On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 01:15:08 -0700, Bill Shatzer
<bshatzer@no-spam> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, alohacyberian wrote:
>
>> Too bad you don't understand the laws of the United States, particularly
>> those regarding the Electoral College. The popular vote counts are
>> meaningless in the United States and always have been,
>
>I don't suppose Robert Mugawbe might have said it any better.
>
>"Vote counts are meaningless"!
>
>What counts is "eine Folk, eine Reich, eine Fuhrer"?
There's that fascination of yours with Nazism. Are you sure you
aren't a closet fascist?
>
>> the Electoral College
>> picks the winner in presidential elections.
>
>And, the USSC picks the electoral college winner.
Bush had the most Electoral votes without any input from the USSC.
>
>Previous to 2000, we used to let the actual -voters- make that
>selection.
You must not be an American citizen, because NO President has EVER
been elected through a popular vote, and for a very good reason.
President's are selected by Electoral College balloting, always have
been, and probably always will be.
>
>> Don't blame Bush for the
>> Electoral College system - it was instituted before he or his father was
>> born. If you don't like it, stop wasting your energy on Bush-bashing and
>> start working to eliminate the Electoral College.
>
>I've no problem with the -system-. But, I've a problem with just
>-how- the Florida electors were selected the last time around.
Gore didn't have any problem recognizing he lost, that's why he
conceded and halted all of the court cases the Democrats initiated.
>
>Perhaps next time, we might select 'em by Just Counting All The
>Votes rather than having the USSC annoint 'em?
Repeat after me 100 times. Bush won, Gore lost.
There. Feel better? No? Too bad. Grow up and get over it.
>
>It is the traditional way, after all.
Maybe Gore would have had a chance if he could have at least won his
own state of Tennessee. No President has ever been elected and lost
his own home state.
ALOHA
Reply to group
(Unsolicited e-mail is deleted unread)
Thomas wrote:
> Maybe Gore would have had a chance if he could have
> at least won his own state of Tennessee.
It was obvious that Gore was in trouble when he
felt it necessary in the last week to campaign
in *Rhode Island*.
Bob T
Bob Tiernan <zulu.pacifier.com@no-spam> wrote:
> alohacyberian wrote:
>
> > Neither has Bush claimed that God told him to do anything. A foreign
> > newspaper, "Ha'aretz" printed a satire that didn't claim any such thing
> > either, but, the Leftwing Liberals have become so desperate to grasp any
> > hallucinatory straw they can find
>
> The second part is correct, but the first part isn't. The conversation in
> which the comment was alleged to have been uttered was behind closed
> doors, and was not recorded on tape or video. But the PLO leader who was
> the recipient of the comment (supposedly) later told about this (he was
> apparently impressed). So we don't know yet if this was really said as
> the information is second hand, and through translators. We also don't
> know if this comment, if it was said, was made because it's the kind of
> thing that would impress a Muslim.
QUOTE: According to Abbas, immediately thereafter Bush said: "God told
me to strike at al Qaida and I struck them, and then he instructed me to
strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the
problem in the Middle East. If you help me I will act, and if not, the
elections will come and I will have to focus on them."
Which is worse: A President who would say such a thing because he
believed it, or a President who would say such a thing in order to
condescend to a Muslim?