Yes, be suspicious, but a lot of the reactions here look more like rabid paranoia. Do you guys know what the consular department of an embassy is there for?

Yes, it would have been better if they’d said this didn’t affect votes made for any other candidate, but I’d bet there’s a similar notice in every polling place in Florida.

I’m not going to claim its all OK, but the comments do look like an over-reaction.

Of course, the remarkable thing is that, in this case, the Republicans have followed Florida state law on elections.

It is criminal, flagrantly enough too. Whether or not it’s been also made illegal, this is another matter. The distinction is that to justly, truthfully, intelligently establish or determine if an act consists of actual criminality, this is a moral order consideration. Conversely, there are laws that are immoral and therefore criminal; because laws can be and rather regularly are whatever the powers say these are to be.

Given that the US Constitution specifically states that the government is to be [for, of, and by] The People, this act by the State Dpt and the Pentagon is therefore and inherently criminal. That justices and other legal experts have not seen to establishing this law in explicit terms, assuming they have not done so, it does not matter in terms of whether or not this is an inherently criminal act according to US laws. After all, it is also crucial to not only apply laws according to the letter, but, and more importantly, according to the spirit of the law.

Mike Corbeil

Comment by dlet

blah blah blah
We go down to defeat knowing we did the “right thing.”

…the fact that Republicans (and Republican-lites) remain competitive in ANY political races in this country…

…especially in Virginia and Tennessee…

…speaks to how SICK the al Cracker anti-American inbred TRAITORS on the right are…

…and that America is FULL of ‘em….

Florida Dems were counting on adding the Foley seat to the win-column, knowing the revulsion Repub voters have for pedophiles – whether they are gay OR straight. Perhaps not realizing the vote wasn’t between “Feely” Foley and the opposition, MOST Repubs would vote Dem. We are simply presenting them with a choice this November – surely you can’t oppose an informed electorate.

Haven’t noticed you around much lately. Good to see you back here. I hope you’re getting better. I’ve seen others asking about you. You raise some good points there.

It seems that our government was less concerned with making sure our troops overseas voted correctly for the candidate of their choice, and more concerned only that they voted Republican correctly.

And I realize that each state can make it up their own minds about how to run elections, but what makes them think this is fair and proper? I do not know what the primary results were when Foley sought his party’s nomination, maybe he ran unopposed. But if he didn’t, and the candidate the party puts up was one of Foley’s opponents, then wouldn’t the Florida Republican Party just be substituting their choice in place of the voters’ choice?

And another thing, I thought the big theme of this year’s Republican races was going to be that these are local elections, not national elections (even though the winners govern the entire nation). So why are they allowed to substitute another person for who the voters pick? What if Foley had died and the voters wanted to send the message that they would rather have a dead man represent them than the choices they were given? (It’s how John Ashcroft became available to be AG.) Under this way of doing things, voters who voted for Foley as a protest would end up voting for somebody not picked to be on the ballot by the voters (of any party).

Doesn’t this all amount to nothing more than voting for a party and not a person? Which is it, Republicans? Do we elect people or do we elect parties?

(Yes, I understand that this is the way Florida law is. I am questioning why they would want it that way.)

And this is my favorite part. Talk about Alice-In-Wonderland world.

Also Wednesday, Negron’s campaign sent out a news release from Marine Cpl. David Snyder, an Iraq war veteran who lives in the district.

“Tim Mahoney should be ashamed of his disgraceful efforts to keep our fighting men and women overseas in the dark about their election ballots,” Snyder said. “They are risking their lives overseas in the fight against terrorism. And how does Tim Mahoney repay them? By fighting to keep them as confused as possible about their ballots.”

naahhh… now, think about that…
i mean i know that the oil companies and insurance companies and credit card banks and arms manufacturers and such also donate some monies to the Dems (maybe?), but i have a hard time believing that they would invest and spend the same amount on a political idealology that is fundamentally opposed to the things that those businesses represent – environmental damage, poverty, bancruptcy, and war…
just a thought…

and i cannot watch WWF any longer than the second it takes to register and click the remote asap! yuck.
…

Isn’t that the 1) correct and 2) available recourse?

Or is the law somehow not being broken by the state department, in some way that this story does not describe?