Bob in Idaho wrote:
How is it that I am "equivocating," when registered voters of the Democratic
Party couldn't bring themselves to vote for their own parties choice for
POTUSA

You are equivocating because there is ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBT that if Nader
hadn't run in 2000, then Gore would be President today. Case closed.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

"rw" wrote in message
nk.net...
Bob in Idaho wrote:
How is it that I am "equivocating," when registered voters of the
Democratic
Party couldn't bring themselves to vote for their own parties choice for
POTUSA

You are equivocating because there is ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBT that if Nader
hadn't run in 2000, then Gore would be President today. Case closed.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

yep. directed verdict for the plaintiff, rw.

wayno (hell, this judge stuff is *easy*)

So, what do I receive, punitive or compensatory damages?

Bob C.
Idahoan for Nader
"Wayne Harrison" wrote in message
om...

"rw" wrote in message
nk.net...
Bob in Idaho wrote:
How is it that I am "equivocating," when registered voters of the
Democratic
Party couldn't bring themselves to vote for their own parties choice
for
POTUSA

You are equivocating because there is ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBT that if Nader
hadn't run in 2000, then Gore would be President today. Case closed.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

yep. directed verdict for the plaintiff, rw.

wayno (hell, this judge stuff is *easy*)

"Bob in Idaho" wrote in message
.. .
So, what do I receive, punitive or compensatory damages?


treble damages awarded against you: failure to understand that the
verdict was rendered *against* you; compensatory damages against you in rw's
counterclaim; punitive damages for filing a ridiculous claim; and treble
damages, just because it ought to be that bad.

a. wayne harrison, j.

Hah, a kangaroo court. Yes, I should have known, as the triple damages are
so similar to the number of Democrats that voted against Al Gore and for
George W. Bush in Florida compared to the number of votes that Ralph Nader
received, the fact that every third-party candidate received enough votes to
cost Al Gore the election, and the fact that Florida wouldn't even have been
a factor in the outcome, if only Al Gore had won his home state.

Fine wines may become better with time, but sour grape only become putrid.

I'm afraid that you gentlemen couldn't make a decent case utilizing mahogany
and teak.

Bob C.
Idahoan for Nader
"Wayne Harrison" wrote in message
m...

"Bob in Idaho" wrote in message
.. .
So, what do I receive, punitive or compensatory damages?


treble damages awarded against you: failure to understand that the
verdict was rendered *against* you; compensatory damages against you in
rw's
counterclaim; punitive damages for filing a ridiculous claim; and treble
damages, just because it ought to be that bad.

a. wayne harrison, j.

Hey guys...before you reply to the next message in this thread please remove
rec.audio.movies.production.sound from the list of newsgroups you are
replying to. None of our newsgroup members have contributed to your thread
and we'd all like to see it disappear from our group. As you can see I've
already removed it from this post...please do the same from your replies to
other messages in this thread. By all means have a great discussion...but
please don't cross post.

thanks!


"Bob C in Idaho" wrote in message
nk.net...
Hah, a kangaroo court. Yes, I should have known, as the triple damages
are
so similar to the number of Democrats that voted against Al Gore and for
George W. Bush in Florida compared to the number of votes that Ralph Nader
received, the fact that every third-party candidate received enough votes
to
cost Al Gore the election, and the fact that Florida wouldn't even have
been
a factor in the outcome, if only Al Gore had won his home state.

Fine wines may become better with time, but sour grape only become putrid.

I'm afraid that you gentlemen couldn't make a decent case utilizing
mahogany
and teak.

Bob C.
Idahoan for Nader
"Wayne Harrison" wrote in message
m...

"Bob in Idaho" wrote in message
.. .
So, what do I receive, punitive or compensatory damages?


treble damages awarded against you: failure to understand that the
verdict was rendered *against* you; compensatory damages against you in
rw's
counterclaim; punitive damages for filing a ridiculous claim; and treble
damages, just because it ought to be that bad.

a. wayne harrison, j.

"Bob C in Idaho" wrote in message
nk.net...
snip
I'm afraid that you gentlemen couldn't make a decent case utilizing
mahogany
and teak.

Bob C.
Idahoan for Nader


Hey Bob, are you attracted to Nader's ideas or his creepy attraction to
very, very young male dates? Gay is fine, if thats how he swings, but I
think he should lay off the youngsters. What do you think? I mean how
"crusading" can a closeted guy really be?

One thing I know for sure . . . his organization fakes "news." I saw them do
it during the WTO "Battle in Seattle" when they claimed to be reporting from
a certain location and were simply lying - they were nowhere near the action
they claimed to be reporting, as could be seen by locals who knew the
locales in the clips.

Dave

Well Dave, Nader's taste in young men, women, cats, dogs, or what ever else
he may choose to frolic with concerns me not, as I would vote for Satan
before I would vote for a Democrat or Republican.

If you have no problem voting for the liars from the main two parties, I
have no problem voting for some one that fakes news reports.

Anything else on your "gay is fine" mind?

Bob C.

Idahoan for Nader
"David Snedeker" wrote in message
...

"Bob C in Idaho" wrote in message
nk.net...
snip
I'm afraid that you gentlemen couldn't make a decent case utilizing
mahogany
and teak.

Bob C.
Idahoan for Nader


Hey Bob, are you attracted to Nader's ideas or his creepy attraction to
very, very young male dates? Gay is fine, if thats how he swings, but I
think he should lay off the youngsters. What do you think? I mean how
"crusading" can a closeted guy really be?

One thing I know for sure . . . his organization fakes "news." I saw them
do
it during the WTO "Battle in Seattle" when they claimed to be reporting
from
a certain location and were simply lying - they were nowhere near the
action
they claimed to be reporting, as could be seen by locals who knew the
locales in the clips.

Dave

Well since you put it that way, THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBT that if ALL
the Democrats in Florida had voted for Gore in 2000, Gore would be President
today! Another case closed.

Your "so-called" argument makes about as much sense as you telling me that I
should plant only the vegetables that you prefer, in a garden that I am
planting for myself.

Except in your own mind, you have totally failed to prove your case against
Nader.

According to your logic, you might as well take a shot at the Reform Party
which garnered 17,484 votes in Florida or the Libertarian Party which
garnered 16,415 votes in Florida. Either of those parties candidates votes
could also have pushed Gore over the top, well except for one tiny little
factor, the people who voted for those candidates didn't vote for Gore
either! They voted for the candidate of their choice, and it wasn't Al
Gore.

You might as well say that George W. Bush cost Al Gore the election, since
he was able to convince Democrats to vote for him who wouldn't otherwise
have voted for him, if he hadn't run for the office of POTUSA.

Face it fella, until there is a constitutional amendment passed making our
political system a two party system, you'll just have to live with the fact
that not everyone agrees with the Democrat/Republican Party agendas. It's
politics in America, get used to it.

One question though: If by chance Ralph Nader were to pull out this time
around, which parties candidate are you going to blame if George W. Bush
wins again?

Bob C.
Idahoan for Nader
"rw" wrote in message
nk.net...
Bob in Idaho wrote:
How is it that I am "equivocating," when registered voters of the
Democratic
Party couldn't bring themselves to vote for their own parties choice for
POTUSA

You are equivocating because there is ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBT that if Nader
hadn't run in 2000, then Gore would be President today. Case closed.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

Bob in Idaho wrote:

Your "so-called" argument makes about as much sense as you telling me that I
should plant only the vegetables that you prefer, in a garden that I am
planting for myself.

I not saying that Nader doesn't have a right to run for President, and
that you and your ilk don't have a right to vote for him. Of course you do.

I'm saying that it's STUPID!

If Nader hadn't run in 2000, 649 American servicemen (and counting)
wouldn't have died in Iraq, thousands more wouldn't have been seriously
wounded, and we wouldn't be stuck in a deadly, no-win quagmire, on the
brink of civil war, abandoned by nearly all of our allies.

BTW, just to be fair, we also wouldn't have found any weapons of mass
destruction. (I'd put a smiley here, but somehow it doesn't seem
appropriate.)

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.