Who, exactly, has been charged in Ohio?
You posted a link to a letter demanding an investigation.

That is a pretty bad example.

I’m pretty sure that you at least think there’s a point in there Vinny - could it be that stageleft has a }}}gasp{{{ left leaning bias? Before you get too high on your horse of all that is good, and right, and fair, go back and check the post you linked to and tell me which side of the fence you decided to come down on.

If there are chargable offenses in Ohio where there is sufficient evidence of wrong-doing and a reasonable extectation of a conviction I’m sure that charges will be laid… and if people are actually found guilty I also expect that IT will make note of that.

Until that time, and as Rhazes has pointed out - it does not appear that either judge or jury has spoken the words “guilty as charged”….

You might wanna read it.

Yeah, everyone should definitely read the official report. Some of the funniest stuff I’ve read in a while. The authors accuse NAACP National Voter Fund of paying a guy in crack cocaine (no proof sited), and that they registered known terrorists to vote. I don’t know if anything in that report is true but it’s a pretty entertaining read. I have no doubt that both parties bent rules whenever possible, the last election was one of the most heated in history, and I believe people on both sides of the fence would have done whatever necassary to win.

I also find it interesting that when discussing problems with the U.S. electoral system, things like this are focussed on, rather than the fact that they only have two parties which are so close in positions it doesn’t really make much of a difference which side gets in.

Oh, and by the way, the main subject in your story wasn’t convicted either, just charged.

Somehow that managed to be worthy of note though.

Spin spin spin spin spin

Oh, and by the way, the main subject in your story wasn’t convicted either, just charged.

Didn’t say he was convicted, but if you’re attempting to draw some parallel between your post and this one, and unless things are a lot different here than they are down there - the prosecution must feel that they have enough evidence to support the charge and a reasonable expectation of obtaining a guilty verdict - otherwise the charge never would have been laid.

Two minutes ago, the only thing that made the Washington story relevant was a judge and jury convicting the people involved (Stageleft’s own words).

There is nothing in the above text to support this statement. Getting dizzy yet?

Ah I see where you’ve gotten confused, in your story, no-one was charged, which stage pointed out. In his story, someone was charged, although not yet convicted. You’re right though, he did say that no one said “Guilty as charged” in relation to your story. Perhaps he should have said “insufficient evidence to file charges” (so far).

But I’m not sure what you’re original point was anyway, that the Democrats are also corrupt? Yes, and the sky is blue. You don’t seriously think that everyone that is against the Bush administration is for the Democrats do you? Or maybe just that every political scandal should be mentioned when discussing any of them on their own.
As for the last three lines of your post, uhhhh, on the other hand, not worth responding to. Let’s try and speak with our grown up voices when discussing issues like this.

This is a more relevant example that BOTH sides were guilty of a “winning at all costs ” mentality.

In the wee hours of Election Day morning, Democrat supporters slashed the tires on 20 Republican ” Get out the Vote ” vans which were intended to transport Republican voters who didn’t have transportation to the polls.

Two of the five charged in the tire slashing were the sons of prominent state Democrats.

In the story I linked an investigation has obviously been started and charges have been laid - leading me to believe that in fact something has in fact happened that could well lead to a guilty verdict, as I said, charges are not usually laid unless the prosecution feels they’ve got a reasonable chance of success. We’ll have to wait and see how it turns out.

In the story you linked there was a call for an investigation by a non-profit entity into allegations of voter fraud - we’ll have to wait and see how it pans out for them. You consider it “pretty damning stuff”, I said neither “judge or jury has spoken the words “guilty as charged”. What needs to be explained?

Mike: You’re right, there was uber stupidity, and illegal activity, all over the place. The courts will ultimately have to sort all that out, bloggers will stake out their positions early on (’cause that’s what bloggers do), and we’ll all be left to read about it in the papers.