> You're welcome.  Thanks for the contribution.  Far more valuable than
> what you tend to spew.

> On Nov 4, 4:46 pm, Credo <credo...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > I dosed off twice reading your story.  Thanks for sharing, need the
> > nap.

> > On Nov 4, 1:04 pm, tetch <tetchmagi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > Had to share this story.  A buddy went to vote yesterday & was told he
> > > couldn't because he was no longer a resident (recently moved).  So he
> > > called his new county who informed him registration had ended before
> > > he was a resident there.  As a result he was not allowed to vote in
> > > either county.

> > > So he makes a stink with the people around there (things like "I'm
> > > being disenfrancihsed" and "denying my sufferage") until at some point
> > > after speaking to various officials the county attorney, who I guess
> > > happened to be there, told him he could see the election judge about
> > > it.

> > > He walks with the attorney to the neighboring court house.  Shortly
> > > after the court finishes resolving some minor matter, and establishing
> > > that the judge was actually the election judge for the day (the clerk
> > > had to tell him), my friend explains the situation and ends with "And
> > > as a result, I can't vote.  And that's not good.".

> > > The judge agrees and issues an order allowing him to cast a ballot for
> > > that day.  My friend was quite happy to go back to the ladies tending
> > > the polls (who initially cackled at his situation) and arrive at the
> > > precise time that they were called and told to allow him to vote.

> > > The conclusion:  he voted no on two municipal items that would cause
> > > increases in taxes in a county that he was no longer a resident.  In
> > > my humble opinion, the duty of any good Republican.- Hide quoted text -

> > - Show quoted text -

> Had to share this story.  A buddy went to vote yesterday & was told he
> couldn't because he was no longer a resident (recently moved).  So he
> called his new county who informed him registration had ended before
> he was a resident there.  As a result he was not allowed to vote in
> either county.

> So he makes a stink with the people around there (things like "I'm
> being disenfrancihsed" and "denying my sufferage") until at some point
> after speaking to various officials the county attorney, who I guess
> happened to be there, told him he could see the election judge about
> it.

> He walks with the attorney to the neighboring court house.  Shortly
> after the court finishes resolving some minor matter, and establishing
> that the judge was actually the election judge for the day (the clerk
> had to tell him), my friend explains the situation and ends with "And
> as a result, I can't vote.  And that's not good.".

> The judge agrees and issues an order allowing him to cast a ballot for
> that day.  My friend was quite happy to go back to the ladies tending
> the polls (who initially cackled at his situation) and arrive at the
> precise time that they were called and told to allow him to vote.

> The conclusion:  he voted no on two municipal items that would cause
> increases in taxes in a county that he was no longer a resident.  In
> my humble opinion, the duty of any good Republican.

> I guess you just aren't paying attention.  Do you not understand that
> he would not have been allowed a vote without an exception being
> made?  That's what the courts are for.  The spirit of the law is
> everyone is entitled to a vote and it just so happened that in this
> case it would be for his former community rather than current.  I
> don't see why that's such a problem for you.

> I don't know why you're being such a prick, but whatever.  If you want
> to take it as someone wasting resources because they're irresponsible,
> that's your deal.  I've chosen to see it positively.  Maybe you should
> consider that for a moment.

> On Nov 4, 4:55 pm, "Mr. Data" <morelikeagh...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > I really don't see what's so good about waiting until the last minute
> > to make sure you are eligible to participate in a vote instead of
> > checking ahead of time like a good voter should do, especially after
> > moving, and then wasting precious tax dollers and public resources to
> > get a special exception made just for him so he could cast his one ill-
> > gotten vote
> > This doofus actually wasted court resources because he didn't do his
> > job as a citizen, and all so he could vote on an issue that doesn'e
> > even affect him.
> > That's your good republican?
> > What's worse is this story sounds completely fake, but whatever, it's
> > actually better if its not because this guy sounds like a real pompous
> > loser.

> > On Nov 4, 4:41 pm, tetch <tetchmagi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > That's one way to look at it.  Another would be that he's someone who
> > > takes his right to vote seriously, unlike most citizens.

> > > He's in the reserves, is getting his degree in public administration
> > > and is a self taught student of history.  I've found him to be
> > > intelligent, strong in his convictions, sometimes abrasive but an all
> > > around good guy.  He rides the party line pretty closely, but his
> > > reasoning skills are sound.

> > > Of course he's also the type to do something just because someone told
> > > him he couldn't.  That may have been the strongest factor in play.

> > > Anyway, I thought it worth sharing.  The title was just because I know
> > > without something at least moderately adversarial or inflamatory no
> > > one reads these things.

> > > On Nov 4, 3:20 pm, Mothermugger <ivan.of.the.oza...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > Sounds like a guy with too much time on his hands.

> > > > On Nov 4, 4:11 pm, "Mr. Data" <morelikeagh...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > I just wonder why he's voting on things that affect a county in which
> > > > > he no longer lives
> > > > > that sounds like fraud to me
> > > > > and even if it isn't, it's unethical at best

> > > > > On Nov 4, 3:54 pm, tetch <tetchmagi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > Nope, court order.  Rule of law all the way.

> > > > > > Besides, ACORN wouldn't facilitate a GOP vote.

> > > > > > On Nov 4, 2:30 pm, "Mr. Data" <morelikeagh...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > sounds like voter fraud to me
> > > > > > > where's googly?

> > > > > > > On Nov 4, 2:42 pm, minaun <minaun...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > > Was this buddy your mom?

> > > > > > > > On Nov 4, 2:04 pm, tetch <tetchmagi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > Had to share this story.  A buddy went to vote yesterday & was told he
> > > > > > > > > couldn't because he was no longer a resident (recently moved).  So he
> > > > > > > > > called his new county who informed him registration had ended before
> > > > > > > > > he was a resident there.  As a result he was not allowed to vote in
> > > > > > > > > either county.

> > > > > > > > > So he makes a stink with the people around there (things like "I'm
> > > > > > > > > being disenfrancihsed" and "denying my sufferage") until at some point
> > > > > > > > > after speaking to various officials the county attorney, who I guess
> > > > > > > > > happened to be there, told him he could see the election judge about
> > > > > > > > > it.

> > > > > > > > > He walks with the attorney to the neighboring court house.  Shortly
> > > > > > > > > after the court finishes resolving some minor matter, and establishing
> > > > > > > > > that the judge was actually the election judge for the day (the clerk
> > > > > > > > > had to tell him), my friend explains the situation and ends with "And
> > > > > > > > > as a result, I can't vote.  And that's not good.".

> > > > > > > > > The judge agrees and issues an order allowing him to cast a ballot for
> > > > > > > > > that day.  My friend was quite happy to go back to the ladies tending
> > > > > > > > > the polls (who initially cackled at his situation) and arrive at the
> > > > > > > > > precise time that they were called and told to allow him to vote.

> > > > > > > > > The conclusion:  he voted no on two municipal items that would cause
> > > > > > > > > increases in taxes in a county that he was no longer a resident.  In
> > > > > > > > > my humble opinion, the duty of any good Republican.- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -

> I guess you just aren't paying attention.  Do you not understand that
> he would not have been allowed a vote without an exception being
> made?  That's what the courts are for.  The spirit of the law is
> everyone is entitled to a vote and it just so happened that in this
> case it would be for his former community rather than current.  I
> don't see why that's such a problem for you.

> I don't know why you're being such a prick, but whatever.  If you want
> to take it as someone wasting resources because they're irresponsible,
> that's your deal.  I've chosen to see it positively.  Maybe you should
> consider that for a moment.

> On Nov 4, 4:55 pm, "Mr. Data" <morelikeagh...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > I really don't see what's so good about waiting until the last minute
> > to make sure you are eligible to participate in a vote instead of
> > checking ahead of time like a good voter should do, especially after
> > moving, and then wasting precious tax dollers and public resources to
> > get a special exception made just for him so he could cast his one ill-
> > gotten vote
> > This doofus actually wasted court resources because he didn't do his
> > job as a citizen, and all so he could vote on an issue that doesn'e
> > even affect him.
> > That's your good republican?
> > What's worse is this story sounds completely fake, but whatever, it's
> > actually better if its not because this guy sounds like a real pompous
> > loser.

> > On Nov 4, 4:41 pm, tetch <tetchmagi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > That's one way to look at it.  Another would be that he's someone who
> > > takes his right to vote seriously, unlike most citizens.

> > > He's in the reserves, is getting his degree in public administration
> > > and is a self taught student of history.  I've found him to be
> > > intelligent, strong in his convictions, sometimes abrasive but an all
> > > around good guy.  He rides the party line pretty closely, but his
> > > reasoning skills are sound.

> > > Of course he's also the type to do something just because someone told
> > > him he couldn't.  That may have been the strongest factor in play.

> > > Anyway, I thought it worth sharing.  The title was just because I know
> > > without something at least moderately adversarial or inflamatory no
> > > one reads these things.

> > > On Nov 4, 3:20 pm, Mothermugger <ivan.of.the.oza...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > Sounds like a guy with too much time on his hands.

> > > > On Nov 4, 4:11 pm, "Mr. Data" <morelikeagh...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > I just wonder why he's voting on things that affect a county in which
> > > > > he no longer lives
> > > > > that sounds like fraud to me
> > > > > and even if it isn't, it's unethical at best

> > > > > On Nov 4, 3:54 pm, tetch <tetchmagi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > Nope, court order.  Rule of law all the way.

> > > > > > Besides, ACORN wouldn't facilitate a GOP vote.

> > > > > > On Nov 4, 2:30 pm, "Mr. Data" <morelikeagh...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > sounds like voter fraud to me
> > > > > > > where's googly?

> > > > > > > On Nov 4, 2:42 pm, minaun <minaun...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > > Was this buddy your mom?

> > > > > > > > On Nov 4, 2:04 pm, tetch <tetchmagi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > Had to share this story.  A buddy went to vote yesterday & was told he
> > > > > > > > > couldn't because he was no longer a resident (recently moved).  So he
> > > > > > > > > called his new county who informed him registration had ended before
> > > > > > > > > he was a resident there.  As a result he was not allowed to vote in
> > > > > > > > > either county.

> > > > > > > > > So he makes a stink with the people around there (things like "I'm
> > > > > > > > > being disenfrancihsed" and "denying my sufferage") until at some point
> > > > > > > > > after speaking to various officials the county attorney, who I guess
> > > > > > > > > happened to be there, told him he could see the election judge about
> > > > > > > > > it.

> > > > > > > > > He walks with the attorney to the neighboring court house.  Shortly
> > > > > > > > > after the court finishes resolving some minor matter, and establishing
> > > > > > > > > that the judge was actually the election judge for the day (the clerk
> > > > > > > > > had to tell him), my friend explains the situation and ends with "And
> > > > > > > > > as a result, I can't vote.  And that's not good.".

> > > > > > > > > The judge agrees and issues an order allowing him to cast a ballot for
> > > > > > > > > that day.  My friend was quite happy to go back to the ladies tending
> > > > > > > > > the polls (who initially cackled at his situation) and arrive at the
> > > > > > > > > precise time that they were called and told to allow him to vote.

> > > > > > > > > The conclusion:  he voted no on two municipal items that would cause
> > > > > > > > > increases in taxes in a county that he was no longer a resident.  In
> > > > > > > > > my humble opinion, the duty of any good Republican.- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -

> I just really don't like these chain-mail propaganda-type cut and
> paste emails.
> I mean really... did this actually happen to your buddy or did you cut
> and paste it from some email or blog or something.
> Either way, this one is fun because it actually serves the opposite of
> its intent in that it makes their "good" republican look like a
> pompous, irresponsible, unethical, resource-wasting, meddlesome
> egotist.

> On Nov 4, 6:19 pm, tetch <tetchmagi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > I guess you just aren't paying attention.  Do you not understand that
> > he would not have been allowed a vote without an exception being
> > made?  That's what the courts are for.  The spirit of the law is
> > everyone is entitled to a vote and it just so happened that in this
> > case it would be for his former community rather than current.  I
> > don't see why that's such a problem for you.

> > I don't know why you're being such a prick, but whatever.  If you want
> > to take it as someone wasting resources because they're irresponsible,
> > that's your deal.  I've chosen to see it positively.  Maybe you should
> > consider that for a moment.

> > On Nov 4, 4:55 pm, "Mr. Data" <morelikeagh...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > > I really don't see what's so good about waiting until the last minute
> > > to make sure you are eligible to participate in a vote instead of
> > > checking ahead of time like a good voter should do, especially after
> > > moving, and then wasting precious tax dollers and public resources to
> > > get a special exception made just for him so he could cast his one ill-
> > > gotten vote
> > > This doofus actually wasted court resources because he didn't do his
> > > job as a citizen, and all so he could vote on an issue that doesn'e
> > > even affect him.
> > > That's your good republican?
> > > What's worse is this story sounds completely fake, but whatever, it's
> > > actually better if its not because this guy sounds like a real pompous
> > > loser.

> > > On Nov 4, 4:41 pm, tetch <tetchmagi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > That's one way to look at it.  Another would be that he's someone who
> > > > takes his right to vote seriously, unlike most citizens.

> > > > He's in the reserves, is getting his degree in public administration
> > > > and is a self taught student of history.  I've found him to be
> > > > intelligent, strong in his convictions, sometimes abrasive but an all
> > > > around good guy.  He rides the party line pretty closely, but his
> > > > reasoning skills are sound.

> > > > Of course he's also the type to do something just because someone told
> > > > him he couldn't.  That may have been the strongest factor in play.

> > > > Anyway, I thought it worth sharing.  The title was just because I know
> > > > without something at least moderately adversarial or inflamatory no
> > > > one reads these things.

> > > > On Nov 4, 3:20 pm, Mothermugger <ivan.of.the.oza...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > Sounds like a guy with too much time on his hands.

> > > > > On Nov 4, 4:11 pm, "Mr. Data" <morelikeagh...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > I just wonder why he's voting on things that affect a county in which
> > > > > > he no longer lives
> > > > > > that sounds like fraud to me
> > > > > > and even if it isn't, it's unethical at best

> > > > > > On Nov 4, 3:54 pm, tetch <tetchmagi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > Nope, court order.  Rule of law all the way.

> > > > > > > Besides, ACORN wouldn't facilitate a GOP vote.

> > > > > > > On Nov 4, 2:30 pm, "Mr. Data" <morelikeagh...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > > sounds like voter fraud to me
> > > > > > > > where's googly?

> > > > > > > > On Nov 4, 2:42 pm, minaun <minaun...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > Was this buddy your mom?

> > > > > > > > > On Nov 4, 2:04 pm, tetch <tetchmagi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > Had to share this story.  A buddy went to vote yesterday & was told he
> > > > > > > > > > couldn't because he was no longer a resident (recently moved).  So he
> > > > > > > > > > called his new county who informed him registration had ended before
> > > > > > > > > > he was a resident there.  As a result he was not allowed to vote in
> > > > > > > > > > either county.

> > > > > > > > > > So he makes a stink with the people around there (things like "I'm
> > > > > > > > > > being disenfrancihsed" and "denying my sufferage") until at some point
> > > > > > > > > > after speaking to various officials the county attorney, who I guess
> > > > > > > > > > happened to be there, told him he could see the election judge about
> > > > > > > > > > it.

> > > > > > > > > > He walks with the attorney to the neighboring court house.  Shortly
> > > > > > > > > > after the court finishes resolving some minor matter, and establishing
> > > > > > > > > > that the judge was actually the election judge for the day (the clerk
> > > > > > > > > > had to tell him), my friend explains the situation and ends with "And
> > > > > > > > > > as a result, I can't vote.  And that's not good.".

> > > > > > > > > > The judge agrees and issues an order allowing him to cast a ballot for
> > > > > > > > > > that day.  My friend was quite happy to go back to the ladies tending
> > > > > > > > > > the polls (who initially cackled at his situation) and arrive at the
> > > > > > > > > > precise time that they were called and told to allow him to vote.

> > > > > > > > > > The conclusion:  he voted no on two municipal items that would cause
> > > > > > > > > > increases in taxes in a county that he was no longer a resident.  In
> > > > > > > > > > my humble opinion, the duty of any good Republican.- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > - Show quoted text -

> Had to share this story.  A buddy went to vote yesterday & was told he
> couldn't because he was no longer a resident (recently moved).  So he
> called his new county who informed him registration had ended before
> he was a resident there.  As a result he was not allowed to vote in
> either county.

> So he makes a stink with the people around there (things like "I'm
> being disenfrancihsed" and "denying my sufferage") until at some point
> after speaking to various officials the county attorney, who I guess
> happened to be there, told him he could see the election judge about
> it.

> He walks with the attorney to the neighboring court house.  Shortly
> after the court finishes resolving some minor matter, and establishing
> that the judge was actually the election judge for the day (the clerk
> had to tell him), my friend explains the situation and ends with "And
> as a result, I can't vote.  And that's not good.".

> The judge agrees and issues an order allowing him to cast a ballot for
> that day.  My friend was quite happy to go back to the ladies tending
> the polls (who initially cackled at his situation) and arrive at the
> precise time that they were called and told to allow him to vote.

> The conclusion:  he voted no on two municipal items that would cause
> increases in taxes in a county that he was no longer a resident.  In
> my humble opinion, the duty of any good Republican.

> i would have voted at least 9 times....................no one tells me
> i can't vote.

> On Nov 4, 1:04 pm, tetch <tetchmagi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Had to share this story.  A buddy went to vote yesterday & was told he
> > couldn't because he was no longer a resident (recently moved).  So he
> > called his new county who informed him registration had ended before
> > he was a resident there.  As a result he was not allowed to vote in
> > either county.

> > So he makes a stink with the people around there (things like "I'm
> > being disenfrancihsed" and "denying my sufferage") until at some point
> > after speaking to various officials the county attorney, who I guess
> > happened to be there, told him he could see the election judge about
> > it.

> > He walks with the attorney to the neighboring court house.  Shortly
> > after the court finishes resolving some minor matter, and establishing
> > that the judge was actually the election judge for the day (the clerk
> > had to tell him), my friend explains the situation and ends with "And
> > as a result, I can't vote.  And that's not good.".

> > The judge agrees and issues an order allowing him to cast a ballot for
> > that day.  My friend was quite happy to go back to the ladies tending
> > the polls (who initially cackled at his situation) and arrive at the
> > precise time that they were called and told to allow him to vote.

> > The conclusion:  he voted no on two municipal items that would cause
> > increases in taxes in a county that he was no longer a resident.  In
> > my humble opinion, the duty of any good Republican.

> You fail to mention the issues he voted against that would cause
> increases in taxes.  Were they to continue funding 911 and emergency
> services, perhaps?  That's why the judge was in err for allowing the
> obstinate fart to vote on a local issue out of his county of
> residence.

> I love one-sided stories.  Something tells me the judge made his
> determination not on stare decisis but rather on a "how do I get this
> ranting lunatic out of my courtroom" basis.

> On Nov 4, 5:13 pm, tetch <tetchmagi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > You're welcome.  Thanks for the contribution.  Far more valuable than
> > what you tend to spew.

> > On Nov 4, 4:46 pm, Credo <credo...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > I dosed off twice reading your story.  Thanks for sharing, need the
> > > nap.

> > > On Nov 4, 1:04 pm, tetch <tetchmagi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > Had to share this story.  A buddy went to vote yesterday & was told he
> > > > couldn't because he was no longer a resident (recently moved).  So he
> > > > called his new county who informed him registration had ended before
> > > > he was a resident there.  As a result he was not allowed to vote in
> > > > either county.

> > > > So he makes a stink with the people around there (things like "I'm
> > > > being disenfrancihsed" and "denying my sufferage") until at some point
> > > > after speaking to various officials the county attorney, who I guess
> > > > happened to be there, told him he could see the election judge about
> > > > it.

> > > > He walks with the attorney to the neighboring court house.  Shortly
> > > > after the court finishes resolving some minor matter, and establishing
> > > > that the judge was actually the election judge for the day (the clerk
> > > > had to tell him), my friend explains the situation and ends with "And
> > > > as a result, I can't vote.  And that's not good.".

> > > > The judge agrees and issues an order allowing him to cast a ballot for
> > > > that day.  My friend was quite happy to go back to the ladies tending
> > > > the polls (who initially cackled at his situation) and arrive at the
> > > > precise time that they were called and told to allow him to vote.

> > > > The conclusion:  he voted no on two municipal items that would cause
> > > > increases in taxes in a county that he was no longer a resident.  In
> > > > my humble opinion, the duty of any good Republican.- Hide quoted text -

> > > - Show quoted text -

> I just really don't like these chain-mail propaganda-type cut and
> paste emails.
> I mean really... did this actually happen to your buddy or did you cut
> and paste it from some email or blog or something.
> Either way, this one is fun because it actually serves the opposite of
> its intent in that it makes their "good" republican look like a
> pompous, irresponsible, unethical, resource-wasting, meddlesome
> egotist.

> On Nov 4, 6:19 pm, tetch <tetchmagi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > I guess you just aren't paying attention.  Do you not understand that
> > he would not have been allowed a vote without an exception being
> > made?  That's what the courts are for.  The spirit of the law is
> > everyone is entitled to a vote and it just so happened that in this
> > case it would be for his former community rather than current.  I
> > don't see why that's such a problem for you.

> > I don't know why you're being such a prick, but whatever.  If you want
> > to take it as someone wasting resources because they're irresponsible,
> > that's your deal.  I've chosen to see it positively.  Maybe you should
> > consider that for a moment.

> > On Nov 4, 4:55 pm, "Mr. Data" <morelikeagh...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > > I really don't see what's so good about waiting until the last minute
> > > to make sure you are eligible to participate in a vote instead of
> > > checking ahead of time like a good voter should do, especially after
> > > moving, and then wasting precious tax dollers and public resources to
> > > get a special exception made just for him so he could cast his one ill-
> > > gotten vote
> > > This doofus actually wasted court resources because he didn't do his
> > > job as a citizen, and all so he could vote on an issue that doesn'e
> > > even affect him.
> > > That's your good republican?
> > > What's worse is this story sounds completely fake, but whatever, it's
> > > actually better if its not because this guy sounds like a real pompous
> > > loser.

> > > On Nov 4, 4:41 pm, tetch <tetchmagi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > That's one way to look at it.  Another would be that he's someone who
> > > > takes his right to vote seriously, unlike most citizens.

> > > > He's in the reserves, is getting his degree in public administration
> > > > and is a self taught student of history.  I've found him to be
> > > > intelligent, strong in his convictions, sometimes abrasive but an all
> > > > around good guy.  He rides the party line pretty closely, but his
> > > > reasoning skills are sound.

> > > > Of course he's also the type to do something just because someone told
> > > > him he couldn't.  That may have been the strongest factor in play.

> > > > Anyway, I thought it worth sharing.  The title was just because I know
> > > > without something at least moderately adversarial or inflamatory no
> > > > one reads these things.

> > > > On Nov 4, 3:20 pm, Mothermugger <ivan.of.the.oza...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > Sounds like a guy with too much time on his hands.

> > > > > On Nov 4, 4:11 pm, "Mr. Data" <morelikeagh...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > I just wonder why he's voting on things that affect a county in which
> > > > > > he no longer lives
> > > > > > that sounds like fraud to me
> > > > > > and even if it isn't, it's unethical at best

> > > > > > On Nov 4, 3:54 pm, tetch <tetchmagi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > Nope, court order.  Rule of law all the way.

> > > > > > > Besides, ACORN wouldn't facilitate a GOP vote.

> > > > > > > On Nov 4, 2:30 pm, "Mr. Data" <morelikeagh...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > > sounds like voter fraud to me
> > > > > > > > where's googly?

> > > > > > > > On Nov 4, 2:42 pm, minaun <minaun...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > Was this buddy your mom?

> > > > > > > > > On Nov 4, 2:04 pm, tetch <tetchmagi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > Had to share this story.  A buddy went to vote yesterday & was told he
> > > > > > > > > > couldn't because he was no longer a resident (recently moved).  So he
> > > > > > > > > > called his new county who informed him registration had ended before
> > > > > > > > > > he was a resident there.  As a result he was not allowed to vote in
> > > > > > > > > > either county.

> > > > > > > > > > So he makes a stink with the people around there (things like "I'm
> > > > > > > > > > being disenfrancihsed" and "denying my sufferage") until at some point
> > > > > > > > > > after speaking to various officials the county attorney, who I guess
> > > > > > > > > > happened to be there, told him he could see the election judge about
> > > > > > > > > > it.

> > > > > > > > > > He walks with the attorney to the neighboring court house.  Shortly
> > > > > > > > > > after the court finishes resolving some minor matter, and establishing
> > > > > > > > > > that the judge was actually the election judge for the day (the clerk
> > > > > > > > > > had to tell him), my friend explains the situation and ends with "And
> > > > > > > > > > as a result, I can't vote.  And that's not good.".

> > > > > > > > > > The judge agrees and issues an order allowing him to cast a ballot for
> > > > > > > > > > that day.  My friend was quite happy to go back to the ladies tending
> > > > > > > > > > the polls (who initially cackled at his situation) and arrive at the
> > > > > > > > > > precise time that they were called and told to allow him to vote.

> > > > > > > > > > The conclusion:  he voted no on two municipal items that would cause
> > > > > > > > > > increases in taxes in a county that he was no longer a resident.  In
> > > > > > > > > > my humble opinion, the duty of any good Republican.- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > - Show quoted text -

> So you should be allowed to vote based on what you are going to vote
> for?  I bet you'd love that if the republicans were in power when that
> policy was instituted.  Dumbass

> On Nov 4, 5:25 pm, Credo <credo...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > You fail to mention the issues he voted against that would cause
> > increases in taxes.  Were they to continue funding 911 and emergency
> > services, perhaps?  That's why the judge was in err for allowing the
> > obstinate fart to vote on a local issue out of his county of
> > residence.

> > I love one-sided stories.  Something tells me the judge made his
> > determination not on stare decisis but rather on a "how do I get this
> > ranting lunatic out of my courtroom" basis.

> > On Nov 4, 5:13 pm, tetch <tetchmagi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > You're welcome.  Thanks for the contribution.  Far more valuable than
> > > what you tend to spew.

> > > On Nov 4, 4:46 pm, Credo <credo...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > > I dosed off twice reading your story.  Thanks for sharing, need the
> > > > nap.

> > > > On Nov 4, 1:04 pm, tetch <tetchmagi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > Had to share this story.  A buddy went to vote yesterday & was told he
> > > > > couldn't because he was no longer a resident (recently moved).  So he
> > > > > called his new county who informed him registration had ended before
> > > > > he was a resident there.  As a result he was not allowed to vote in
> > > > > either county.

> > > > > So he makes a stink with the people around there (things like "I'm
> > > > > being disenfrancihsed" and "denying my sufferage") until at some point
> > > > > after speaking to various officials the county attorney, who I guess
> > > > > happened to be there, told him he could see the election judge about
> > > > > it.

> > > > > He walks with the attorney to the neighboring court house.  Shortly
> > > > > after the court finishes resolving some minor matter, and establishing
> > > > > that the judge was actually the election judge for the day (the clerk
> > > > > had to tell him), my friend explains the situation and ends with "And
> > > > > as a result, I can't vote.  And that's not good.".

> > > > > The judge agrees and issues an order allowing him to cast a ballot for
> > > > > that day.  My friend was quite happy to go back to the ladies tending
> > > > > the polls (who initially cackled at his situation) and arrive at the
> > > > > precise time that they were called and told to allow him to vote.

> > > > > The conclusion:  he voted no on two municipal items that would cause
> > > > > increases in taxes in a county that he was no longer a resident.  In
> > > > > my humble opinion, the duty of any good Republican.- Hide quoted text -

> > > > - Show quoted text -

> Ask your toothless buddy what the issues were that he voted against to
> save his ex-neighbors tax dollars.  Come on, jackass, let's research
> your claim.

> On Nov 4, 8:37 pm, tetch <tetchmagi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > So you should be allowed to vote based on what you are going to vote
> > for?  I bet you'd love that if the republicans were in power when that
> > policy was instituted.  Dumbass

> > On Nov 4, 5:25 pm, Credo <credo...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > You fail to mention the issues he voted against that would cause
> > > increases in taxes.  Were they to continue funding 911 and emergency
> > > services, perhaps?  That's why the judge was in err for allowing the
> > > obstinate fart to vote on a local issue out of his county of
> > > residence.

> > > I love one-sided stories.  Something tells me the judge made his
> > > determination not on stare decisis but rather on a "how do I get this
> > > ranting lunatic out of my courtroom" basis.

> > > On Nov 4, 5:13 pm, tetch <tetchmagi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > You're welcome.  Thanks for the contribution.  Far more valuable than
> > > > what you tend to spew.

> > > > On Nov 4, 4:46 pm, Credo <credo...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > > > I dosed off twice reading your story.  Thanks for sharing, need the
> > > > > nap.

> > > > > On Nov 4, 1:04 pm, tetch <tetchmagi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > Had to share this story.  A buddy went to vote yesterday & was told he
> > > > > > couldn't because he was no longer a resident (recently moved).  So he
> > > > > > called his new county who informed him registration had ended before
> > > > > > he was a resident there.  As a result he was not allowed to vote in
> > > > > > either county.

> > > > > > So he makes a stink with the people around there (things like "I'm
> > > > > > being disenfrancihsed" and "denying my sufferage") until at some point
> > > > > > after speaking to various officials the county attorney, who I guess
> > > > > > happened to be there, told him he could see the election judge about
> > > > > > it.

> > > > > > He walks with the attorney to the neighboring court house.  Shortly
> > > > > > after the court finishes resolving some minor matter, and establishing
> > > > > > that the judge was actually the election judge for the day (the clerk
> > > > > > had to tell him), my friend explains the situation and ends with "And
> > > > > > as a result, I can't vote.  And that's not good.".

> > > > > > The judge agrees and issues an order allowing him to cast a ballot for
> > > > > > that day.  My friend was quite happy to go back to the ladies tending
> > > > > > the polls (who initially cackled at his situation) and arrive at the
> > > > > > precise time that they were called and told to allow him to vote.

> > > > > > The conclusion:  he voted no on two municipal items that would cause
> > > > > > increases in taxes in a county that he was no longer a resident.  In
> > > > > > my humble opinion, the duty of any good Republican.- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > - Show quoted text -

> Look mommy.
> The stupid guy didn't register but still got to vote.
> Isn't that how GW won Florida?