Liberty Tree wrote:
We all know by now he lacks the moral fiber to ever admit he is wrong, no matter what evidence is presented. He will always say it is not valid because he is self delusional about the truth and cannot accept it if it goes against the way he wants things to be.
That is choice, you loons deny facts and then have the hypocrisy to call others who present evidence to support their position delusional. Obviously, you're the delusional ones. Try reading the posts between "banjojack" and myself. His theory of "voter fraud" is based on two liars and a mythical 177 convictions of "voter fraud", in Minnesota, in the 2008 Senatorial race. "banjojack" can't prove there were 177 convictions of voter fraud, because they don't exist. Look, it's real simple, even for intellectually challenged individuals, such as yourself. List the names of the 177 individuals who were tried and convicted, in Minnesota, in the 2008 Senatorial race. And if these 177 convictions, of "voter fraud" can be verified, I'll completely admit I am wrong and personally back efforts for state "voter registration" laws. It's just that simple. If the two "liars", Fund and von Spakovsky can claim there were 177 convictions of "voter fraud", in Minnesota, in 2008, then the names of these individuals are obviously accessible. Now remember my source said their were 10 cases of "voter fraud" reported in Minnesota, since 2000, so you'll need to come up with at least, 40 verifiable cases of convictions, of "voter fraud", in Minnesota, in the Senatorial election, of 2008. I should require you to list all 177 mythical cases "banjojack" cites, as his evidence of "wide spread" voter fraud. Happy hunting. And of course this may be the last time any of you loons address this subject, because I doubt seriously you'll come up with even one verifiable case of "voter fraud". Yet who knows. But most of all please don't start with all the excuses on why you can't name the 177 individuals, who were convicted of "voter fraud", in Minnesota, in the 2008 Senatorial race. We'll take a page from Bill O'Reilly, this is the "No Excuses Zone". It is fools like you who accept these lies as facts, so it is you who must produce the evidence confirming your allegations.
Food for thought..."John Fund and Hans von Spakovsky are ideologues whose assertions about widespread fraudulent voting have not just been debunked by scholars, but by George W. Bushs Justice Department itselfwhere in 2006, von Spakovsky, a lawyer, led the firing of seven U.S. attorneys for not zealously pursuing voter fraud."...AlterNet, Aug. 8, 2012, by Steven Rosenfeld.
Also this..."The problem with this assertionfrom a new book by The Wall Street Journals John Fund and George W. Bush Justice Department attorney Hans von Spakovskyis that it is not just factually wrong, according to Minnesota Supreme Court records, the Minnesota prosecutor who investigated most of the cases, and some of the countrys top election scholars..." Ibid