Neal Boortz has a piece on the new Democratic initiative to play on people’s emotions, especially that of blacks, regarding the recount in Florida in 2000.
Yes, the political urban legend that black voters in Florida were harassed and intimidated on Election Day four years ago is making a comeback. Only yesterday Jimmy Carter, fresh from blessing Hugo Chavez’s dubious victory in Venezuela, moaned that in 2000 “several thousand ballots of African Americans were thrown out on technicalities” in Florida, and that this year more black than (Republican) Hispanic felons are being disqualified to vote–as if all felons weren’t supposed to be barred, regardless of race.
This carries on the claim that Bush was “selected, not elected” which has become quite popular over the last four years. So, I thought I’d spend just a few minutes (that’s all it took) doing a little research on the web. It is, once again, an accusation based on lies. Even CNN admits the recounts all showed Bush beat Gore in Florida.
A comprehensive study of the 2000 presidential election in Florida suggests that if the U.S. Supreme Court had allowed a statewide vote recount to proceed, Republican candidate George W. Bush would still have been elected president.
And as for blacks being targeted, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights found no such conspiracy.
In an OpinionJournal editorial, the “bad ballot” claim takes a major hit:
Which leaves the “stolen election” crowd with these inconvenient facts: In 24 of the 25 Florida counties with the highest ballot spoilage rate, the county supervisor was a Democrat. In the 25th county, the supervisor was an Independent. And as for the “felon purge list,” the Miami Herald found that whites were twice as likely to be incorrectly placed on the list as blacks.
And for an explanation of the US Supreme Court rulings, check this from the BBC. Talk about fair and balanced.
This is going to be pounded daily by MSM and DNC advertising. The NAACP and all the anti-Bush 527s will be adding to the noise. Jimmy Carter is looking for relevance in the US, and will be in Florida to monitor the election as he was in Venezuela. Count on it. The only problem with it is that the whole thing is a huge lie.
Unless you just want to believe it.
The right ALWAYS believes what the right writes, and vice versa. Both sides SWEAR it’s the truth. I just know in my heart of hearts that DUMBYA is not the man for the job. He simply does not have the gray matter necessary. He is a mediocre man, and less of a leader.
Comment by Mary — September 28, 2004 @ 7:22 pm
Bunker you know how I feel, but in case you forgot I’ll remind ya. I feel that in my life there have been two “stolen” presidential elections, the first was when I was all of two years old (I turned 46 this year you do the math) and the next 40 years later, although I did not vote for Gore (I wrote in Truman). I was sceptical form the moment they announced a winner, especially when I saw the numbers for Patrick Buchanan. I know you disagree. No problem we can agree to disagree.
Comment by Bubba Bo Bob Brain — September 28, 2004 @ 7:48 pm
Bubba, you may disagree that Dubya is the right choice, but the facts are as I presented them. At least we have intelligent arguments!
Mary, I’m not intellectually dishonest. If you’ve read much of my site you’ll see that. Besides, we’ve had that conversation before. I used CNN and BBC as links for a reason.
I find it odd that people who look at some of our celebrities as brilliant can look at Bush and see a moron. I remember not too long ago a professor at Harvard Business School being incensed that anyone would degrade his institution by claiming Bush was given a free ride.
If anyone really wanted to talk about how stupid one or the other is, we could compare their Yale records. Both attended at the same time (about a year difference) and that could be a somewhat valid comparison. I assume, based on the lack of yelling and evidence from the left, that the two of them must have done comparably well, or Bush did better than Kerry.
Voicing someone else’s opinion as fact just doesn’t cut it. Of course, I’ve already told you that on the phone!
Comment by Bunker — September 29, 2004 @ 5:53 am
Lest folks forget, we judge other people’s intelligence based upon how much they agree with what how we think and feel about issues important to ourselves.
Using that criteria Mary and Bubba are entitled to their opinion of Bubya, ‘sway it is.
I will be very attentive to the debate two days hence, and I’m tempted to listen to it only on the radio, skipping the TV, ManTan and all. I don’t want stage settings and body language to cloud the message of either man. While I know the questions asked are pre-approved, and the answers are going to be well rehearsed, it will still be interesting to hear how each field the questions. This may be a measure of the relative intelligence of the two men. Based on Dubya’s mauling of Al Gore in 2000, you may get a surprise.
What I find screwy is that the comments ascribed to Bunker’s post, regarding a Neal Boortz rant, have nothing to do with the posted thoughts. The liberal line never varies, no matter the topic.
Comment by John — September 29, 2004 @ 10:11 am