|
Grex > Agora41 > #20: Couple pardoned by Clinton paid Hillary's brother 1/4Mil$US. | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 117 responses total. |
jp2
|
|
response 50 of 117:
| 
Mar 28 18:51 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 51 of 117:
|
Mar 28 20:39 UTC 2002 |
...in at least three languages (Bush's new
internationalism-when-it-suits-him).
|
klg
|
|
response 52 of 117:
|
Mar 28 20:50 UTC 2002 |
re: "I'm surprised that I have yet to see a Bush supporter point out the
obvious:
Gore supporters, at least in Florida, are idiots who can't even manage a
ballot." Well, since so many of those who voted for Gore were dead,
you can't really blame them.
|
scott
|
|
response 53 of 117:
|
Mar 28 20:53 UTC 2002 |
So if it was so obvious that Bush had won... why did the Supreme Court step
in and essentially decide the election in favor of Bush?
|
oval
|
|
response 54 of 117:
|
Mar 28 21:11 UTC 2002 |
cuz sandra's a republican?
if i don't vote - doesn't that mean i don't pay taxes either? i mean -- if
i dont count and all ..
|
rcurl
|
|
response 55 of 117:
|
Mar 28 22:01 UTC 2002 |
It isn't even a requirement that you be alive.
|
oval
|
|
response 56 of 117:
|
Mar 28 22:06 UTC 2002 |
is that a threat?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 57 of 117:
|
Mar 28 22:21 UTC 2002 |
No, its a fact.
|
jazz
|
|
response 58 of 117:
|
Mar 28 22:24 UTC 2002 |
Actually, he reminds me more of Vasquez's _Invader Zim_ in his
immediate response is to declare anything that he does not like to read is
written by someone who is "stupid".
I repeat the original post:
a good portion of the fact that it was taking too long. The fact that a
completed recount has the result of Gore winning, proves that a recount was
an entirely reasonable request.
I never said there was only one recount, nor only one factor considered
in a recount, BUT that a recount found Gore winning. That's a fact. You can
dispute the legitimacy of the count, but it doesn't change the legitimacy of
the request, and it doesn't change the essentially underhanded nature of
delaying something and then filing suit because it's taking too long.
Thus do I rain doom down upon his filthy doomed head.
|
oval
|
|
response 59 of 117:
|
Mar 28 22:30 UTC 2002 |
Gir is my hero.
|
jazz
|
|
response 60 of 117:
|
Mar 28 22:32 UTC 2002 |
Oval, could you sing the doom song for me?
|
oval
|
|
response 61 of 117:
|
Mar 28 22:36 UTC 2002 |
doomdedoomdoomdedoomdoomdedoomdoomdedoomdoomdedoomdoomdedoomdoomdedoomdoomdedo
omdoomdedoomdoomdedoomdoomdedoomdoomdedoomdoomdedoomdoomdedoomdoomdedoomdoomde
doomdoomdedoomdoomdedoomdoomdedoomdoomdedoomdoomdedoomdoomdedoomdoomdedoomdoom
dedoomdoomdedoomdoomdedoomdoomdedoomdoomdedoomdoomdedoomdoomdedoomdoomdedoomdo
omdedoomdoomdedoomdoomdedoomdoomdedoomdoomdedoomdoomdedoomdoomdedoom ...
|
jp2
|
|
response 62 of 117:
|
Mar 28 23:08 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
dbunker
|
|
response 63 of 117:
|
Mar 29 02:41 UTC 2002 |
Calm down junior. A statewide recount under almost any scenario would have
likely resulted in a Gore victory. Strangely, the position Gore adopted
(partial recounts) would likely resulted in his loss. So try to wrap
>your brain around the fact that both parties were "losers."
>
>If you are interested in what the *Florida* judge might have done had the
>SCOTUS not thrown it rancid weight around, read
>http://slate.msn.com/?id=2058793
|
jp2
|
|
response 64 of 117:
|
Mar 29 02:52 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
mdw
|
|
response 65 of 117:
|
Mar 29 03:29 UTC 2002 |
I don't think there's any serious doubt that the florida election
exposed some grave defects in the system. Unfortunately, the lesson
everyone seems to have learned is that fairness just doesn't count.
Republicans clearly gave up on fairness with Tricky Dicky, and fell in
love with such loveable rogues as little Ollie North. I'm not sure how
many Democrats are left that still think fairness will win elections.
It's not clear to me how meaningful the concept "democracy" can be
without a sense of fairness.
|
jp2
|
|
response 66 of 117:
|
Mar 29 03:32 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 67 of 117:
|
Mar 29 03:36 UTC 2002 |
Bush was elected.
|
russ
|
|
response 68 of 117:
|
Mar 29 03:38 UTC 2002 |
Re #42: Au contraire, I have seen some (hilarious!) things
saying exactly that. One was a Flash movie that... oh, you
can dig it up and watch it, I can't remember the site anyway.
Re #49: Of course, a Democrat designed the butterfly ballot.
|
mdw
|
|
response 69 of 117:
|
Mar 29 03:49 UTC 2002 |
#66 is a good example of the republican position on Florida. "Nothing
happened". This is a fine example of "if we repeat it often enough, it will be
true". Unfortunately, in today's world of sound-byte politicians, it's all too
effective of disposing of such unpleasant realities as the systematic errors in
the implementation of the anti-felon voting laws in Florida, any discussion
about the fairness of anti-felon laws in the first place, gerrymandering the
voting process by preferential spending on voting technology, and whether the
Federalist society is really as objective as the Republicans claim when
recommending judicial candidates for the federal court system.
|
jp2
|
|
response 70 of 117:
|
Mar 29 03:54 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
senna
|
|
response 71 of 117:
|
Mar 29 04:15 UTC 2002 |
Yes, Marcus, all REpublicans are manipulative cheats.
|
mdw
|
|
response 72 of 117:
|
Mar 29 04:32 UTC 2002 |
Oh, there are some Republican politicians who are not manipulative
cheats. There may even be a lot of Republican voters who are not
manipulative cheats. Now, how exactly does this excuse the unelegant
process of the last election?
|
bdh3
|
|
response 73 of 117:
|
Mar 29 07:38 UTC 2002 |
Here in chicagoland which is predominately black or hispanic, people
with 'irish' sounding names get elected. There have even been cases
where folk change their middle name to make it 'irish' and they get
elected after numerous unsuccessful attempts. Some suspect that many
voters know this and play along, others worry about other reasons such
as the blacks and hispanics aren't voting (which the counter case is
probably more true - 'hispanic' last names is the only criteria one
can use to examine as race is not on the voting records).
Drift? No, the point is that an election is a process, the process
was completed, and Bush was elected POTUS. Deal with it.
You can make the same sorta silly arguements ignoring reality by
claiming Clinton was 'illegitimate' his first term - remember, Dukakis
got a higher percentage of the popular vote as a loser than Clinton did
as a winner.
|
jazz
|
|
response 74 of 117:
|
Mar 29 13:24 UTC 2002 |
The other two techniques I've sen for distracting attention from the
general sketchiness surrounding last years' election are the "reducto ad
absurdum" technique, which points out that there is minor sketchiness in all
elections, which has little to do with the major sketchiness in this one, and
the "free will" argument, which I believe Jamie has used, that if you do
something deceptive like the unusual ballot layout in Florida, that people
have free will to read carefully and question the form, which applies at an
individual level, but not a group level.
Once in a while the Republican apologist will get really good and
direct a few attacks at Clinton's character, which also has nothing to do with
the election.
|