In article ,
" wrote:

On Thursday, February 6, 2014 11:59:52 PM UTC-5, Malcom Mal Reynolds wrote:
In article ,

" wrote:



On Thursday, February 6, 2014 3:04:03 PM UTC-5, Moe DeLoughan wrote:

On 2/6/2014 1:37 PM, Malcom "Mal" Reynolds wrote:



Now this is truly insane. The National Republican Congressional



Committee is tricking would-be Democratic campaign donors into making



donations to defeat the candidates they support -- with Republican



websites that look like they could easily be the campaign pages of



Democratic candidates.







First, after public backlash, they had to start offering refunds to



donors who'd been misled, and now, Google has put a "reported
phishing



website" warning on at least the anti-Alex Sink site.







http://thinkprogress.org/justice/201...blicans-trick-
vot



ers-donating-democratic-candidates/











Standard Republican strategy: win elections through committing fraud,



because they know they can't win them by honest means.



Good grief you libs are stupid beyond belief. And I say

"you libs", not just malformend, because it came from a

leading lib website.

The three examples shown in that link are not fraud and

they are as clear as day.

You'd have to be incredibly stupid to not realize that the

website is seeking donations *against* the candidate:



of course it is, by committing fraud









"Make a contribution today to defeat Martha Robertson and

candidates like her"



topped by a banner in large print that proclaimes "Martha Robertson for

Congress"







Make a contribution today to defeat Ann Kirkpatrick and

candidates like her"



topped by a banner in large print that proclaimes "Ann Kirkpatrick for

Congress"



So, you admit you libs are too stupid to read.
For starters, you've swallowed the recycled dog
food presented to you by ThinkProgress. If there
is fraud going on, I'd say it's by them. In
the examples they show, they don't show the whole
web page, which would give you a fair picture.
They only show what they *chose* to
excerpt from it. The one link they do provide to
an actual website they are bitching about is John
Tierney and it's full page of why to vote against
him. It starts out with accusing Tierney's
family of being involved in illegal gambling operations:

"John Tierney may be infamous for his family's involvement with their illegal
international gambling operation in Antigua, but Tierney is also one of the
most extreme and partisan members of Congress whose unwillingness to work in
a bipartisan way is holding our economy hostage. While middle class families
in Massachusetts are trying their best to provide for their families,
Tierney's out-of-the-mainstream policies will make it even harder for them to
do that.



Here is what you need to know about John Tierney:
*John Tierney's brothers-in-law ran an illegal, international gambling ring
in Antigua. Tierney's wife Patrice managed $7 million of that gambling money
and she personally received close to a quarter-of-a-million in those
gambling proceeds. Patrice went to jail for her involvement, but pleaded
spousal privilege so that she would not have to testify against her husband,
a sitting Congressman. Despite all of this, Tierney claims he knew nothing.
*In 2011 and 2013, Tierney voted for the Grijalva Budget, which would tax
Massachusetts businesses at rates between 45% and 49% and would add a
financial transactions tax that would harm middle class families saving for
retirement.
*In fact, Tierney's budget vote was so out-of-the-mainstream that it
couldn't get a majority of Democrats to vote for it, with even Nancy Pelosi
voting against it. In talking about the budget that Tierney supports, former
President Bill Clinton said: "Its corporate tax proposals are so at variance
with even our high-tax competitors that multi-nationals may be tempted to
relocate to other countries," and that the financial transactions tax could
lead to "high-dollar transactions now done in the United States being moved
overseas with a net loss in revenue from the taxable incomes of people who
do the transactions." Moreover, Clinton notes that the budget Tierney
supported does nothing to help save Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid."



Fed up with John Tierney? - Sign up Today



So, what you're saying is Democrats are so dumb
that when a website links a candidate to illegal
gambling at the very beginning, lists all kinds
of reasons not to vote for him and ends with
"Fed up with John Tierny?", they think it's one raising money for Tierney.




but the banner at the top of the page says "Vote for John Tierney" not
"Don't Vote for John Tierney" and even extremists like you should be
able to parse the difference