In The News → Re: Open a Bank Account and get a free Rifle

said by Copzilla:

---

That's what I like about Bush. He's straight up, doesn't BS around. Says he used to have a problem with alcohol. Okay, that was then, good for him. People want to make him out to be stupid, but he also went to an Ivy League school, like Gore, except Bush got better grades than Gore.

---

Yeah, Bush isn't very smart. He graduated from Yale with a B.A. and from Harvard with an M.B.A, and scored approximately one hundred points higher than Bill Bradley on the verbal portion of the SAT. Also regardless of how he got the team he successfully ran a Major League franchise. He upset the heavily favored incumbent for the governorship of Texas. During his tenure as governor he was popular not only with the electorate but with both sides of the aisle and in the state legislative organization. He was elected to the presidency of the United States and successfully prosecuted the war against the Taliban and drove al Queda from Afghanistan with the help of others.

Yes sir, a real dummy.

Aaaaand, while he was our guvnah, he signed concealed carry into law. Gotta love him. You're right, he was an extremely popular governor here in Texas. And if people would stop spewing about him long enough to figure out that economic shift takes a minimum of 6 years to implement, they would realize that he's actually doing the country a great service. We were headed into a bull recession full force when Clinton left office. Bush inherited his mess. The Enron / Worldcom / Global Crossing messes weren't created since Bush took office. Those false fronts were built on Clinton's watch.

Lets not confuse the issues with fact, okay?

said by Lost in Space:

---

...He was elected to the presidency of the United States...

---

He won a court decision, not an election.

There will always be an asterisk after his name.

Grow up. He won an election by the laws of your country.
Don't like it, change the laws. But please, quit whining, we have quite a ways to go.

This is a point on which we will have to disagree. I must abide by the court decision, only because the only court of appeals left is in November 2004. Unless that election is stolen too.

And I grew up a long time ago.

said by spg:

---

said by Lost in Space:

---

...He was elected to the presidency of the United States...

---

He won a court decision, not an election.

There will always be an asterisk after his name.

---

Your totally wrong. The Supreme Court heard all the facts presented in the case of the completed and legal election. They ruled the election was valid, the votes had been counted, the time for additional recounts had under law expired and the guy who had the most votes at the end of the valid and legal election was George W. Bush. Those are the facts. The court simply reaffirmed not elected.

Also, and this is most important: why did the Supreme Court even have this before them? It was because of the illegal political activism of the Florida Supreme Court. Every challenge at the state and Federal level made by Gore in Florida was decided in President Bush's favor. The last court took great pains in explaining its reasons for its decision and backed the decision with specific facts.

Now it goes to the Rogue Florida Supreme Court who said essentially, yes the law has been followed for this election but we don't like the way things are so to hell with the law we want the election to continue and different procedures and more recounts, etc. It was appealed to the Supreme Court. The court could have stepped in at that time and slammed the Florida Supreme Court for trying to make new law, which they could not legally do, and ignoring the existing law, which they could not legally do, and just overturned them then. Instead the U.S. Supreme Court took the unusual step of returning the case to the Florida Supreme Court with the very judicially polite comment that Supreme Court could not rule on the Florida court's decision because the Florida bozos had not provided sufficient information in their decision that the U.S. Supreme Court could not even decide legally why Florida made their decision. (It was the polite way of saying you guys are out of control and wrong and rather than cause a big controversy we are sending it back to you to get it right. The Florida idiots still screwed up. They voted the same way 4-3 with the The Chief Justice of the Court writing a stinging dissent saying there was no basis in law for the Florida Court to make the 4-3 ruling they did.

Only then did the Supreme Court, forced by the Florida misconduct, have to make their ruling.

Live with it. He's in. Anybody who doesn't like it will have to live with it too. Their real complaint is their guy, Gore, loss. In fact he loss every recount--Bush always came out with more votes and every court ruled against him except the Florida Supreme Court. That makes about six or seven times in one election he loss.

He was dead in the water election wise and legally the very next day after the election when he had the right to ask for a statewide recount but went for just several counties. Doofus move. Gore made the problem. Since he loss he doesn't get the credit for it he deserves. Most of the people unhappy about the outcome are just whiners and uninformed or legal air-heads. And if the vote count and outcome had gone exactly the opposite in favor of Gore I would say exactly the same thing.

said by spg:

---

And I grew up a long time ago.

---

He meant intellectually, not physically. Ignoring facts, arguing unsupportable positions endlessly and crying over spilt milk are not signs of a mature mind. See that phone in your avatar? It's ringing. Better get it, it might be a clue.

said by spg:

---

said by Lost in Space:

---

...He was elected to the presidency of the United States...

---

He won a court decision, not an election.

---

As much as the election left a bad taste in my mouth both sides knew about Florida’s problems and did not to do anything about it.

Bottom line Gore ran a lousy campaign and lost. The fact we are quibbling about a few hundred or thousand votes means the country is evenly divided and either candidate could have won. If you want to effect change worry about the midterm elections this year and the presidential election in 2004.
[text was edited by author 2002-08-20 15:14:49]

said by tschmidt:

---

As much as the election left a bad taste in my mouth both sides knew about Florida’s problems and did not to do anything about it.

---

You know the concept that Florida had some type of special problems in their voting procedures and invalid ballots is more myth than fact.

When you look at all of the states and the percentage of invalid votes cast along with snafus at the polling places Florida was nothing special. In fact it was business as usual pretty much every where as well as in Florida. The things that happen in Florida happen every election and happen nationwide in various forms.

The ONLY thing "special" about Florida was that in its case it was the location that in the order of events functionally decided the election. Therefore it was there the "legal" battle was fought.

We are getting rather OT, but one more comment.

said by Lost in Space:

---

The ONLY thing "special" about Florida was that in its case it was the location that in the order of events functionally decided the election. Therefore it was there the "legal" battle was fought.

---

While most of the focus was on the voting machines themselves the real problem was voter registration.

I agree voting problems are widespread. Normally no one cared because the error rate is small and usually swamped by the difference in candidates.

said by tschmidt:

---

We are getting rather OT, but one more comment.

I agree voting problems are widespread. Normally no one cared because the error rate is small and usually swamped by the difference in candidates.

---

LOL about OT. You're right! But hey if we had a life we wouldn't be posting like mad would we?

As a humorous side note. In the middle of the election recounts and charges and counter charges I am especially fond of that morning when I got up and the lead story that day was all of the senior's complaining about the confusing butterfly ballot and that they thought they voted for the wrong person and were breaking down in the parking lot after leaving the polling places and so on ad nauseum. Now I was really following the story closely and was really interested in ALL of the events--unusual for me. So based upon the charges I thought boy this sounds serious. I can't wait to look at this incredibly confusing and misleading ballot. I took the charges serious and at face value.

Well, I went to work and myself and hundreds of others pulled up the ballot on the web. Most of us were all rolling on the floor laughing out loud--even most of the Gore folks. On the ballot was the guy's name. Going directly from his name was a bold and distinct arrow that went all the way up to and touched the hole that you would punch for the guy at the other end of the arrow. Confusing? Only if you were deaf and blind. Of course then it came out that the ballot, which I must admit wouldn't be my first choice for best and simplest, had been specifically created to make it easier for the geezers because they got confused with the ballot in the previous election and had a history of getting confused with any ballot in just about every previous election.

said by Kangaroo:

---

See that phone in your avatar? It's ringing. Better get it, it might be a clue.

---

First, I didn't say Mr. Bush wasn't the President. I said he didn't win the election. And I will stand by that until the day I die.

And as for Avatars, yours would be a perfect seal for the Supreme Court. When a Justice has a relative that is employed by one of the attorneys arguing the case, it's time to recuse himself. When one has a spouse working for the Heritage Foundation, which was prescreening potential employees for the new administration, it's time to recuse himself.

When a court that has a history of upholding "states' rights" reverses itself, and then tells us not to use the decision as a precedent, that's bogus.

It is the highest court in the land and I have to abide by it's decision. It's decision is final, not necessarily correct.

So even the manual recounts by several media showing, yet again, that Bush won by a majority of Florida votes cast, even with and without the chads counted, does not make you think the matter is settled?

Sounds like more sour grapes to me.

"Bush didn't win the election."

If he didn't, he wouldn't be president. The people who tried to steal it were prevented from doing so. In spite of many many recounts and attempts. I saw video transcripts of the ballot examinations, and it was a Democratic FARCE, and the only thing stopping them from stealing it was the handful of Republicans who were watching carefully. In spite of that, they still tried to rig it, popping out chads which fell on the floor, to the tune of many objections from the right.

Democrats lie too much. Clinton being the classic example.

I'll try not to hold it against you that you're not from Texas.

Nope. The media stories went both ways.

and now to really confuse you... back to the topic!

As far as the bank giving away free rifles, fine with me. It's been pointed out that they weren't just handing them out. They were obeying the laws in the way they were doing it.

People from the city without experience with firearms have a tough time accepting that in the rural areas, guns are just another tool. Just like a tractor or a jeep that actually gets into 4 wheel drive. There are, believe it or not, legitimate uses for guns.

Whining has no "Statue of Limitations"

Which is why I let them continue...;)

said by Ugly:

---

So even the manual recounts by several media showing, yet again, that Bush won by a majority of Florida votes cast, even with and without the chads counted, does not make you think the matter is settled?

---

When someone's mind is made up, don't confuse them with the facts.

said by spg:

---

Nope. The media stories went both ways.

---

Nope, not confused. You?
Your point actually supports Bush's election by making an ambiguous result even more ripe for judicial review.
Law does explicitly allow for recounts and challenges in court when an election is in doubt.
Indeed, what evidence exists that Gore had ever more votes in Florida at all?

The confusion I was referring to was that here I am, a bleeding heart liberal "whining about the election", as you folks put it, supporting the bank giving away rifles.

I will admit that Gore should have won by an even larger majority of electoral votes. He darn near lost the election.

The last time I heard, and I am not able to cite the source as it was a while back, that if Gore Challenged all the precincts in Florida, he would have won by an even larger margin.

Also, If you read the entire thread, you will notice that not once did I make a disparaging remark as to Mr. Bush's intelligence.

Don't blame me! I voted with the majority!

So you blame Gore for his mistakes [not asking for a full recount] that may have influenced the outcome of the election? So what exactly are you whining, complaining or whatever about then exactly?

I'm not whining. I merely pointed out that Mr. Bush did not win the election. He won a court decision. (which I pointed out that I have to abide by) I didn't say Mr. Bush wasn't the President, and I conceded that although Gore won, he ran a lousy campaign and darn near lost.

I'm pretty much convinced that I'm not going to change your mind, and by now you should be getting the picture that I'm not going to change mine. (And yes, I do have one;))

This is a debate that will continue on. People still argue over the Hayes election. (At least the parties cut a deal on that one: Hayes got to be President and Reconstruction was ended.)

So, either we back off to our respective corners on this one, or we need to insert a loop here so we don't get carpal tunnel syndrome from typing all night. Deal?
edited for spelling
[text was edited by author 2002-08-20 21:48:59]

said by spg:

---

This is a debate that will continue on. People still argue over the Hayes election.

---

Yes, you sure are dead on there, the debate will continue and will be added to the list of other endless debates such as the earth is really flat, the moon landings were faked, Elvis is alive, and Gore won or got more popular votes in Florida and nationally more electoral votes. Such debates never cease.