Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
"Stanley Barthfarkle" wrote in message m... You blithering idiots! You re-elected that imbecile George Bush as your President. He's a complete moron and so are most of you! I happen to have been for Kerry, but I am a democrat as well as a Democrat. Inherent in both is a belief that in this country we respect the decision of the electorate. Screaming that voters are blithering idiots means that the screamer favors something other than a democratic form of government. In all likelihood that would be a dictatorship, run by the individual doing the screaming. Now, about epoxy vs. polyester ... |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 02:31:31 GMT, "Auerbach"
wrote: "Stanley Barthfarkle" wrote in message om... You blithering idiots! You re-elected that imbecile George Bush as your President. He's a complete moron and so are most of you! I happen to have been for Kerry, but I am a democrat as well as a Democrat. Inherent in both is a belief that in this country we respect the decision of the electorate.... I am a registered independent. I was not exactly enamored of the biggest national debt creator in the history of the country, and I was not exactly overwhelmed with his opponent whose response to the flip flop attack ads was unconvincing. I like the idea that the majority gets to select the pres. So I was interested to read a sour-grapes piece in a blog which remarked on the surprizing discrepancy between exit polls and e-vote machine districts, versus exit polls and paper vote districts. the former divergent, the latter convergent. The little district with 600 voters registering 2400 votes via an e machine poll lent this position a little credibility. It seems that the e machine makers have distinct connections to the party gaining most wins via e machines.... ....this could be a rational basis for calling us morons - if we have instituted no checks against easy-peasy voting machine fraud. Brian Whatcott Altus OK |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Brian Whatcott" wrote ...
The little district with 600 voters registering 2400 votes via an e machine poll lent this position a little credibility. We are guilty of feeding the trolls. I bet this district is the same as last election where there were rooms full of uncounted ballots except the founts of this information could never say where the evidence was. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Brian Whatcott wrote in message . ..
On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 02:31:31 GMT, "Auerbach" wrote: "Stanley Barthfarkle" wrote in message om... You blithering idiots! You re-elected that imbecile George Bush as your President. He's a complete moron and so are most of you! I happen to have been for Kerry, but I am a democrat as well as a Democrat. Inherent in both is a belief that in this country we respect the decision of the electorate.... I am a registered independent. I was not exactly enamored of the biggest national debt creator in the history of the country, and I was not exactly overwhelmed with his opponent whose response to the flip flop attack ads was unconvincing. I like the idea that the majority gets to select the pres. So I was interested to read a sour-grapes piece in a blog which remarked on the surprizing discrepancy between exit polls and e-vote machine districts, versus exit polls and paper vote districts. the former divergent, the latter convergent. The little district with 600 voters registering 2400 votes via an e machine poll lent this position a little credibility. It seems that the e machine makers have distinct connections to the party gaining most wins via e machines.... ...this could be a rational basis for calling us morons - if we have instituted no checks against easy-peasy voting machine fraud. Your reading way too much on those conspiracy theory websites. Mix together 10% of what might be true, 40% of stuff that has been twisted 180 degrees, with 50% bull****, and you have a something all the sore losers can run around with for four years. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Brian Whatcott wrote:
It seems that the e machine makers have distinct connections to the party gaining**most*wins*via*e*machines.... ...this could be a rational basis for calling us morons - if we have instituted no checks against easy-peasy voting machine fraud. Then what are you if those 'checks' turn out to be insufficient. Nobody knows what happens in that diebold warehouse when they close the door. So I guess your country just gets the leader that it deserves. -- kind regards, Jelle |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
"Auerbach" wrote: I happen to have been for Kerry, but I am a democrat as well as a Democrat. Inherent in both is a belief that in this country we respect the decision of the electorate. Screaming that voters are blithering idiots means that the screamer favors something other than a democratic form of government. In all likelihood that would be a dictatorship, run by the individual doing the screaming. Now, about epoxy vs. polyester ... To bad you don't live in a democracy.....The USA is a Repersentative Republic.......or did you sleep thru that class in US History and Civics when you were in High School??????? Me |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Finally, the correct answer! Add to that the fact that the electoral college is there to prevent the tail-wags-the-dog effect of high population centers and the fact that our electoral statesmen are supposed to understand how our country is based on transcendent law, not law based on current whim and fad (aka 'current public opinion') and you might be on to something. A guy that just wrote to me recently, one who'd rather see law based on current whim and fad, actually threatened to "take the government back, by force if necessary" ...talk about being uneducated, stupid, ignorant of history and governments ...including our own! True, Georgy Boy needs to cut the spending, learn how to veto the neo-conservatives, shrink government and it's programs (especially the liberal-left social engineering institution ....I mean the federal board of education), but at least he's a known quantity. The only things known for sure about Kerry are a) anti-establishment/anti-American, b) can't handle the realities of war, c) consistently grows government and raises taxes, and d) always votes for abortion. All other things in his mind are subject to the opinions of whoever is standing in front of him. We voted Bush into office because he's closer to what we want ...what the moral majority who understands our government and history, those that understand what works, wants. The rest of the world, the placating passifists and appeasers, have failed and are jealous ...rather than wake up and learn to emulate what succeeds, they'd rather whine and hate those that do succeed (too bad ...nanny nanny boo boo!). We elected the right guy, but need to work together to defeat Bush's tendency to spend too much and to grow government. The Middle East needs to get out of the hot sun and start thinking for a change, Islamo-fascists/imperialists in particular. The rest of you whiners need to quit your idealist utopia fantasy thinking and get real. It didn't work for Marx, and it won't work for you. Live and let live, folks. Don't whine and hate. Quit acting like a spoiled child. Fix the country that YOU live in and shut the hell up. That's what adults do. Next time you need military intervention in something, or want hand-outs, go ask China or France. In the mean time, it's time the US kicked the UN out of our country and dropped funding to zero. Brian "Me" wrote in message ... In article , "Auerbach" wrote: I happen to have been for Kerry, but I am a democrat as well as a Democrat. Inherent in both is a belief that in this country we respect the decision of the electorate. Screaming that voters are blithering idiots means that the screamer favors something other than a democratic form of government. In all likelihood that would be a dictatorship, run by the individual doing the screaming. Now, about epoxy vs. polyester ... To bad you don't live in a democracy.....The USA is a Repersentative Republic.......or did you sleep thru that class in US History and Civics when you were in High School??????? Me |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
I think most Americans held their noses as they voted, whether for
bush or kerry (based on my friends and family) with only the democratic and republican bases really supporting either one. The electoral college is a throw back to when it was not the people who elected the president, but rather the states, just as the senators initially represented the states, not the people and were selected by the state legislatures. I think both parties failed to provided us with their 'best and brightest' from which to choose the president. This is why I and many other have migrated to the 'third parties' such as libertarian, reform, constitution or green parties. My objection early on to this thread was those outside the US telling us how dumb we were to elect bush and that we should choose our leaders based on what other countries think. When I start seeing the rest of the world choosing their leaders based on what America wants I will consider this, but that is not going to happen, nor should it. I think the last several elections point to the fact that we need to look again at how we select presidents, unfortunately, the entrenched interests of the two major parties will prevent this from happening as the current system, with the collusion of the media in the US, guarantees that the white house will always be held by one of the two. They are in no hurry to open up the competition further. Weebles Wobble (but they don't fall down) On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 20:14:48 GMT, "Brian D" wrotf: Finally, the correct answer! Add to that the fact that the electoral college is there to prevent the tail-wags-the-dog effect of high population centers and the fact that our electoral statesmen are supposed to understand how our country is based on transcendent law, not law based on current whim and fad (aka 'current public opinion') and you might be on to something. A guy that just wrote to me recently, one who'd rather see law based on current whim and fad, actually threatened to "take the government back, by force if necessary" ...talk about being uneducated, stupid, ignorant of history and governments ...including our own! True, Georgy Boy needs to cut the spending, learn how to veto the neo-conservatives, shrink government and it's programs (especially the liberal-left social engineering institution ...I mean the federal board of education), but at least he's a known quantity. The only things known for sure about Kerry are a) anti-establishment/anti-American, b) can't handle the realities of war, c) consistently grows government and raises taxes, and d) always votes for abortion. All other things in his mind are subject to the opinions of whoever is standing in front of him. We voted Bush into office because he's closer to what we want ...what the moral majority who understands our government and history, those that understand what works, wants. The rest of the world, the placating passifists and appeasers, have failed and are jealous ...rather than wake up and learn to emulate what succeeds, they'd rather whine and hate those that do succeed (too bad ...nanny nanny boo boo!). We elected the right guy, but need to work together to defeat Bush's tendency to spend too much and to grow government. The Middle East needs to get out of the hot sun and start thinking for a change, Islamo-fascists/imperialists in particular. The rest of you whiners need to quit your idealist utopia fantasy thinking and get real. It didn't work for Marx, and it won't work for you. Live and let live, folks. Don't whine and hate. Quit acting like a spoiled child. Fix the country that YOU live in and shut the hell up. That's what adults do. Next time you need military intervention in something, or want hand-outs, go ask China or France. In the mean time, it's time the US kicked the UN out of our country and dropped funding to zero. Brian "Me" wrote in message ... In article , "Auerbach" wrote: I happen to have been for Kerry, but I am a democrat as well as a Democrat. Inherent in both is a belief that in this country we respect the decision of the electorate. Screaming that voters are blithering idiots means that the screamer favors something other than a democratic form of government. In all likelihood that would be a dictatorship, run by the individual doing the screaming. Now, about epoxy vs. polyester ... To bad you don't live in a democracy.....The USA is a Repersentative Republic.......or did you sleep thru that class in US History and Civics when you were in High School??????? Me |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message ... I think most Americans held their noses as they voted, whether for bush or kerry (based on my friends and family) with only the democratic and republican bases really supporting either one. The I think "most" is a stretch. electoral college is a throw back to when it was not the people who elected the president, but rather the states, You clearly don't understand the wisdom of the Electoral College. just as the senators initially represented the states, not the people and were selected by the state legislatures. Unfortunatly most Senators and Represenatives represent themselves to the end of being reelected so as to make money and retain power. Representing the people vanished long ago in my observation. I think both parties failed to provided us with their 'best and brightest' from which to choose the president. In the case of the Republicans, they presented the only choice inasmuch as W was the incumbent. In the case of Kerry, I haven't a clue what the Dem party was thinking. From what I have heard, the Dem party was pretty much disorganized and never had any coherent plan. This is why I and many other have migrated to the 'third parties' such as libertarian, reform, constitution or green parties. Unfortunately, you have to choose between the 2 candidates. One of them IS going to win. As painful as it is, one must choose one of them. Idealogically the other parties have good points (some of them) but the reality is that one of the Red or Blue bozos is going to get elected. Vote for the one that offends you the least. My objection early on to this thread was those outside the US telling us how dumb we were to elect bush and that we should choose our leaders based on what other countries think. Absolutely! When I start seeing the rest of the world choosing their leaders based on what America wants I will consider this, but that is not going to happen, nor should it. Diddo! I think the last several elections point to the fact that we need to look again at how we select presidents, unfortunately, the entrenched interests of the two major parties will prevent this from happening as the current system, with the collusion of the media in the US, guarantees that the white house will always be held by one of the two. They are in no hurry to open up the competition further. Damn that Constitution! Weebles Wobble (but they don't fall down) On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 20:14:48 GMT, "Brian D" wrotf: Finally, the correct answer! Add to that the fact that the electoral college is there to prevent the tail-wags-the-dog effect of high population centers and the fact that our electoral statesmen are supposed to understand how our country is based on transcendent law, not law based on current whim and fad (aka 'current public opinion') and you might be on to something. A guy that just wrote to me recently, one who'd rather see law based on current whim and fad, actually threatened to "take the government back, by force if necessary" ...talk about being uneducated, stupid, ignorant of history and governments ...including our own! True, Georgy Boy needs to cut the spending, learn how to veto the neo-conservatives, shrink government and it's programs (especially the liberal-left social engineering institution ...I mean the federal board of education), but at least he's a known quantity. The only things known for sure about Kerry are a) anti-establishment/anti-American, b) can't handle the realities of war, c) consistently grows government and raises taxes, and d) always votes for abortion. All other things in his mind are subject to the opinions of whoever is standing in front of him. We voted Bush into office because he's closer to what we want ...what the moral majority who understands our government and history, those that understand what works, wants. The rest of the world, the placating passifists and appeasers, have failed and are jealous ...rather than wake up and learn to emulate what succeeds, they'd rather whine and hate those that do succeed (too bad ...nanny nanny boo boo!). We elected the right guy, but need to work together to defeat Bush's tendency to spend too much and to grow government. The Middle East needs to get out of the hot sun and start thinking for a change, Islamo-fascists/imperialists in particular. The rest of you whiners need to quit your idealist utopia fantasy thinking and get real. It didn't work for Marx, and it won't work for you. Live and let live, folks. Don't whine and hate. Quit acting like a spoiled child. Fix the country that YOU live in and shut the hell up. That's what adults do. Next time you need military intervention in something, or want hand-outs, go ask China or France. In the mean time, it's time the US kicked the UN out of our country and dropped funding to zero. Brian "Me" wrote in message ... In article , "Auerbach" wrote: I happen to have been for Kerry, but I am a democrat as well as a Democrat. Inherent in both is a belief that in this country we respect the decision of the electorate. Screaming that voters are blithering idiots means that the screamer favors something other than a democratic form of government. In all likelihood that would be a dictatorship, run by the individual doing the screaming. Now, about epoxy vs. polyester ... To bad you don't live in a democracy.....The USA is a Repersentative Republic.......or did you sleep thru that class in US History and Civics when you were in High School??????? Me |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 17:23:21 -0500, "Doug Dotson"
wrotf: wrote in message .. . I think most Americans held their noses as they voted, whether for bush or kerry (based on my friends and family) with only the democratic and republican bases really supporting either one. The I think "most" is a stretch. Then again, you observed below "Vote for the one that offends you the least." Kind of makes my point, doesn't it? electoral college is a throw back to when it was not the people who elected the president, but rather the states, You clearly don't understand the wisdom of the Electoral College. If we want the president to represent the states - the original intent of the framers - then the electoral college is fine. There are those of us who believe that politicians should serve the people. Otherwise, why go through the sham of a popular election? I understand both the role of the electoral college and the reasons why it may not be the best solution for America today. We are much more diverse than the America of 1787 when the constitution was penned. Back then, the only voters were white male landholders. The country was agrarian with little of the industry we have today. The country was small. Unfortunatly most Senators and Represenatives represent themselves to the end of being reelected so as to make money and retain power. Representing the people vanished long ago in my observation. Sadly in my observation as well. I am not sure how that can be addressed, but it surely needs addressing. There are ways to take the money out of DC, but they require those in power willingly making changes that give up their power. This of course, is unlikely to happen and the remedy the constitution gives the people - to call a new constitutional convention - bears its own dangers, esp. in a country where most people do not even understand what form of government we have. In the case of the Republicans, they presented the only choice inasmuch as W was the incumbent. In the case of Kerry, I haven't a clue what the Dem party was thinking. From what I have heard, the Dem party was pretty much disorganized and never had any coherent plan. Regardless of bush being incumbent, he is far from the best the republicans had to offer us. Part of the problem is the polarization of the parties that tends to produce candidates with broad party support - playing to that party's extremes - but narrow appeal to those in the middle or the other side. I think eliminating the primaries and caucuses and having all candidates run in a single general election and then following that with whatever runoffs are necessary to find a consensus president that represents more of America would go a long way. It would also take power away from the two major parties, opening the presidency to more challengers representing a broader spectrum of opinion, pulling people away from the 'them or us' two party mentality and causing us to really listen to what candidates have to say. Also, eliminating the current primary/caucus system would remove the disproportionate sway certain states have in the primary process where only two or three states have a chance to vote on all the candidates. Unfortunately, you have to choose between the 2 candidates. One of them IS going to win. As painful as it is, one must choose one of them. Idealogically the other parties have good points (some of them) but the reality is that one of the Red or Blue bozos is going to get elected. Vote for the one that offends you the least. No, you do not have to vote for one of them even though, for now, they have a disproportionate advantage. Their formation of the Commission on Presidential Debates virtually guaranteed that for the moment they can marginalize the other candidates as their rules for who can participate lock out other candidates where the old League of Women Voters format allowed other candidates to participate. And as more people vote for the other parties, two things happen. One is that the parties begin to look at the issues the third parties raise and assimilate some of them. The other is that they circle the wagons. Indeed, the copd is a direct reaction to the success of Ross Perot and Ralph Nader in getting significant numbers of votes that, while not winning the elections, certainly altered the outcomes. It is doubtful that Bill Clinton could have won either election without Perot nor that Bush could have won without Nader. Candidates like Howard Dean show how much effect Nader had on the Democrats and by the same token Bush's 'kinder, gentler conservative' rap was a nod towards Perot's politics. My objection early on to this thread was those outside the US telling us how dumb we were to elect bush and that we should choose our leaders based on what other countries think. Absolutely! When I start seeing the rest of the world choosing their leaders based on what America wants I will consider this, but that is not going to happen, nor should it. Diddo! I think the last several elections point to the fact that we need to look again at how we select presidents, unfortunately, the entrenched interests of the two major parties will prevent this from happening as the current system, with the collusion of the media in the US, guarantees that the white house will always be held by one of the two. They are in no hurry to open up the competition further. Damn that Constitution! The system by which we hold the presidential elections (the popular election portion) is by no means dictated by the constitution. The constitution leaves it to the states to decide how they apportion their electoral college votes. The primary/caucus system, the debates and the elections themselves are NOT defined in the constitution other than setting the rules for who can hold the presidency. The system by which we run the popular vote is entirely a product of the politians. This can and should be revised, whether or not the electoral college is kept or changed. I think Colorado's proposed amendment where they would apportion votes rather than be a winner take all system is a good step. The current system resulted in the two 'big candidates' focusing their attention almost entirely on just 6 'battleground' states. If apportioned voting applied nation wide, then the candidates would have to work more broadly than they did this time. Those who claim a straight popular vote would over-empower the urban centers need only look at the popular vote this year. The urban centers did not determine the winner in either the popular or electoral college vote. Weebles Wobble (but they don't fall down) |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
More bad news for Bush, good news for Americans | General | |||
) OT ) Bush's "needless war" | General | |||
Mystery Beach Photo Contest | ASA | |||
Another Boat show | ASA |