Posted on 09/19/2008 1:39:19 PM PDT by steve-b
House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.) told John McCain's campaign Friday to take control over its supporters following reports that a Republican county chairman in Michigan planned to use lists of recently foreclosed residents to block them from voting
"It is beyond disgraceful that the Republican Party now seems to be targeting those who are suffering the most," Conyers said. "It appears that individuals who can't recall how many houses they own don't understand how awful it is to lose your home to foreclosure, and don't know that you don't need to own property to vote in the United States of America."
"It should surprise no one that the people who gave us the worst economy since the Great Depression would now want to prevent those victimized by this economy from voting in the coming elections. Senator McCain needs to step forward now and halt the Republican Party's efforts to profit politically from the economic misery of others."
In a letter sent to the McCain, Conyers asked the Arizona senator to "repudiate any efforts of the Republican Party and any of its state affiliates to engage in voter suppression and intimidation tactics."
Every election, the same old crap. Blacks are being kept from voting. The same crap over and over again.
If there are two disputed set of electors, both houses of Congress would vote on which set of electors to accept. Even if there is a split among the House and Senate, it would go back to the Governor. Since that Granholm is Governor, she would chose the Obama slate.
Nope.
My hardcore Democratic near-ninety pappy told me recently that he's never seen things so bad. So I asked dear old dad if today was worse than the Great Depression. He said yes. My father lived in Detroit for a good share of his youth, and maybe he told Conyers. (smirk)
It’s amazing that Conyers can form these “thoughts” while he’s crapping in his Depends, and drooling all over himself.>[p>
You go, Crap-Boy!
I am right, look it up. It’s the law, Electoral Count Act in 1887. It was put in right after the election of 1876.
The heart of the dispute in Bush v. Gore was that in order to meet the safe harbor provisions of the law, the electors needed to be certified before a meaningful recount could be obtained. Note the timing: the Governor would have had nothing to say about a dispute in the EC vote count at the point where the House and Senate would (potentially) become involved in 2001, because Florida law required certification by the Governors appointee before the safe harbor date; and so does the controlling US Code 5.3. This is what the SCOTUS ruled.
Mark Levin explained this on his show. In the event there are two different slate of electors, let’s say, one slate for Gore and one for Bush.
The House would have voted for the Bush Slate and the Senate would have voted for the Gore Slate. In order to resolve the the deadlock, the matter would have gone back to the Governor of Florida, who was Jeb Bush, and Bush would have won.
I have a lot of respect for Levin, but if he said that, he was mistaken.
Obambi, John reveals, has 9,000 lawyers ready to challenge November 4 election results in thousands of precincts in hundreds of counties in dozens of states, all under the phony claim of "voter suppression" perpetrated by evil election-stealing Republicans.
Just to take one single county, Bernalillo County in New Mexico: over 1,000 fraudulent voters registrations have been submitted by ACORN, and if they are not accepted, ACORN will scream "voter suppression!"
Incidentally, Obambi's call for his followers to "argue with your neighbors and get in their face" if they don't support him (9/17 in Elko NV) is a classic ACORN intimidation technique. Read John's book.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.