Let's Fight Microsoft

[Laukev7]

they were slandering too much

On the contrary, they lost because they did not work hard enough to denounce the lies of the Bush regime. People did not see a difference between Bush and Kerry, because they did nothing but repackage their rhetoric pushing for more war. Also, there is the fact that there was widespread vote fraud organised by the GOP and their Diebold cronies, with the help of Bush's brother and his money laundering.

[DavidB]

On the contrary, they lost because they did not work hard enough to denounce the lies of the Bush regime. People did not see a difference between Bush and Kerry, because they did nothing but repackage their rhetoric pushing for more war. Also, there is the fact that there was widespread vote fraud organised by the GOP and their Diebold cronies, with the help of Bush's brother and his money laundering.

And that's just the beginning. I ran for state office that same year, and there was almost incomprehensible corruption even before voters got to the polls. Many counties in Washington State didn't issue Voters Pamphlets for the first time. Some put information about the candidates on their websites, but it was all over the map. One county listed just one candidate in my race. The Secretary of State listed all the candidates, with links to their campaign websites. The link to my site was dead.

I participated in the "Video Voters Guide" - brief televised statements all the candidates are allowed to make. I've never even seen the video, but several people have told me I looked white as a ghost. In fact, someone in the studio told me that just after they filmed me.

I saw one candidate tape her speech just before me, and another went on just after me. Why weren't they white as ghosts?

The Seattle Times LIED about my campaign -twice. The Seattle Weekly didn't even mention my name once. If you don't believe me, visit http://www.seattleweekly.com and type "David Blomstrom" into the search function.

I was only invited to ONE public forum - near the end of the campaign. Which raises another issue - absentee voting.

Why does the establishment go to such great lengths to encourage people to vote absentee, whether they need to or not? I think I know the answer.

Elections are just about the only times that public officials can be held accountable. They're just about the only time the public can have  a voice that competes with the media. After all, the public has to know what the candidates are saying, right?

So the establishment tries to restrict this "window" as much as possible. They write very little about the candidates until August or even early September, when many people are preoccupied with unpacking after summer vacation or preparing for a new school year. Even then, they don't give people like me a voice.

But if I found a way to make my voice heard? Suppose, for example, I pulled off a brilliant public relations stunt on September 8. It wouldn't do much good if people have already voted absentee on September 7.

And don't even get me started on the public forums I attended during past campaigns. What a crock.

[Laukev7]

The Seattle Times LIED about my campaign -twice. The Seattle Weekly didn't even mention my name once. If you don't believe me, visit www.seattleweekly.com and type "David Blomstrom" into the search function.

Actually, your name is mentioned in this article:

 

She wouldn't have the authority to do so as superintendent

[DavidB]

Actually, your name is mentioned in this article:

 

As well as this article (as well as nine others):

 


 To be fair though, they did give you a very unfair campaign coverage. It is obvious that they were deliberately trying to obscure you.

That's odd; when I checked, there were 0 entries for David Blomstrom in 2004. I wonder if they've changed their search function somehow.

But their coverage was still disgusting. "Former teacher David Blomstrom is also running" is ALL they wrote about me in one article. The first link you posted mentioned a candidate named Arthur Hu. In fact, he wasn't even a candidate; he ran in 2000!

There was a BIG article about the Supt. of Public Instruction campaign - I'm pretty sure it was the most extensive article the Seattle Weekly published - that didn't even mention my name. In fact, I think it just mentioned their two favorite (and obviously corrupt) candidates.

It's interesting that their tactics have changed, though. During my first two campaigns, they ridiculed me pretty severely. In return, I began exposing the Seattle Weekly's media whores on my website. During the last two elections, they pretty much ignored me.

Imagine making Microsoft a campaign issue in Bill Gates' own backyard AND calling for the death penalty for the president in a city that could serve as the capital of the IMPEACH BUSH movement and not even seeing a word about either issue in the Seattle Weekly, which pretends to be an alternative newspaper.

[DavidB]

Acutally, those nine links you posted represent EVERYTHING written about me over the course of FOUR campaigns for public office. I believe the first link is the only one associated with my 2004 campaign.

That's an average of 2.25 "mentions" (or insults) per campaign.

ON EDIT... Actually, there are a total of 11 "mentions," 3 of which were written before I first ran for office.

[Siplus]

On the contrary, they lost because they did not work hard enough to denounce the lies of the Bush regime. People did not see a difference between Bush and Kerry, because they did nothing but repackage their rhetoric pushing for more war. Also, there is the fact that there was widespread vote fraud organised by the GOP and their Diebold cronies, with the help of Bush's brother and his money laundering.

Wow. I say the EXACT same thing about libs

[DavidB]

Wow. I say the EXACT same thing about libs

Well, duh...I think that's who he's talking about. Or are you referring to the second part of the post? Are you suggesting that the libs were aided by Diebold and George Bush's corrupt relatives?

[bedouin]

Even though I'm not old enough to vote, if I could have voted in the 2004 election.  I would have voted for Bush.

Being able to properly punctuate a simple sentence should be a prerequisite for voting.

[Laukev7]

Being able to properly punctuate a simple sentence should be a prerequisite for voting.

Amen to that.

Wow. I say the EXACT same thing about libs

[Lead Head]

[OFFTOPIC] My scroll wheel is melting now[/OFFTOPIC]

[worker201]

Being able to properly punctuate a simple sentence should be a prerequisite for voting.

Except that literacy laws were long used in the United States to prevent blacks from voting.  I'd have to be fairly certain that educational systems were functioning properly and fairly before I would agree to another literacy law.

[DavidB]

Except that literacy laws were long used in the United States to prevent blacks from voting. I'd have to be fairly certain that educational systems were functioning properly and fairly before I would agree to another literacy law.

True. On the other hand, literacy laws would keep a lot of Republicans home on voting day.

[Siplus]

True. On the other hand, literacy laws would keep a lot of Republicans home on voting day.

Somehow I doubt that. Typically speaking, Liberals tend to be younger in age; however, Conservatives tend to be older. Anyone who thinks younger people are more educated than older people (in general) is mistaken. I know from first hand experience that the average person my age has not developed lingusitic skills beyond that of the majority of you.

Since this is an online forum, and I care very little about writing properly, I do not care about being grammatically correct.

This is not published (unless someone is printing this out.. but that would be pointless). I do not care what half a dozen ideological extremists think about my abilities (My academics are my business). Pointing out grammatical errors online is very annoying, and few people care. You are no better than the trolls on slashdot.

[DavidB]

Pointing out grammatical errors online is very annoying, and few people care. You are no better than the trolls on slashdot.

It depends on the nature and extent of the grammatical errors. We all make typos, and I've never met anyone who could spell every world and had mastered every grammatical rule.

However, extremely poor grammar or spelling is sometimes evidence of ignorance. One of my favorite examples is the right-winger who recently labeled me a "creaton" on a political forum. It took me a while to figure out he meant cretin.

[skyman8081]

You want to kill everyone who voted for Bush?

That's called genocide.

Sieg Hail, fucker: