Re: confederacy of dunces*

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

Date: Mon Nov 27 2000 - 16:38:19 PST

In a message dated 11/27/00 2:01:43 PM Eastern Standard Time,

<< wrote:
> In a message dated 11/26/00 9:17:59 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> writes:
> << I agree that Gore shouldn't be trying to get all the absentee
> ballots thrown out, but the fact that some of the ballots were not filled
> out by the voters themselves, but by other people who recieved the ballots
> makes me a bit suspicious too. >>
> boner buns,
 Uh, geege, that's cdale making that comment. Unless you're trying to claim
 something about her vis-a-vis me... :-/

i orignally cc'd you - was trying to kill two birds with one stone. (cdale
is sugar buns.)
> the problem with the absentee ballots is validating when and by
> whom the votes were cast. you need a postmark, a signature and the
> signature of a witness. do you believe any of these things should be
> overlooked just because they are military?
 Well... yes. >>

okay, forget the witness signature. what about the DATE? all the overseas
voters of EITHER party five or more time zones behind us - can't you see why
it's critically important that we know when the ballot was sent?

"Bob, this is Dick. Looks like our boy is falling behind. Better do
something quick or you'll be minus one stripe in December!"

(what bad dialogue resulting from ignorance of the military looks like.)


Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Nov 27 2000 - 16:45:00 PST