor) in St. Louis, Mo and Milwaukee, WI) in the Nov. 2000
election. Not to mention a number of states that Gore won by less than 1/2 of 1 percent
of the popular vote.

If the Republicans had called the Democrats bluff and said something along the lines of
"Yeah, let's call in a number of internationally recognized election monitors...
and have them do a rectal exam of what happened on the first Tuesday of November 2000..."
I suspect a few of the Democrats that hadn't fried their brains with too much
LSD in their "summer of love" would have quietly withdrawn their proposal...
seeing how such the Republicans might have actually mobilized their base
by reminding them that if there was any vote fraud in Nov. 2000...it wasn't by Republicans.

30 posted on 07/17/2004 12:45:15 PM PDT by VOA

Sandlin - D-TX - only voted yes because he is one we will hopefully lose this fall, due to the re-districting. I know I will vote against him.

Vote twice! Once for me.

31 posted on 07/17/2004 12:50:51 PM PDT by lonestar (Me, too!--Weinie)

To: listenhillary; facedown

I'm saving it too

So revolting

32 posted on 07/17/2004 1:16:40 PM PDT by mcar

Bump - Rush covering this today 7/19

33 posted on 07/19/2004 10:19:07 AM PDT by listenhillary ($0.273972603 a day = $100 a year to FR., Listenhillary, MD.)

To: listenhillary

Limbaugh was wondering how the Dems could vote for this?

I'm still wondering what the Dems knew about Oil For Food and when they knew it.

34 posted on 07/19/2004 10:21:28 AM PDT by mewzilla

Because it could hurt Bush? I'd love them to keep bringing this up.

35 posted on 07/19/2004 10:40:25 AM PDT by listenhillary ($0.273972603 a day = $100 a year to FR., Listenhillary, MD.)

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794