Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Shall I Vote Or Vomit ?

Posted 2 years ago on Dec. 26, 2011, 2:41 p.m. EST by Nasa (33) from Brooklyn, NY
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

The problems with nausea and vomiting are related to the cause. ...

98 Comments

98 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 9 points by XaiverBuchsIV (508) 2 years ago

Rest assured that whoever you vote for, it doesn't count.

Rigged USA Elections Exposed

[-] 2 points by economicallydiscardedcitizen (761) 2 years ago

Thanks for the 'heads up' on rigged elections.The day we see voting strictly by computer,internet or iPod/iPhone is the day we should all know that voting is the biggest lie (and you know, a lie is just the truth concealed.)

I remember hearing about this but had never seen the YouTube video or the mainstream media coverage but anyone who's been through more than a few elections remembers the 'hanging chads' fiasco.

For anyone who hasn't seen the in court admission of rigged elections: : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEzY2tnwExs

Uploaded by truthstream on Mar 2, 2006 Computer Programmer testifies that Tom Feeney (Speaker of the Houe of Florida at the time, currently US Representative representing MY district ) tried to pay him to rig election vote counts. See more videos like this at http://www.TruthStream.Org - Streaming Videos of TRUTH to the American People!

More on Diebold/Premier Election Solutions, Inc/DESI Corp. in U.S.A. and Brazil (the actual company site is here: http://www.premierelections.com/)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier_Election_Solutions

"Avi Rubin, Professor of Computer Science at Johns Hopkins University and Technical Director of the Information Security Institute has analyzed the source code used in these voting machines and reports "this voting system is far below even the most minimal security standards applicable in other contexts."[6] Following the publication of this paper, the State of Maryland hired Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) to perform another analysis of the Diebold voting machines. SAIC concluded “[t]he system, as implemented in policy, procedure, and technology, is at high risk of compromise.”[7]

The company RABA did a security analysis of the Diebold AccuVote in January 2004 confirming many of the problems found by Avi Rubin and finding some new vulnerabilities."

[-] 2 points by XaiverBuchsIV (508) 2 years ago

Republicans - the beneficiaries of rigged elections (2000 Bush appointment, 2004 Ohio fraud and many state elections) - want to reduce turnout among the poor and students and have passed voter ID laws to do just that.

Voter ID Law Blocked By Feds In South Carolina, Texas Could Be Next

[-] 0 points by economicallydiscardedcitizen (761) 2 years ago

Interesting point but I'd hate it if someone were to show up and identify themselves as me with the only supporting evidence being knowledge of my address.

[-] 1 points by XaiverBuchsIV (508) 2 years ago

At which point you could challenge the vote with legal action.

[-] 0 points by economicallydiscardedcitizen (761) 2 years ago

I wonder how many have had the experience of having to...

[-] 1 points by XaiverBuchsIV (508) 2 years ago

None. This is what those who would control the vote for their own benefit want you to think.

[-] -1 points by Kirby (104) 2 years ago

A legal challenge should never be a problem if people prove they are said person on the voting list. What average person has the time and money to fight some asshole that uses their name to vote. Proving who you are with a picture ID discriminates equally to all citizens.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

It does not discriminate against someone voting in the same district for 50 years with no
IN STATE ISSUED PHOTO ID
It does not discriminate against an out of state student voting at his university with no
IN STATE ISSUED PHOTO ID
It does not discriminate against someone who can't afford $20 for the
IN STATE ISSUED PHOTO ID
It does not discriminate against someone who can't drive with no
IN STATE ISSUED PHOTO ID


Don't you get it?- IT DISCRIMINATES AGAINST DEMOCRATS

[-] 0 points by Kirby (104) 2 years ago

Are you saying democrats are poor, don't drive, are all students, or old people living in the district for 50 years and face should be recognized at the poll?

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

I'll try to make it clear a disproportionate number of poor people dont have state photo ids a disproportionate number of old people dont have state photo ids
a disproportionate number of students dont have state photo ids a disproportionate number of minorities dont have state photo ids and a disproportionate number of all of these groups vote for Democrats. SMART - AREN'T THEY !


Now lets listen to the Rs -
The Republican National Lawyers Association (RNLA) in an attempt to discredit a NAACP report this week on the lack of voter fraud evidence has bolstered the view that there is no need for voter ID laws, imposed by many states. .

Viewing the Republican data for the period 2000-2010, the report by its own account shows there is no link between voter fraud in states and the need for stricter voter ID laws.
The data shows that during the entire 10 year period, 21 states had only 1 or 2 convictions for some form of voter irregularity.
Five states had a total of three convictions over a ten year period.
Rhode Island had 4 convictions for the same 10 years.
Taking a close look at the RNLA data shows 30 states, including the District of Columbia had 3 or less voter fraud convictions for a 10 year period.

[-] 0 points by Kirby (104) 2 years ago

What do they do when they go to buy liquor, have a neighbor vouch for them?

[-] 1 points by XaiverBuchsIV (508) 2 years ago

This is misdirection: the kind of fraud that is problematic is gerrymandering, electronic voting, paperless voting, corporate money in politics, hidden money in politics, anonymous money in politics, unlimited money in politics, voter ID laws that prevent or inhibit people from voting, etc.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

Discrimination = equality.

Now that's truly twisted thinking.

Orwell couldn't have put it better.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

fox and the Rs have an Orwell PhD in this since reagan invented the benefits of "trickle down"
And you know what comes out of the Rs

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

The worst part is, they think it's normal.

[-] 0 points by Kirby (104) 2 years ago

Thank you.

[-] -1 points by Kirby (104) 2 years ago

What is wrong with proving your identity? It discriminates everyone equally.

[-] 1 points by JamesS89118 (646) from Las Vegas, NV 2 years ago

NOT TO WORRY! The Repubs have solved all voting fraud issues by requiring IDs. It's the best solution to Supreme Courts, young Republicans and Diebold.

Voter ID laws will solve Global Warming! Voter ID laws for abortions! For sidewalks! To save us from the French!!!

All we ever needed were Voter ID laws and slavery. God blessed Voter ID laws thru Moses. Mohammad walked from city to city for Voter ID laws. Jesus died for our right to Voter ID laws.

Don't get caught black get your $10 Voter ID law card today. (Food stamps not welcome).

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

we could all vote publicly

then everyone could count the result


[-] 1 points by Nasa (33) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

Sick Bag . Lol

[-] 3 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

When you allow the elites to preselect your candidates to choose from, you are always screwed.

[-] 2 points by Lavant (96) 2 years ago

Normally I would say vomit, but Rocky Anderson has me hopeful for the first time in my life. If our votes are still worth anything my current opinion is they should go to Rocky Anderson!

Check him out. https://www.voterocky.org/node/14

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Abstaining means the republicans win, and that means a more conservative corrupt supreme court. Ruth Ginsburg and likely one other Justice is about to step down and be replaced.

Without a worker friendly supreme court, nothing, absolutely nothing, can change for the better.

For all their shared stupidities, if Obama does not win over Romney or Gingrich, we will have an even more money and corporation friendly supreme court on our hands for the next few decades. Whatever little voice we have left will be silenced completely and permanently.

In such a context, not voting means handing over power completely to the 1%. It is self-defeating. It is the same as Nixon having won the presidency and extending the Vietnam war because the left was angry at the democrats. It was a classic case of progressives and liberals cutting off their nose to spite their face.

It is a dangerous game "principled" people are playing. The prize is not temporary legislation during one admonistration, but the decades-long make-up of the court.

So vote. Then, by all means, go outside and vomit.

[-] 2 points by AFarewellToKings (1486) 2 years ago

The only vote that matters this year is voting for your rep to the National General Assembly.

http://www.the99declaration.org/

[-] 1 points by Nasa (33) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

I will vote for NGA only !

[-] 2 points by TheTrollSlayer (347) from Kingsport, TN 2 years ago

Vomit will do more for ya the way things are looking.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

These four men REQUIRE that you vote for Obama

John Roberts
Antonin Scalia
Clarence Thomas
Samuel Alito

If you don’t believe them,
……ask Newt Gingrich or John McCain about Citizens United
OR
……ask the family of any soldier killed in Iraq about bush v Gore

OR

Are you afraid to
……tell me why supreme court appointments make no difference ?


If you cannot see the difference between the democrats and the Rs –
.……that President Gore would invade Iraq, or NOT read his PDBs –
…….you are blind


If you want to do what Davis & Lee failed to do
…….you are crazy


[-] 1 points by nickhowdy (1104) 2 years ago

Occupy the election....Show up at the rallies, crash them...Show up at voting locations..Do "whatever"..

It doesn't matter if voting is rigged, because the whole damn thing is rigged..

[-] 1 points by nickhowdy (1104) 2 years ago

Look at your choices....TPTB give you Obama (Manchurian Candidate President) on the one hand and on the other hand you get the white retarded version of the same thing..

Either way if we keep playing the elites stupid game we are just asking for more of the same...

Get out of the box...

[-] 1 points by nickhowdy (1104) 2 years ago

You'll probably feel better if you vomit...

[-] 1 points by nickhowdy (1104) 2 years ago

Pick "all of the above"

[-] 1 points by Rico (3027) 2 years ago

Yes. Your vote operates in two dimensions.

In regards incumbents, your vote is a sign of approval for what they've done. In regards new candidates, your vote is a sign of approval for what they propose. These two dimensions of your vote are not necessarily linked.

I personally feel that Obama has not delivered on what he promised and is now accepting large sums of Corporate money. Under no circumstances will I approve of that behavior by giving him my vote, even if there is "nobody better;" the politicians just have to know that we do hold them accountable for what they promise. Otherwise, they will promise everything without planning to do anything and our entire election process becomes a farce.

I haven't decided who I will vote for, but it will not be Obama. I would rather vote in a new guy who has not yet lied to us than the old guy who we know for sure did lie to us. Accountability.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

If you don't know why these four men REQUIRE you to vote for Obama - don't vote !

John Roberts Antonin Scalia Clarence Thomas Samuel Alito

OR

Ask Newt about Citizens United

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

The key is electronic machines with no verifiable paper trail
[ as there were in Ohio ]
Are any of these still being used?

[-] 1 points by cJessgo (729) from Port Jervis, PA 2 years ago

Space is never given.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

Can I use this title for a promo we are doing?

[-] 1 points by Adson (3) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6e5qRUCI1I It is great message ! Happy New Year !

[-] 1 points by Nasa (33) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

Sure you can. It will be my pleasure! And good luck !

[-] 1 points by Adson (3) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

vomiting will be best choice

[-] 1 points by nuik3 (17) 2 years ago

voting is for idiots... voting has led us to where we are today and it only gets worse.

when i think of a voter, i think its the same type of person who buys microplated patriotic fake currency from the franklin mint. god that one with the 9/11 firefighters on it makes me so fucking depressed. when i think of the sad souls who must have that item, its an emotional trap for me.

[-] -1 points by capella (199) 2 years ago

I suppose , like 0bama you have no use for the Constitution.

[-] 1 points by darrenlobo (204) 2 years ago

The ostensible supporters of the Constitution, like the ostensible supporters of most other governments, are made up of three classes: 1. Knaves, a numerous and active class, who see in the government an instrument which they can use for their own aggrandizement or wealth. 2. Dupes --- a large class, no doubt --- each of whom, because he is allowed one voice out of millions in deciding what he may do with his own person and his own property, and because he is permitted to have the same voice in robbing, enslaving, and murdering others, that others have in robbing, enslaving, and murdering himself, is stupid enough to imagine that he is a "free man," a "sovereign"; that this is "a free government"; "a government of equal rights," "the best government on earth," and such like absurdities. 3. A class who have some appreciation of the evils of government, but either do not see how to get rid of them, or do not choose to so far sacrifice their private interests as to give themselves seriously and earnestly to the work of making a change. --Lysander Spooner

[-] 1 points by nuik3 (17) 2 years ago

lets put it this way: i think its good when people die for it because at least they cant have any more children.

[-] 0 points by capella (199) 2 years ago

so according to your point of view people who put their lives on the line defending the Constitution and YOUR rights are worthless?

[-] 1 points by nuik3 (17) 2 years ago

yes

[-] 0 points by capella (199) 2 years ago

Parasite.

[-] 1 points by nuik3 (17) 2 years ago

you're an idiot just like your dad

[-] 1 points by capella (199) 2 years ago

The Parasite drools again..

[-] 1 points by nuik3 (17) 2 years ago

the idiot father speaks through his idiot son again...

but we could go on all day like this. whatsay i just give you a point and we leave it at that?

[-] 0 points by capella (199) 2 years ago

see ya.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

You mean the Constitution that you keep trampling on because you have never read it?

[-] 0 points by capella (199) 2 years ago

I trample? give examples, be specific. By the way I have more than one copy of the Constitution and have read it many times.

[-] -1 points by Kirby (104) 2 years ago

You have never engaged anyone in an intellectual discourse Girlyman.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

But you didn't come here for intellectual discourse, did you? You came here to fuck with people.

I am just fucking back. Isn't this what you wanted?

What, not fun anymore?

[-] -2 points by Kirby (104) 2 years ago

Keep it coming sissy. You sound like your hero, BHO.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

rectum breathed, hemorrhoid lipped, koch suckin buttfuck

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

LoL!

the President doesn't sound like that at all

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

Not at all. :D

[-] 0 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

we should network, and get that comment voted up.

; D

[-] -1 points by Kirby (104) 2 years ago

You have a massive 7 word vocabulary. Go back to grade school and increase your education.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

Actually, I have a rather extensive vocabulary. However, you didn't come for an intellectual conversation. So, I will just treat you like the trash you are. :D

[-] 0 points by Kirby (104) 2 years ago

No one has ever seen it here. Now go play in your sandbox.

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

Information

Joined Dec. 29, 2011


Really? One of your alts has.

[-] 1 points by Adson (3) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

But what the cause ?

[-] 1 points by Nasa (33) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

The cause is re-pub-lick ants & demo-cans!

[-] 1 points by divineright (664) 2 years ago

Or both. I'm with you on this one :$

[-] 1 points by darrenlobo (204) 2 years ago

Don't vote:

The Vote for Nobody Campaign http://www.anti-politics.ws/

Principled Nonvoting: The Beginning of Disengaging From the State http://theinternationallibertarian.blogspot.com/2010/09/principled-nonvoting-beginning-of.html

[-] 0 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Abstaining means the republicans win, and that means a more conservative corrupt supreme court. Ruth Ginsburg and likely one other Justice is about to step down and be replaced.

Without a worker friendly supreme court, nothing, absolutely nothing, can change for the better.

For all their shared stupidities, if Obama does not win over Romney or Gingrich, we will have an even more money and corporation friendly supreme court on our hands for the next few decades. Whatever little voice we have left will be silenced completely and permanently.

[-] 1 points by darrenlobo (204) 2 years ago

Keep dreaming.

"The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can throw the rascals out at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies." --Carroll Quigley http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carroll_Quigley

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

You are not getting it. I don't disagree with your assessment of the corruption that exists in both parties.

However, there are real and substantive differences in the kinds of people they appoint to the Supreme Court. And you can't tell me with a straight face that a Ruth Ginsburgh is the same as an Antonin Scalia. Nor can you tell me that this is of no consequence. That court decides everything, including whether or not corporations are people, whether campaign finance reform is constitutional or not whether health care mandates that get 45 million people insured is constitutional or not, whether limits on banking practices, or class action discrimination suits against Walmart are constitutional or not.

And that's the real danger of letting a repelican get to the white house. It is beyond irresponsible to allow that to happen.

[-] 1 points by darrenlobo (204) 2 years ago

They all are interested in giving the govt more power, that they have in common. That's why ultimately it doesn't matter who is in power, the issue is the power itself.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

I don't care what they're interested in. I care what kind of people they're likely to appoint to the court. Their personalities don't interest me. Supreme court rulings effect everyone.

The newly signed NDAA will likely stand with this supreme court, That means the government can indefinitely detain anyone forever without trial or even charges. Do you want a law like that to stand? Republicans do. But a progressive court would more than likely strike down this law. Is that not worth it? No Democrat would appoint another Scalia, Thomas, Alito or Roberts, They would appoint a Ginsburgh or Kagan, who would strike down the government's claim to unfettered power. Surely you must understand that.

[-] 1 points by darrenlobo (204) 2 years ago

Perhaps I'm not being clear. Rs & Ds all want to empower the govt. The game they play is that they expand its power when they're in power. When out of power they rail against what the other party is doing, but once they gain power they don't scale back the other party's expansion of tyranny. A good example of this is Ashcroft's calling the Clinton administrations power grabs big brother stuff then supporting the Patriot Act when in power himself. http://www.talkleft.com/story/2002/12/08/643/99703

I don't think the 2 parties are as different as you seem to think they are.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Perhaps I'm not being clear. First, you have not, in any of your replies, actually addressed what i am talking about.

I am talking about the Supreme court.

Ginsburg is about to retire and will be replaced.

ALL LAW is adjudicated by the Supreme Court. Virtually every piece of legislation sooner or later goes on front of the court, and is decided upon. That effect you and me more than any single politicians can in his or her entire corrupt lifetime.

So I have a question. What kind of person do you want to replace Ginsburg? A right winger who will repeal Roe v Wade, tell the congress and the military it's OK to arrest you with no charges and lock you up permanently with no trial, or someone who will uphold your rights?

You don't have to keep repeating that all politicians are the same; I got it the first five times. Just answer that one question.

[-] 1 points by darrenlobo (204) 2 years ago

I'm an anarchist so I don't want anyone to replace Ginsburg. I want the supreme kangaroo court shut down along with the rest of the govt. How's that?

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Then you're living in a nah-nah land that has no relationship to reality, and you not only help further the status quo, but make it worse.

Whether or not you WANT the court to be shut down or not, it won't be, regardless of whatever fantasies you have spinning in your head. In the meantime, the reality is that it will be much more corporate friendly if she is replaced by a right-winger.

[-] 1 points by darrenlobo (204) 2 years ago

You keep living in your nah- nah land where you think there is such a thing as good govt. It doesn't matter who sits on the supreme kangaroo court, what matters is that it exists. Look Don Quixote, there's another windmill. Go get it!

[-] 0 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

You are completely blind to to everything except what you dislike. Your right even to publicly say that government sucks is not a universal right, but one that this government has given you. Try doing that in China or North Korea.

This government today has a host of real and deep problems, problems that need people of good faith to work hard to fix. But this government also provided every single freedom and advantage that you enjoy.

The Supreme court, in particular, has established reproductive rights for women, child labor protection laws, upheld anti-trust laws, anti-monopoly laws, and environmental protections, among thousands of things that effect your life, either positively or negatively, every single minute of every single day.

THe "kangaroo" court, as you characterize it, can overturn Roe v Wade, decide that it's OK to arrest you and hod you without charges or access to a lawyer, eliminate work safety rules, further empower corporations at everyone's expense, and generally make life here more miserable than you clearly feel it already is.

You are so pissed of at government it doesn't occur to you that it could get even worse, and you're so delusional that you think that - just by deciding - it won't effect you because you WANT something different. Guess what? It DOES matter who sits on the Supreme court, and if you were even a thimbleful more aware of American history then, you would know that.

You want the Supreme Court shut down. And you dare call ME Don Quixote? How will you shut it down, moron? Will your grandiosity do it all by itself?

You are a delusional, grandiose, hubristic, ignorant, self-involved fantasist, ungrateful for what you have and irresponsible toward your fellow citizens. I'm sure you believe in your superior morality, but in fact you are merely a self-indulgent narcissist who can't be bothered working to make things better because the results won't be perfect.

[-] 1 points by darrenlobo (204) 2 years ago

The ostensible supporters of the Constitution, like the ostensible supporters of most other governments, are made up of three classes: 1. Knaves, a numerous and active class, who see in the government an instrument which they can use for their own aggrandizement or wealth. 2. Dupes --- a large class, no doubt --- each of whom, because he is allowed one voice out of millions in deciding what he may do with his own person and his own property, and because he is permitted to have the same voice in robbing, enslaving, and murdering others, that others have in robbing, enslaving, and murdering himself, is stupid enough to imagine that he is a "free man," a "sovereign"; that this is "a free government"; "a government of equal rights," "the best government on earth," and such like absurdities. 3. A class who have some appreciation of the evils of government, but either do not see how to get rid of them, or do not choose to so far sacrifice their private interests as to give themselves seriously and earnestly to the work of making a change. --Lysander Spooner

[-] 1 points by darrenlobo (204) 2 years ago

State is the name of the coldest of all cold monsters. Coldly it lies; and this lie slips from its mouth: "I, the state, am the people."

It is a lie! It was creators who created peoples, and hung a faith and a love over them: thus they served life.

Destroyers are they who lay snares for the many, and call it state: they hang a sword and a hundred cravings over them.

Where there are still peoples, the state is not understood, and is hated as the evil eye, and as sin against laws and customs.

This sign I give to you: every people speaks its own language of good and evil, which its neighbor does not understand. It has created its own language of laws and customs.

But the state lies in all the tongues of good and evil; and whatever it says it lies; and whatever it has it has stolen.

Everything in it is false; it bites with stolen teeth, and bites often. It is false down to its bowels.

Confusion of tongues of good and evil; this sign I give you as the sign of the state. This sign points to the will to death! it points to the preachers of death!

--Friedrich Nietzsche

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Well, now, that leaves you opposed to OWS, since it is essentially a reform movement.

Your quoting Neitzsche or Spooner does nothing to address the issues which are based in reality, not an ivory tower..

Your denying the state has legitimacy over you and your refusal to do anything about improving it is like someone with a gun to their head refusing to acknowledge the existence and power of that gun while the trigger is being squeezed. It has no effect other than certain death.

Not acknowledging reality, whether it be through psychosis or a hyper- inflated sense of superior morality does not make reality go away. It just makes the denier a narcissist, and a terminal one at that.

[-] 1 points by darrenlobo (204) 2 years ago

The state has no legitimacy only superior force. If I try to do something about it I'll be crushed. I know too many tax honesty people who have been to prison to think that there's anything we can actually do right now. I'll continue my efforts to educate people until we have the numbers to do some good.

[-] 1 points by BearDickinson (125) from Ewing, VA 2 years ago

republiCANT$ AND demoCANT$ ? Shart and vomit......

[-] 0 points by Odin (583) 2 years ago

Everyone has a choice on whether to vote or not. You can choose to vote for someone who's views are most like your own, but you have to know that that person is only giving you lip service, hence you will be a dupe. You could also vote for someone who's views you don't agree with, but is at least more honest. Either way you're screwed!

[-] 0 points by Charles99 (15) 2 years ago

If you are voting for Obama, please vomit.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

Vomit on your ballot, after casting your vote.

If you can get all your friends to do this, you might start a movement.

You might become famous.

You might even get on TV.

Go 4 It!!!!

[-] 0 points by FarIeymowat (49) 2 years ago

Vomit would probably make you feel better. I know it helps me after an Obama, Biden, Pelosi, or Reid, babble.

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 2 years ago

It all depends upon what kind of effect you want to have with what you do.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by economicallydiscardedcitizen (761) 2 years ago

http://www.oilempire.us/ballot.html Faith Based Voting Machines? We need paper ballots, counted by hand!

For anyone who hasn't seen the in court admission of rigged elections: : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEzY2tnwExs

Uploaded by truthstream on Mar 2, 2006 Computer Programmer testifies that Tom Feeney (Speaker of the Houe of Florida at the time, currently US Representative representing MY district ) tried to pay him to rig election vote counts. See more videos like this at http://www.TruthStream.Org - Streaming Videos of TRUTH to the American People!

More on Diebold/Premier Election Solutions, Inc/DESI Corp. in U.S.A. and Brazil (the actual company site is here: http://www.premierelections.com/)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier_Election_Solutions

"Avi Rubin, Professor of Computer Science at Johns Hopkins University and Technical Director of the Information Security Institute has analyzed the source code used in these voting machines and reports "this voting system is far below even the most minimal security standards applicable in other contexts."[6] Following the publication of this paper, the State of Maryland hired Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) to perform another analysis of the Diebold voting machines. SAIC concluded “[t]he system, as implemented in policy, procedure, and technology, is at high risk of compromise.”[7]

The company RABA did a security analysis of the Diebold AccuVote in January 2004 confirming many of the problems found by Avi Rubin and finding some new vulnerabilities."

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 2 years ago

Lets get creative here, lets keep posting more "spoof names" for R & D parties, I posted DEMONCATS and REPUGISNOTS

[-] 2 points by Budcm (208) 2 years ago

Put 'em in a bag and they'd have to have a name tag to determine which party they belong to. They ALL look alike to me!

[-] 1 points by Nasa (33) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

re-pub-lick ants & demo-cans

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 2 years ago

Why do both, after you cast your vote, use the box as a catch can? Nobody will bother to count those votes, and you will do your part to fix the system....;)

The best of both worlds - vomiting could offer some relief - and the alternative is Pepto bismol, or generic bismuth equivalent liquid.

Either way you are still free to decide...

Demon-cats and Repuginauts, always a choice , the lesser of two evil candidates.

[-] 0 points by economicallydiscardedcitizen (761) 2 years ago

My sentiments exactly. Geez, this time around it looks like American voters will have a choice in the voting booth between candidate A: Mitt Romney, The Future President with The 'Magic' Underwear (a reference to the Mormon 'Holy Underwear' that males in that church are known to wear) or B:'Barack The 'Magic' Negro' as I think conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh has been known to call him.

So, which will it be an 'R' with 'Magic' Underwear or a 'D' in 'Magical Color?'

[-] 0 points by TIOUAISE (2526) 2 years ago

What's your problem? Too hard to choose between the REPUGNANTS and the DEMAGOGUES?... :o)