On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 09:25:26 -0500, John Gaquin wrote:


Please post a copy of the USSC document detailing the "appointment" of the
President.

I'm not alone in the opinion that the Supreme Court "short-circuited" the
process.

http://www.lightparty.com/Misc/NoneD...ItTreason.html

http://www.larouchepub.com/lar/2000/...on_sup_ct.html

John Gaquin wrote:

"bb" wrote in message


How much tighter can it get than Gore winning the vote and Bush being
appointed by the supreme court?

This is getting tiresome, like fourth-graders whining "...no fair!!. Will
you people PLEASE read the Constitution? Gore lost 20 of the votes that
mattered, and Bush won 30.


It has nothing to do with the Constitution. What happened is that Bush
and his operatives *stole* the Florida electoral votes, and the
Republican dominated Supreme Court rubber-stamped the theft.


Please post a copy of the USSC document detailing the "appointment" of the
President.



Dubya was annointed by the Supreme Court.

"John Gaquin" wrote in message ...

Will you people PLEASE read the Constitution?

Then perhaps, some US history would be in order.

I swear, some folks never-ending crybabying, almost four years after
the fact, is nearly as amusing as their shocking ignorance of US
history which they so proudly display for all to see, here on
rec.boat.

1876 Rutherford B Hayes 185 Elec. vote - 4,033,768 pop. vote.
Samuel Tilden 184 Elec. vote - 4,285,992 pop. vote.

1888 Benjamin Harrison 233 Elec. vote - 5,440,216 pop. vote.
Grover Cleveland 168 Elec. vote - 5,538,233 pop. vote.

Some other rather famous "minority presidents" (who were elected with
less than 50% of the popular vote) were Abraham Lincoln (1860),
Woodrow Wilson (1912 & 1916), Harry Trumam (1948), John F. Kennedy
(1960), Richard Nixon (1968) and, lo and behold, their "hero" William
Jefferson Clinton Bythe (1992).

Suck on that one, all of you never-ending crybabies.
--
SJM

Scott McFadden wrote:
"John Gaquin" wrote in message ...

Will you people PLEASE read the Constitution?

Then perhaps, some US history would be in order.

I swear, some folks never-ending crybabying, almost four years after
the fact, is nearly as amusing as their shocking ignorance of US
history which they so proudly display for all to see, here on
rec.boat.


The issue is not the electoral college, per se, but the stealing of the
election by BushCrap operatives in Florida, and the affirmation of that
theft by the KonservativeKrapKourt.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
John Gaquin wrote:

"bb" wrote in message


How much tighter can it get than Gore winning the vote and Bush being
appointed by the supreme court?

This is getting tiresome, like fourth-graders whining "...no fair!!.
Will
you people PLEASE read the Constitution? Gore lost 20 of the votes that
mattered, and Bush won 30.


It has nothing to do with the Constitution. What happened is that Bush
and his operatives *stole* the Florida electoral votes, and the
Republican dominated Supreme Court rubber-stamped the theft.

Again, the Supreme Court just said that you can't change the rules on
counting votes after the votes have been cast. This is a foreign concept to
you Democrats but it is the law.

Please post a copy of the USSC document detailing the "appointment" of
the
President.



Dubya was annointed by the Supreme Court.

Actually it was the Constitution of the United States of America. The
operative word in the previous sentence is "States". This country is
comprised of 50 states.

Bert

thunder wrote:

I'm not alone in the opinion that the Supreme Court "short-circuited" the
process.

Nope. Anybody that looks at the facts will conclude that the Supremes acted in a partisan fashion and
probably illegally.

Scott McFadden wrote:

I swear, some folks never-ending crybabying, almost four years after
the fact, is nearly as amusing as their shocking ignorance of US
history which they so proudly display for all to see, here on
rec.boat.

What's shocking is that you miss the point. Repeatedly. And you so proudly display your obtuseness etc
etc.

The point is not that Bush was not elected by a majority vote (since that's not the way the President is
elected anyway). The point is that the Supreme Court interfered with the election on blatantly partisan
grounds.

Of course, to many people, cheating isn't wrong if your chosen side wins.

DSK

OK, as time goes by this is getting fuzzy.

Did the S.C. actually rule to overturn something or did they affirm the Fla
decision?

-W

"DSK" wrote in message
...

The point is that the Supreme Court interfered with the election on
blatantly partisan
grounds.

The issue is not the electoral college, per se, but the stealing of the
election by BushCrap operatives in Florida, and the affirmation of that
theft by the KonservativeKrapKourt.

Outrageous. So you say that the KKK was to blame?

The KKK. OK, Hairball. And the Chief Justice is the
Grand Wizard?

Clams Canino wrote:
OK, as time goes by this is getting fuzzy.

Did the S.C. actually rule to overturn something or did they affirm the Fla
decision?

IIRC they did not give the Florida court time to rule

The Florida court made two hasty (and IMHO rather stupid) decisions:
with the deadline approaching, they ruled that the recount *had* to be
completed before the deadline or no recounted votes would stand... then
they stopped the recount process.

The Democrats tried to open a hearing on this decision, saying that
either they should give the recount a chance to be completed, or let the
recounted votes stand... but didn't get very far. The Republicans went
straight to the top.

The Supreme Court stepped in to halt the whole process. It's like a game
called on account of rain, with a win going to the team that the umpire
decides *should* have won.

The above is partly from a recap of headlines and partly from my
admittedly not perfect memory. For the actual Supreme Court papers:

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/florida.html

Hope this helps... intended to be non-partisan...

Doug King

Harry Krause wrote in message ...
Scott McFadden wrote:
"John Gaquin" wrote in message ...

Will you people PLEASE read the Constitution?

Then perhaps, some US history would be in order.

I swear, some folks never-ending crybabying, almost four years after
the fact, is nearly as amusing as their shocking ignorance of US
history which they so proudly display for all to see, here on
rec.boat.


The issue is not the electoral college, per se, but the stealing of the
election by BushCrap operatives in Florida, and the affirmation of that
theft by the KonservativeKrapKourt.

No it's not, as that never happened... Read the post by DSK, he has it
right. But of course, being the lying piece of **** you are, you would
not care for the truth.

Gotta say it again, after seeing what happened to Gephardt in Iowa, it
is clear that the rank and file is also telling the union hacks like
you to get fu****!

Take back the news group, don't even address Harrys lies...