Bald Lobby for Kerry

[bombscience]

Go u

Mission accomplished? Please, how am I going to assume that I can intelligently debate you if are labeling opponents douchebags??

And now to further lay the smack down. I will provide you with a nice timeline of what happened in 2000.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0884144.html

There are 3 important points to remember when reading this.
1 - A majority, 5 out of the 9 judges on the supreme court were conservatives
2 - During the same year the US supreme court voted that states, not the federal govenment, should govern rights when it came to guns in schools and dealing with abuse of women, but OVERTURNED the right for a state to preform a manual hand recount of their ballots.
3 - The supreme court stepped in 1 day before the hand counting needed to be completed and STOPPED the counting.

Finally, if Bush was so CONFIDENT that he won in Florida, why did he have his lawyers repeatedly try to HALT the recounts?

http://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/sto ... .election/

Ok, now you can go read through this. A lawyers interpretation of what happened in Florida of 2000. Although it is a liberal viewpoint, you should definetly understand when you are dont that the election was stolen, and not won.

http://www.iknowwhatyoudidlastelection. ... -court.htm

 

[Guest]

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Classic :lol:

How bout another photo of GW - with male pattern baldness?

 

[Matgallis]

Go u

Mission accomplished? Please, how am I going to assume that I can intelligently debate you if are labeling opponents douchebags??

nice now former loser Gore is my opponent and I must hunt him down. I will win!!! oh wait it's 2004 nvm.

And now to further lay the smack down.

Labeling opponents is almost as good as laying down "smack". That's just an assumption, i'll wait till you respond to tell me what's right.

There are 3 important points to remember when reading this.
1 - A majority, 5 out of the 9 judges on the supreme court were conservatives

So if 5 of the 9 were democrates it would be fine if they voted against a recount in an area that bush was down by 159 votes? Maybe the 4 democrates that voted for a recount just wanted Gore to win because he's democrate? Looks like a double sided card to me

2 - During the same year the US supreme court voted that states, not the federal govenment, should govern rights when it came to guns in schools and dealing with abuse of women, but OVERTURNED the right for a state to preform a manual hand recount of their ballots.

How does this have any significants? Please elaborate

3 - The supreme court stepped in 1 day before the hand counting needed to be completed and STOPPED the counting.

How accurate is HAND counting? Lets say if .25% of all votes are mistaken by human error and 50,000 votes were to be recounted, the error in votes is roughly 125 votes. Wasn't votes for needed for Gore to win close to or at that number?

If I remember correctly those voting machines made a .0001% error when counting. 200,000,000 votes = 200 votes in error.

I've held the last 3 election polls (local, state and nation) at my house. During the last Govenor poll I looked to see how many of these puntch ballots had those "blips" hanging off the bottom... guess how many?

None.

Finally, if Bush was so CONFIDENT that he won in Florida, why did he have his lawyers repeatedly try to HALT the recounts?

Do you think Gore would have just stood by? I highly doubt it

 

[Vampa]

Ugh, I can't believe how ignorant some of you are.

The reason Bush wanted to block another recount is because there had already been a recount before that! How many times did we need to recount Bush winning? His margin GREW with the second recount. The supreme court decided what was a vote and what wasn't, the voters still chose.

The only way Al Gore would've won is if we had used is asinine method of "well, if they voted for Buchanon, that was probably a vote for me so count it towards mine."

 

[bombscience]

nice now former loser Gore is my opponent and I must hunt him down. I will win!!! oh wait it's 2004 nvm.

not your opponent. bush and gore = opponents.

So if 5 of the 9 were democrates it would be fine if they voted against a recount in an area that bush was down by 159 votes? Maybe the 4 democrates that voted for a recount just wanted Gore to win because he's democrate? Looks like a double sided card to me

2 - During the same year the US supreme court voted that states, not the federal govenment, should govern rights when it came to guns in schools and dealing with abuse of women, but OVERTURNED the right for a state to preform a manual hand recount of their ballots.

How does this have any significants? Please elaborate

These two points are related, AND very relevant. Actually 7 of the 9 judges were republican, 5 are considered "conservatives." In fact, 7 republican judges voted against a recount. However, you're not interpolating what i'm saying here. The same conservative judges that voted no to a recount voted repeatedly AGAINST the federal government controlling state issues. Vote counting has ALWAYS been a state issue. Why would a panel of justices that repeatedly were against state control suddenly switch when making a decision on that state's right to recount votes? Or should I ask if that decision seems judicial or political?

How accurate is HAND counting? Lets say if .25% of all votes are mistaken by human error and 50,000 votes were to be recounted, the error in votes is roughly 125 votes. Wasn't votes for needed for Gore to win close to or at that number?

Actually, they were hand counting the votes 3 times to make sure the totals were the same each time. I would consider that pretty accurate.

If I remember correctly those voting machines made a .0001% error when counting. 200,000,000 votes = 200 votes in error.

That figure is grossly incorrect. Voting systems in the united states are so INCREDIBLY flawed that sometimes THOUSANDS of votes dont get counted. This is an issue for an entirely different debate. Please read "Black Box Voting: Ballot Tampering in the 21st Century" by Bev Harris. It will surely make you wonder if your vote really even counts anymore.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/de ... s&n=507846

I've held the last 3 election polls (local, state and nation) at my house. During the last Govenor poll I looked to see how many of these puntch ballots had those "blips" hanging off the bottom... guess how many?

I think no matter where you stand on the election results, there isnt really much to debate on the fact that the voting systems in Florida *were* flawed. A LOT of people voted for the wrong person because of confusing ballot. A lot of votes werent counted because holes werent punched correctly. And a lot of african americans were turned away from the polls because their names were "lost" from voter registration lists. All I'm saying that vote count in Florida was inherently incorrect because of this.

Finally, if Bush was so CONFIDENT that he won in Florida, why did he have his lawyers repeatedly try to HALT the recounts?

Do you think Gore would have just stood by? I highly doubt it

You thought he really went through all that to be a sore loser? They fought for a recount because they were confident the totals were incorrect. The exit polling data told them that.

 

[bombscience]

Ugh, I can't believe how ignorant some of you are.

The reason Bush wanted to block another recount is because there had already been a recount before that! How many times did we need to recount Bush winning? His margin GREW with the second recount. The supreme court decided what was a vote and what wasn't, the voters still chose.

The only way Al Gore would've won is if we had used is asinine method of "well, if they voted for Buchanon, that was probably a vote for me so count it towards mine."

Ummm... Not exactly:
http://www.miami.com/mld/miami/news/2072092.htm?1c

 

[flux]

Damn, Bomb, way to fight the good fight.
One of these days you really should let me buy you a brew. int:
We both know its pointless arguing these guys, but it is for the benifit of the impartial observer to make sure the facts are laid out.

(you may want to quote that miami herald article; registration is required)

 

[Bryan]

Damn, Bomb, way to fight the good fight.
One of these days you really should let me buy you a brew. int:
We both know its pointless arguing these guys, but it is for the benifit of the impartial observer to make sure the facts are laid out.

And if either of you guys find yourself in Houston, the brews are on me! Yes, here I am deep in the heart of Dubya Territory. I feel like a stranger in a strange land.

Bryan

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Damn, Bomb, way to fight the good fight.
One of these days you really should let me buy you a brew. int:
We both know its pointless arguing these guys, but it is for the benifit of the impartial observer to make sure the facts are laid out.

And if either of you guys find yourself in Houston, the brews are on me! Yes, here I am deep in the heart of Dubya Territory. I feel like a stranger in a strange land.

Bryan

Bryan, you should move.

Interestingly, during the last election in 2000, those blue states, or wherever Gore got his votes, always bordered water. Both coasts, and along the Great Lakes.

If you live near water, you tend to vote Demoratic. If you're deep inland with no water nearby, you would tend to vote Republican. I wonder why that is?

 

[bombscience]

The word inbreeding comes to mind...

Kidding of course. Go Middle America!

 

[DAC21]

Damn, Bomb, way to fight the good fight.
One of these days you really should let me buy you a brew. int:
We both know its pointless arguing these guys, but it is for the benifit of the impartial observer to make sure the facts are laid out.

And if either of you guys find yourself in Houston, the brews are on me! Yes, here I am deep in the heart of Dubya Territory. I feel like a stranger in a strange land.

Bryan

Bryan, you should move.

Interestingly, during the last election in 2000, those blue states, or wherever Gore got his votes, always bordered water. Both coasts, and along the Great Lakes.

If you live near water, you tend to vote Demoratic. If you're deep inland with no water nearby, you would tend to vote Republican. I wonder why that is?

Then again, Bush won

Texas, LA, MS Al, FL, GA, NC. SC, VA, AK, All on various Coasts. Try another theory.

 

[DAC21]

DAC21, to think you can talk anyone into voting for a moron who has basically made the entire planet less habitable and less safe. 185 countries were for the Kyoto Treaty - and Bush walked away.

The Kyoto Treaty was predicated on the belief that Global warming is a reality and that mankind's industrialization of the World is responsible for it.

Yet a recent study of iceberg debris from the floor of the North Atlantic shows that, in the 12,000 years since the end of the last Ice Age, the World has had nine global warmings, followed by nine global coolings. So it is not unreasonable to say that since the end of the most recent cooling period, which included the 'Little Ice Age' of the 17th century, the Earth has been in a warming phase of this natural cycle - believed to be caused by changes in solar radiation intensity.

But legions of environmentalists and a panoply of pressure groups live by promoting this theory of man-made global warming as an indisputable fact. They'll say, as if it's fact, that by increasing CO2 emissions man is causing global warming via the greenhouse effect, and back it up with statistics like; air temperatures have risen by 0.6 degrees Celsius in the past 100 years, without mentioning that most of this occurred before 1950 whilst the bulk of the post-industrialization rise in CO2 levels took place after 1950.

But then I haven't heard Greenpeace, or the left-leaning media, talk about how global warming induced increases in low-level cloud cover will affect temperatures. Or how a professor of meteorology at MIT believes that the high altitude clouds that block outgoing radiation decrease as temperatures rise - suggesting the Earth has an amazingly intricate mechanism of self-regulation.

Slarti

ps. a lot of those 185 countries breathed a sigh of relief when America refused to commit to Kyoto.

quote="Slartibartfast"]

DAC21, to think you can talk anyone into voting for a moron who has basically made the entire planet less habitable and less safe. 185 countries were for the Kyoto Treaty - and Bush walked away.

Good Job Slartibartfast,

Midnightflyer should just check his facts a little more; he needs to stay off sKerry's web site of propaganda. The fact is Kyoto was Clinton's baby. He wouldn't let it get past debate in the Congress because he knew it would go down in PARTISAN flames. IT NEVER CAME TO A VOTE!. Plus Kyoto let China and India off the hook. They only have what, one and one half billion people between them? Same BS for the arsenic in water issue . Clinton signs a bill in the last days of his presidency dropping allowable arsenic levels by more than 50%. Of course it doesn't take effect UNTIL Bush is the President. Once again tens of Billions $$ to implement for municipal water districts. Boy that sounds like a great idea in the middle of the Clinton recession. Bush stops the bill, it's total Clinton BS legacy building. Now DemocRATS are all up in arms that Bush wants to keep arsenic levels AT THE SAME RATES THAT CLINTON HAD FOR ALL 8 OF HIS YEARS. Of course the RATS fail to mention that little tidbit, all you hear is that Bush wants to poison the water. PATHETIC HYPOCRITES

 

[bombscience]

DAC, it's obvious you are hardcore republican. Although spelling Clinton with a K and accentuating the word rats as a part of Democrats does fall in line with the Republican party's habit of taking cheap shots, it does nothing to lend credibility to anything you're saying.

Secondly, it's funny that when anything negative has happened in the last 4 years the Bush presidency has this immediate spin that places blame on the Clinton era. For people like me the excuses stopped working a LONG time ago. Bush has had 4 years to do something effective with his first term and he hasn't done anything.


However, if you are unsure that it might be time for a change, I must ask you these questions:

Do you know more people that are employed with higher paying jobs than you did 4 years ago?
Do we have better educational systems and more school funding than we
did 4 years ago?
Are we any closer to a solution for national health care?
Have your bond and market investments flourished in the last 4 years?
Are retired war veterans better taken care of now than 4 years ago?
Have we done anything to improve the conditions of our environment and
protect our natural lands in the last 4 years?
Is our national debt or surplus in a "reasonable" state now?
Did the tax cuts help YOU in any way at all?
Do you feel "safer" than you did 4 years ago?
Are our foreign relations with the majority of the world any better
than they were 4 years ago?
Is the world more peaceful now that we have removed an evil dictator from power?

A lot of these questions can be debated, but if you can give me a hard
fact yes on any of them, then I want what you're smoking. I'm
serious.

 

[Whoome?]

well today i was just going through some old posts and noticed that no one ever answered bomb, so i thought i'd answer him.

Do you know more people that are employed with higher paying jobs than you did 4 years ago?

I'm not sure if you notice, but we were and still crawling out of a recession partly caused by the Clinton administration. And oh.. yes of course! We Are At War.. and was attacked in the heart of our financial district, if that doesn't effect people's jobs what will? Show me another President in history that inherited the start of a recession and was able to turn it around in a single term

Do we have better educational systems and more school funding than we
did 4 years ago?

where are you basing this off of? IMO its still the same, with stricter guidelines. I have a little brother whose in 3rd grade in Florida ( one of lowest rated education systems in the country, with some of the most under paid teachers) and our education system sucks not because "oh its Bush's fault" its the state beaucrats who are taking money out of the state education funds. So as a President you can only put so much money into the education system, but ultimately it depends on the state's own legislature to determine the total funding that goes into their education systems. There is no way that the Federal government can soley effect the education system, unless they completely in control of how much funding is being contributed by the state and the Fed (which btw the states would never agree).


Are retired war veterans better taken care of now than 4 years ago?
I myself am veteran, infact I was a reservist who was activated for over a year and a half,the ones you hear on the media all the time. The ones who are "suffering, mistreated, and misguided". Well let me tell you something, are you really that naive to believe everything you hear on the news? Do you truely believe that all the reserve or active military are resenting Bush for going to war? Well its not true, infact a majority of the military supports Bush. The military in its nature are drawn to strong willed leaders, leaders who do not relent to others (europeans who were against the war because of their own self interests). Its a shame that our own media does not like to broadcast this.. instead it likes to manipulate the general public into thinking that our men died for nothing, they exploit us on a daily basis for their anti-Bush propagandas. The Media everyday reports how our men died, but you never hear the good and heroic things they did before they died. Many times different units in Iraq has requested media sources like reuters and others to come and film the progress they are making in Iraq, the children they have saved, the schools and hospitals they have bulit, but of course the media denies their request. Now when a soldier dies, what happens? the media flocks to them filming every little bit of the tragedy and broadcasts it all over the world. Its organizations like this who puts out anti-bush propaganda, but at the same time they do not realized how they have dishonored the deaths of our men and our Country, by showing a one sided story. And now to finish answering your question Bomb, yes Bush has been extremely generous with the Military. Over the past years our base pay as risen many times amongst other things like GI Bill, per diem, combat pay, healthcare for us and our family, extended full healthcare coverage for all activated reservists, 100%Tuition Assistance, Housing allownce, retirement benefits and much much more.Thats why the Military loves Bush.

Have we done anything to improve the conditions of our environment and
protect our natural lands in the last 4 years?

Go look up Brownfields program, Healthy Forest Initiative, and the Billions he's commited for National park restoration and maintenance, the 40 Billion to conserve and restore farm lands, 507 million for cooperative conservation programs and more.


Is our national debt or surplus in a "reasonable" state now?

Go look at what I said for your first answer and think about it.


Did the tax cuts help YOU in any way at all?


Yes defintely, and it certainly helped my parents who is married and has my little brother to claim. It was certainly more than what we got than during Clinton Administration. You show me someone from the middle class or lower that recieved less tax return than before.

Do you feel "safer" than you did 4 years ago?
Yes, certainly. During Clinton Admin we recieved multiple terrorist attacks all over the world, and lets not forget the first attack on world trade center. What did Clinton and his administration do? throw a few bombs in their direction, put a price on a few suspect's head and call it a day. If you truly believe we live in a world of "peace" filled with furry bunnies and and pink flowers, then you are "smoking something" too. The whole idea of leaving keeping to ourself and we wont be attacked just wont work. We have to be on the offense, not the throw a few bombs and sweep it under the rug.

Are our foreign relations with the majority of the world any better
than they were 4 years ago?

OO so the french hates us now... and so does the germans... *sob* soo sad.. *sigh* come on! drop that middle school mentality, so what! Do you know why many of these European nations were against the war on Iraq? Its because they were benefiting from the oil for food program, they were getting their oil much cheaper from Iraq, and now that US is in there they aren't free loading anymore. What? our foreign relation with the world sucks? Did China put an embargo on the US? Are Nations threating to invade us? NO

Is the world more peaceful now that we have removed an evil dictator from power?

Yes, If you went to Iraq and saw the faces of the men, women, and children there, you would know it.

 

[harey]

DAC21 -- You're an idiot!

No, you're not an idiot, you're just either a) young, or b)...not that bright.

Why do states near water vote democratic? Are you seriously asking this question? Guess what -- California is exposed to doing lots of business with Japan, New Yorkers are exposed to other countries and people. We've met those folks and figured out that they're really not that bad. Who woulda thunk? I've got Bush on the t.v. by coincidence downstairs, and while I like G.W. a hell of a lot as a person, his base is so damn uneducated it's not even funny. I particularly love how Bush gets hammered so bad on obvious crap and then fight back by saying Kerry is "denigrating" our allies. He grasps at straws, and just screams "terrorists! terrorists!" because most of middle America is worthless. Salt of the earth, yes, but they're also fat, dumb, stupid, and the reason why China will be handing us our lunch in 50 yrs. England had the world in the palm of her hand for so long, and there is no logical reason why the good ol' US of A will be on top. There's a natural rise and fall, ebb and flow to things, and Bush's presidence, although I voted for him, has been disastrous.

 

[Bryan]

Excellent post, Harey! I agree with pretty much everything you said...

Bryan

 

[harey]

forgive the spelling errors. i also didn't mean to come across the way i did, but seriously. if john kerry were reversed with george bush all bush would do is

A) bring up john kerry's lesbian daughter.

B) bring up outsourcing. this can be painted as such a wholly american issue, even though it's not. it's really not bush's fault, it's not anyone's fault, but if kerry were in his position, all bush would do is hammer home to your average clueless american how john kerry has taken away our jobs. kerry is a good enough human being (and maybe that's his mistake) where he even says that outsourcing is not bush's fault, it's not a bad thing at all, but certainly tax breaks should not be given out to outsource.

C) how dare bush bring up kerry's medals, when he was busy skirting national guard duties. this should be considered treason.

I used to be a big fan of bush as a man, but I hope he takes a bullet to his head. the shortsightedness and "Kick everyone's *** who fucks with america" is the very reason why terrorists brought us to our knees. And will again.

I know a lot of great white men, past and present, but the fact is, all that ripping on asians for your own insecurities, making fun of indian accents? you see where it gets you. right in the ***. and guess what? it only gets worse.

9/11 took half of my college friends (i went to nyu). the next one will probably take my sister. but while terrorism is wrong and disgusting, we probably deserve it. we've been doing so much worse for hundreds of years. and continue to.

 

[blue]

We do continue to get worse...it doesnt matter whos president ..inflation will go up.......terrorists will still be around and the rich will continue to get richer.
All you talk like its gonna get better....doesnt matter who is in office us as americans will continue to find something to b**ch about even though we have it better then any other country out there.

 

[Matgallis]

Wow don't get all depressed and anti-america. The only reason why you think we are so bad and will go down is because of the media. Turn off the news for a week and you'll think the world was in a perfect state of peace with the world.