DISQUS

chetlyzarko · 1 year ago

The correction above, while it is welcome and should be accepted in some spirit of good will, forces one to doubt the other "legs" of this story. The carelessness of conflating Doug Preisse's statement with foreclosure challenges forces one to question how accurately Melzer quoted Carabelli. The sensational-ness of the headline calls for a high-burden of evidence to make this a valuable story - if that burden had been met, the story could have been valuable. As is, we're left with a he-said, she-said battle.

First, this whole "Republicans are trying to intimidate black or poor voters" is part of a 30-year old "script" we hear in every election. Does that mean the author, Ms. Melzer, is part of a "conspiracy"? No, absolutely not. She's investigating leads based on a script she's been conditioned to accept. Does it mean that Republicans are completely guiltless throughout time and space? No, certainly there have been "incidents" where overactive individual partisans thought they were helping the cause and probably became too zealous (I'd note that those incidents occur on the left too, with different types of "voter fraud," as the historically-infamous political machines of Chicago, LBJ, and even here in Detroit often prove). Here, we know part of Ms. Melzer's "script" came from the July 6 Columbus Dispatch, which she misquotes. That's a human error, as would be asking "leading questions" (Carabelli in his Beckman interview claims), so Carabelli's story that he didn't say it the way Melzer said he did is plausible. I have a hard time believing Melzer would "fabricate" the quote out of whole cloth a la Jayson Blair, but its not a hard step to take to believe that she'd ask a leading question, get an ambiguous answer, and take the notes down wrong in some way.

Ms. Melzer interviewed me twice on this subject while I was in Arizona (by phone) during the course of this story, trying to find out if I knew of some "foreclosure list". I told her I was unaware of such a list, although I wasn't in "the loop" for such things, I do deal with voter information regularly and that it struck me as unlikely, and frankly not very valuable if it was the plan, that Republicans would use foreclosure lists. Not valuable because such lists aren't accurate as to whether the voter is in the home, or even if not in the home legally entitled to vote (a recent foreclosure would not necessarily change the residence as Hebert points out). We agreed that "returned mail" would be more valuable and easier to list, although I don't know that the Party uses it since I don't the Republican Party. I spoke of Democrat list broker Mark Grebner, and some of the tricks he's (and accurate points) he's been involved with, and suggested that both sides were likely to use sophisticated mail lists for their purposes in challenges (indeed, Grebner actively sought to disenfranchise petition signers in 2006's Proposal 2, and Drolet's 2008 Dillon recall (on the basis of residency)). She asked if an inefficient tactic might be used just to delay voters and decrease turnout - I disagreed because deploying such a tactic is time and resource consuming to have any meaningful numerical effect, and that it was unlikely to be a good way to change an election outcome (traditional message is just plain more efficient), if it didn't in fact backfire. I told Melzer my experience with the relevant players lead me to disbelieve the foreclosure idea would be used as a tactic. In a second interview, she asked why Carabelli would lie and retract his quote - I told her at that early time (there was no lawsuit by the DNC and the story just broke) I didn't necessarily believe anyone was lying, that I couldn't speak for Carabelli, and that it was possible there was a mis-communication and that she should place herself in the shoes of her interviewee. This perspective was not quoted in the article, and while I understand that to be within reasonable editorial discretion particularly given the length of the article as is, it might have given the article some perspective.

Some stories are so good they penetrate through the "script". There's a "smoking gun," or chain of logic that is impenetrable. Here, you have one quote stretched to the conclusion with one of the supporting background quotes being retracted. This story doesn't have either, unless there is some future break that breaks the log-jam of "he-said, she said." Certainly, if proven true this story would be important, but the more sensational the truth, the higher the burden in proving it. If this story proved its case, I'd stand behind the author in a bi-partisan way, but I just don't see it. The truth is likely somewhere in between - I suspect Carabelli answered a question about foreclosures, and it was either leading and he wasn't precise or the answer misunderstood or notated. I doubt Melzer intended to fabricate a quote, but to make this one stick she's needs more.

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

Chetly -- can you tell us right now that you are not receiving any monies from conservative candidates for services that include making them look good?

You've left another comment here without disclosing that you, as owner and operator of Zarko Research and Consulting, provide multiple services for conservatives and their political campaigns. You have a vested interest in making a case against progressives, and the mere act of leaving a comment here in thread may be part of your paid services. Our readers have a right to know that they may be reading commercial services provided on behalf of your conservative clients.

We are a progressive website; we are not partisans, running a broad spectrum in our philosophies from Green to Libertarian and everything in between, which includes fiscal conservatives/social liberals to social conservatives/fiscal liberals. We often don't agree, and we have to find common ground in our work. We have a perspective colored by this range of philosophies, and it's ultimately progressive.

What I want to know is why is this different and unacceptable when mainstream, corporate-owned media outlets actively use their bias as product differentiation. FOX News, for example, is hardly a neutral outlet, and they make no bones about being conservative. They make of point of targeting a conservative audience as part of their marketing strategy.

I also want to know why you have such doubts about this one piece of Melzer's work in particular, that you've had to invest more than 800 words in this thread alone; you have not been commenting at this site for quite some time, and it's only now since publication of Melzer's investigative work on "voter foreclosure" that you've returned. Are you investing similar amounts of effort elsewhere in the blogosphere?

Or only on issues that impact Republicans in Macomb and Oakland County, Michigan?

chetlyzarko · 1 year ago

Rayne, you are absolutely hilarious. I sign my responses with my full name without using any means of obscuring my identity. My identity on the internet is an open book, quickly learned from Google, etc. You know who I am. This is a response area to a blog (or at least on blog software if you don't admit to that title), not a place where I do original investigative publication or work where I'd feel that necessary. It's for feedback to you - you know who I am. The idea that I would identify the nature of my business in every blog post is funny.

But I'll entertain you somewhat. I openly admit to running a business focused on "conservative and moderate" clients (when the clients are political), although at least one of my political clients was liberal (Christine Barry, FOIA) and I'm sure some of my business clients are or have been liberal. My comments here are, however, unsolicited and do not have any direct bearing to my business, and indeed, in expressing my belief Ms. Melzer wouldn't wholly "fabricate" the quotes could theoretically damage my business (at least, its not the "Party-line", literally). Regardless, no one is compensating me for commenting here - my primary motive for commenting was that I am actually part of the story in that I was interviewed and had some insight into the story as such. While "designing literature" or building a website may make candidates "look good", I'd hardly call it justification for me to waste time here, particularly when none of my active clients have any direct stake in this story (and by the way, I've never had a client from Macomb County, and don't ever recall meeting Mr. Carabelli, although I'm sure we've crossed paths). My lack of commenting MM over the last many months has more to do with being busy (primarily during Primary season) and the obvious nature of MM's product compared to my interests. You'll note my comments in other parts of blogosphere are quite sporadic and haphazard - similar I'd say to here. When a topic interests me, involves me, or simply floats my boat, I invest similar amounts of time -- but on the whole, including even my own sites (which are a priority), its between a few minutes a day and less than an hour. Here, I was called twice by your reporter - I have a somewhat different motivation than almost all your readers for being involved.

I have no problem with you admitting that you are a progressive source. Indeed, that's (part of) what I ask for and hold myself to (just as Frank Beckman's point drives home). But the crux of the contradiction is that you criticize me for being a conservative source, and say that it invalidates a priori the credibility of my **arguments.** On the flip side, you expect your arguments to be taken seriously when you admit to being "progressively" biased but simultaneously attack others solely for being allegedly conservatively biased. The bottom line has to do with our arguments and their quality - and you make no effort to address the substance of my argument that this story isn't persuasive because 1) it miss-paraphrased a key second-example from Ohio, calling into question the accuracy of the whole article 2) there is no pattern beyond Carabelli, and the "script" of the story is an ongoing "progressive script" where even subconscious bias could have lead to "leading questions," and a misinterpretation somehow of his words.

I've posted a well-thought out, moderate interpretation of events, and all I get is you trying to shut-down debate with irrelevant points outside of the merits of my argument. Conservatives and progressive/liberals can actually reasonably debate, but it can only be measured (perhaps by moderates persuaded) without regard to anything but the argument itself. The labels are quite irrelevant. In that sense, its ironic the Republicans are pointing out your progressive biases, but it hoists you on your own petard and is an unfortunate part of any "he-said, she-said" type of battle.

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

Chetly --

1) This isn't your first internet rodeo; you know that the majority of readers do not run checks on usernames, especially if they believe they may have been spoofed. Just because you sign in here with what you know to be your real name does not mean that our readers do.

2) The problem is not that you are conservative. It's that your comments here may constitute work product, not merely somebody throwing out an opinion, and you regularly fail to disclose your conflict of interest.

3) I note that you did not answer the question as to whether you now or in the past have represented anybody in Oakland County.

4) Based on the estimated 1500 words you've written in this thread, you can hardly say anybody here has shut down debate. We should take bets on how many words you'll use in your next missive here.

5) You want to avoid labels? Here it is, the crux of this entire sitution: Did Carabelli disclose to Melzer the use of foreclosure lists? Did he disclose there was more being done besides the use of foreclosure lists? You've already got Melzer's reporting on this. And you can listen to Carabelli's reply on Frank Beckman's program, just as other readers can.

We hope and trust the readers can sort their way through the static that began once the lawyers and PR firms began defensive moves. That includes reading carefully the clarification regarding Priesse's comments.

TiredofFoolishness · 1 year ago

As I've been reading various blogs (without comment until now) the one thing that is painfully apparent is the total absence of objectivity. We all tend to surround ourselves in personal ideologies and point out the "gross" injustices of those who do not think as we. Obama is a terrorist and baby-killer, Bush is a liar and war criminal (and McCain is just like Bush).

Every good lie (and every good joke) has SOME truth in it and most of what I read (from both sides of the coin) are lies . This nation is polarized and it is not Bush's, Clinton's, Obama's, or McCain's fault... it is our fault. To take one source and ignore any opposing views is narrow-minded and short-sighted. Democrats read and observe liberal news and Republicans do the same with conservative views. As I read the comments in this thread, I mostly hear hatred and blame.

There is some truth in all the points listed. I'm sure there is some truth (maybe a lot of truth) in the article being discussed. What is our individual responsibility to ensure everyone with the right to vote has opportunity to excercise that right? What is our responsibility to ensure those who do not have the right to vote do not cast a vote? That would be a more productive discussion. We can't just start fighting for everyone to vote (regardless of legality) and we can't start fighting for no one to vote.

I believe with all my heart we should look for the balance and then excercise our right to vote for others looking for balance. Both parties have good and bad but neither party seems to accept the good in the other and both parties ignore the bad within their group.

As (admittedly) difficult as it is for me at times, I'm going to research the possibilities of voter disenfranchisment and voter fraud... and I will go and vote for the person I believe has the best plan.

Peace...

Update Info · 1 year ago

What they are saying is make sure all your informaiton on your voters registration is correct. I noticed my birthdate was incorrect, DVM corrected the matter immediately. Incorrect informaiton on voters registration will disqualify your vote. Please check and update all information on your voters registration.

TAB · 1 year ago

Shouldn't they legally be voteing by their new addresses no one has said don't vote just vote in the correct place. I don't like the way this is being done but what is worng with asking people to follow the rules?

ramman · 1 year ago

Don't be stupid the tactic itself is wrong all the way around. If you are registered you should be able to vote even if your living out side. If you were live out side that wouldn't stop the state from taking money out of your pay check if your working. It's a shame they would take your money but not be ashamed to take away your individual voting right.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

One is required to have an address in order to vote. The logic? How does one show where your vote is to be counted? No address means that a person copuld vote many times in different places.
By the way it is not a tactic, it is application of the rules of election. A notice of foreclosure, which everyone against is assuming, is not the same as a foreclosure. A forclosed property belongs to the lending institution.

mblackburn · 1 year ago

The stated purpose of the Republican party is to elect Republicans. Thus, everything they do ought to be with the intention of achieving that goal. A tactic is a "limited plan of action for achieving a goal." Therefore, this action (challenging voters) ought to lead toward the stated goal (electing Republicans). The Republican party has enough challenges running on their record of EPIC FAIL, they are not doing this merely to "apply the rules of election." They feel that this tactic of challenging voters will help them elect Republicans...IF they get away with it.

On your question of whether one is required to have an address, you are only partly correct. You must provide your city or township or residence, but not necessarily a street address, to vote. Otherwise, the homeless would not be not allowed to vote. The MI voter registration specifically allows for this by making the address optional: "If no house or street address" is a subsection under "Identifying the township you live in."
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/MIVoterRegist...

You might try knowing something or at least using the googly tubes before talking out your ass. It makes your arguments so much more credible.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

"The stated purpose of the Republican party is to elect Republicans. Thus, everything they do ought to be with the intention of achieving that goal."

That gives the impression that you think the Democrats do not have a similar goal. As refutation just consider the Democrat actions regarding one of the VP candidate!

"The Republican party has enough challenges running on their record of EPIC FAIL,"

Just what might that "EPIC FAIL" be?

"They feel that this tactic of challenging voters will help them elect republicans."

Well if this tactic of making sure that every vote is a legitimate vote elects Republican candidate then that is the will of the people. You do realize that a challenge does not prevent an individual from voting?  Many people are of the opinion that the Democrats will invent votes in any manner they can. Note I said some people!

"On your question of whether one is required to have an address, you are only partly correct. You must provide you city or township, but not an address, to vote."

I am a bit more than partly correct!  There are 11 instances in the Michigan Compiled laws that require an elector to have a residence.  There is a difference between being a person qualified to be an elector and being registered to be an elector.  "
MICHIGAN ELECTION LAW
(EXCERPT) Act 116 of 1954 
Section 168.495 Registration affidavit; contents.


(b) The residence address of the elector, including the street and
number or rural route and box number and the apartment number, if
any."  So clearly an address is required!As to your assertion that "The MI voter registration specifically allows for this by making the address optional: 'If no house or street address' is a subsection under 'Identifying the township you live in.'."  The reference you provide is not part of the Michigan law.  The form to which you refer does not have the force of law. The actual state law does ask for an address as cited above.
"You might try knowing something or at least using the googly tubes before talking out your ass"

First of all an educated person does not always need to use "the googly tubes" in order to carry on a conversation.  Second it appears that, since the issue of the requirements of the law have come up, I have done a better job of researching the Michigan law that have you.  And since you refer to a document of the great State of Michigan I must presume that you are a resident of that state.  That makes the discrepancy in our separate knowledge bases even that more disquieting, as I do not.  At least your state requires a photo ID on election day!
Duncan

Shortcircuit28 · 1 year ago

The section you refer to applies to what options must be on the affidavit (Voter Registration application), NOT what must go in the "box." It only requires that there be an OPTION for putting the Address (Street number, etc.). Counties can decide how they want their voters to indicate their addresses.

Also, as in 168.507:
"(1) A registered elector who has removed from 1 election precinct of a township, city, or village to another election precinct of the same township, city, or village and has not recorded the removal with the local clerk shall execute a transfer of registration request, ..."

-essentially, you have to process the change of address.

HOWEVER, as of

(2) "....It is not necessary for the elector to change his or her registration to reflect the change in order to be eligible to vote."

In essence, while it does state that you must file a change of address, IT DOES NOT HAVE TO GO THROUGH BEFORE THE ELECTION in order for the person to be eligible.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

"I am sorry but you are incorrect. Whatever is required or even stated on a form does have the power to change the law as written and passed. The law requires that the address must exist. I do not believe that I made an actual citation reference. The quotes you included are specific to a certain set of criteria.



The section you cite, 507 applies to "

MeanGene · 1 year ago

At their new address, yes. However these people may still be living at their current home even though it is in forclosure...It usually takes moths before people are forced to leave. But more than that, they are attempting to suppress turnout by making long lines to discourage voters in these heavilly Democratic neighborhoods. Just another example of the Republican lie of "America First".

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

"people may still be living at their current home even though it is in forclosure (sic)"

True! But being in foreclosure does not mean that you have been foreclosed. Foreclosure is
a process, being foreclosed is the process completed.

"But more than that, they are attempting to suppress turnout by making long lines to discourage voters in these heavilly (sic) Democratic neighborhoods."

First you are assuming the location without evidence. You completely ignore the fact that foreclosures are usually vacant and as such are potential sources of fraudulant voting by anyone.

aihley · 1 year ago

And while they are eating their cake in their new residence, they can go back in time and register before the 30 day deadline so they may vote from their new address. You are a genius.

First of all, not many people who get foreclosed on have somewhere else to go. Second, if they are foreclosed on after the registration deadline, what are they supposed to do? Their vote is stolen from them. While I don't truly believe that this is an insidious plot to disenfranchise black voters, specifically, I do believe this practice will unfairly and probably illegally prevent some legitimately registered voters from having a say in this election.

justcorbly · 1 year ago

Being in foreclosure does not necessarily mean you have moved out of the house. Challenging voters based on foreclosure will result in illegally disenfranchising voters who have not changed their address. It will also gum up the works on election day and increase the length of the lines, which is a GOP tactic intended to discourage voting by people who work two jobs, etc, and don't have the ability to go to the polls in the middle of the day.

The GOP is not interested in the sanctity of the polls. It Is interested in preventing likely Democratic voters from excercising their rights.

leart2 · 1 year ago

Allowing a person to challenge a voter without proof is a weakness in the voting system, and it should be corrected immediately. The complainer has to be able to prove when the voter changed address. However keep one thing in mind, the average voter has to understand that voting is an individual responsibility, and there are certain things that a responsible voter has to do to keep their eligibility current. Anyway, I don't think the Repubicans will benefit much from this move since most people I know do fill out a change of address card when they move, i've done it several times over the years.

Blacks have to start being more aware of the voting process and what they have to do. The youngsters have to be educated about voting, and not have to be told to register and vote. There are several organization who council and encourage people to register to vote, but probably fewer than half end up voting, and some of those are not aware of what or whom they are voting for. Many talk a good game, but some don't know the difference of positions on issues between Obama and McCain.

leart

latisha · 1 year ago

The problem with this tactic is that we all know what the republicans are trying to do. Just because you got a foreclosed letter does not mean you moved out already. Most people file bankrupcy or get other loans or get other help. So to say a person does not live in that city any more is bull crap. The republicans are running scared and they are back to their old games again. I don't believe you are can't see through this. What rules have anyone broken if they still live there. A court order means something. Now if they come with list of court orders saying these people moved out because of non-payment then I could agree with them. Bottom line this is another way to stop black votes. Blacks are the ones being forclosed on mostly and most blacks are Democrats. Republicans have messed up this economy and caused this forclosure problem and now they want to punish people for just getting a forclosure notice, not even a court order forclosure notice? Republicans send millions of dollars to Iraq monthly, making our deficit worst but meanwhile Iraq has a $79 Billion dollar surplus they are not touching. Do you still want to know what's wrong with following the rules? How about being humane to the people in this country. Why not clean up your house before going over to Iraq to "clean their house up"? Republicans have destroyed this country and now they want to make us pay for what they have done. Republicans have not followed rules in decades. Now they want to discourage the rest of us from voting by making the lines long!

olraya · 1 year ago

If you register to vote at your parents address but live in a dorm at college. Should they take your vote away? No!!!!!!
You just have to go to your original polling location to vote!
This is ethically wrong. If you registered to vote in the county that you lost your home in you should be able to go back to that county to vote. PERIOD

amy731 · 1 year ago

Are you kidding me??? In a foreclosure situation, once the foreclosure is started, most families are able to live in their homes for six months (or longer) until the local sheriff's deputies physically remove the home owners. I am firing up on this situation and so angry.
Trott and Trott is a firm that acts as a middleman between loan agencies (banks) and consumers (home owners) in the most advance moments of foreclosure, right before the loan agencies (banks) take possession of the home. I find it obscene that a company (Trott and Trott) that should remain neutral in foreclosure situations would cross the lines with having a specific political operation in the same building, give to the cause of the same political operation AND THAT SAME political operation would impair those operations that the company (Trott and Trott) posses as a middleman to protect.
Rule #1 for foreclosures and voting, bring the most recent mail that you have. This is a GOP ticktack that I will expose.

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

"Foreclosure specialists" or "attorney for servicer" are not neutral. They are typically selected and appointed by the lender in the terms of the mortgage, although the terms of the mortgage may require the borrower to pay any service fees owing the "foreclosure specialists" or "attorney for servicer."

stef0811 · 1 year ago

we lost our home, due to a predetory lender and my husband having a massive heart attack, he worked for a republican based company, so no disability, we lived there for almost a year before we had to move into an apartment, during that time we voted at the same place we voted for most of our lives. when forclosure starts, you have time to try to work things out, you maintain that address, we still had to pay taxes there, why would we lose our right to vote.

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

Not everybody has the same experience; some folks cannot manage to negotiate a settlement, particularly if they have had a serious change in income. They may move out of the home earlier rather than later for any number of reasons, and if stressed about the move, may forget that their voter's registration is impacted. There are legitimate reasons for concern about one's residency, given the circumstances, and there's a window of opportunity to change one's voter registration. Whether the average citizen going through this situation is aware of the need to change their registration is a challenge.

The point of the article, though, is that under the schema described, anyone whose house has been in foreclosure -- whether they lose their house or not -- could be on a list that is used to contest their vote at the polls. During an election with an expected record turnout, in a state where monies may not have been available to increase polling places or equipment, a larger number of contested voters could obstruct more than the contested resident's vote. Imagine the bottleneck this could cause in some counties with record high foreclosures, if every individual whose house had been in foreclosure (no matter the outcome, debt settled or evicted) has their vote contested.

In other words, you may not lose your right to vote -- but you could be a means by which voting at your precinct is impeded, if you were foreclosed upon this year.

BillCole · 1 year ago

Read the article for your answer:

people often remain in their homes after foreclosure begins
and sometimes are able to negotiate and refinance.

A foreclosure filing does not mean that the people living at that address have moved out. It means that a loan is not being paid. Residents may be renters (who sometimes stay in place through a landlord's foreclosure) or they may be one of the lucky ones who manage to pull out of foreclosure before they are evicted, or they may be one of the many people who have technically lost their homes from a legal standpoint but who remain in them because the lenders are in such bad shape themselves that they have a months-long backlog of evictions of people who are still living in the homes they could not continue to pay for.

As the article points out, some of the scumbags doing this have personal vested interests in disenfranchising people who have lot or been close to losing their homes: lawyers whose practice focuses on foreclosure. If the electorate ever really wakes up and starts voting in their concrete interest rather than in reaction to lies about things that don't really matter, those lawyers might find their business drying up.

And beyond that, it is useful to understand 2 facts:

1. A fixed residence is not a prerequisite to the right to vote. People who move in the period between the registration cutoff and election day are supposed to vote where they were already registered. A homeless person technically has voting rights wherever they live, although it's very hard for someone living on the street to get registered...

2. To have a factual basis for challenging a registration, one would need evidence that the registration was false to begin with (i.e. that the voter didn't reside where registered at the time of registration) or that the voter is currently living somewhere other than the precinct in which they are registered.

Unfortunately, the GOP nationally has adopted a strategy of using illegitimate challenges to voters and baseless charges of voting fraud. It doesn't really matter in the end that they almost always fail to make their cases, because just the processes of harassment get them some of the results they are seeking: challenged voters often don't bother fighting for their right to vote and in many places any sort of challenge lands a ballot in "provisional" status which may never be resolved one way or another and may mean the ballot is never counted. That is the goal. The GOP doesn't really care about vote fraud, they care about keeping people who don't vote for them from voting and maintaining the myth of widespread fraud to justify their vote suppression tactics.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

"As the article points out, some of the scumbags doing this have personal vested interests in disenfranchising people who have lot or been close to losing their homes:"

The article says no such thing!

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

"The GOP doesn't really care about vote fraud"

Then why is only that side of the political spectrum that is able to find instances of Fraud and for
the other side it always is a simple oops I made a typo?

In Wisconsin, in complying with the Federal law regarding voter roles, an error rate of 20%
was found. The State board tasked with managing elections ordered every clerk in the State
to not take any action to ensure that the voter roles were accurate, as required by Federal
law. Does serious potential for fraud exist? Yes! Is the Democrat run State going to fix it? No!
Who is not taking voting serious?

hmorfei · 1 year ago

Here's another thought... if you have had to move out of a house, and your address has changed, it is too late now to change the address on your voter registration card (I can't remember the exact deadline). In that case, you are supposed to vote in your old precinct. But these people won't be allowed to do that. They will literally be TURNED AWAY at the voting booth. Can you imagine someone telling you that you CAN'T vote, especially when that person's party is the one who "got you into" the foreclosure mess in the first place??? Wow.

dcree77 · 1 year ago

This is an absolutely idiotic plan. And is most likely illegal. As the article points out, just because someone receives a foreclosure notice does not mean they automatically move out of their home. People are often able to enter work out plans with their lenders to save their house or sometimes postpone the actual sale of the home. Inclusion on the list is not a reliable basis upon which to challenge a person's right to vote. Consider this too, you are not just punishing the person who took out the loan on the house, you are punishing any voting age member of the household. This is ludicrous and criminal and shameful. It is meant as a way to intimidate voters and scare them away from the poles. I am glad my state encourages absentee voting. You can vote early and you don't have to put up with voter intimidation or other efforts to block people's access to the voting both.

entropy · 1 year ago

First off, I would like to quote the article:

The Michigan Republicans’ planned use of foreclosure lists is apparently an attempt to challenge ineligible voters as not being “true residents.”

It flat out says that aren't eligible to begin with. And whether you're living at that address or a new one, you should be able to prove where you're living. If you're still living at that address, you should be able to prove it. If you're not still living at that address, and have moved, you would effectively be able to vote in two places, and that is illegal. Challenging a voter does not mean that they can't vote, it just means how they vote is different and subject to proving that the voter lives where they claim to. And in the event of foreclosed homes, it is difficult to take the stance that, "well, they might still be living in that house, even though they could be living in the next county with a friend or family while they sort out the problem with their house."

So, before you go claiming that something is illegal, or criminal, or shameful, you should accept that fact that proving you still live somewhere which is reasonably expected to be cleared out is fair. Taking on faith that someone lives there is criminal in the event they don't still reside at that residence because it is allowing someone to vote in a place that they legally cannot vote. Have you thought of that? Its simple to have something from the bank stating you are still living in the house and working out your debt issue with them.

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

Under Michigan and federal law, proving residency does not require proof of property ownership.

Using foreclosure lists to contest one's right to vote relies on status of property ownership and not residency.

entropy · 1 year ago

But if you're no longer residing in the home, due to foreclosure, then you need to prove you still reside in that polling area. The foreclosure list is merely a means to know that the addresses are questionable due to the fact that people may no longer be living there. And if you're not living there, what residency status do you have?

Being registered to vote means having a current address. If your current address is not the one you are registered with, where you vote can change. And you're still ignoring the fact that challenging a voter does not prevent them from voting. It just means they need to prove residency before their vote is counted.

webdoctor · 1 year ago

No, you don't. You are 100% wrong. Sounds like this place is overrun with neocon fluffers. Leave our great State already.

entropy · 1 year ago

And you are 100% vague, and said nothing useful. Why has Rayne1 not accused you of being confrontational and adding nothing to the discussion, threatening to have you removed as spam-trolling?

I don't even know what you're saying I'm wrong about, but don't you dare go calling me, or anyone else names.

Let me quote the Michigan.gov web site where it talks about voting:

"Remember to bring an acceptable form of photo identification to the polls on Election Day."

"If you do not have photo ID, you can still cast a ballot simply by signing an affidavit. The affidavit can be used by:

* Voters who do not have acceptable photo ID
* Voters who have photo ID but didn't bring it to the polls

Once you sign the affidavit, you may cast your ballot. It will be counted with all other ballots on Election Day. "

"Moving: Whenever you move to a new city or township, you must re-register to vote. If you move within a city or township, you must update your address. This can be handled through your local clerk, at a Secretary of State branch office, or by mail. Michigan voters must use the same residential address for voter registration and driver's license purposes. Consequently, if you submit a driver's license address change, it will be applied to your voter registration. Similarly, if you submit a voter registration address change, it will be applied to your driver's license."

And for the issue of the foreclosure lists, they are public information, which anyone can access. As a result, people wishing to cast fraudulent ballots are capable of registering to vote via those addresses, and I'm sure that you would like to ensure those people do not get to vote multiple times throughout the city. Anyone who is living in a foreclosed home should be very easily able to prove they are still living there, and thus they should not have any problems.

What is more interesting, is that I haven't seen anything on boards by people who are actually suffering from this problem, instead just people who are attacking the process of insuring voter integrity. I would rather have the process slightly slower and know that the votes actually represent my area. And I still insist that people pay attention to this one other thing I've been saying, and not just ignore it when they respond to me: BEING CHALLENGED DOES NOT MEAN YOU CAN'T VOTE.

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

Look, I actually have to spend time working on content management -- not just babysitting threads, wherein I expect people to act like adults.

webdoctor did not make an ad hominem attack in his reply. You're going to have to expect people to disagree with you, and on the internet, they're blunt about it.

As for the point webdoctor was trying to make, you may be right that a person retains their right to vote regardless of being challenged, but using status of property ownership to challenge voters is a suppressive tactic that may discourage not only the voter challenged, but suppress other voters by bottlenecking the precinct.

And as for people suffering from foreclosure: most folks I know in these straits aren't spending their time on line. One friend is too busy trying working to try and pay debts to hang around threads.

If you don't mind, I'm going back to work.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

"No, you don't."

Don't what?

"You are 100% wrong."

Concerning?

mblackburn · 1 year ago

think.
everything.

dcree77 · 1 year ago

The rational sited for interrogating unsuspecting voters at the voting booth regarding their address because their address happens to appear on a foreclosure list is nonsensical and heartless.  Whether you live at the address indicated in your voting record is not something anyone else has to prove when they go to vote.  At most, they are asked to show their id.  Anyone can move from the address listed in their voting record.  Singling out someone because their home is in the process of foreclosure is inherently wrong.  It is adding insult to injury; the proverbial "kicking a man when he is down."  If you are working out your loan with your lending institution, that is no one else's business but yours.  You should not have to explain that to some stranger on voting day, at the voting both.  If the republican party wants to verify the address of every voter in a voting district, that is their perrogative, but to single out the people who are most
hurt by the conditions of the down economy is not the "family values" that I would want to teach my children.  Shame on you!

entropy · 1 year ago

A challenge is based on whether there is reason to believe that the information about an elector is accurate and valid. If someone at the polling place does not recognize you, and does not think you live in the area, they can challenge you and ask you to prove where you live. If it is reasonable to believe that you do not live there anymore, via foreclosure lists, then you can be asked to prove you still reside in the area for that polling place. If you were to move from one town to the next because of your foreclosure, and tried to vote in both places because you don't know which to vote at, would you want your vote to count twice or just once?

If you say you want your vote to count twice, then shame on you. It is not kicking a man when they are down. And personally, I think that everyone should have to show at least a state ID, with an accurate and current address. The plan that got shot down for that to be a national requirement proposed to provide free IDs for that purpose. But that wasn't good enough. The people who are opposed to this idea are opposed to the idea of showing you have the right to vote where you are trying to vote, which should be something everyone is willing to do. If you believe in the democratic process, then you should want it to be as transparent as possible, and that means making sure anyone challenged is willing to provide the required proof of residence. It is in fact a requirement in Michigan to show photo ID when you go to vote, and it is a requirement in Michigan to notify the county clerk, or the DMV whenever you move. How many people don't do that?

When I go to the polling place to vote, I don't even say my name when they ask, I hand them my driver's license to prove who I am. We just had a local election where I live, and my father was told he had already voted when he arrived, even though he hadn't. Someone came by and said that it was a different person from a few houses down, and they were going to make the corrections in the ledger. He made a mistake on his ballot and went back for another, and they had yet to make the corrections, so there was no record of this other person having voted, and thus anyone could come in claiming to be that person and vote, and there would be at least one extra vote. After casting his ballot and on his way out, he looked at the ledger, and saw that there was still no correction made. These kinds of things need to be stopped from happening, and challenging voters, as well as checking IDs is the only way to make sure this is the case.

I currently live in a state where more than 1/5 of registered voters don't exist, and while the election commission knows this, they are refusing to do anything to fix it. And as a result the state attorney general has filed a federal lawsuit against them in an attempt to get them to do their job.

In the given case, it may seem like singling out, but it really isn't. And beyond that, I still stand by my own opinion, that singling out shouldn't happen because everyone should be required to prove they live where they claim. Anyone who argues against that does not want to ensure the integrity of the democratic process. One person, one vote; that is the creedo that our government has been built on, and people seem to lose sight of that. It certainly is lost with the Democrat's Super-delegates, who get to control thousands upon thousands of votes, regardless of what their representee's want.

shorttimer231 · 1 year ago

Entropy, you are correct that we have to show valid ID when voting in Michigan. Therefore, if a person tried to vote in a poling location other than the one they are registered to vote in (i.e. they have not registered in a new location), they would not be in the rolls, and they would likely not be allowed to vote. Additionally, their address would show that they were in the "wrong polling place." If, however, the person arrives at their registered polling place, they would be on the rolls and should be allowed to vote. Simply assuming everyone who has received a foreclosure notice, is by definition no longer living at the previous address might be valid. However, that doesn't mean that the person is trying to "vote twice". It does mean that they are trying to vote, and with an average turn out of about 20-30%, we should be encouraging people to vote, not discouraging it. The Voter ID act is sufficient to prevent multiple voting. We don't need "Big Brother" Republicans to look out for us.

entropy · 1 year ago

But if the person goes to the same old polling place out of habit, and having been going there for the last 12 years, it would be good to be able to identify them and redirect them to the proper polling place as well. The voting twice I mentioned was a mere hypothetical, and it is possible that at least one person might do it, though not necessarily to have two votes. And the other issue is whether they update their IDs prior to the election which some people may put off for various valid reasons.

dcree77 · 1 year ago

In a way, you and I are saying the same thing.  It is only when you select out a certain group of people for enforcement based on some arbitrary factor that I have a problem.  I am not sure how large a town you live in, but none of the people at my polling place have any idea who I am and I don't know them.  I have never seen them before, even though I have lived here all of my life.
 
I have no problem with requiring everyone to show id when they go to vote.  My problem is with challenging someone's right to vote because their property address might appear on a list of homes in forclosure proceedings.  There are very legally technical reasons why a person whose address appears on the list might still, legally be considered a resident of the voting district even if they are not physically present at the property.  Further, there are instances where an address might appear on the list and the occupant is still residing in the home.  As I said in my original post, a person has the right and ability to work out payment arrangements with their lendor upto and even after a sheriff's sell of the property.
 
The ultimate question is whether or not someone can produce id that shows that they are who they say they are and that they can demonstrate that they live where they say they live.  That is done by producing state issued id.  Once a person has done that, that should be the end of the voluntary action by the voter.  If there is credible evidence that a person is intentionally attempting to commit voter fraud, then there is reason to act based on the evidence.  An address appearing on a list of foreclosed houses is not evidence of anything other than a person who fell behind in paying their mortgage.  It is not probable cause to conclude that the person is attempting to commit voter fraud.
 
Having to face down some stranger at the voting booth who accosts you based on the fact that you live in a house that is on a foreclosure list is abhorrent.  It would be humiliating to the accosted person and only serve to intimidate would be voters.  Which, I would submit, is the purpose behind the action.  Considering the law surrounding bankruptcy and foreclosure, and the ability of a person to continue to live in their house even if it is in foreclosure, there is no justification for singling out such voters.  However, if there is a system to verify the legitimate identity claim of every voter, treating each voter equally, then I have no objection.  If there is system to challenge voters based on legitimate concerns regarding their claims of residency, I have no objection.  The foreclosure list approach is neither legitimate nor legal.  In fact, it may violate not only the voting rights laws but the bankruptcy laws designed to protect
debtors from harassment.
 
It will be interesting to see the outcome of the legal challenge to the plans annouced to launch this foreclosure list initiative.  I am willing to gamble that my interpretation is shared by the judges who will opine on this issue.

entropy · 1 year ago

Michigan State Law says the following.

168.727 Challenge; duty of election inspector; indiscriminate challenge; penalty.

Sec. 727.

(1) An election inspector shall challenge an applicant applying for a ballot if the inspector knows or has good reason to suspect that the applicant is not a qualified and registered elector of the precinct, or if a challenge appears in connection with the applicant's name in the registration book. A registered elector of the precinct present in the polling place may challenge the right of anyone attempting to vote if the elector knows or has good reason to suspect that individual is not a registered elector in that precinct. An election inspector or other qualified challenger may challenge the right of an individual attempting to vote who has previously applied for an absent voter ballot and who on election day is claiming to have never received the absent voter ballot or to have lost or destroyed the absent voter ballot.

(2) Upon a challenge being made under subsection (1), an election inspector shall immediately do all of the following:

(a) Identify as provided in sections 745 and 746 a ballot voted by the challenged individual, if any.

(b) Make a written report including all of the following information:

(i) All election disparities or infractions complained of or believed to have occurred.

(ii) The name of the individual making the challenge.

(iii) The time of the challenge.

(iv) The name, telephone number, and address of the challenged individual.

(v) Other information considered appropriate by the election inspector.

(c) Retain the written report created under subdivision (b) and make it a part of the election record.

(d) Inform a challenged elector of his or her rights under section 729.

(3) A challenger shall not make a challenge indiscriminately and without good cause. A challenger shall not handle the poll books while observing election procedures or the ballots during the counting of the ballots. A challenger shall not interfere with or unduly delay the work of the election inspectors. An individual who challenges a qualified and registered elector of a voting precinct for the purpose of annoying or delaying voters is guilty of a misdemeanor.

Tell me how it is then, that challenging a voter's right to vote IN THAT PRECINCT, based on reasonable information saying they are no longer a registered elector OF THAT PRECINCT. You keep making it out to be that they are not going to be allowed to vote if they don't do it in that place. That is wrong. You claim that what is being done is illegal, and I have yet to see you make any attempt to support that with evidence. You are spouting the word illegal because you think it is wrong. Before you come back saying AGAIN that what is being done is illegal, find something that supports your claim. I have cited law of the State that shows anyone can challenge the right of an elector to vote in that precinct. It does not give them the right to challenge that elector's right to vote elsewhere, just in the one precinct. And it hardly counts as harassment as defined in bankruptcy laws, either. One cannot be harassed regarding their debt, and that is not the case. And since the voting rights laws are what have been cited above, I would like to know how they are being violated, because it seems to be clearly in line with the law.

dcree77 · 1 year ago

Citing a law and then spouting opinion is not supporting an argument, it is citing a law and spouting an opinion.  My "evidence" is the same as yours; the language of the statute itself.
 
The statute that you provided specifically states that the challenge must be based on specific knowledge or "good reason to suspect that the applicant is not a qualified and registered elector of the precinct."  Just because someone's declared address appears on a foreclosure list does not give someone good reason to suspect anything other than the fact that the person is claiming to live in a house that is in foreclosure.  Evidence that someone is not qualified and registered to vote would be something like documents showing that the house they claim to live in no longer exists or that the person they claim to be is deceased.   It is not that the person may or may not be in the middle of bankruptcy proceedings and at somepoint in time they may no longer be living at the address listed on the forclosure list.
 
I have been practicing law for the past 14, years.  I am not going to participate in a debate with you about what is or is not illegal, citing statutes, regulations and case law.  There is no financial incentive for me to do so.  A judge will ultimately decide if your foreclosure lists provide sufficient basis for challenging someone's right to vote in a particular precinct.  Given the proper circumstances, a judge will ultimately determine whether targeting people who are in financial distress falls within the definition of harassment under the bankruptcy code.  A judge will ultimately decide the actions of the GOP who choose to engage in this despicable behavior have violated the law.  You and I don't have to solve this problem because the matter is in the hands of the court, where it should be.

DCinDC · 1 year ago

Obama has to face the fact; McCain is not a nice guy. Obama can be the nice guy all he wants but McCain is playing hardball. The Democrats need some super rich guys to throw their money together and produce some hard hitting slime, in the mud TV, Internet, and newspaper ads. These ads need to talk about McCain in such a way to undermine him. The ads have to be smart and real to catch the public's attention and have them talk about McCain's unfitness with their neighbors, family and friends. There must be some rich democrats that can form the right kind of 527s to do this. Isn't there? 6 weeks from now and it will be too late!

reggie1298 · 1 year ago

How about George Soros for the money man, but it is probably already too late.

rowdy · 1 year ago

Hardball, nothing.
The GOP are actively contributing to the suck of the world with this one.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

More rich people contribute to the Democrats that the other parties.

thokitts · 1 year ago

I think the real question in need of being asked here is: "Why is the Michigan GOP being given a list of foreclosures?" It smacks of privacy violations, depending upon who is releasing the information for such a politically motivated purpose.

Michigan Messenger: Send the reporter back to find out. And at the very least, send a reporter to follow up after the election to verify that African Americans (or Democrats in general) weren't disproportionally targeted by this list. At least do that.

TroubleNYC · 1 year ago

Lis pendens (foreclosure) notices are available to the public.

sukabi1 · 1 year ago

the Republicans are getting their lists directly from the law firm that works from the bank, they would have access to information from the bank on houses in preforeclosure, nearing default and in with payments that are late.... turning over that information can't be legal.

JackDemocrat · 1 year ago

Lists of foreclosures are public records. Anybody can get them from the courthouse.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

Public information!

ajf24 · 1 year ago

As if these people, citizens of America like you and I don't have enough drama in their lives. Now the GOP sadly wants to take their votes tool They seem to work overtime to find ways to keep poor people and especially blacks away from the polls. That is what they are about. That's why I could never vote Republican. Ruthless and heartless are words that immediately come to mind. Something must be done to prevent this from happening.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

That is an assumpition on your part.

lunachik · 1 year ago

The GOP love voter caging.

Check it out:

http://www.gregpalast.com/bill-to-oulaw-voter-c...

reggie1298 · 1 year ago

Checked it out. What is the problem with voter caging? If someone registers to vote, shouldn't that person reside at the address he used in the registration? If he resides at that address he can receive mail at that address. Please limn for me a scenario in which the mail is returned to the sender or a third party, yet the registered voter should still be registered at that address.

odonnell · 1 year ago

The one that happened to me was I sublet my apartment during a 3 month work trip (while still holding a lease for the following year). The sublessors, against my instructions, reported me gone and returned my mail.

The one that happened to a neighbor of mine in Baltimore was that I moved away, her name was similar to my wife's, and the post office started forwarding her bills to me. But the letters from the registrar are sent with instructions not to forward.

Then, there are the stupid blunders by the post office.

Then, there are the people without fixed mailing address. For example, in New York, where I had occasion to research the law on residence for voting purposes, a man had registered to vote with a particular hotel as residence, where he lived most of the year, but did not keep a room while he was away. As far as I know, this particular man always went to the same hotel, but he might well have found no vacancy on one of his trips, and used another. Or stayed with a friend, family member, or business associate.

I bet there are a *lot* more possibilities.

The point is that a well functioning democracy finds ways to make it reasonably feasible for everyone to vote, not ways to filter out all the unusual people.

Slim Cognito · 1 year ago

These notices are intentionally made to look like junk mail. A lot of people throw them away. That is what the GOP is betting on.

bmh · 1 year ago

Voter caging is a felony. The voting rights act of 1965 strictly prohibits this.

The problem here is that even if the person lives elsewhere within the city, this is used as a means of disqualifying that person, and they CAN NOT VOTE.

For example, the letters are given a specific (short) period of time. If they aren't retrieved in that time, say a week, they're returned. So, go on vacation, a long business trip, or GO TO SERVE YOUR COUNTRY IN IRAQ - and guess what? You can't vote any more, because your right to vote is challenged, and there's nothing you can do about it at the time you want to vote.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

This is not a means of "disqualifying" a voter. There are many reasons to not forward mail. A persons place of voting is one of them. If the registering body has reason to suspect that a person is no longer in residence at a given address there is reason to ask that person where they do live.

bmh · 1 year ago

I no longer use this email address. Please email me at my Me.com account (bhart@).

Thanks!

Brian

Defer2Karma · 1 year ago

Spin, Spin, Spin! Never let this stop Spinning until After the election! This should be kept in the national news! Let the nation see how Republicans really feel about working people. Highlight John McCain's connection to this event. Never let it stop Spinning. Every speech in every city should include a reference to this heartless act. Never let this die. Headline: Republicans Foreclose on the Hopes, Homes and now VOTES of the Poor and already Hard-Hit Working Class. Remind the listeners/readers/viewers that if they come for those people today, they'll come for them, tomorrow. Spin, Spin, Spin! Make 'em dizzy till they drop!

bish66 · 1 year ago

If people want to vote, they have to meet certain requirements. Such as being a true resident of the city or township. Such as providing photo ID. Such as registering to vote.
One side calls it 'suppression', the other calls it 'fraud'. I don't see what is wrong with checking the registers and crossing out people who no longer live in a certain area. If they don't do this, people could theoretically vote in two places, their old district and the new one where they live now.

ebrayton · 1 year ago

So a family loses its house in foreclosure and has to move. In the middle of all the emotional turmoil that causes, the difficulty in finding another place to live, sometimes moving in with relatives and the difficulties that come with that, maybe having to put the kids in different schools, etc, you forget to go to the Secretary of State office and change your voter registration. You should be denied the right to vote because of that? That's madness. And bear in mind, as the article says, that foreclosure does not necessarily mean they aren't living at the house. They usually have as much as six months before being forced to move out. So even people using their correct addresses may be denied a vote because of this. And of course, challenging all those people increases the chances of someone else getting fed up because it's taking too long.

And no, it does not mean that people could potentially vote twice. If they change their address with the SOS office, they come off the old voter list and won't be allowed to vote where they used to vote. If they neglect to change their address in the middle of such a terrible time in their lives, they should at least be able to vote somewhere.

Alieninthissociety · 1 year ago

and if you're temporarily living in a relative's home, most likely you will not have a utility bill with that address

To me, this is another "hanging chad." How anyone could vote Republican in this election truly bewilders me.

reggie1298 · 1 year ago

To save the Supreme Court.

reggie1298 · 1 year ago

If you really think they automatically come off the old list when they are added to a new one you have not had much contact with local governments.

ebrayton · 1 year ago

Even if that's true, why should people be denied their right to vote because the local government can't do things right? That's simply irrational. It's not like there's some conspiracy to have people lose their homes so they can vote twice, for crying out loud.

azdemocrat · 1 year ago

I call it segregation!!

whatthefuck · 1 year ago

Please, please, please give me a f!#@ing break. I have had it with this kinda crap. You are the problem with this country. What the GOP is doing is against everything that our country is for. To posit the theoretical questions that you have is ridiculous. How many people who have been foreclosed on even have time to go vote twice?!!! Stop being so stupid and THINK! Everyone just needs to think!

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

Think? I think that is a good idea. Unfortunately too many are just knee kerk reactors and go off half cocked. Attack an idea without even all the data.

nerys · 1 year ago

Actually I contest the legality of that. Its interesting because clearly we are INTENDED the right to vote but its so "obvious" that the actual wording was never put into the constitution itself.

The 1st amendment is the closest. It guarantees the right to free speech which voting is a form or and it also guarantees the right to redress of grievance which voting most definitely is.

So the idea that the states can impose arbitrary limitations on the vote is to me nullified by the right to redress of grievances which can NOT be arbitrarily limited.

No where in the constitution does it say you must have an "address" in order to vote. You only need to be a United States Citizen.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

Two things;
There is no attempt impose a limitation ON voting, only to ensure WHERE you are voting.
Without an address the only vote you would actually have a RIGHT to cast would be for the only
National offices.

camX · 1 year ago

bish66's comments may be the singularly most ignorant thing I've ever seen posted on the internet. If you want to know why, please post a request here. I don't want to waste everyone else's time who has at least two functioning brain cells explaining why you are so wrong.

The GOP's sinister plan won't pass muster (from Frank Kelley's opinion #6930):

In Dunn v Blumstein, 405 US 330, 336; 92 S Ct 995; 31 L Ed 2d 274 (1972), the Court recognized that any restriction on the right to vote is subject to close constitutional scrutiny:


In decision after decision, this Court has made clear that a citizen has a constitutionally protected right to participate in elections on an equal basis with other citizens in the jurisdiction. This "equal right to vote," is not absolute; the States have the power to impose voter qualifications, and to regulate access to the franchise in other ways. But, as a general matter, "before that right [to vote] can be restricted, the purpose of the restriction and the assertedly overriding interests served by it must meet close constitutional scrutiny."


(Emphasis added) (citations omitted).

The Dunn court then, in the context of a durational residency voting requirement, set forth the strict scrutiny test to be applied whenever the fundamental right to vote is at stake.


In sum, durational residence laws must be measured by a strict equal protection test: they are unconstitutional unless the State can demonstrate that such laws are "necessary to promote a compelling governmental interest." Thus phrased, the constitutional question may sound like a mathematical formula. But legal "tests" do not have the precision of mathematical formulas. The key words emphasize a matter of degree: that a heavy burden of justification is on the State, and that the statute will be closely scrutinized in light of its asserted purposes.



It is not sufficient for the State to show that durational residence requirements further a very substantial state interest. In pursuing that important interest, the State cannot choose means that unnecessarily burden or restrict constitutionally protected activity. Statutes affecting constitutional rights must be drawn with "precision," and must be "tailored" to serve their legitimate objectives. And if there are other, reasonable ways to achieve those goals with a lesser burden on constitutionally protected activity, a State may not choose the way of greater interference. If it acts at all, it must choose "less drastic means."


Anyone facing such a challenge should demand to be given an affidavit of residency to sign. That'll ensure that they are given the opportunity to vote.

bish66 · 1 year ago

Camx, you are pathetic!
First of all, if what I wrote "may be the singularly most ignorant thing I've ever seen posted on the internet" then you don't have been around the internet much...
Secondly, you claim that you don't want to waste everybody else's time, and then you go into a lengthy statement...

There is no written right to vote in the USA. Some states do have that right written down in their constitutions. In Belgium, citizens have the DUTY to vote. Fail to participate in the election and you face a fine.
Here in America, you are not automatically registered to vote. European states handle it differently. In Germany, e.g., you have to register in the city where you live. Come election time, the city sends out letters with voting cards, reminding you of the election and that you can vote absentee and that you get the ballot, if you return your voting card.
If you have houses in different parts of the country, you have to decide on one as your place of residence (usually where you live, work, where your kids go to school) and that is the city and state where you have the right to vote. Since the federal goivernment has to pay money to the city for every regular citizen, the state has an interest not to pay twice or more often for a citizen. So, they check the lists for double entries, because, one man/woman, one vote.

In America, we have stories of voting fraud every two years, stories that would make a banana republic proud! Votes were offered on Ebay, felons tried to vote, dead people apply for ballots from the grave, absentee ballots stolen from the mail, faulty registers, machine meltdown, software problems, make your pick.
There is voting fraud every single election and there are dozens of stories about fraud at the caucuses of the Democratic party, favoring a certain candidate...

Now, every state has a certain set of rules concerning who is allowed to vote. Most common are the following:
You have to be an American citizen.
You have to be able to read a ballot written in English, no Spanish or Chinese ballots allowed
You have to register to vote.
You lose your right to vote, if you are a felon in prison, in some cases even if you have served your time.
You have to have a certain age.
And, fresh of this year, the Supreme Court ruled that in order to deter voter fraud, voters have to provide a Photo ID.

If a state passes regulation that disenfranchises voters because of race, religion or gender, then the Court will come down on them with all their might.
Requiring voters to prove that they are residents? In my book, this is absolutely okay. If you read the article correctly, the GOP plans to QUESTION the elegibility of voters whose homes are on a foreclosure list. It will then be the duty of the voting officials or the courts to find out, if the voter is/was still a resident. So, if they foreclose your house, but you still live there, then there should be no problem. If you moved in with your family, but failed to change your registration (because, correct me if I am wrong, the registration is still required), then you are not correctly registered to vote. If you don't have a home, because you live on the street, do you have the right to vote?

Besides, I don't understand the whole fuss. If they said "we only cross out registered Democrats from the list and turn a blind eye on Republicans and Independents" then you would have a case. But their action goes against all groups whose residence status is questionable. You might point out that some groups are more likely to be affected by that ruling, but who tells you how these people would vote in November?

To make a long story short: There are rules to every election and EVERY party should see to it that the rules are obeyed.

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

As you said, there are rules to every election. One of them includes not using homeownership as a criteria for voting.

It's bad enough that Michigan's secretary of state may have violated state law with a recent voter ID directive:

Bradley Heard, attorney with the Advancement Project, a Washington, D.C.-based voting rights group, told Michigan Messenger that Land’s policy authorizing poll workers to require multiple IDs is unprecedented, gives too much discretion to poll workers and may result in overuse of provisional ballots, placing an unfair burden on voters and especially on poor and minority voters.

Heard said Land’s directive violates Michigan law, which allows provisional ballots to be used only when a voter’s name does not appear on the precinct list, and that the state should treat people who look different from their photos like those who have no ID at all — have them swear to their identity and then vote a regular ballot

(Source: http://www.michiganmessenger.com/3542/michigan-...)

Did you gain or lose weight? did you change your hairstyle, get new glasses, anytime since you last got your driver's license? Then you're already a potential target -- and the secretary of state here, a known Republican Party operative, is not obeying the rules.

camX · 1 year ago

I was wrong, and I apologize. Your first post was not the singularly most ignorant thing I've ever seen. At least no longer. Your second post (in response) is a tour-de-force of ignorance. You, my friend, have out-done yourself. Bravo!

I won't take the time to respond to your rambling uninformed opinion other than to ask for a citation for your "Supreme Court ruled that in order to deter voter fraud, voters have to provide a Photo ID".

Please explain to me how challenging people over foreclosures will do ANYTHING to address the many concerns you have over voter fraud.

And, no matter how impressed you are with your opinions, you are wrong as a matter of law. I'm an attorney (in academia). I research these things.

bish66 · 1 year ago

I don't accept apologies that come along as abuse from some pompous ***... attorney.

You want a citation: http://articles.latimes.com/2008/apr/29/nation/...

If you are an attorney, then I am really surprised that this ruling failed to capture your attention.

i wonder what kind of an attorney you are...

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

"In Dunn v Blumstein, 405 US 330, 336; 92 S Ct 995; 31 L Ed 2d 274 (1972), the Court recognized that any restriction on the right to vote is subject to close constitutional scrutiny:"

No one has placed a restriction on an indiviuals right to vote!

TstormVA · 1 year ago

Can you still be living in a residence if your house in foreclosure? Do foreclosure proceedings start ater 60 days of no payment? What is the Democratic response to this? I know I have a lot of questions but why do we wait until Republicans steal elections until we cry OUTRAGE?

reggie1298 · 1 year ago

Name one election Republicans have stolen.

TstormVA · 1 year ago

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gcJOhCHWRQ&feat...

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

"Name one election Republicans have stolen."

No joy!

TstormVA · 1 year ago

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gcJOhCHWRQ&feat...

lissafaith · 1 year ago

Tell me you're joking, right?

The last two Presidential ones? Ring a bell?

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

Yeah!
The Dems lost!
In spite of ...

lissafaith · 1 year ago

Who is this? Do I know you under some different name? If not, please do not e - mail me anymore, whomever you are.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

I have not emailed you anything!  Since this refers to Michigan Messenger it is likely a forward of a comment posted in reference to the article regarding elections from that publication.  I did post several comments after having read much of what people had to say.

Duncan

lissafaith · 1 year ago

Well, the comment came in my e - mail, hence my question. Thanks for explaining how that worked.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

Your welcome!

Merenwentari · 1 year ago

I'll name two. The Presidential election of 2000 and the Presidential election of 2004.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

You are incorrect!

TstormVA · 1 year ago

No response?

cshortridge · 1 year ago

This is non sense! All the more reason to encourage everyone Obama is what we need to lead our country. There has to be something someone of higher power can do to stop this madness. If they decide to stop Black voters due to foreclosers, they will have to legalize it across the board and make it for every american who has claimed bankruptcy not to vote. As long as you are an american citizen it is your right to vote, not when it is convenient for the white people in office. This is BS and then they wonder why riots occur as if the black americans do not get mistreated and have to overcome diversity as it is. Everything that black americans have we have earned not been given and the littlest thing "the right to vote they want to controll that as well". Sorry I am so upset over this.

JackDemocrat · 1 year ago

This is politics and checking voters' names against foreclosure lists to ensure they are true residents is entirely fair. I just don't understand why Democrats don't adopt similar legal tactics in order to suppress the Republican vote. Could it be that because we're so "nice" (Remember the people who decided that the 2004 convention would be "positive" and not "Bush-bashing" and got us no bounce?)? We should play hardball too. I'm tired of losing elections. For whatever theoretical contribution you make to democracy by being positive and encourage open and fair debate, the fact remains that if you don't win, you don't get to make a difference.

cshortridge · 1 year ago

Yes my dear,

You all are soo nice, that is why our country is in one of the biggest deficits it has ever been, that is why we are in the recession and depression we are in. I will vote and I will encourage those who surround me to do the same, if Obama doesn't win he can walk away with his head held high understanding that he has not used any federal funded money is primarily why he does not have a stupid commercial coming on every two minutes. Like Obama said a pig is a pig. Names against forclosed homes is not fair considering it is the stupid republican George Bush who has created this non-sense. Do you realize how many soldiers wife's and husbands who have lost their spouse over in Irag fighting that wore and to top it off have lost their homes. Do you all not have any heart? People's homes go into forclosure for various reasons and using this to stop black americans from voting is cowardly act. And you my friend should have a problem with that.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

The country is not in recession.
The economy is still in positive territory.
Since we have not entered a recession a depression is impossible.

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

Duncan, if you don't mind, I'd rather rely on the opinion of economists and specialists in the financial industry to tell me whether this economy has tanked or no.

Like Nouriel Roubini -- especially after the failure of Lehman Brothers and the shotgun wedding of Merrill Lynch to Bank of American this weekend.

Secondly, you have left at least 6 comments inside a one-hour span on this thread, most of which were confrontational to other commenters. Any further hostile comments will be removed as spam-trolling.

If I were you, I'd spend less time harassing people and more time minding your money -- you obviously need some work on understanding finance and economics.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

A recession is by definition two consecutive quarters of negative economic growth. It does not take an economist to evaluate the data. Since 1960 there have been three defined recessions; quarter three and four of 1974 plus quarter one of 1975. quarter two and three of 1980, and quarter four 1981 - quarter one 1982.
2008 has for the first two quarters produced a positive growth of the economy.

So now you are telling me that I am to be enjoined from exercising my rights. When I first found this there were some 168 messages. Many of them merely engendered a response. Why is that wrong?

I am not harassing but attempting to enter into a discussion. Understanding finance? Based on the results in the major financial companies today - they don't seem to have a very good handle on finance either. But finance is not the issue. The definition of a recession is the issue and all I need for that is to be able to read.

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

First, nobody "enjoined you" from exercising your rights. You are perfectly free to start your own blog. This site has a comment policy -- observe it, or exercise your free speech elsewhere.

Secondly, your understanding of a recession is shallow, textbook.

So far, we have seen no recession in the technical sense: two consecutive quarters of negative growth in real GDP. Why not?
The definition of a recession isn't only two consecutive quarters of negative growth. The NBER (National Bureau of Economic Research) puts a lot of emphasis on things like employment, and employment has already fallen for seven months in a row. It also emphasizes income and retail and wholesale sales. Many of these things are declining.
Maybe the recession started in January; if you look at the data on gross domestic product on a monthly basis between February and April, GDP was falling. Saying this is not a recession is just a joke. Maybe instead of a 'U' recession and recovery, it will be a 'W,' with a rebound in the second quarter. But by the third quarter, the effect of the government's tax rebates is totally gone, because other forces on the consumer are more persistent and negative.

GDP is a construct, frequently gamed and therefore a poor measure.

Now move along.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

"First, nobody "enjoined you" from exercising your rights."

Really? What does this sound like to you? "(Y)ou have left at least 6 comments inside a one-hour span on this thread, most of which were confrontational to other commenters. Any further hostile comments will be removed as spam-trolling." Sounds like an attempt to silence to me!

As for defining a recession, you would prefer a fluid definition? Sounds a little like situational ethics to me. Since I never said the economy is robust and going gangbusters. All that can be said with certainty is that the country is not, repeat not, in recession. Changing the definitions of a given word to fit a situation does no one a service. You mention unemployment. Well unemployment is a two edged sword. I had always been taught that full employment was CONSIDERED to be 5% unemployed. Further study have revealed that full employment encompasses a range of between 2% and 10%. Further a low unemployment rate creates inflationary pressure. Now if we accept the rate that in the US has been considered full employment, 5%, the current rate of 6.1% statistically means very little. Now, yes it is terrible to involuntarily lose ones job. It can be traumatic and hard on the parties involved, but it also can be overcome. But what are we really talking about here, an increase of 1.1%? Still well within the range of what many economists consider full employment. A review of the GDP shows that it appears on a roller coaster. The first quarter of the year had a positive rate of 1% and the second a rate of growth of 3%. Now yes the first quarter did grow but the second quarter rate is that rate that economists believe is a healthy rate of growth to move the country forward and avoiding inflation.

Perhaps "other forces on the consumer are more persistent and negative." because people are no longer putting money aside for a rainy day. Before you jump on that I have been just as guilty, until recently.

cshortridge · 1 year ago

of course we are, have you not watched the news, world news, CNN, Early Show etc..3 out of 5 major financial companies went under, Wall Street is at its bleakest moments, millions of Americans have lost their jobs, homes and families. The unemployment funding is almost dry. What is a recession or depression in your eyes? Americans who were struggling to put their kids through private schools had to pull them out, Americans are having to decide how to heat, provide food and pay for gas to travel to and from work because of the increase in gas. Americans are taking second jobs if they can find one due to the increase of health care cost. The foreclosure rate has increased, homes are sitting on the market 5 times longer than what they were 5 yrs ago. All the republicans are doing/ Bush/ McCain are taking away the middle class leaving two groups of economic status Rich and Poor. If two people households are struggling giving up items where they have found themselves having to prioritize more, getting rid of cell phones, cooking bigger/ cheaper meals to last longer and to save on groceries, you can only imagine what it is like for single family households. > Subject: [michiganmessenger] Re: Lose your house, lose your vote> From: > To: casonia33@msn.com> Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2008 22:41:02 +0000> > DuncanONeil wrote:> > The country is not in recession.> The economy is still in positive territory.> Since we have not entered a recession a depression is impossible.> > Link: http://www.michiganmessenger.com/4076/lose-your...> > --> You may reply to this email to post your response. To turn off notifications, go to your Disqus settings at: http://disqus.com/settings/notifications/
_________________________________________________________________
See how Windows Mobile brings your life together—at home, work, or on the go.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/msnnkwxp1020093182m...

whatthefuck · 1 year ago

You are simply a fucking idiot. Is that nice enough for you? Why don't I come kick you out of your house after you lose your job and then tell you that you can't vote. People make stupid mistakes, but that fact does not take away their citizenship.

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

Easy there -- this kind of comment is a violation of our site's comment policy. Further comments of this nature may be removed for non-compliance.

bmh · 1 year ago

No, it is not fair. It's not legal. Get this through your head. It's called CAGING.

nerys · 1 year ago

because that would (as is intended) eliminate voters that are the objective of this effort. Did you not read that 60% of the foreclosures were low income African Americans IE democrats.

IE McCain and party are attempting to manipulate this election by targeting in this manner.

TheAudacity · 1 year ago

You HAVE the right to vote, wether you are black, white, asia, or purple, IF you are a US CITIZEN, not convicted of a FELONY, can provide LEGAL identification & address so you are registered to vote in ONE district (which is in place so you can only vote ONCE!) This has absolutely nothing to do with race or people who have foreclosers on their homes!!! It has EVERYTHING to do with VOTER FRAUD....not by the Republican Party.....but to protect against the voter fraud Obama, his campaign, and ACORN (Obama's former community organizer employer) have been criminally charged with. REGISTERING FELONS AND ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS TO VOTE USING DEAD PEOPLES IDENTITIES & VACATE FORECLOSED HOMES AS THEIR LEGAL ADDRESS!!!! The media sure can get you going when they spin something as "racial discrimination". Don't believe me? Why don't you get on the Internet and do some research on what your man Obama is really doing! And while your at is ask yourself who is trying to evoke this anger, hatred, and moral outrage in you to their benefit? (hint: you are going to vote for him NO MATTER WHAT!)

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

You've been trying to make the case repeatedly in comments at this site that Obama's campaign has been using illegal activities in other states to register voters. Would you care to cite credible sources on this -- links only, please, no further violations of copyrights as you recently did with a Detroit Free Press article.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

"Brad Shannon

The Olympian

OLYMPIA, Wash. — Prosecutors in King County are looking at possible criminal charges related to a voter-registration drive held in 2006, echoing the suspicions of impropriety raised during the razor-close gubernatorial election of 2004.

King County's acting prosecutor, Dan Satterberg, is reviewing 1,829 questioned voter-registration forms turned in last year by people working for the national activist group ACORN, or the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. A decision on whether to file criminal charges is expected in late July, Satterberg's spokesman, Dan Donohoe, said Friday.

"We're dealing with possible criminal charges with regard to fraudulent registrations. "
(http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews...)

"CLEVELAND -- A national organization that conducts voter registration drives for low-income people has curtailed its push in Cuyahoga County after the Board of Elections accused its workers of submitting fraudulent registration cards.

The board is investigating the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. Results of the inquiry could be turned over to the county prosecutor. "
(http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/08/cuyahog...)

THE UNION NEWS

"A national organization that registers low-income people to vote has cut back its push in Cuyahoga County after workers were accused of registering phantom voters. The Cuyahoga County elections board is investigating ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, which has submitted about 75,000 voter registration cards to the Cuyahoga board this year.

No one knows how many registrations were faked, but the voter registration department received so many suspicious cards that it began compiling a binder with evidence. The binder grew to be an inch thick.

Board employees said multiple ACORN workers often handed in registration cards listing the same people but showing them living at different addresses. Other times, multiple workers submitted cards with identical voter names but showing different dates of birth.

"I'm obviously very concerned," Board Chairman Jeff Hastings said. "This goes to the essence of our democracy."

ACORN had a part-time staff of 30 who worked five days a week to find unregistered people.

The workers were paid $8 an hour and had to sign up 20 voters per five-hour shift.

The elections board said in a report that ACORN's quota contributed to the possible fraud."
(http://theunionnews.blogspot.com/2008/08/acorn-...)

EMPLOYMENT POLICIES INSTITUTE

"New report shows ACORN has been linked to voter fraud in 12 states including Ohio

8/11/06, Washington, DC –ACORN’s recent run-in with the Franklin County elections board for allegedly turning in falsified voter registration cards is only the latest in a long-standing pattern of dubious elections practices. ACORN employees have been accused of submitting bogus voter registration cards and forging signatures on ballot initiatives in 12 states since 2004.

In addition to Ohio, ACORN employees have been accused of illegal elections practices in New Mexico, Florida, Colorado, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Virginia among others. Here are just a few examples of ACORN’s pattern and practice of fraud associated with their campaigns: "
(http://www.epionline.org/news_detail.cfm?rid=171)

Since the words alone are not enough for you I supplied both. The last one has additional info available. If that is not enough for you try a search on "Rotten ACORN"

PAY ATTENTION HERE! I am not accusing anyone other than those I may name.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

Finally!

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

Question! Who said this was about a particular group of voters?

mox · 1 year ago

Foreclosed house or not, if you've registered to vote by the deadline, you have the legal right to vote on November 4th. This is not only a blatant power grab attempt by the Michigan GOP, it's blatant racism disguised by an argument that will surely be challenged by any decent lawyer.
Here's a suggestion to the GOP who seem to think they can prey upon people who they deem as not knowing any better: let the rest of the campaigns play themselves out and then registered voters will have their say. If you feel threatened because you're the opponent of a smart highly educated, highly motivated ambitious candidate who is more than fit to lead - than you should have come up with a more formidable candidate instead of unleashing illegal racist threats.
How pathetic.

AwakeNReady · 1 year ago

F.Y.I. I agree, just because your house is in foreclosure.. DOES NOT MEAN that is not where you live. Some people stay as long as a year! You can always ask your City for An Absentee Ballot - Call the Clerk's Office - they will send you out a form, then you state reason that applies to you. 1) Can't stand in line - i.e. health reasons. 2) Will be out of town, etc. and several others including age. If you are working hours and can't get there.. do not give up your vote. Get an Absentee Ballot!! They are not just for Senior Citizens of which I am. This will tie in your legal address without the foolishness on election day at the Polls. I watched the Florida hearings the year of the 'chads', I heard all the ways legal voters were prevented from voting...and sorry to say... this was similar. They could prove they lived at addresses, but they were turned away at the Poll by false challengers. So sad a day to think a party like the Republicans count on intidimating minorities and the elderly, cause that is who they try to weed out. Looks like they will try anything to sidestep the election being fair...so Beware and do not stand down. Stay in line....hold up the process...until they become embarassed. Take names and report anything to the local authorities and TV stations. Don't let this go unchallenged...or unreported.

This is more than a mean-spirited attack....it's a pattern with the Republican to fly under the radar.. What country do I live in? Well, I know I will stand firm for my vote being counted.

Remember this is INTENDED to fluster the Poll Workers.... any dispute, whether founded or not, can cause one vote to be lost.

Anthony Russo · 1 year ago

This is the most ridiculous underhanded tactic I ever heard of. Not only do you slow the process down for everyone that goes out to vote, you also cause embarrassment to someone who is obviously going through a difficult time. What a waste!

Unbeliveable

Anthony

Cjab · 1 year ago

I can't believe this. I agree with all those who say the Dem's need to take the gloves off and get in the ring. They always have trouble with that. And on the foreclosures? The nation - we - have just decided to spend billions of dollars to rescue the two largest holders of foreclosed properties: Fannie and Freddie. Can't we - the nation - take an emergency action to ensure the voting rights of those families affected by this same economic travesty/tragedy? Come on Obama - make a stink. Call for a bill on the Senate floor to protect these rights during this election. Make headlines. The least those suffering the most from our economic challenges can do is be promised that they can vote to affect the solution!

Earthdreams · 1 year ago

I agree with what you're proposing Cjab. Senator Obama should sound the alarm in the Senate. Every democrat should stand behind those whose homes are in foreclosure. If we need to yell to get the point across, then let's shout. What is this, "roll over and play dead," again? Democrats AND Republicans need to stand up and fight this, lest we all slide into dictatorship.

ACuriousOnlooker · 1 year ago

PLEASE, tell me you are doing everything in your power to get this to larger news sources. People need to know about this.

truesunn · 1 year ago

I know I posted it to all my social networks and blog as well as sent it to CNN, BBC, MSNBC and the ACLU. I asked friends to repost the heck out of it on their own websites, blogs and social networks as well. This MUST get national, even international attention!

Cjab · 1 year ago

I did same. And attempted to send to Obama campaign, tho can't tell if it went!

truesunn · 1 year ago

Ditto, mine said it went. I also posted them on their (Barack and Joe) MySpace pages as well so that other supporters can be informed.

ACuriousOnlooker · 1 year ago

I'm doing the same. I'm also trying to contact the NAACP and Freep.com

truesunn · 1 year ago

Forgot to mention our state legislators. You can get a listing of them all at congress.org

ACuriousOnlooker · 1 year ago

Thanks very much! I'm so on this.

Earthdreams · 1 year ago

Thanks truesunn. I'll contact them.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

Why not the Chamber of Commerce, Kiwanis, Moose, and the Attorney General. You appear to be only desierous of helping a small specific set of the populace.

ACuriousOnlooker · 1 year ago

By all means, don't let me stop you.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

"Why not the Chamber of Commerce, Kiwanis, Moose, and the Attorney General. You appear to be only desierous of helping a small specific set of the populace."

Since your response, "By all means, don't let me stop you." says nothing regarding the second part of my comment I can only assume that what it says is true and correct. You desire to aid only a specific subset of voters. That would make you guilty of the very thing many people are posting vitriolic comments about. In case that does not ring any bells, the position that this attempt to ensure the voting process is an attack against an identifiable segment of the population.

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

Thanks for your concern. Faxes and emails have been sent to a broad spectrum of corporate and public media outlets across the state, and to other outlets across the U.S.

However we can't be the only driver; readers can help by demanding the news outlets you use cover this story. Send them a link to this story. You can tell them we're an independently-produced nonprofit daily online news outlet, and that this is just one of the many stories we've done that are important to readers like you; maybe they'll pay more attention and catch our next big stories like this one since we aren't beholden to anybody else and we do the heavy lifting for them.

Thanks for your readership. Stay tuned, there's more in the pipeline.

ACuriousOnlooker · 1 year ago

I will most definitely be following this and am in the process of contacting as many people as possible myself.

Good luck getting this out.

Kiabell · 1 year ago

I'm not surprised, given that the Republicans are really just a front for the KKK. It's disgusting how they continue to rule this country, and noone trys to stop them. This is not a democracy.

xtrabiggg · 1 year ago

Is this the kind of government we want? Check out the story below... Apparently, the McCain campaign feels that if you have been foreclosed on (even if you STILL live in your home!) you have no right to vote, and you WILL be challenged at the polls! How convenient that the McCain Regional Headquarters is in the Building of TROTT & TROTT - Michigan's foremost FORECLOSURE LAW FIRM!!!! Hmmm... Coincidence? I think not!

This is typical of the so-called 'Maverick' Senator from Arizona! He is the ultimate DC Beltway insider, has ties to (and cash from!) all the big corporate, military and banking interests that are bleeding the average American dry, and will say or do anything to further his acquisition of power and influence- even if it is the WRONG thing for America! McCain is a political opportunist, and is one of the most unscrupulous politicians ever to run for President. If you disagree, just GOOGLE 'Keating Five' and see how sleazy McCain was, is and will be as President.

xtrabiggg
++++++++++++++++++

Earthdreams · 1 year ago

Never mind the "Keating Five," watch videos of POW's families when Senator McCain was heading the Congressional Committees to address the families pleas to get their loved ones (MIAs and POWs from the Korean and VietNam wars) released. I'll say no more.

xtrabiggg · 1 year ago

I absolutely agree! There are more skeletons in this guy's closet than
anyone can believe! Unfortunately, the 'powers that be' know that, and have
used this fact to manipulate McCain throughout his career!

xtrabiggg
+++++++++++++++++++++++

Earthdreams · 1 year ago

Those whose homes are in foreclosure should vote by Absentee Ballot. They should immediately get a list of other families whose houses are in foreclosure and individually or collectively contact the NAACP, the ACLU and members of Congress.

politigal2 · 1 year ago

To all the commentors who obviously did not read the article and/or do not understand foreclosure notices - just because you have received a notice does not mean you are not still living at that address-
It is not as if we were not expecting this from the Repubs- they want to win by fair means or foul & this is foul. But here is how to fight it:
When you go to the polls- bring a recent (October) bill & the envelope it came in- showing it was delivered to your name (registered voter) at that address-
These people are evil - they could care less about "proper electoral proceedures" - no - it is an attempt to steal this election - after all they have been successful doing so twice already.

ncbill · 1 year ago

A very high-risk strategy, considering simply receiving a notice of foreclosure happens while the homeowner is still the legal owner, and has several months before they must vacate.

As an organized strategy, there is the risk of unlimited personal liability from everyone to the local challenger up through the top organizer of this campaign (party chairman)

There's also the risk of having to look over your shoulder for federal charges until the 5 year (more than one presidential administration) statute of limitations runs out.

miocid31 · 1 year ago

I only have one question, What can we do about this?

blitznstitch · 1 year ago

Go tell Carabelli directly how Un-American he is and how much he is not patriot! To prevent fellow Americans from voting is Jim Crow!

James Carabelli works for United Lawnscape.

http://www.unitedlawnscape.com/team-com.php

Here is his professional profile and information:
http://center.spoke.com/info/pFa265a/JamesCarab...
Here is his professional profile:
James Carabelli
Director of Landscape Sales
United Lawnscape
26215 Delwal Drive
Novi, MI 48375-1225
http://www.unitedlawnscape.com

heywood_yablome · 1 year ago

GO JIM CROW GO JIM CROW GO JIM CROW GO JIM CROW
GO JIM CROW GO JIM CROW GO JIM CROW GO JIM CROW
GO JIM CROW GO JIM CROW GO JIM CROW GO JIM CROW

Earthdreams · 1 year ago

We need to start an investigation as to whether the GOP had anything to do with colluding with the banks in advising low-interest home loan scams, ie, predatory loans, to districts that are heavily populated with 1) lower income earners, 2) minorities and 3) democrats. There is that old stinky odor being emitted from the GOP yet again. Anyone who has been paying their utility bills from the address where their house has been in forclosure, or anyone who is still living at that address, even though it is in forclosure, must be allowed to vote. We, as a nation, cannot continue to call ourselves a democracy as long as the GOP continues steal the votes of minority citizens. A class action law suit to stop this voter theft is in order. Let every American who truly believes in democracy, file a class action law suit against the GOP in Michigan. Now, that would be patriotic! The GOP is suppressing the vote again. Antidote: a massive class action lawsuit. Charges are as follows: Charge #1 - Voter Supression, Charge #2 - Racism, Charge #3: Trying to fix an election. Are you in?

kyfhoUSA · 1 year ago

I hope these scumbag GOP tactics are being brought to the attention of the Federal Election Commission and investigated!

Enough is Enough! We need to take America back from the sleazy GOP. We deserve better than this as Americans!!!

http://www.cafepress.com/geofftoons

lefty75 · 1 year ago

You don't deserve anything. You have to fight for it.

Merenwentari · 1 year ago

Those who have come before us and fought for our freedom deserve to have that sacrifice honored. We are free because of those who have come before us, and as a woman I can say that I can vote because of the hard-won battles that those before me have fought. I DO have the RIGHT to vote, just as every other American does. We shouldn't have to keep re-fighting battles that have already been won.

cinnamonape · 1 year ago

Typical disgusting GOP tactic...but it could backfire. The Obama campaign should get the folks who are foreclosed upon to go back to their former neighborhoods and canvas their former friends and neighbors. Their kids should talk with their friends in school and say..."do you know that the Republicans are trying to prevent my folks from voting." I think everyone in areas hit by high foreclosure rates or who have seen a neighbor lose their home will think that this is an absolutely inappropriate action. And vote against any Republican on the ballot.

It brings the GOP's methods out into the steriliizing lamp of sunlight and makes it "personal".

And what does THIS mean? "Republican Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land, voter challenges need only be “based on information obtained through a reliable source or means.” “But poll workers are not allowed to ask the reason” for the challenges, Rozell said. In other words, Republican vote challengers are free to use foreclosure lists as a basis for disqualifying otherwise eligible voters."

All they need is SOMEONE who they believe is a "reliable source" and they will accept the challenge...and the poll workers can't even ask for the evidence? And if the evidence turns out to be an illigitimate foreclosure listing (since a person might still be resident, or have renegotiated payment, or be renting from their foreclosed residence under a new owner)....they will still be prevented from voting.

This is vote THEFT...a disenfranchisement of legal voters. We are no longer a Democracy, apparently!

nerys · 1 year ago

We never were a democracy BE THANKFUL FOR THAT! Trust me.

We are or were a Constitutional Republic. Trust me MUCH better than democracy.

Democratic (not democrat) is good PURE democracy is as bad as communism or anarchy etc..

janezed · 1 year ago

Mugabe in ZIMBABWE also used these types of tactic for disenfranchizing voters
Is USA a THIRD WORLD country?
certainly NOT a democracy and its citizens are not free to vote obviously

ezky · 1 year ago

These letters often require signatures and are delivered when people aren't home. Because they have to work.

reggie1298 · 1 year ago

How do you know this? That would cost the sender at least $2.00 or so for each letter. I don't think that's very cost-effective.

bmh · 1 year ago

Certified mail costs less than $1 per item sold.

There were over 3 million votes that weren't counted in the 2004 presidential election. Buying an election is easier (and cheaper) than you might think.

reggie1298 · 1 year ago

Please find that here

bmh · 1 year ago

I no longer use this email address. Please email me at my Me.com account (bhart@).

Thanks!

Brian

Fightbacknow · 1 year ago

My good friends and neighbors we should not allow the republicans to intimidate possible voters with these scare tactics. We must fight back. One way to do this is to systematically plan to fight fire with fire and use similar tactics. I just suggest that once we have voted in our proper voting place we select populous republican voting precincts and go there get in line and attempt to vote there in large numbers, thus clogging up and blocking them from voting as they are attempting to block us from voting. BUT PLEASE REMEMBER TO VOTE IN YOUR PROPER AND LEGAL PRECINCT FIRST.

Just put the word out and broadly advertise it in all mediums of information that this will happen. Be sure to be planned and ready for this to happen on election day. Lets make this an all day activity. If they try to prevent us from voting we will do the same. Lets have a very exciting election day.

oparippa · 1 year ago

GREAT PLAN....GOOD LUCK...

reggie1298 · 1 year ago

Because Richard Nixon was a disgraced president , but mostly because he was an evil Republican, many people don't know that he lost Illinois to John Kennedy in 1960 because of voter fraud in Cook County. If he had been awarded the electoral votes from Illinois he would have beaten Kennedy. Why don't you hear about this when Gore's and Kerry's losses are big, conspiratorial deals? Because Nixon feared that his disputing the vote would tear the country apart, so for the good of the nation he let Kennedy have it.

Voter fraud exists, it is perpetrated mostly by Democrats, and if it has influenced one election, that's one too many. Life is difficult; you don't change the rules because people have a lot going on in their lives. If you think that's overly harsh, consider that you might be overly soft.

odonnell · 1 year ago

Well, a major reason that you don't hear about this, and that Nixon didn't demand a recount, is that a recount would have covered the whole state, and there was a similar amount of Republican voter fraud outside of Cook County.

GaryKleppe · 1 year ago

Actually, the reason you don't hear about it is that it's false. According to the official tally, Kennedy won with 303 electoral votes to Nixon's 219. Even if you flipped Illinois' 27 voted to Nixon, it would still have left Kennedy up by thirty votes. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_pres...

johnj999 · 1 year ago

Do you think the Republicans would have allowed the 12 Apostles to vote - seeing as they forfieted their houses and all their worldy goods voluntarily? Maybe we should say a prayer for the Republicans - maybe it would help them get back on the path of righteousness.

virgett · 1 year ago

John McCain can never be President his parents were not married in America.
Jonn Mcain can never be President he was not born on American soil or the United States of America.
John MCCain does not have an Address to Citizenship to be the President of USA.
History can not be changed with John MCCain. The Republicans will have the surprise of their life.
Sarah Palin is a Native American Indian born on a Idaho Reservation. She maybe not be able to
be a Vice-President base on American Indian Affaird Dept. and the USA Constituton Legal Laws.
The Facts will come out. Both are Fake and can not be in the White House.
Vote Democrat, They will win , It is written let it be done!

oparippa · 1 year ago

PLEASE GO TO GREG PALAST WEB PAGE....Obama doesn't sweat....he should....the republicans have been perfecting this since 2000....nothing new for them...they are getting REALLY GOOD AT IT....and the world is paying the price....

Ms_ADK · 1 year ago

Of course folks who are homeless can't vote. How un-American are they?

And tell them to have their babies in mangers.

This is insane. We gave up on property-owning requirements for voting and then poll taxes. Let's see how fast we can move backward. Can we get there before November 4th?

KrisWA · 1 year ago

I have never contacted the media or my elected officials before but I tell ya I am so outraged by this that i felt strongly that the word needs to get out about this. So I just sent emails to the media, the DNC, and my elected officials. This is a perversion of democracy. The deadline for voter registration is in Oct. sometime... if I remember correctly...so these voters need to be aware that time is of the essence!

Does the insanity of this Election ever stop?

firedup · 1 year ago

Since foreclosure lists will be used to challenge voters why wouldn't the foreclosure list have to be verified with the sale of the property? I would think that the elected government in Michigan would want to ensure that their constituents were able to vote and would therefore insist that 'challenges' to their voters would be legitimate. In Illinois, property transfers are recorded and public record. (By the way, do you think its possible that some government officials are experiencing foreclose? and maybe we should challenge them and/or embarrass them. Maybe they could be challenged on non payment of property taxes?)

Belle3 · 1 year ago

If this is happening and I do not doubt it, then what does that say about the people of the Republican Party. I am so disappointed that in this day and age, that people have to be so dishonest just to win. I am tired of the Republican Party. They put us into war, they put us into an economic downfall, they have sent jobs over seas, they give tax breaks to oil companies, that then in turn charge us $4 at the pump, they approve of a VP pick, that has the thinnest resume, and they continue to lie to the American people just to win. What does that say for the character of the Republican Party? If this is what America is all about, and this party wins the election, then the American people get exactly what they deserve. Can anyone honestly say, that those are qualities and characteristics that they are proud of? Shame on the Republican Party. Shame on those Americans who have been deceived for the last 8 years, that you would allow themselves to be deceived again. Is this the kind of image you want the rest of the world to see? Is this the kind of qualities that you want your future generations to have? Are Americans really that stupid?

lark1964 · 1 year ago

Even criminals in prison are permitted to vote. It's call "absentee". I think even those on death row have the right.

If this is true, the GOP is trying this, I find it very interesting their initial target - the black population... Golly, think they're worried?

loufah · 1 year ago

http://aftmichigan.org/files/voter.pdf

Felons can vote in MI only after they serve their time.

David1752 · 1 year ago

Its the only way they can win! NO MORE LIES!! OBAMA 08

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

Question. What is the lie?

alijean · 1 year ago

In CA you can request a provisional ballot, if you are not on the roles. Check with your local registrar.
It's only going to get worse, the more desperate the Republicans become.
If your state has electronic only, no paper, insist on a provisional. We must be diligent, don't let them steal our votes again.

TstormVA · 1 year ago

In the end, they never count the provisional ballots.

TAG131 · 1 year ago

If the house hasn't actually gone through Foreclosure then they can still vote under that address simply because at any time before the thing goes before the proper officials, they have a right to pay for any money that was due. So technically they still live there. Regardless, they can vote if they are registered in that state. They can't stop someone from voting. These racists pigs. Let's just see how many white people will be on this list.

PARockNRoller · 1 year ago

A person with legal standing in each of the targeted counties should seek a Cease and Desist Order to prevent discrimination based on Age, Race or Religious affiliation. If there is any evidence that foreclosures have affected African Americans in these counties disproportionately the arguement is germain. Using foreclosure lists, that are evidence of the proportionality, against those voters is the very embodiment of discrimination that this country was founded to fight against.

This is should be taken to the national press. This should be taken to the Federal Election Commission...oh no...don't do that Bush runs that Department...and we all know his track record of following the letter of the law and not using the government against the people. There must be legal organizations that would offer counsel to assist in building the Cease and Desist orders. This should be taken to all concerned parties, legal entities, courts etc, but mostly this should be outted to the voting public at large so the rest of the country knows what tactics McCain is using in the northeast to attempt to win these electoral colleges.

eagleye · 1 year ago

I wish someone in the national media would point out that Democrats are always looking to increase voter participation, while Republicans are always trying to minimize attendance at the polls. Every time, in case after case around the country we see this same scenario play out.

Grafilthy · 1 year ago

Wow. These neo-con-artists never cease to amaze me. The whole deal seems like another stinky right wing attempt at disenfranchising poor voters.

HillbillyBob · 1 year ago

The rule is you register to vote then you vote, in your precinct. This caging tactic is wrong. Like in Florida with the
300,000 or so voters dumped from the rolls because they had a name that sounded like a felons or might be a relative of a felon or you might be a felon in the future, then there was the ballot shredding.
When you register to vote at your new address the Election office sends a notice to your old precinct.
If you have not registered a new address your registration should not change unless you are declared dead, or the county coroner sends a notice of your death or you move again and reregister at your new address.. If you are in foreclosure and have not left your registered address they have no legal ground to stand on other than they are corporate rnc shills, and unlawful to make your private and confidential business public by farming this out to some RNC hired firm...

besuretovote · 1 year ago

In the 60's, Congress passed two bils "The Right to Vote for Blacks (African Americans) and Civil Rights" and along the amendments for Blacks (African Americans) to live as a citizen in these United States of America. Has GOP committee lose their mind using foreclosure tactics to win the election? Praying that people of Michigan and Ohio wake-up this tactics of the GOP committee. If GOP committee can not hang with big dogs, get off the porch and let the Democrats show them how it is done not using tactics to scare people from voting in the election.

Votekeeper · 1 year ago

There are many things you can do to stop the Republican crimes:
1) Make sure YOU are still registered to vote, and then urge your friends to do the same. Go to www.michigan.gov/vote or call your local clerk. The SOS undertook a purge project in 2006 that may have affected over 400,000 voters, violating numerous provisions of federal law.
2) Call your local clerk (city, village, or township) and ask how they plan to respond to challenges based on foreclosure notices. Note that under Michigan law, a person has the right to vote at their old address one more election even if they have moved in the past 60 days. Moreover, a person has the right to make an election day change of address within the jurisdiction, which can be "nontraditional," that is, homeless. The clerk by law must allow registration at the nearest freeway underpass or street intersection, with a POB mailing address.
3) Volunteer to serve as a challenger yourself, for the Michigan Campaign for Change. Democratic Party challengers work to provide voter protection and help voters vote at the right location. Go to National Voter Protection Center Home to volunteer:
http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/vpchome
http://my.barackobama.com/counselforchange
4) Volunteer to serve as an election integrity monitor to keep this election from being stolen via tampering with the tabulating machines. Go to www.michiganelectionreformalliance.org to see how to sign up and receive training. Keep Michigan from becoming another "Ohio."

illumiknitti · 1 year ago

Please forward this article to major news outlets--it is imperative that these tactics do not go unnoticed. I have never written to the media in my life, and I'm busily sending out email to every one on the list below:

ABC News
77 W. 66 St., New York, NY 10023
Phone: 212-456-7777

General e-mail: netaudr@abc.com
Nightline: nightline@abcnews.com
20/20: 2020@abc.com

CBS News
524 W. 57 St., New York, NY 10019
Phone: 212-975-4321
Fax: 212-975-1893

Email forms for all CBS news programs
CBS Evening News: evening@cbsnews.com
The Early Show: earlyshow@cbs.com
60 Minutes II: 60minutes@cbsnews.com
48 Hours: 48hours@cbsnews.com
Face The Nation: ftn@cbsnews.com

CNBC
900 Sylvan Avenue, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632
Phone: (201) 735-2622
Fax: (201) 583-5453
Email: info@cnbc.com

CNN
One CNN Center, Box 105366, Atlanta, GA 30303-5366
Phone: 404-827-1500
Fax: 404-827-1784
Email forms for all CNN news programs

Fox News Channel
1211 Ave. of the Americas, New York, NY 10036
Phone: (212) 301-3000
Fax: (212) 301-4229
comments@foxnews.com
List of Email addresses for all Fox News Channel programs
Special Report with Brit Hume: Special@foxnews.com
FOX Report with Shepard Smith: Foxreport@foxnews.com
The O'Reilly Factor: Oreilly@foxnews.com
Hannity & Colmes: Hannity@foxnews.com, Colmes@foxnews.com
On the Record with Greta: Ontherecord@foxnews.com

MSNBC/NBC
30 Rockefeller Plaza, New York, NY 10112
Phone: (212) 664-4444
Fax: (212) 664-4426
List of Email addresses for all MSNBC/NBC news programs
Dateline NBC: dateline@nbc.com
Hardball with Chris Matthews: hardball@msnbc.com
MSNBC Reports with Joe Scarborough: joe@msnbc.com
NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams: nightly@nbc.com
NBC News Today: today@nbc.com

PBS
2100 Crystal Drive, Arlington VA 22202
Phone: 703-739-5000
Fax: 703-739-8458
The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer: newshour@pbs.org

National Radio Programs

National Public Radio
635 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20001-3753
Phone: 202-513-3232
Fax: 202-513-3329

E-mail: Jeffrey A. Dvorkin, Ombudsman ombudsman@npr.org
List of Email addresses for all NPR news programs

The Rush Limbaugh Show
1270 Avenue of the Americas, NY 10020
Phone (on air): 800-282-2882
Fax: 212-445-3963
E-mail: ElRushbo@eibnet.com

Sean Hannity Show
Phone (on air): 800-941-7326
Sean Hannity: 212-613-3800
James Grisham, Producer: 212-613-3807
E-mail: Phil Boyce, Program Director phil.boyce@citcomm.com

National Newspapers

The Los Angeles Times
202 West First Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Phone: 800-528-4637 or 213-237-5000
Fax: 213-237-4712

L.A. Times Contact Information by Department
Letters to the Editor: letters@latimes.com
Readers' Representative: readers.rep@latimes.com

The New York Times
620 8th Ave., New York, NY 10018
Phone: 212-556-1234
D.C. Bureau phone: 202-862-0300
Fax: 212-556-3690

Letters to the Editor (for publication): letters@nytimes.com
Write to the news editors: news-tips@nytimes.com
Corrections: senioreditor@nytimes.com
New York Times Contact Information by Department
How to Contact New York Times Reporters and Editors

USA Today
7950 Jones Branch Dr., McLean, VA 22108
Phone: 703-854-3400
Fax: 703-854-2078
Letters to the Editor: editor@usatoday.com
Give feedback to USA Today

The Wall Street Journal
200 Liberty St., New York, NY 10281
Phone: 212-416-2000
Fax: 212-416-2658

Letters to the Editor: wsj.ltrs@wsj.com
Comment on News Articles: wsjcontact@dowjones.com

The Washington Post
1150 15th St., NW, Washington, DC 20071
Phone: 202-334-6000
Fax: 202-334-5269

Letters to the Editor: letters@washpost.com
Ombudsman: ombudsman@washpost.com
Contact Washington Post Writers and Editors

Magazines

Newsweek
251 W 57th Street, New York, NY 10019
Phone: 212-445-4000
Fax: 212-445-5068

Letters to the Editor: letters@newsweek.com

Time
Time & Life Bldg., Rockefeller Center, 1271 6th Ave., New York, NY 10020
Phone: 212-522-1212
Fax: 212-522-0003

Letters to the Editor letters@time.com

U.S. News & World Report
1050 Thomas Jefferson St., Washington, DC 20007
Phone: 202-955-2000
Fax: 202-955-2049

Letters to the Editor letters@usnews.com

News Services / Wires

Associated Press
450 West 33rd St., New York, NY 10001
Phone: 212-621-1500
Fax: 212-621-7523

General Questions and Comments: info@ap.org
Partial Contact Information for the Associated Press by Department and Bureau

Reuters
Three Times Square, New York, NY 10036
Telephone: 646-223-4000
Reuters Editorial Feedback

United Press International
1133 19th Street, NW, Suite 800, Washington, DC 20036
Telephone: 202-898-8000
FAX: 202-898-8048
Comments and Tips: tips@upi.com

heartbot · 1 year ago

This is disgusting.

oscar2000 · 1 year ago

When you go into foreclosure you can still be living in your house so your address is going to be the same as it always was. What the Republican's are trying to do, is say since this house is in foreclosure you must not be a leagal resident. How any of the volunteers can sleep at night knowing that they are participating in an activity that is not allowing an American the right to vote is beyond my comprehension.

renter · 1 year ago

Renters don't own their homes and they don't have to show proof of living there on the day they are voting. I don't understand how this can be legal.

iggy · 1 year ago

Amazing. The idea that being foreclosed upon should revoke your voting rights would seem, well, insane, but for Republicans it's a cunning plan.

SALES · 1 year ago

I believe the people would be allowed to vote anyway because of the time they did lived in the house pay there taxes (state & local) for a period of "X" months of that calendar year. Did they file their taxes at that address? Does the government accepting that filing recognize that address? The Republicans would be creating another wasteful "witch hunt" at the taxpayers hands...Foreclosure is a "process" then legally the mortgage company/bank/lender has to go to court to take possession...The foreclosure process I have seen it take months even years...Banks are accepting short sales, modifications, etc...What are the persons "redemption rights" in that state (s)...A whole can of worms they will open...Then what about big business who go bankrupt? All the money they gave to political parties? They look bad for thinking about this...I went to college I still voted at home...I lived at college...what was my new address???

SALES · 1 year ago

Funny thing is people think it is just happening to poor black people...I am in lending and real estate and it happens to people in Hollywood to clear cross NYC...across all genders and races...because unemployment, business shutting down, investors loosing on wallstreet and real estate, not every foreclosure is their primary home...I am personally listing homes as short sales from people with college degrees, voters (some guy on here thinks that people who loose their homes don't vote so it doesn't matter) lawyers, doctors, etc...I have a million dollar listing I am working on...Business man who is not getting the contracts like they use to...the economy is hitting across all walks of life and affecting whether people eat out, fly, drive, advertise, etc...be careful how you judge people as you will be judged later...

xclnt · 1 year ago

Isnt it amazing, all this outrage over vote suppression and voter inconvenience. Where was all this concern when ACORN was signing up dead people in Illinois. They are also currently nder investigation here in Ohio for their "registration" campaigns in the inner city.
To some on this blog who claim people shouold be able to vote anywhere as long as they are registered, That is not permitted for two reasons. One, it eliminates (or tries to) people from voting multiple times...another fine Chicago tradition. Two, there are more items on the ballot than the Presidency. How would you like outsiders voting on your school levies, congressmen and local issues? That would also happen if you lose control of the system.
Follow the friggin rules, it's not that tough. My kids went off to college and voted absentee ballot every time. If it is that important to you, quit bitchin and make the effort to follow the rules and vote.

TennMom · 1 year ago

Well, "TAB", as the article points out, many people stay in their foreclosed homes for months. To disenfranchise a voter simply because one's name is on a list is wrong. If the GOP wants to take away a citizen's right to vote, it should have to prove that the citizen no longer lives in a particular residence, not the other way around. Sadly, this is what the Republicans do to win elections. They lie, cheat, steal, smear, and disenfranchise because they have no viable policies nor solutions to solve the problems in this country, and because they have no morals that they will not sacrifice for the sake of power.

esmucker · 1 year ago

Remember, if you want to vote, but are afraid your voting rights will be taken away due to foreclosure, you can always absentee vote, since technically you may have good reason to believe you will be out of town on election day. Here's the link where you can find an absentee ballot. http://www.michigan.gov/sos

medbert · 1 year ago

THIS IS OBSCENE!!!! I think the media needs to be proactive this time and expose this disgusting behavior by McCain campaign and their operatives IMMEDIATELY

Jallenrule · 1 year ago

This is a dumb move on their behalf. Very, very dumb. Cowardly at best.

Of course, republicans have to do all they can to rig this election, it's the only chance they got. Unfortunately for them, it ain't gonna work this time. Sorry assholes.

lefty75 · 1 year ago

So if they use this list in Lansing, say, but not Bloomfield Hills, is that actionable?

Bill_Nowling · 1 year ago

This story is not true. The Michigan Republican Party is not using foreclosure lists to challenge voters. This has never been discussed. This is not being discussed. This will not be discussed. Period.

Bill Nowling
Director of Communication
Michigan Republican Party

CalDamage · 1 year ago

Translation: "The STATE party knows nnnooothing! about the activities of any COUNTY or LOCAL Official Republican Party operation of voter suppression, but we will keep our hands off it completely and not try to prevent it in any way."

That's Germanic/Polish country up there, Bill. Is that name pronounced 'kneeling'?

Cjab · 1 year ago

Excuse me.....as quoted above:

“We will have a list of foreclosed homes and will make sure people aren’t voting from those addresses,” party chairman James Carabelli told Michigan Messenger in a telephone interview earlier this week. He said the local party wanted to make sure that proper electoral procedures were followed.

and:
Carabelli is not the only Republican Party official to suggest the targeting of foreclosed voters. In Ohio, Doug Preisse, director of elections in Franklin County (around the city of Columbus) and the chair of the local GOP, told The Columbus Dispatch that he has not ruled out challenging voters before the election due to foreclosure-related address issues.

No - maybe not the 'state' Republican Party - but sure looks like at least a few locals (Mich and otherwise) find it a 'fun' idea. And local is where the action is...right - the votes happen right here at home....

and...I don't hear the state or national Republican office getting all outraged at the behavior. Not like I'm hearing any comments from the state office - you - directed toward the local office instructing them to stop this behavior and act more conscionably.

073165 · 1 year ago

This could EASILY backfire considering Dems could use the same strategy in other white counties within the state. This is WHY voters should always use ABSENTEE ballots to avoid the mess that will probably occur on November 4th.

FAPastor · 1 year ago

The Democrates should attempt to file a cease and desist --- or, a temporary restraining order!!

When a person receivies notice of being foreclosed they usually are given time to pay the default or they can file for bankruptcy or the administration is currently considering a freeze on foreclosures by Freddy Mac and Fanny May. All of these things allow a person to remain in their homes - and current resoidences. Besides, if your house burned down and you moved to a motel, it would not mean that your residence was not your address. What is Michigan's law on residency for voting? Generally one establishes residency when physicall coming to a location and intending it to be their residence. Foreclosure doesnot mean you have given up your fight to remain at the voting address.

msw_aka · 1 year ago

The Republican Party is so pathetic that they continuously have to try to disenfranchise a particular population. If John McCain were truly for "change" he would denounce his party's practice of voter intimidation and support the U.S. Constitution that gives every person the right to vote. And, how exactly will the "challenger" be able to determine whether the intended voter is, or is not, still residing at the foreclosed property? Isn't the burden of proof placed on the alleger? This information has lit a fire under my bottom and I will definitely be a poll watcher on Election Day to make sure that voter rights are not infringed on. And I will be there to challenge the "challenger" when they attempt to block anyone from their legal right to vote!

loufah · 1 year ago

> If you were live out side that wouldn't stop the state from taking money out of your pay check if your working.

Sure, but taxes are based on where you work and where you live, but voting rights are based only on where you live., I know people who are NJ residents who work in NYC, pay NYC taxes, but don't get to vote there.

sadvoter · 1 year ago

Can these people vote by absentee ballot? Then they wouldn't be challenged at the polling places.

flygirl17699 · 1 year ago

Not only do I find it disturbing that anyone from any party could ever use forclosure listings against people, especially in our current economy, but I found it especially alarming that more than 60 percent of all sub-prime loans were made to African-Americans in Michigan. Can you say "Institutional Racism"? It is absolutely unacceptable that the mortgage industry, and any other loan provider, would use race as a determining factor when selecting the type of loan that they approve for a person.

bbandit · 1 year ago

"John McCain’s campaign stands to benefit from the burgeoning number of foreclosures in the state. McCain’s regional headquarters are housed in the office building of..." Having an office in the same building is not evidence of ties. My attorney has an office in a bank sky rise; but her firm has no ties other than a lease payment due each month.

Oh, by the way; some foreclosed homes have no resident. It has been used by defrauders in the past to sneak in fraudulent votes. In fact, there are quite a few democratic campaign employees in jail for it. Don't be fooled; Gore vs. Bush proved that the Dems couldn't even win a campaign they tried to fix for themselves. (Dumpsters full of legitimate republican votes were found that were never counted)

Don't read much into the article, it is more editorial opinion than factual reporting; just garbage.

SouthernYankee · 1 year ago

I wonder if the democratics can do the same. Why should we be surprised that is the only way the can win. The republicans haven't won a fair election since Ronald Reagan. Cheat is the name of the game for republicans. Mean spirited, hell yes. But would like to tell the republicans sooner or later the rooster is going to come home.

votingrightsforall · 1 year ago

so let me get this straight, in a "Democracy" It's standard procedure to put programs in place to ensure that the public cannot vote and participate in the political process? I mean, is this the message that the Republican party is trying to make sure the American people are aware of?

sablearms · 1 year ago

Please show me exactly where in the Constitution does it give the GOP in Michigan or any other organization, government agency or any entity for that matter the right to block certain individuals(American citizens) from casting there Constitutionally given right to vote in any of our Nation's elections. Typical powerplay on the part of the PTB in Michigan to intimidate individuals of a perhaps lesser socio=economic status. Violate the Rule of Law and The Supreme Law of the Land, nonetheless. These GOP idiots are the same ones who completely destroyed the entire process of electing delegates for the two major conventions during the primaries. i.e. Nevada, Louisiana, Indiana, Colorado, etc. appointed many if not most or all of their representative party delegates---- elections were either suspended, post-poned, or done away with all together. Ron Paul would have had several hundred delegates elected nationwide had this fraud not been perpetrated upon the American people. The two party system has failed us miserably. This attempted GOP action in Michigan is just one more example why our system of government must return to the Rule of Law, a Constitutional basis. Anything less is a complete failure in which we all lose.

Wilma1 · 1 year ago

I think that is beyond rediculous! Why should our financial privacy be available for anybody who wants to intrude on it? We are participating in the election for the next President, we are not applying for assistance or credit - why should anyone be allowed to not only exam my personal infornation and not for the purpose of denying me credit but denying me My Constituional Right as a US Citizen to vote. I feel that the homeless should be allowed to vote after all, they are homeless US Citizens.

nick1465 · 1 year ago

typical low down dirty republican tricks. Can't win legally, so we stonewall peoples right to vote. Stealing the election again.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

No one is doing so!

heywood_yablome · 1 year ago

Dear Eartha Jane Melzer,
Why do you lie? You know that what you wrote is completely false. In fact the Michigan Messenger is nothing but a completely leftist blog and is not at all independent.

As you know, voter fraud is very much a concern, especially here in the Detroit area. In past elections, the dead vote, residents of vacant lots and burned out homes vote, and many imaginary friends of the democrats vote too. Voter fraud in Detroit is very high and a common practice.

I would be very happy to see anyone making an effort to eliminate voter fraud. In fact if someone has had their home taken from them via foreclosure, then they no longer live at that address and do have the right to vote. Hence they are voting illegally. The entire "Foreclosure and Voting" issue can be avoided if those people would pay the bills and debt obligations. They should live within their means.

So, Eartha Jane Melzer, please stop the lies. The truth shall set you free.

Sincerely,
Heywood Yablome

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

Michigan Messenger stands behind the reporting of Eartha Jane Melzer.

Note this article for Michigan Messenger's and the Center for Independent Media's position on demands by MIGOP for retraction of the story.

The truth indeed can set us free; ask yourself why the MIGOP has not filed a defamation suit.

pageiv · 1 year ago

Real news orginizations don't sit around and wait for lawsuits to retract or correct stories.

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

Real news organizations don't issue corrections or retractions of true content.

The truth is the absolute defense.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

While the quote as published may be accurate it appears incomplete. And surely was not the sum total of the conversation!

flygirl17699 · 1 year ago

Why would you think she is the one lying? What advantage does that give her to make up something like this?

Also, by the way, just in case you missed this in your Government class, being a homeowner is not a requirement to vote. There may be voter fraud out there, but it's on both sides. We should be cracking down on all fraud, not just picking on people who lose their jobs and homes due to a bad economy.

TheAudacity · 1 year ago

Let me tell you the other side of this that you will not hear in the mainstream liberal media. The reason they are verifying voter registration is because the Obama campaign along with ACORN (Association of Community Organizations Reform Now) for which Obama previously worked as a community organizer are being investigated & charged with voter fraud. Milwaukee's top election officials are seeking criminal charges against ACORN for offering gifts to sign up voters, falsify driver's licenses numbers, Social Security numbers, and other information on voter registration cards. ACORN has child rapists, drug offenders, and forgery convicts on their payroll who are being PAID to vote for Obama by registering the felons (who are ineligible to vote) using DEAD PEOPLES NAMES AND VACANT FORECLOSED HOMES for legal addresses. The Obama campaign has admitted they failed to report $800,000 in campaign payments TO ACORN disguised as payments to a front group called "Citizens Services Inc." for "advanced work". Now with a wave of his magic wand Obama amended his Federal Election Commission forms to change the "advanced work" to "get-out-the-vote" work.

Who is guilty of voter fraud and trying to "fix" this election in their favor? And say again why the GOP should not be allowed to verify that EVERY voter is legally registered to vote, are able to provide identification, and are not felons and non-US citizens illegally registered using a deceased person's identity & vacant foreclosed homes as their address???

Wake up people....you are being fooled and used by Obama & the Democratic Party and they fuel you by making you believe it is about "racial discrimination"!!!! Please take a little time to learn the facts & find the truth. You are about to put yourself, your children, your friends, neighbors, & the entire United States in grave danger if you don't!

yourejoking · 1 year ago

o Thank You Thank You Thank You ! I do not understand these blind followers. There is sooooooooo much wrong with the entire Obama candidacy that even my Democrat ex-hubby and my 23 year old Democrat sister are voting for McCain this year....the first Republican either one has ever voted for. An Obama-nation = ruination. This is so scary.

flygirl17699 · 1 year ago

I am curious to know why you think Obama would ruin the nation???? What is he going to do that is so horrible that Dems are going against their party to vote for someone who has obviously Conservative views? McCain is against gay marriage and abortion, he supports off-shore drilling (which isn't going to do crap for our current economy anyways except ruin the environment surrounding the drills), supports lower taxes for companies that want to send jobs overseas, supports the government not helping out those less fortunate and thinks that they should pull themselves up by their "boot-straps" and doesn't really know enough about the economy to even make a good decision. He basically supports the government being less involved in our financial lives and more involved in our personal lives. Look at how he reacted to AIG's bailout. He opposed it, but had the government not bailed them out, their failure would have been one of the most devastating blows to our economy yet, not to mention the impact on the rest of the world because they are the largest insurance carrier in over 130 countries.

If you agree with all of the above, then by all means, vote for McCain. Both of them support renewable energy and both of them support reform in Washington. Obama wants the government to be less involved in personal lives and more involved our financial lives. He wants the government to stand up and help those less fortunate, give tax breaks to the middle-class and raise taxes for the wealthy.

Both of them are great men, one a war-hero and the other a community activist. They both have shown how they genuinely care about others and their country and both want to make the world a better place. It's just up to the voters to decide what kind of better place they want. What is so scary about Obama wanting to be President? He's just as qualified at McCain yet better educated.

ninaki2000 · 1 year ago

You know why that is? Because some people, obviously people like your ex and your sister, just WILL NOT vote for a black man, that's just creepy...you know what is scary...having another four years of what we had for eight years. Don't you see that McCain is a mere clone of Bush? You must really like the way things are going in the world today, otherwise why would you be asking for more????

webdoctor · 1 year ago

You marginalized yourself in the first sentence of your neocon rant when you chimed in with the "mainstream liberal media' BS. Enough with the feigned indignation crap already GOP. People have seen you for what you are the past 8 years and be thankful we still allow you to stay in Michigan. Go back down south where you belong.

flygirl17699 · 1 year ago

Could you please list some references to where you found this information on Obama and how you know it is true? I have a hard time believing that something so huge would not be publicized and used by the Republicans to demolish Obama's campaign.

By all means, the GOP can verify voter registration all they want, but a home forclosure is not the way to do it. There are way too many ways that the forclosure listings can give a false view of reality. I do think that there should be more verification of voters, but not this way.

ninaki2000 · 1 year ago

Its people like you that McCain banks on, people that are entirely ignorant, people that thrive on fear based politics, yep, you sound like a true Republican, its a shame....

ShelbyCitizen · 1 year ago

Think about this!!

THE ONLY REASON WHY A REPORTER NOW ADAYS USES NOTES INSTEAD OF A VOICE RECORDER IS SO THEY CAN MISQUOTE THE SUBJECT IN THE ARTICLE. MELZER HAS BEEN CHALLENGED BEFORE AND WILL NOT USE ELECTRONICS TO RECORD AN INTERVIEW BECAUSE IT INTERFERS WITH HER INTERPRETATION OF THE FACTS!!

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

Michigan law, as we understand it, requires consent of both parties for recording conversations. You can surely understand why someone may not want to be recorded if being asked sensitive questions.

Michigan Messenger stands behind Eartha Jane Melzer and her reporting.

TheAudacity · 1 year ago

Below is the Detroit Free Press recanting the "Lose Your House Lose Your Vote" article....THIS STORY IS NOT EVEN TRUE.....like I said before they sure can get you rallied and riled by telling you lies & calling "racism". You might want to find another news source besides this "blog" trying to pass as real news! "Reporting" like this should have some limitations.

www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/200809...


GOP won't use foreclosure list to block voters
Macomb County party chair says blog is wrong
BY KATHLEEN GRAY AND AMBER HUNT • FREE PRESS STAFF WRITERS • SEPTEMBER 12, 2008
Read Comments(20) RecommendPrint this pageE-mail this articleShare this article:

Michigan Republicans will send thousands of challengers to polling places on Election Day, but party officials said they won't be using foreclosed home lists to contest voters.



Their comments followed allegations in a liberal blog, "The Michigan Messenger," that the Macomb County Republican Party would use foreclosure lists to challenge voters who no longer live in their foreclosed homes.

Rumors that Republicans were trying to keep people who had lost their homes from voting went viral on the Internet on Thursday as activists announced plans to rally outside Republican presidential candidate John McCain's Farmington Hills campaign office today to demand the resignation of James Carabelli, the Macomb County GOP chairman.

Carabelli flatly denied quotes attributed to him, saying he told a staffer for the blog that volunteers only would check to make sure that an address in a poll book matches the one the voter gives.

The GOP is "absolutely not" gathering foreclosed home addresses for poll challenges, Carabelli said. He said the blog was "actually kind of shocking. It's completely untrue."

The Michigan Republican Party also won't allow its challengers to use foreclosure lists, spokesman Bill Nowling said.

"What does a name on a foreclosure list tell us? Nothing," Nowling said. "We go into the polling place with the qualified voter file and that is all."

A person's name and address on a foreclosure list doesn't mean he or she has left the home, Nowling said.

Eartha Jane Melzer, who talked to Carabelli for the blog, said she stands by her story but didn't tape her interview.

"It could be that they're embarrassed at having such a cynical tactic exposed," she said.

Under a new state law requiring voters to produce photo identification, poll challengers may check to see that the person voting matches the ID.

In 2004, 4,276 Republican volunteers were challengers in 1,800 Michigan precincts. A similar effort will occur this year, Nowling said.

Democrats and other organizations say the GOP challengers aim to intimidate and suppress the vote.

Contact KATHLEEN GRAY at 313-223-4407 or kgray99@freepress.com.

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

First, let me point out that the Detroit Free Press and other mainstream corporate media outlets did not bother to investigate this potential problem; they "mooched" off this particular online news outlet (which you refer to as a blog) and merely counter-reported the same story, leading with the rebuttal by the Republican Party.

Second, the rebuttal itself is questionable. Michigan Messenger nor its parent organization, nor the reporter Eartha Melzer received any request to retract the article; the MIGOP instead issued a press release with its rebuttal. Had they actually planned to sue Michigan Messenger, they would have taken the first step of asking directly for a retraction as a prelude to a lawsuit. Such a lawsuit would make all notes, phone and other records subject to subpoena as evidence. You might want to ask yourself why the Detroit Free Press and other mainstream media outlets didn't press this issue with the MIGOP.

Thirdly, you have posted in its entirety a complete article by the Detroit Free Press, which is likely a violation of their copyright and not Fair Use. Any further re-posting of complete articles will be removed.

pageiv · 1 year ago

The Flint Journal ran with this and of course Democrats and NAACP are all up in arms over this issue whish, thus far, is not proven. But start a rumor, run with it is how Democrats work every other year.

mblackburn · 1 year ago

Yes, the Democrats are the ones profiting from scurrilous rumors.
Spoken like a man without an email account!

ninaki2000 · 1 year ago

But the Republicans wouldn't do anything like this....right? Yeah, right....the Republicans have been placing Ads on National TV that were complete lies, but that is OK?????

Eye10QJ · 1 year ago

Thanks this just goes to show that we need to read and research before jumping and running. As in ANYTHING! Get the facts but where do we go for the truth? We can't go to the (un-opinionated)press. They take sides and lie to the people. We can't go to our elected officials. Talk about liars! So how do we know? Who do we go to for the truth? Just add this to the list of things that make u a proud american. We're lied to constantly and we run around with our heads in our behinds because we have no other place to go...or do we? We sit and watch what's going on in someone elses home (reality tv) and in the mean time we're losing ours. We sit (again) and vote for the next idol and model yet we can't come together and properly vote for the next man/woman to run our country.
This country is falling apart right in front of our eyes and we're allowing it. Because we'd rather BLOG and sit on our behinds rather than doing what are parents did and voice our opinions, collectively!!

chucksantenna · 1 year ago

shouldn't decent people be legally allowed to execute these assholes for stealing our government and our homes.

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

I'm going to take this as a rhetorical and theoretical statement rather than an actual threat of violence.

In the future, please avoid the use of similar rhetorical devices, although we can understand your frustration and anger about this situation.

Stanley_Burrell · 1 year ago

Now, I haven't read or even physically made eye-contact with this article, but, I defend it, entirely, based upon Ravenstorm telling me to.

http://www.forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?t...

Monks in '08 muthafuckaz!!1one.

Stanley_Burrell · 1 year ago

Also in my defending case: http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1808306

ECStanton · 1 year ago

Regarding the swift-boating accusations about Obama and ACORN -- if these egregious acts are true, there will certainly be proof. Republicans would be trumpeting it everywhere. Where is it?

For the unbright: if you target a demographic that's likely to vote for your opponent, that's vote suppression. If you target foreclosed homes in a specific area in which that demographic tends to live, that's vote suppression. Also, 2 + 2 = 4.

NITEOW · 1 year ago

The National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) provides voters the chance to cast a FEDERAL ONLY ballot if they were registered but failed to reregister when they moved. If they live in the same election jurisdiction they can return to their old polling place and at least vote for President, US Senate, and US Congress candidates. This is more effective than casting a Provisional Ballot which would only be counted after the election. Thus, even if registered voters had to move from a foreclosed home, they could still vote for those federal offices.

Americans for Democratic Action in Washington, DC has formed a Voter Suppression Task Force to publicize dirty tricks like this, take legal action if necessary, etc.

Earthdreams · 1 year ago

illuminiknitti, Thank you for all of the work you have done by gathering contact information to news organizations. This is very helpful.

ProgressiveReb · 1 year ago

This is outrageous. And if it happens in Michigan, it will certainly happen in other states.

We must fight back. Progressive Future has a great action page posted where you can write to Michigan's Secretary of State, Terri Lynne Land, and tell her that this kind of interference with the basic right to vote is unacceptable, and that you expect her to say so—publicly. Just click here.

Nuffsaid · 1 year ago

Why is their no National Ballot for National Elections?

We are citizens of the United States of America first.

We are residents of Michigan, Florida etc. second.

Why is there no National Election laws covering who can vote and who can't in national Elections?

Why is the determination of the qualification to voter left in the hands of Elected Partisan Officals?

In the day of computers and databases why is their no national Voters Registration?

I can understand why the US has the lowest voter turn out of any industrial nation because we make the system so hard and unfair. The people who think there is no use voting because their vote want count anywayare probably correct.

Bentrider · 1 year ago

The Republicans pushed through and then defended in court the requirement that all voters have a photo ID to receive a ballot. What we should do now is to do away with the formal 30 day registration deadline and allow any one with a valid driver's license or state ID to register the day of the election using the address on the ID, which must be within the precinct. Then the only challenge that the vote suppressing Republicans can use is that the address is not in the precinct. Thus the drive of the elitists who make up and are represented by the pro-Amway, pro-Chamber of Commerce, Right-to-life but pro-death penalty, Vote Suppessing Republican Party would actually bring the voter registration system into the 21st Century. All we would need to complete the process is to computerize the registration system and connect it live to the county clerks' offices and the Secretary of State's office to be able to check that data base. Then all interested citizens who wish to vote would be able to vote.

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

Interesting point, worthy of further exploration. Minnesota, for example, allows same-day registration; does it work well? what would it take to implement here?

yourejoking · 1 year ago

Research it and stop telling others their being stupid. It's legal...it's the Law...whats the problem? When I moved from my home...not because of foreclosure...I followed the rules governing our voting rights and completed the proper paperwork to ensure my voting rights remained intact. Ten years ago when I lived in an apt. in Ohio they would check your address to ensure you were within voting rights. Thats the way the system was set up as a means to help reduce enigmatic voters and forged elections. I'm sick of YumYums who dont understand the laws but think just because they are "Americans" they have all these entitlements. We the people are governed by far more laws than you are aware but people continue to bitch out of ignorance for the law. Take your thumb out of your whining mouth and do your research. I dont understand why any exception should be made to someone who foreclosed on their home...even more so as they would then be able to vote (illegally) for the candidate most likely to relinquish their consequences & make those of us who can manage our money pay for their lack of responsibility in spending. I work hard to pay my mortgage and and frugal enough to live within my means. Why do I want my taxes to wash away the consequences of the irresponsible? My neighbors son has a wife and 2 kids making 60K /year and bought a 300K home. WTF?! Living within your means should have some reward and living beyond your means should have some consequence. Thats called learning.

loufah · 1 year ago

> Why is their no National Ballot for National Elections?

> We are citizens of the United States of America first.

> We are residents of Michigan, Florida etc. second.

> Why is there no National Election laws covering who can vote and who can't in national Elections?

The Constitution says states can't discriminate against voters on the basis of race, color, or sex.

It also says that it is up to the states to choose electors for President. They don't even have to let the public vote. Obviously, all the states nowadays let the public vote, and choose electors based on that (either proportionally or winner-take-all).

If you want to change things, a Constitutional Amendment is the way to go.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

I am getting real tired of this! Those of you decrying this attempt to VERIFY who is to vote from which Ward are not paying attention.
No one no where has said that they want to prevent people from voting.
People are confusing a notice of foreclosure with a foreclosure.
"Foreclosure Defined
A foreclosure occurs when a property owner cannot make principal and/or interest payments on his/her loan, typically leading to the property being seized and sold.
Stages of Foreclosure

The foreclosure process is not very difficult to understand. There are several stages during which the homeowner has an opportunity to bring the loan current and avoid foreclosure.

After about three to six months of missed payments, the lender orders a trustee to record a Notice of Default (NOD). At the County Recorder’s Office. This puts the borrower on notice that he or she is facing foreclosure and starts a reinstatement period that typically runs until five days before the home is auctioned off. It is at this time that the property is foreclosed. Of course after the sale there is a new owner.
All of this does not take away a person's right to vote but does affect where they vote from. Therefore a challenge of the person's status is legitimate!

Talk about politics of fear!

Coyoty · 1 year ago

Where do they vote from then if they're told they can't vote where they would have if their address were accepted?

pageiv · 1 year ago

I just want to thank you for starting this rumor, you have no shame at all. I know you called GOP party chairs to ask them "What if?" questions until you got your comment. Let's hear the audio of the entire conversation? You wont put that out, all you want to do is put out these rumors and urban legends to scare Dem voters, its what you liberal groups do every 2 years because you cant debate issues.

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

You do realize Michigan requires 2-party consent to tape conversations, yes? Do you really think that any member of the Republican Party would actually consent to being taped while saying they were breaking the law?

Speaking of debating the issues -- this one being the issue of voter rights -- you've left 3 comments in this thread inside eight minutes, none of them actually furthering discussion of the topic and merely being confrontational. Any further comments of that nature will be removed as spam-trolling.

gotothepark · 1 year ago

I thought McCain was a reformer. He is continuing the same Bush Policies.Taking away citizens indiviual liberties. Please email this article to the Obama Campaign. They could use this material for a campaign aid against John McCain. This really ties him to Bush and show him benefiting from those who are hurting. Use everything the republican preceive as a weakness and use it to our strength. We have to quit whinning and get to work. The republicans are not use to us fighjting back. If they refuse to let us vote shut down the voting polls. Bring the news stations, riot! The Law firm is also breaching client confidentiality. There should be a call to boycott this law firm. Hit the greedy republicans where it hurts. The pocket book.

webdoctor · 1 year ago

The GOP likes to think that only black are on foreclosure lists. I know a LOT of white families who have been booted out of their homes this year, too. Some of which are Republicans tried and true. Wonders if they, too, will be turned away from the polls. This will be followed up on and heavily scrutinized. Watch your backsides neocon fluffers, and NOT just from the likes of Larry Craig.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

How is this a Bush issue?

ninaki2000 · 1 year ago

We are in this whole mess because of Bush's failed policies, he failed on every level from the War in Iraq to the Housing Crisis, and he did so for 8 YEARS. Now we got McBush who vote with his buddy 95% of the time. You still can't see the connection between Bush and McBush (ahem McCain...)

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

ninaki2000 You start out by referring to "Bush's failed policies".
You specify two the 'War in Iraq". I can not even begin to
surmise what you are going to call a "failed policy" so that
remains with you, until you a willing to be a bit specific.
Then there is "the Housing Crisis", is there even such a crisis?
I can not find any reliable data on historical foreclosure
rates therefore we can not really discuss the current crop
of data. I did locate one piece of empirical data, well a
couple really, that I can reliably comment on. It is
reported that in July of 2008 all forms of adverse action
on mortgages affected 272,171 accounts. This is from a total
population of some 80,000,000. This means that the so-called
housing crises is affecting less than fourth tenths of one
percent. That does not really rise to the level of a crises
in anyone's book. In addition in any given year hundreds
of thousands of people go through this process.

But if you really want to call it a crises, let us put the
blame in the correct lap. Congress passed law forcing lenders
to give loans to parties that the lenders normally would not.

"McBush who vote with his buddy 95% of the time"

I am really glad you brought this up. First the number is 90%.
The Democrats are all agog saying this is proof that McCain is
not the least bit independent but a lackey. This from the party
that removed from their party a member who was shown to have only
voted with the 95% of the time. This was considered insufficient
party loyalty. So which is it voting with the party is good or
voting with the party is bad. And don't forget that the figure
for not being enough inline with the party is 106% of that being
used against McCain.

ninaki2000 · 1 year ago

Denial is not just a river in Africa.

Because you refuse to admit the truth does not obviate the truth.

The Iraq war is the perfect example of the failure of  "Bush Doctrine" of preemptive war.  Each and every excuse given for going to war was proven to be false and it has cost the US over 4,000 lives, over 2 trillion dollars, the respect and trust of the world and the opportunity to turn all of the good will of 9-11 into a world changing event. 

John McCain with all of his military experience, with all of his training, with all of his political experince could have stopped this war.  Single handedly.  He could have said "NO" and the congress would have gone with him but for all of his military experience, for all of his training, for all of his "foreign relations" experience, he blew the call.  Absolutely blew it.  He does not deserve the chance to blow it again.


"It is

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

I do not believe I denied anything. I did ask you questions.

"Each and every excuse given for going to war was proven to be false"
Again an amorphous statement.  I can deal with some of "Each and every".  Let's see! No WMD is the most popular.  Such material was in fact found. I read reports in my local paper of nerve agent artillery shells being found, even before we found Sadam.  Then there is the AP report of 550 metric tons of yellowcake that has been finally transferred to Canada. In case numbers bother you that is over a million pounds.
So it appears that the WMD argument to spank Sadam was valid.

"(C)ost the US over 4,000 lives"
Under no circumstances can this be deemed a policy failure. Heck people in the country do not really care about military deaths. For a 10 year period before the war started the military lost, in peace, 18,006 personal killed. By that standard, war is safer for the military than peace.

"2 trillion dollars"
Is also a poor standard to measure policy success or failure.  Are you standing in line to get a loaf of bread? Is you daily needs rationed?
More to the point where is the money going?

"(R)espect and trust of the world and the opportunity to turn all of the good will of 9-11 into a world changing event."
Respect and trust are by their nature very amorphous. Also you can not make such a blanket statement of this kind for the whole world.
The good will of 9/11?  That is not good will that feeling would has been one of comiseration. That is for all of those that were not dancing in the streets and cheering.  Where was those peoples respect and trust?
Seems to me your manner of protecting yourself is "Please don't hit me I'll leave you alone."

"Single handedly.  He could have said "NO" and the congress would
 have gone with him"
Bit arrogant don't you think? All of Congress? on his word?  You don't want to give McCain a chance to be the top dog> But are perfectly willing to give that job to an unknown. A product and practitioner of Chicago Machine politics. A man that is just now experiencing his first actual political contest. A man that took as his own work product that of other members of the Illinois legislature.  A man who has with is own mouth said that most of the people supporting him will be disapointed?

ninaki2000 · 1 year ago

"So it appears that the WMD argument to spank Sadam was valid."

Funny, the Iraq Study Group disagrees with you.  "Regarding Iraq, the Commission concluded that the Intelligence Community was "dead wrong" in almost all of its pre-war judgments about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and that this constituted a major intelligence failure. The Commission's report described in great detail the systemic analytical, collection, and dissemination flaws that led to the Community's erroneous assessments about Iraq's alleged WMD programs. Chief among these flaws were failures by certain agencies to gather all relevant information and analyze fully information on purported centrifuge tubes, insufficient vetting of key sources, particularly the source "Curveball," and somewhat overheated presentation of data to policymakers"

In other words, Bush lied, servicemen died now McCain wants those same lies to make him president.  I'd call that more of the same.

"(C)ost the US over 4,000 lives"
Under no circumstances can this be deemed a policy failure. Heck people in the country do not really care about military deaths."

That is a typical Bushist line.  The military serve.  They promise to give their lives, if need be in the defense of their country.  To dishonor that sacrifice by using under false pretenses, using lies and deceit, to achieve purely political goals stains the memory of every serviceman killed or wounded in Bush' Iraqi adventure.  Military people are expected to die.  That means the commander in chief carries a special responsiblity to exercise wisdom and caution with their sacrifice.  Bush didn't, McCain won't.


"2 trillion dollars"
Is also a poor standard to measure policy success or
failure.  Are you standing in line to get a loaf of bread?
Is you daily needs rationed?
More to the point where is the money going?"

Gee, let's see.  2 trillion dollars, Let's see.  $7,000 for every man, woman, and child in the US.  Let's see, where is it going?  In the toilet, that's where it went.  Not to our defensee.  not toward achiving energy independence, not to rebuilding our infrastructure.  Just in the toilet.  And McCain wants more of the same.

"(R)espect and trust of the world and the opportunity
to turn all of the good will of 9-11 into a world changing
event."
Respect and trust are by their nature very amorphous."

No, respect and trust are why we're supposed to vote for John McCain aren't they?  Isn't that what his leadership is supposed to be all about?  We respect his leadership and trust his jusgement?  Money, power, and governments can be lost.  Respect, honor and dignity can only be given away.  George Bush with his dishonesty, with his boorishness, with his arrogance, with his ignorance, gave away our honor, took away our respect, and threw away our dignity.  John McCain was there, helping, every step of the way.


"Single handedly.  He could have said "NO"
and the congress would
have gone with him"
Bit arrogant don't you think? "

No, I don't think.  There were two men in the congress who could have done this.  John Warner and John McCain such was the respect they carried inside and outside congress and across party lines.  If either of them had gone to the floor of the Senate and said, "NO" Bush' AUF would have evaporated.  But, they didn't.  Take your pick, McCain put his party before his country or he's too incompetent to be president.  There is no middle ground.


President is not earned because you've been in a POW camp or spent the last quarter century pandering to lobbyists in DC.  Dumping your first wife for a younger, prettier, richer model who can help your political ambitions is not the stuff of presidents.  Crashing 4 navy jets is not the judgement of presidents.  Pulling strings with federal regulators to stop an investigation of a banker with whom your wife is involved in several questionable real estate deals is not the stuff of presidents.  Failure to recognize the real threats facing this nation and placing the desires of your party over the needs of your nation is not the stuff of presidents but, it is the stuff of McCain.

Turning down high six figure jobs so you can work to help people make their lives better, working to convince people they can be better, inspriring people to work for a better America, inspring people to believe in themselves and their nation, that is the stiff of presidents and that is the stuff of Obama.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

Apparently the ISG got it wrong! I would hope you check out the links.

"Secret U.S. Mission Hauls Uranium From Iraq



 



On July 5, 2008, t he Associated Press (AP) released a story titled: Secret U.S. mission hauls uranium from Iraq. The opening paragraph is as follows:



 


The last major remnant of Saddam Hussein's
nuclear program – a huge stockpile of concentrated natural uranium –
reached a Canadian port Saturday to complete a secret U.S. operation
that included a two week airlift from Baghdad and a ship voyage
crossing two oceans.


 


See
anything wrong with this picture? We have been hearing from the
far-left for more than five years how, 'Bush lied.' Somehow, that
slogan loses its credibility now that 550 metric tons of Saddam's
yellowcake, used for nuclear weapon enrichment, has been discovered and shipped to Canada for its new use as nuclear energy.


 


It
appears that American troops found the 550 metric tons of uranium in
2003 after invading Iraq. They had to sit on this information and the
uranium itself, for fear of terrorists attempting to steal it.  It was
guarded and kept safe by our military in a 23,000-acre site with large
sand beams surrounding the site.


 


This is vindication for the Bush administration, having been attacked mercilessly by the liberal media and the far-left pundits on the blogosphere. Now that it is proven that President Bush
did not lie about Saddam's nuclear ambitions, one would think the
mainstream media would report the story? Once the AP released the
story, the mainstream media should have picked it up and broadcast it
worldwide.


 


This
never happened, due in large part I believe, to the fact that the
mainstream media would have to admit they were wrong about Bush's war
motives all along. Thankfully, the AP got it right when it said, 'The
removal of 550 metric tons (100,000 pounds) of 'yellowcake'' – the seed
material for higher-grade nuclear enrichment – was a significant step
toward closing the books on Saddam's nuclear legacy.'


 


Closing
the book on Saddam's nuclear legacy? Did Saddam have a nuclear legacy
after all?  I thought Bush lied?  As it turns out, the people who lied
were Joe Wilson and his wife.


 


Valerie Plame
engaged in a clear case of nepotism and convinced the CIA to send her
husband on a fact finding mission in February 2002, seeking to
determine if Saddam Hussein attempted to buy yellowcake from Niger. The
CIA and British intelligence believed Saddam contacted Niger for that purpose but needed proof.


 


During
his trip to Niger, Wilson actually interviewed the former prime
minister of Niger, Ibrahim Assane Mayaki. Mayaki told Wilson that in
June of 1999, an Iraqi delegation expressed interest in 'expanding
commercial relations' for the purposes of purchasing yellowcake.


 


Wilson
chose to overlook Mayaki's remarks and reported to the CIA that there
was no evidence of Hussein wanting to purchase yellowcake from Niger.


 


However, with British intelligence insisting the claim was true, President Bush used that same claim in his State of the Union address in January of 2003.


 


Outraged
by Bush's insistence that the claim was true, Wilson wrote an op-ed in
the New York Times in the summer of 2003 slamming Bush.


 


Wilson did this in spite of the fact that Mayaki said Saddam did try to buy the yellowcake from Niger.
The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence disagreed with Wilson and
supported Mayaki's claim. This meant nothing to Wilson who was opposed
to the Iraq war and thus had ulterior motives in covering up the prime minister's statements.


 


It
was a simple tactic really. If the far-left and their friends in the
media could prove Bush lied about Hussein wanting to purchase
yellowcake from Niger, it would undermine President Bush's credibility
and give them more cause for asking what other 'lies' he may have told.



 


Yet,
the real lie came from Wilson, who interpreted his own meaning from the
prime minister's statements and concluded all by himself that the claim
of Saddam attempting to purchase yellowcake was 'unequivocally wrong.'
Curiously, the CIA sat on this information and did not inform the CIA
Director, who sided with Bush on the yellowcake claim. This was made
public in a bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report in July
2004.


 


Valerie
Plame also engaged in her own lie campaign by spreading the notion that
the Bush administration 'outed' her as a CIA agent. Never mind that it
was Richard Armitage
-- no friend of the Bush administration -- who leaked Plame's identity
to the press. Never mind that Plame had not been in the field as a CIA
agent in some six years.


 


The
truth is, due to their opposition to the war, Joe Wilson, Valerie
Plame, the mainstream media and their left-wing friends on the
blogosphere engaged in a propaganda campaign to undermine the Bush
administration. Now that Saddam's uranium has been made public and is
no longer a threat to the world, do you think these aforementioned
parties will apologize and admit they were wrong? Don't count on it.
The rest of the American people should hear the truth about Saddam's uranium. It is up to you and me to inform them every chance we get.


 


As
far as the anti-war crowd is concerned, the next time they say that,
'Bush lied,' we should tell them to, 'Have the yellowcake and eat it
too.'


 


This story was verified, if you want to check it for yourself, click on the link below.


 


Read this link the article and it's substance:


 


 


http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/u/uraniumy...

 


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25546334"

ninaki2000 · 1 year ago

You're kidding right?  No really, you gotta be joking.

THIS

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/u/uraniumy...

Is your source to "prove" Bush' justification for his stupid war?

THIS

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/u/uraniumy...

Trumps

The Iraq Study Group
Wall St. Journal
LA Times
Atlanta JC
Washington times
NY Times
Newsweek
Time
NBC
CBS
ABC
CNN
and the dozens of books written on the subject

THIS

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/u/uraniumy...

And I suppose you think Fox news really is "Fair and Balanced"?

I have rational discussions with rational people.  The proof of Bush-McCain's failures are there for those who care to open their eyes and look. 

More?

September 2002 to January 2003 Bush declares on many occassions Iraq to be an "Imminent" threat and yet, for six months did nothing.  If he really thought Iraq was a threat he would have attacked immediately.  He knew there was no threat and the only threat to his plans were the UN Weapons Inspectors. 

October 2004 debate.  The moderator asked Bush "given what we know now, ..."  would he still have invaded Iraq.  Bush said yes.  He did not try to correct the moderator.  Just said yes, even given perfect knowledge he would still have invaded.  This, whether you admit it or not, is an acknowledgement that the reasons given for the invasion were false.  I knew this in 2002, Russ Fiengold knew this in 2002, Ron Paul knew it in 2002. 

McCain either didn't know it or chose, like you, to make believe.  In either case, when the time came to lead, McCain failed.  He does not deserve the chance to fail again.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

No the AP story is the evidence of existence, along with several distinct stories from the Journal/Sentinal published during the opening days of operations in Iraq.  Along with a little common sense. 
Yes common sense! If you start to find in separate and disparate places material that can be classed as WMD do you really want to announce it to the world.  Were you to do that what would happen when nefarious people decide to come and look for the stuff themselves?

ninaki2000 · 1 year ago

sonny, sonny, sonny.  That uranium was no secret stash.  The IAEC and Weapons Inspectors had that stuff under lock and key since 1997.  That's why this "news story" upon which you hang your hat is nothing more than a footnote.  Even Bush didn't claim this "find" justified his war.  Why?  Because, sonny, it is so easily disproven, except to the fooled.

From YOUR article....

Did you read the AP article?

“Tuwaitha and an adjacent research facility were well known for decades as the centerpiece of Saddam’s nuclear efforts.

Israeli warplanes bombed a reactor project at the site in 1981. Later, U.N. inspectors documented and safeguarded the yellowcake, which had been stored in aging drums and containers since before the 1991 Gulf War. There was no evidence of any yellowcake dating from after 1991, the official said.”


A child molester "justifes his crime by saying "the child wanted me to".
A thief rationalizes his crime by saying "they didn't need it anyway."

Don't try to rationalize Bush's crime in Iraq or McCain's complicity in it.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

It is not the one story just the most recent and apparent.  If it had been as known as you suggest there would have been no need to keep it secure in place for the years it took to move it out.
As for other items;
Found buried and preserved - mobile chemical labsFound Sarin artillery shellsFound Mustard Gas Artillery shellsFound MIGS preserved and buried
Found SCUDS trailered and hidden in civilian locationsDiscovered materials shipped out of Iraq that is capable of sustaining the kind of program Iran is following nowFound documentation that supports Iraq engaged in proscribed weapons programsBut by far the biggest problem, aside from Iraq's attempt to become a nuclear power, is the disinformation that Iraq put out about the level and currency of its nuclear program.  That was for the sole purpose of diplomatically gaming Iran and, in spite of its success, it backfired big time.

I do particularly like that you state that the story about yellowcake was disproven while at the same time admitting that it existed?  Kind of oxymoron, don't you think?

Bush's crime?  How can you lay this on Bush as his error when Congress was asked and agreed. Then again there was the use of the UN to defuse the problem in Iraq. Every attempt that was made there went for naught.  I am sorry but there being one reason to take the action taken in Iraq is simplistic.  This was a long involved diplomatic series of negotiations that unfortunately ran to the diplomatic end game.

You and others love to take the position that people that do not fall in line with you beliefs and reasoning are somehow mentally deficient. You could, although virtually no one ever does, have the same claim at your feet.  No matter what anyone brings to you are provides as evidence it is always dismissed as inappropriate or spun to meet the requirements of the DNC.

ninaki2000 · 1 year ago

"Found buried and preserved - mobile chemical labsFound"
Turned out to be weather research stations

"Sarin artillery shellsFound Mustard Gas Artillery"
Over 20 years old and rusted out and unusable

Found MIGS preserved and buried
Not preserved, buried in the sand in the desert by Iraq's military to keep the US from bombing

Found SCUDS trailered and hidden in civilian locations
Perfectly permissable under the UN cease fire agreement

And on and on and on......

In every instance the "proof" claimed by the Bushists turned out to be more lies.

None of the "justifications" you present, even if they were true and even if Bush had knowledge of them before the war,  meet the criteria laid out by Bush for his decision to go to war and justify his deception of the American people.

Remember  "Imminent Threat", "Clear and Present Danger"

None of what you present meet that test, while most of if, like 20 year old artillery shells rusted out and buried in the desert, were both unkown at the time of the invasion and presented no danger at all except to the poor unfortunates who found them, that would be US soldiers.  Even using what Bush did not know to justify his actions, even in the face of the undeniable fact that what he claimed to know was lies, STILL fails to meet any reasoned test of "imminent threat" or "clear and present danger."

The story you referenced as your ULTIMATE proof was true.  Your interpretation on the lies you and the rest of the Bushists add are what is false.  It took about 90 seconds to disprove your lie.  But, as always, these lies are not aimed at me, a person willing to look and understand and research.  These lies are aimed at the ignorant, at those who are afraid, at the lazy.

If you are not a liar you are then ignorant, afraid, or lazy.  There is no middle ground.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

You know what aside from the fact that nothing would be "acceptable" evidence this is not even close to the subject at hand. 
It is also very tiring to try to explain things to people that do not fully understand the concept of information and operational security!
The people may have a right to know but that does not mean they need to know right this instant.

ninaki2000 · 1 year ago

"The people may have a right to know but that does not mean
they need to know right this instant."

Tell that to the parents of the 4100 US service personnel who've died in Bush's war.

I understand.  I've understood from day 1 that this war was never about WMD.  This war was never about terrorists.  This war was never about Iraqi freedom.  This war was always about one thing and one thing only.  Projecting American military power in the oil producing regions of the Middle East.

The single object of Bush's war in Iraq was the overthrowing of the legitimate government of Iraq and the insertion of a puppet government obedient to current US desires.  The objective was faulty, the execution flawed, and the goals will never be met.

Occam's Razor.  To accept yours, and Bush's explanation I have to believe that all of the intelligence was just wrong, that all of the nations advising the US of the folly of the war were just wrong, that all of the reasons given for the war were true, despite all of the information to the contrary.  Sorry, the pieces of your puzzle do not fit properly and the simplest answer is almost always the correct answer.  The simplest answer?  Bush lied and McCain helped.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

Your position on the sole purpose of the war is a crock!

As to "(t)ell that to the parents of the 4100 US service personnel who've died in Bush's war."
That is not even close to the same thing.  Besides it is not the job of the news media to get that information to the families by publishing it to the world.  The families of those servicemen you speak of were the first to be notified.  That is little more than a low blow.  You know full well what kinds of things should not be made available to the public just because you can.

"I have to believe that all of the intelligence was just wrong"
The Brits, Italians, French, and Russians, to name a few, all were of the opinion that WMD programs in Iraq were viable and extent.

"(A)ll of the nations advising the US of the folly of the war were just wrong"
Just which nations were those, prior to 2003?

"(A)ll of the reasons given for the war were true, despite all of the information to the contrary."
All the so-called info to the contrary came out after the fact.  That sounds a bit like hindsight (always 20/20)

June 2000 Saddam gave a speech in where he said Iraq would not disarm
until others in the region did. A rifle for a rifle, a stick for a
stick, a stone for a stone,'" Piro recalls. That June 2000 speech was about weapons of mass destruction. In talking
casually about that speech, Saddam began to tell the story of his
weapons. It was a breakthrough that had taken five months.
"Oh, you couldn't imagine the excitement that I was feeling at that point," Piro remembers.
"Saddam told me that most of the WMD had been destroyed by the U.N.
inspectors in the '90s. And those that hadn't been destroyed by the
inspectors were unilaterally destroyed by Iraq," Piro says.



"So why keep the secret? Why put your nation at risk, why put your own life at risk to maintain this charade?" Pelley asks.
"It was very important for him to project that because that was what
kept him, in his mind, in power. That capability kept the Iranians
away. It kept them from reinvading Iraq," Piro says.



Before his wars with America, Saddam had fought a ruinous eight year war with Iran and it was Iran he still feared the most.



"He believed that he couldn't survive without the perception that he had weapons of mass destruction?" Pelley asks.



"Absolutely," Piro says.

"As the U.S. marched toward war and we began massing troops on his
border, why didn't he stop it then? And say, 'Look, I have no weapons
of mass destruction.' I mean, how could he have wanted his country to
be invaded?" Pelley asks.



"He didn't. But he told me he initially miscalculated President
Bush. And President Bush's intentions. He thought the United States
would retaliate with the same type of attack as we did in 1998 under
Operation Desert Fox. Which was a four-day aerial attack. So you
expected that initially," Piro says.



Piro says Saddam expected some kind of an air campaign and that he
could he survive that. "He survived that once. And then he was willing
to accept that type of attack. That type of damage," he says.



"Saddam didn't believe that the United States would invade," Pelley remarks.



"Not initially, no," Piro says.



"Once it was clear to him that there was going to be an invasion of
the country. I mean, did he actually believe that his armies could
win?" Pelley asks.



"No," Piro says. "What he had asked of his military leaders and
senior government officials was to give him two weeks. And at that
point it would go into what he called the secret war."

 In fact, Piro says Saddam intended to
produce weapons of mass destruction again, some day. "The folks that he
needed to reconstitute his program are still there," Piro says.



"And that was his intention?" Pelley asks.



"Yes," Piro says.



"What weapons of mass destruction did he intend to pursue again once he had the opportunity?" Pelley asks.



"He wanted to pursue all of WMD. So he wanted to reconstitute his entire WMD program," says Piro.



"Chemical, biological, even nuclear," Pelley asks.



"Yes," Piro says.



So it appears that the actuall person responsible is Mr Hussain himself.  This interview shows two things. That the one who lied was Saddam. And he fully intended to reconstitute his WMD programs.  That reconstitution is why I believe those "weather stations" were hidden.

ninaki2000 · 1 year ago

"That is little more than a low blow.  You know full well what kinds of things should not be made available to the public just because you can."

If you are going to kill an American serviceman he, and his family, have the right to know that the cause is just.  That the cause is honorable.  That the justifications are true.  None of those things can be said of Bush' s war.

"The Brits, Italians, French, and Russians, to name a few, all were of the opinion that WMD programs in Iraq were viable and extent."

And yet none of them supported Bush's war.  Actions speak louder than words.  OBVIOUSLY, the French, Germans, Russians, countries with an active presence did not consider Iraq a threat.

"Just which nations were those, prior to 2003?"
Germany, France, Russia, to name a few.

"All the so-called info to the contrary came out after the
fact.  That sounds a bit like hindsight (always 20/20)"

Yet another Bushist lie.  The Weapons Inspectors found no justification for the Bush allegations.  Joe Wilson spoke to the lie about purchasing uranium.  Yes, there was intel supporting Bush' s position.  There was at least as much intel opposing his position.  If you're going to kill a US Serviceman, be right because he won't get another chance.

"June 2000 Saddam gave a speech in where he said Iraq would
not disarm..."

In 2002 Saddam released a report to the UN detailing the absence of WMD and weapons programs.  What?  Was he honest and believable in 2000 but a liar in 2002?  The CIA's own evaluation said that Iraq was unlikely to use WMD unless they were attacked.  Was Bush trying to get Iraq to use WMD?  No, he didn't believe they existed.  The lies he told were for people like you.

"That reconstitution is why I believe those "weather stations" were hidden."
Belief is not truth.  Belief is not fact.  The facts are that absolutely none of the reasons given for Bush' s war in Iraq were true.  The facts are that had Bush not intended to invade and overthrow the legitimate government of Iraq so that he could then, with the agreement of Iraq's new government, use Iraq as a military base, he would not have cherry picked that information to produce a false threat.  A threat that never existed.  And, most important,

It is a fact that John McCain had access to all of that information and either failed to realize the truth or was complicent in the lies. In either case, McCain does not deserve another chance to fail his nation.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

"Dead Wrong" and "a major intelligence failure" are somewhat mutually exclusive.  The "major intelligence failure" is a worldwide failure if it exists.  In fact the so-called failure was in fact a misinformation campaign established by Hussein to put the fear of god into Iran.  Seems he did too good a job.  But then again there is that pesky million pounds of yellowcake!

Let me ask you this. What part of intelligence is collection of protected information, ie secrets.

Bush did not lie, a million pounds of yellowcake support that, and servicemen die all the time war or not!  Remember 18,006 servicemen dies in the 10 years preceding the commencement of the war.  That makes this war safer for the servicemen than piece!

"(C)ost the US over 4,000 lives" Under no circumstances can this
be deemed a policy failure. Heck people in the country do not really care about military deaths."
That is a typical Bushist line.  The military serve.
Typical! You ignore the data I presented to support my claim.  18,006 military deaths in 10 years of peace. 1800 per year or a total of 9000 in the length of this war.  As I said this war is safer for the troops than piece.  Further there was no outcry about these 18006 deaths, not one word!

"purely political goals stains the memory of every serviceman killed"
Let me be perfectly clear. All use of the troops is political!  War is the final tool in the bag of every diplomat.

Further do not presume to try to say you have the slightest understanding of the military mind.  Bush has been military, as has McCain.  All of us, unlike you, are willing to admit that the
military McCain has a skill set and an understand of war that most never experience. Said experience will put McCain squaely on the side opposite of where you expect. 

As far as you are concerned war is all that the military live for, nothing could be farther from the truth.  War is the last thing we want to engage in.

"Gee, let's see.  2 trillion dollars, Let's see.  $7,000 for everyman, woman, and child in the US.  Let's see, where is it going?  In the toilet, that's where it went.  Not to our defensee.  not toward achiving energy independence, not to rebuilding our infrastructure.  Just in the toilet.  And McCain wants more of the same."

I see that you have no clue as to where the money is going. nor what it is being spent on.  We can revist this when you learn more about it.


George Bush with his dishonesty, with his
boorishness, with his arrogance, with
his ignorance,
Clearly you are having an emotional reaction with no basis in fact."McCain put his party before his country or he's too incompetent to be president.  There is no middle ground."
Interesting! then how do you explain the flap over Lieberman?  You all thought that his breaking from the party line 5% of the time was too much of a maverick.  Why is it that holding to the party line for a Democrat is a good thing and holding to the party line for a republican is a bad thing? You can't have that both ways.

President is not earned because you've been in a POW camp or spent the last
quarter century pandering to lobbyists in DC.
Nobody ever said it was.

  Dumping your first wife for a younger, prettier, richer model who can help your political ambitions is not the stuff of presidents.
As someone here said when they read your comment " Yeah Kennedy was never President." I on the other hand would be inclined to say "So you think Edwargs had no business running for President
 Crashing 4 navy jets is not the judgement of presidents.
Combat does not count!
  Pulling strings with federal regulators to stop an investigation of a banker with whom your wife is involved in several questionable real estate deals is not the stuff of presidents.
But being involved in questionable real estate deals your self is ok. Seeing that government funds are sent to an organization that has your wife on the board is ok.  Putting someone in office who was brought forward, is beholding to, and conducts business in the manner of the Chicago Machine is perfectly fine?
  Failure to recognize the real threats facing this nation and placing the desires of your party over the needs of your nation is not the stuff of presidents
Interesting that "the real threats" are always mentioned but no one ever says what they are.  Sorry but most of the things that liberals see as threats are not the provence of the President.  I have yet to see a Democrat, or other liberal, that is willing to put the country before the overwhealming desire to punish certain categories of people in favor of giving largesse to other categories of people.  Since when is it the provence of Government to decide who gets to be successful?
 but, it is the stuff of McCain.
I am not convinced that Mr. Obama will be able to determine siad threats and needs.  McCain and his current running mate have respectively presented a record that displays an ability to persevere and has in fact done the things you mentioned.

Turning down high six figure jobs so you can work to help people make their
lives better,
You really think he did that?  Then how did he get to a salary of $240,000, which he thaught was insufficient by the way.

 working to convince people they can be better, inspriring people to work for a better America, inspring people to believe in themselves and their nation, that is the stiff of presidents and that is the stuff of Obama.
The man that has said; "I am new enough on the national political scene that I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political strips project their own views. As such, I am bound to disappoint some, if not all of them.' (Barack Obama, The Audacity of Hope (New York: Random House, 2006), 11)

This man has jet to actually say anything.  He is running on personality rather than issues.

ninaki2000 · 1 year ago

You really need to get more sources of information than Fox News and your own blog.

Rather than take a quote from a third party, an inspiring quote I might add, and try to use it as "proof"  against Obama, try actually reading his books.  Try educating yourself.

I will not change your mind.  You are the type of voter the Bush-Mccain people depend on.  Afraid.  Ignorant.  Angry.  Hateful.  They prey on your weaknesses, your fears, to get you to vote against your own self interest and in theirs.

I was a McCain supporter in 2000.  In 2002 when he climbed on Bush's war bandwagon he lost my vote.  In 2008 when the "Straight Talk Express" turned into the "Can't Lie Fast Enough Express", when he not only embraced Karl Rove's campaign tactics but the people who executed them against him in 2000, as he and Palin rail against earmarks while Alaska and Arizona split nearly 3/4 billion dollars in earmarks,  while he talks about financial reforms while Phil Graham, the architect of the deregulation that made it all possible is his top economic advisor.  He proved my misgivings correct. 

There are no good reasons to vote for McCain.  You can vote for him because you're a Republican and no matter how stupid the choice is you will vote Republican.  You can vote for him because you're a victim of his campaign tactics.  But, on the issues, the only sane vote is for Obama.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

It appars as I am to be prevented from exercising my rights on any matter attached to this site!

ninaki2000 · 1 year ago

I saw that all your comments were removed, I don't know why, but maybe you could trying telling the truth, maybe the administrator of the site doesn't want you to spread your lies.

catforobama · 1 year ago

This is a Bush issue, because this involves Karl Rove sleazy tactics to discourage people from voting. It's more of the same from Bush McSame, not an honorable person or campaign

IronLion · 1 year ago

To all the Republican trolls here:

You're misinterpreting Michigan election laws. Either you're Michiganders who are ignorant of them or you're from out-of-state and don't understand them is irrelevant. Read the election laws and then come back.

Michigan election laws place priority on where people are REGISTERED, not property titles. It doesn't matter if your home is foreclosed, not foreclosed, foreclosed and you still live there or you don't. If you're registered to vote there, the respective precinct is where you vote. Michigan law places an importance when someone moves on where they were LAST REGISTERED. If you move and haven't registered at your new address, you're eligible to vote at your last residence.

This, of course, puts the onus on the voter to register in the correct place. If you vote in one place and live in another, you are robbing yourself of the right to vote for the people who directly represent you.

This usage of foreclosure lists as a means to prevent people from voting is simply voter suppression by the GOP. Plain and simple. When your house is foreclosed, many simply don't know what they're going to do. Am I going to move? Negotiate with my lender? As such, by the time the election comes, even if you are in foreclosure you haven't re-registered if you have moved.

Someone needs to remind the GOP that this tactic won't stand up in court. And I fail to see if someone has moved that they can vote in two places. You can only register in one place and vote in the place. So-called "voter fraud" is a myth concocted by the Republicans in order to justify passing voter-suppressing legislation like voter ID laws.

1truepatriot · 1 year ago

If the Republican voting stance on people displaced due to mortgage foreclosures is taken to its logical conclusion, then those people (from mostly red states) that have been displaced due to Hurricane Ike who now have no house in which to reside would also have to be included in that stance. I am not condoning or endorsing such a decree, just pointing out what the Republicans themselves are purporting.

rbutkowski · 1 year ago

What we have is a dilemma. Voting was originally meant to be a privilege extended only to property owners. Well that was no more since the invention of mortgages. Renters are voters. So this tactic, adopted by heartless fascists is just that - a tactic, and a savage one at that. On the other hand it is reasonable to verify residency in a given governmental municipality or locale (via absentee ballot). This tactic is mean-spirited and needs to be challenged and defeated. Proof of residency and age is all that needs to be verified. Get rid of the Democrat and Republican duopoly and this problem will go away.

rbutkowski · 1 year ago

What we have is a dilemma. Voting was originally meant to be a privilege extended only to property owners. Well that was no more since the invention of mortgages. Renters are voters. So this tactic, adopted by heartless fascists is just that - a tactic, and a savage one at that. On the other hand it is reasonable to verify residency in a given governmental municipality or locale (via absentee ballot). This tactic is mean-spirited and needs to be challenged and defeated. Proof of residency and age is all that needs to be verified. Get rid of the Democrat and Republican duopoly and this problem will go away.

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

Interesting concept. Personally, I think it's less about the parties than it is about power and money. Start by taking the money out of politics and the motivation to suppress voters is undermined.

jpcx01 · 1 year ago

This story is a complete fabrication. The Messenger is making up quotes in order to cause a political stunt. The Detroit Free press has already debunked this article and the quote.

Your newspaper is pathetic, and I imagine what's left of the paper's credibility will be destroyed when this saga is over.

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

Michigan Messenger stands behind the reporting of Eartha Jane Melzer and this story.

Please point to where the Detroit Free Press debunked this article; to the best of my knowledge they have only noted the inconsistencies between what our reporter was told and what the Macomb County Republican Party chair said in rebuttal. If you check across the different media outlets that have featured the same party chair, there are many inconsistencies in his statements from outlet to outlet.

arenaeh · 1 year ago

If it is a complete fabrication, I would expect to hear of a libel/defamation suit filed against it. Since I have not, I believe there is enough truth in the article to warrant attention. In fact we see the opposite - Obama's camp is filing a suit against the GOP over this "debunked" article. If they have enough evidence to file a suit, that tells me there is something to the allegations.

That being said, I do not trust any politician, regardless of party affiliation. The best I can do is look up their voting records and vote for whichever candidate most closely lines up with what I believe on the issues.

tomtomiowa · 1 year ago

I thought this was good?
Bill Clinton would undertsnad the issue in Michigan, “Its the economy stupid”. Michigan’s economic problems begin with the Democratic Michigan Governor. Over the last 6 years Governor Granholm’s “Big Government” & “Tax and Spend” polices have destroyed Michigan’s economy. Granholm and Obama are tied at the hip. Their Campaign Promises concerning Taxes are identical. Ask Michigan’s residents about taxes Granholm has proved that Obama’s Policies are wrong for America.

Contrast Michigan with Ohio. The Democratic Governor of Ohio, Ted Strickland has pursued policies to reduce the tax burden and shrink the size of Government. Governor Strickland, and the Ohio Legislature, have taken action to reduce Individual and Business Taxes.

Ohio is on the road to recovery while Michigan continues in a downward spiral.

The election isn’t about Parties - It is about Policies.

http://mcauleysworld.wordpress.com/2008/09/08/m...

http://mcauleysworld.wordpress.com/2008/09/08/o...

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

You need to to do a little homework, brush up on your Michigan history. Jennifer Granholm took office while saddled with $2 BILLION in budget deficits left behind by the Engler administration; Engler had managed in his 3 terms in office to take a budget surplus and piss it away, instead of putting it in the bank for the days ahead when the automotive industry wasn't doing well.

Since Granholm first took office, the automotive industry has continued to flounder, unable to compete with offshore competitors due to rapidly rising health care costs and commodity costs. Since the state remained locked in a macabre death spiral with the auto industry, and since it was unable to afford to build a way out, the deficits have continued to thwart any chance for improvement in Michigan's economic climate.

The deficit represents debts that the people of the state of Michigan incurred; they have to pay them down. There's no way around it. You may see this as increased taxes, but paying down debts worked under the Clinton administration when it was saddled with Reagan/Bush deficits.

Just as one can obtain better credit ratings by paying all debts on time and on schedule, so can Michigan improve its situation if it takes care of obligations. Michiganders need to stop listening to shallow hucksters like Engler who promise to "give them back their money" when in truth he meant he wasn't going to pay the bills, and the tab would eventually come due.

Lastly, comparing Ohio to Michigan is rather ineffective if Ohio's business hasn't been as tightly invested in a single industry which collapsed as the automotive industry has in Michigan. Strickland's lucky he hasn't had to deal with that level of challenge.

Reader11722 · 1 year ago

Voter supression, yet another infringement on our rights by the gov't. Add it to the ever-growing list of violations:
They violate the 1st Amendment by opening mail, caging demonstrators and banning books like "America Deceived" from Amazon, Wikipedia and Facebook.
They violate the 2nd Amendment by confiscating guns during Katrina.
They violate the 4th Amendment by conducting warrant-less wiretaps.
They violate the 5th and 6th Amendment by suspending habeas corpus.
They violate the 8th Amendment by torturing at Gitmo.
They violate the entire Constitution by starting illegal wars without declaration.
Impeach them all (both parties) and save this great country.
Last link (unless Google Books caves to the gov't and drops the title):
http://www.iuniverse.com/Bookstore/BookDetail.a...

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

"They violate the 1st Amendment by opening mail"
Who opens mail?
"They violate the 2nd Amendment by confiscating guns during Katrina."
That was the action of local authorities in LA, Democrats!
"They violate the 4th Amendment by conducting warrant-less wiretaps."
Not on citizens!
"They violate the 5th and 6th Amendment by suspending habeas corpus."
Hasn't happened! You have no evidence in spite of what you say.
"They violate the 8th Amendment by torturing at Gitmo."
Never happened! Too many people moving in and out to keep it quiet. Have you even seen the facilities?
"They violate the entire Constitution by starting illegal wars without declaration."
Congress gave the Executive Branch the authority to engage up to 200,000 troops without action by congress.

Dennis_U · 1 year ago

the subtitle is obviously an attempt to increase racial divsion. isn't one of the requirements to vote is to be able to prove residency in the district? how can the voter rolls be accurate without proof of residency? this isn't suppression of voters right but fowollowing the law and common sense.
to reader1722 suspended habaes corpus? where? in gitmo? those are POWs and not subject to constitunal protection (they aren't even afforded geneva convention rights since they aren't uniformed soldiers of any recognized nation). what went on a abu graib isn't considered torture when compared to cutting off heads, hiding weapons in places of worship and schools, fighting behind civilians. you need to grow up and quit being such a bleeding heart, this is a war and we are figiting for our lives. demonstrators that are caged have no right to interfer with a convention. their rights to free speech end when they begin to disrupt someone elses right to free speech. they can go rent a hall or whatever and talk about anything they want. Um the war was declared, approved by congress and santioned by the U.N., where were you? clinton did go to war in kosovo without authorization, where was the outrage? consficating guns in new orleans was totally wrong and something the city did on its own and not the feds.

donmate · 1 year ago

Maybe you can't get into the details here, but I was wondering if your reporter recorded the interview?

Shortcircuit28 · 1 year ago

Michigan Election Law, regarding address changes:

As in 168.507:
"(1) A registered elector who has removed from 1 election precinct of a township, city, or village to another election precinct of the same township, city, or village and has not recorded the removal with the local clerk shall execute a transfer of registration request, ..."

-essentially, you have to process the change of address.

HOWEVER, as of

(2) "....It is not necessary for the elector to change his or her registration to reflect the change in order to be eligible to vote."

In essence, while it does state that you must file a change of address, IT DOES NOT HAVE TO GO THROUGH BEFORE THE ELECTION in order for the person to be eligible. The "tactic" whatever anyone wishes to call it, is bogus and should not effect ANYONE's eligibility to vote. So let them waste their money, they will just get thrown out of court :-)

Montely · 1 year ago

Heywood sounds like a member of the Michigan Messenger, but anyway, an address on a list that is generate from foreclosure filings and not actual foreclosures does not prove that a person does not reside at the address in question as stated in the article. There are laws that prevent individuals and organizations from blocking someone from voting based on non-factual information and those that break these laws run the risk of being in viloation of a few civil rights laws. Me, I would have that person blocking me from voting without absolute, undenialbe proof, arrested on the spot. A larger picture, and should be look at by civil rights groups immediately, involves going after Trott & Trott and the local GOP for poll tampering if at all possible.

leader52 · 1 year ago

This story is completely false. I have spoken with the Macomb county Republican Committee and they have categorically denied ever making such statements. I would contact Ms. Melzer but this "progressive" media lists no contact number to challenge them.

albaby · 1 year ago

So the Clinton administrations pressure to force financial firms into making sub-prime loans in decaying areas and to pepole with poor work histories and inadequate income had nothing to do with the foreclosures, right?

Angel101 · 1 year ago

That's right. Because where ever you are getting your "facts", they are feeding you a load of bullsh1t. The Clintons have been out of office for EIGHT YEARS! That excuse is getting old and tired. Take responsability for your own sh1t and stop trying to blame it on the Clintons.

albaby · 1 year ago

So you think this just happened overnight! LOL

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

Actually, it took since 1999 when McCain's economic adviser Phil Gramm rammed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley legislation through, gutting the Glass-Steagall Act. The bill was veto proof, making it impossible for Clinton to do anything but sign it.

albaby · 1 year ago

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.a...

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

With that article we can say you really don't have a clue what you are talking about.

chetlyzarko · 1 year ago

Rayne, a "veto proof" bill does not make "impossible for Clinton" to do anything but sign legislation. The President is under no obligation to sign any legislation - it simply becomes law without Presidential veto if the requisite number of Senators and Representatives vote for it to override a veto. Get your Constitutional facts straight.

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

Do you seriously think that Clinton politically had any other choice in 1999? How old were you then -- do you remember what was going on at that point in time?

Get your history straight.

chetlyzarko · 1 year ago

How old were you? What a ridiculous question.

Since I was an adult them, I remember. If you look at my comment closely, I took no position on the cause(s) of the crisis or link to Clinton - merely on your assertion of constitutional facts about veto-proof votes.

I actually think its unfair to criticize Clinton significantly for that legislation (both parties got involved in that one), or to pin the whole blame for today on the legislation. Similarly though, it was part of the problem, and its unfair to blame Bush entirely or any President for large economic forces that are difficult to predict. Indeed, I'd give them little credit for growth, either. Enron, for example, was largely belly-flop from the over-exuberant 90s (and Greenspan predicted it in outline even in the 90s although he didn't know WHICH companies would be the ones) - the irony is that much of the blame for even obviously 90s bubble bursts transferred to Bush.

And how ridiculous it is to suggest a President doesn't have any other choice "politically" -- we hire Presidents to make tough political choices sometimes despite the consequences. You're saying Clinton was a follower - not a leader. I don't know whether he's that simple of a figure - but it is the logical conclusion of your defense.

albaby · 1 year ago

Hey messenger, why don't you publish where your money comes from. It may help explain why you "mis-stated" the GOP on the foreclosure/voting issue. Sure glad to see the Dems spring into action based on your "misstatement". LOL

Angel101 · 1 year ago

Hey stupid. "Mis-quoted or not, this article isn't going to polling places and trying to dis-enfranchise people. I bet you don't even know what that means. Moron.

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

Ad hominem comments are not compliant with the site's comment policy.

HAs · 1 year ago

Albaby,

Do you have evidence that is contrary to what "Messenger has published? If so, please state the evidence here for everyone to read. You cannot just call a man a thief without telling us what he has stolen. "Messenger" stated that the GOP Operatives plan to use the list of homeowners who had lost their homes due to foreclosure proceedings from a donor who is a strong supporter of GOP and who owns a company processing foreclosed homes. If your evidence is contrary to this, please let the world know about it. Please I am waiting to read your refuting evidence. Please make no mistake, I am not a Democrat. Thanks.

albaby · 1 year ago

http://www.mlive.com/newsflash/michigan/index.s...

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

You have posted a broken link twice. Please make sure the next one works or it and these other two broken links will be removed as clutter.

albaby · 1 year ago

the links work. What are you talking about? Is it just that you don't want peopleto see the article?

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

Actually, they don't. The two links above take people to a list of links at MLive.com, a default page.

albaby · 1 year ago

I tried them for the fourth time and they worked just fine. Here is the headline iof the article you can't seem to find.

Mich. Messenger agrees it misstated GOP comments

albaby · 1 year ago

Your response in the Messenger is hilarious.

Messenger clarifies Ohio official’s remark LOL
So the Messenger clarified HIS remarks, not it's misrepresentation of his remarks-nice spin! LOL

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

Did you happen to notice that there was NO RETRACTION of any of the reporter's work in regards to Macomb County GOP Chair's comments?

So far your ability to read is highly selective.

chetlyzarko · 1 year ago

And so is yours, including 1) your violation of your own policy against ad homimen ("your ability to read") 2) it seems to me that albaby is suggesting that if you had the need to "clarify" or whatever euphemism you prefer one portion of an article, the other portions credibility is cast into doubt. This is not a suggestion of intentional misconduct by the author - just evidence supporting a pattern of misunderstanding by the author and perhaps subconscious bias.

Since MM admits to "not being an MSM site" and admits to advocacy journalism, it admits to having biases. Since you admit through your attacks on my own (admitted) bias that bias removes the credibility of my writing, you are by a logical application of consistency admitting that MM has no credibility.

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

albaby is the newest spam-troll at this site, and their efforts will be addressed as we deem fit.

Would you like us to come and tell you how to run your sites, Zarko?

chetlyzarko · 1 year ago

I have no idea who albaby is, but I suspect its someone who has taken interest in the story because its become so overblown and that they don't believe the hype. I would suggest its unfair to label albaby a troll just because of a few comments, unless he's being uncivil and then I'd agree with you.

And you are welcome to comment on my sites as long as you maintain civil discourse. I'm not telling you how to run your site - that is almost entirely at your speech and property rights discretion - I'm just pointing discrepancies in how you advertise your product with what it really is. And I'm hardly here often enough to truly bother you. I'll leave it at that.

albaby · 1 year ago

Sorry, here's page 1. Also note that it is an Associated Press article.

http://www.mlive.com/newsflash/michigan/index.s...

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

You can find a list of our donors in the footer of this page, at the link labeld "Our Funding".

There was no misstatement of the Macomb County Republican Party Chair's statement regarding the use of foreclosure lists, nor any misstatement about other methods being employed by the GOP that the chair did not want to disclose. You may wish re-read the article to acquaint yourself with those quotes.

albaby · 1 year ago

You may wish to retry the links I posted-the ones you claim are broken. And yes, I did read the list of donors-such as George Soro/s Open Society, Rockefeller foundation etc . All far to the left.

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

In your opinion, of course. I'm sure the Rockefeller Foundation's and Open Society's and other donors' money didn't fall from the clouds like manna from heaven. There was probably some good old fashioned smarts and labor along with conservation of resources that eventually became capital -- unless, of course, you have a problem with smarts, labor and careful investment of capital, and the free choice to apply them as individuals see fit.

johndowd · 1 year ago

Sounds bogus, like something to motivate people, BUT if they can get away with it, they will. Personnally, I would like to OPT out of this election..."OPT" is an Obama/Palin Ticket...one clean sweep would satisfy everyone, they would balance every concern out, the only arguement is "experience" but then that is the "blessing" of electing these two. An OPT would give our nation a chance to really start all over again, without all the residue from the previous administrations, the only person not covered in this equation is "the man"...and it's time to shake things up...In this equation women, blacks, children's health and education, earth concerns, every kind of rights group, every form of finances, fairness, greed (they would balance each other out in this area, and we can get real solutions to the energy crisis), lying (they both answer to a higher calling), adultery (they both have one spouse), religion (they both openingly worship something), handicap people...all our nations ills would all be erased, satisfied, considered...just like that!!!! (Clinton, McCain, nor Biden could do this, they have been in this corrupt system too long, they are a part of it)...Let's get the word out, OUT NATION WANTS AND NEEDS THE "OPT" OUT (OBAMA AND PALIN TICKET)!!!! Let's start a revolution and revise our country's purpose, goal, and clean up our mess!!!! Make Shirts!!!!

johndowd · 1 year ago

I have been involved in a foreclosure since 2006, from mistakes made 2-years before that, 2004, by one of the mortgage-servicing-company that we hear about in the news...hint, they were the first ones that got the bail out... on a Sunday...my 750 credit score has been completely destroyed...and I don't believe that I can recover...but who cares, I'm just a "peeon"! Why has this matter dragged out so long....the mortgage company knows that they screwed up but they don't want to pay for damages, and my legal expenses...they are just letting the debt mount, and says they are using my credit as "leverage" against me...it is not right...and it's an abuse of power....you better believe I have suffered greatly during this time in more ways than one, as I waiting for them to finish this matter....if this huge mortgage company has handled other clients as poorly as they have handled mine, no wonder our nation is in a mortgage crisis...I did do some research and there are others who have complained about this mortgage-servicing company on death ears, like blogs too...I have boxes of proof that this mortgage company shows a total disrespect for the customer....the mistakes are clear and proven, yet it drags on year by year, out of my control... I am a victum of their mistake...So does this mean that I may loose my right to vote while this thing is in litigation....it's bad enough that the last 4-years of my life has been on hold!!!!! while they get RICHER!!!!

russtic · 1 year ago

I'm begining to understand Timothy McVeigh.

Rayne1 · 1 year ago

We'll take this reference to be meant kiddingly.

Future references to violence may be in violation of the site's comment policy.

C_IV · 1 year ago

This action on the part of the Republican party, using the law to supress citizen participation, is indicative of the mentality of a once proud political party. Challenges based on foreclosure details, besides being mean spirited, narrow minded and vindictive is flat wrong, factually and lawfully. Circulating the propaganda that your vote won't count if the address on your voter registration shows up on a "foreclosed property" list will cause some people to skip voting. I am, have always been, but may not continue to be, a Republican for over 50 years, and I am disgusted with this group of henchmen that call themselves Republicans.

DuncanONeil · 1 year ago

dbigwood · 1 year ago

I'll believe this is a group of concerned impartial citizens when they also get a list of those with more than one piece of property and challange them. Isn't it likely that people in that group could register under both residences, or all 10 of them? Seems like something to be concerned about to me. Until that time it just looks like a tactic to disenfranchise folks.

andibump · 1 year ago

All this political underhandedness is making me sick. The fact remains that some of our politicians are heartless. If you have to go to these measures to stop the democratic vote, something is dreadfully wrong. If something like this happens, all I can say is God does not like ugly. Carabelli will have to face the wrongs of his ways. You may think that you can get away with treating people bad, but it comes back on you even harder. It's bad enough that some of these people may lose their homes in the long run, but to be turned away from the polls is outrageous. I hope he can sleep at night, and that he don't one day have to face foreclosure himself. What right do he have to invade peoples privacy? Our government has really gotten out of control.

angryalaskan · 1 year ago

what happened to our America? Palin for VP she is not qualified, McCain is one of the Keating 5. The connections are all there another election is getting frittered away and worse yet stolen. as an Alaskan I am greatly concerned to hear about our fellow US citizens of Michigan being robbed of their voices. The media here in AK is attempting to stifle the many of us who reject our Governor's place on the Republican ticket, yet the media here says nothing. I am ready to scream, I am ready to protest, I am ready to stand up with my brothers and sisters in Michigan and say enough is enough!

toya609 · 1 year ago

What kind of crap is this?? So what is going to be done about all of those that get evicted from an apartment or any form of rental property??? This is discrimination!! The GOP can't possibly be that ignorant!!!!

liamartin003 · 1 year ago

Foreclosure proceedings DO NOT necessitate the loss of a home. You can have proceedings begin and STILL live in and even keep your house. This is ridiculous. A lot of people have been late on their mortgages lately and have caught up. Happens all of the time. No one has batted an eye in the past. This is really sick and this is supposed to be the moral party. These are the most twisted morals I have ever witnessed.

Diebluma · 1 year ago

This is an outrage!!! A down right outrage!!! Blocking voting is a terrible nasty cheating thing of the Republicans to do! They did it last election in several states for many made up or false reasons. I can't believe I live in this country, slowly we are turning into what we never wanted in the first place which is controlling and fascist and its all because the Republican party wants to take away our constitutional rights!!! They would want the Wealthy Fat Cats at the top to get even wealthier while the majority of Americans, working class people get stupider, lose all of their rights, and have nothing left but the military and god. There should be protesting and riots in the streets. France's citizens always prove their point and the government is afraid of them because over there it's a true democracy where the people have a choice which is what it's supposed to be like over here. If those citizens don't get what they need then they revolt. This whole thing upsets and enrages me and makes Canada look more and more inviting to me by the minute.

aappundit · 1 year ago

Thank You for bringing this important topic to the nations attention. I have also posted on this issue on my blog. http://africanamericanpoliticalpundit.com/showD...

stinker · 1 year ago

Will they be barring the folks in Galveston who lost their homes to Ike from voting next? Oh, probably not, that's a RED state! What an insult to the working folks who lost their homes, but still pay to bail out the banks and Wall Street. It's like the Poll Tax. America is going backwards.

ckmunson · 1 year ago

That is a good point you bring up, one will have to wait and see. I get that we have to have voting rules, but this is very hard to wrap my head around. Its an admission that as a party, they are willing to do what is necessary to win at all costs. Shameful.

kc666 · 1 year ago

this is an out rage!

stinker · 1 year ago

The Republicans got away with a very similar strategy in Florida the last two times--voters names could not be found or they were erroneously listed as felons or the polling places closed early. By the time the dust cleared, it was too late; election over! Don't think they can't get away with this or would never try such a travesty of justice. They have and will again. And the ironic thing is they get away with it and the middle and lower classes keep cheering them on as if they were being represented! Unbelievable!

kc666 · 1 year ago

the erroneous plans need to be stop. we have to get out there and get more people to vote.

MamaD · 1 year ago

Is this sinking to a new low....sorry, your house is gone.....sorry, your vote doesn't count....maybe this isn't a NEW low....just another low blow to people without a voice. For crying out loud! How can the Republicans think this is remotely ok to do this? They're the ones constantly talking about living life with a "moral compass." Baloney! What Chutzpa! I hope everybody hears about this one....it'll be President Obama come January, for sure! And hooray to that!

pbehan · 1 year ago

That is really low, but not surprising. I think the best strategy to defeat this ugly effort would be to publicize it and encourage anyone likely to be on a foreclosure list to vote early or vote absentee. That will give voters warning, so they aren't taken by surprise, can take lots of documents along to show they still live there, and won't allow the Republicans to slow down the lines for other voters on election day. The local Democratic Party headquarters should also make legal information and knowledgeable supporters available to such voters, in case they are challenged at the early/absentee stage.

Kimmyoung · 1 year ago

This is sinking. These people have already lose their homes and now they are trying to take away their rights. What kind of country and people have we become. This is the time we need to come together and make a change. Shame on the Republicans! The Democratic Party needs to get together and stop this insanity.

alscheck · 1 year ago

These people behind this move should be tried in a court of law, convicted and put in prison. This is the most unamerican thing I have ever seen, save the awful efforts they went through in the south after the civil war to stop blacks from voting. I'm a white man 72 years old and I am ashamed of some people in this country for even thinking of something like this. Thankyou God for helping us get this far towards equality, but this takes the cake. When I was in Korea, there were no blacks and whites when we faced an enemy, there were just Americans and we all stuck together. Even a southern boy would have said that, and at the time they were still keeping the blacks segregated, but they fought along side of us.

tarshaone · 1 year ago

What can be done about this issue and how can it be stopped? It's enough to talk about the issue and make sure they wont try this in other states as well!

tater · 1 year ago

bottom line: these foreclosures would not have happened if our economy was in better shape - thanks to the bush administration.

rev_linda · 1 year ago

RE: The Foreclosure Baiout and loosing votes hit more than the upper middle class

Recently, newspaper headlines have debated the pros and cons of a government mortgage/ foreclosure bailout which of course would be financed at tax payer’s expense. I have read article after article, opinion after opinion, yet I have not seen or heard anyone ask the following question: why should the tax payer’s bailout mortgage foreclosures while it allows governmental entities to foreclose on homes of low-income Americans for back property taxes? Why is it that the government’s concern lies with those persons whose homes are values at approximately $300,000+, while Americans on Social Security and/or Social Security Disability loose their homes while they struggle to make ends meet on an average of $600.00 a month? Could it be that these same politicians who have been elected due to their religious/moral ethics, the politicians who claim to be Christians ignore low-income families because as a general rule, this class of people is not known to vote?
Why should I, as a tax payer, be forced to continuously pay taxes to help the upper middle class while at the same time no one cares that I could become homeless? For all of our Christian leaders, does Proverbs 21:13 not state "If a man shuts his ears to the cry of the poor, he too will cry out and not be answered." Maybe, those who elect politicians because of their morality are no better than what Matthew 6:5 quotes: “And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.”
I would like to know who amongst your readers will happily pay taxes to better the life style of the upper middle-class and/or the wealthy while the lower middle-class and the country’s poor are continuously allowed to suffer. Should this country truly be looking to bail out those who have made bad decision while they allow those who have found themselves with little choice to suffer?

Heartfelt Empathy;
Linda Munro

johndowd · 1 year ago

Like your scripture references, but we need to really get an understanding of what's really going on, along with that biblical wisdom, all of these "crisis" is happening at the end of the Bush term, all these people who have been floating high throughout these last 8 years are bailing out, they don't know what is going to happen, this wouldn't be happening if the Republicans weren't worried...I don't understand how the Christians seem to think that all Christians are Republican...I do believe that there are some Christian Democrats too...The Christians have allowed being labeled as a Republican help cause this "great divide" in our country...the Christians knew that Obama deserved their vote, a long time ago, but they could not get past their prejudice, everyone knows that our nation gets away with being prejudice at least one and a half hours every Sunday morning, doing the last election, TBN and other were pounding vote your conscience, the the African-American had to vote for Bush, and it was never verified that he was "really" a "church-going" Christian, we, Christians just got a few unverified stories about Bush, not like what we got during Obama's inital campaign, we learned that he has served God as a Christian, for at least 20-years, no matter how we tried to dig up a different God....we tried to side with the world and blamed our reason for not voting for Obama on his Pastor, when we ALL know that we don't have control of what our Pastor says, he has the microphone, we may say something to him or eachother but we don't leave. And when Palin came on the scene, she was like the "great white hope", we could all breathe a "sigh of relief", because we now had someone WHITE to vote for, we knew we couldn't vote for McCain, it didn't matter that Palin didn't have any experience, we are willing to overlook all ot the requirements that we put on any of the other candidate. It would have been easier to have Romney, but we will take Palin over.... I heard my pastor say Palin from the pullpit Sunday....he was comparing this unknown to something good...suddenly we can talk about politics in our church.... Really, as a Christian the more I hear about Palin the more I like her, but I just can't get past those 5 children, and I wonder where was she while daughter was getting pregnant? I know that I was always in my three teenage children's business to avoid those types of things, I know that things still happen but the chances are less, when you take an ACTIVE role in the CHILDREN'S lives. As a Christian, with radical teaching like Palin, I also thought about the "familiar spirit" thing, generational curse thing, with her getting pregnant before marriage like her parents...but that make me think even more that she should have been in her daughter's face, and in her leadership position, she should have been more attentive...what about the parents that are on their children's skirt tails, what does this say to them? I know that everyone agreed that the children are off limits, but would everyone had agreed had it been the otherway around, I think not. But let's just let the children be off limits, what about what the scripture says, it clearly says that if a person cannot rule their own house, they should not be in charge...in leadership...but then I think of the future, what is that little girl who chased her mother all around that stage when she was nominated going to say to us, years from now, when we have taken her mother away from her. Like I said, I really believe that a "Palin-type" would be good for our country, I think she is gutsy enough to handle business, I have no problems with her wanting to fire her brother-in-law, the guy has been married about 4 times, something is wrong with him...not her. How many times have you felt like if it were in "your power" you would handle a matter...okay it was in her power, and she handled the matter.
Anyway, we all have opinions, but I would like to share mine, as a Chrisitan, we are always harpening on how this country was started on Chrisitan values, well let's elect people of "like faith", and create the Obama/Palin Ticket. We certainly would have a real team of "prayers", Christians know that where there is two or more of us gathered, you know the scripture, we would bring God in our mist! Mist of our country's affairs...one thing, we wouldn't have to worry about praying openingly, we already know that they are long-time Chrisitans, so no one would be shocked at them leading the nation in prayer. Neither one of them have denied their faith, and that brings blessings too, Jesus says if you acknowledge me before men, that He, Jesus will acknowledge you before His, my our father, we all know that Obama did that, on television more than once, and now it's coming out that so did Palin....haven't heard anything from Biden, but WE ALL KNOW THAT MCCAIN has kicked several Christian leaders to the curb, openingly and defiantly...now he wants our vote..,and he only gets the Christian vote because of Palin...SOMETHING IS WRONG WITH THAT...once in office he can easily squash her or control her, because she's VICE President....but with Obama and Palin, we can't loose! "OPT" out!!! Another OPTion, "OBAMA/PALIN TICKET!!!!! And if they don't know how to do something, they will do like every other Christian and pray!!!!

acaru · 1 year ago

"More than 60 percent of all sub-prime loans — the most likely kind of loan to go into default — were made to African-Americans in Michigan"
Yes thats a great point, but lets not forget the african american population in ALL of Macomb county is 2.71 percent as of the 2000 census. Dont get me wrong- every vote counts- but as a resident of macomb county I can attest to this demographic. It also doesnt mean that what is being done is right, it just puts your point a little more into perspective.

Angel101 · 1 year ago

Point taken.