N312RC
Topic Author
Posts: 2584
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2000 10:58 am

Give It Up Gore!

Thu Nov 30, 2000 8:05 am

I saw a couple polls on T.V. the other day. 60% of Americans (and growing) think that Gore should stand down, drop all lawsuits, and concede the election. 80% of Americans say that they will accept Bush as president.. There is considerable support for a concession from Gore, why wont he do it?? Political suicide for him, he'll never win another election if he doesnt stop! Your thoughts, almost 3 weeks after the election. By seeing how each candidate has acted, if there was a revote, would you change? Would you not vote at all?
N/A
 
mbmbos
Posts: 2568
Joined: Sat May 27, 2000 4:16 am

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Thu Nov 30, 2000 8:23 am

Polls measure attitudes at one point in time. So, you're looking at attitudes today. What if we find out, after recounting, that the vote in Florida was badly mis-represented and that Gore actually won? What if we find out that there was a lot of monkey business going on?

In the long term, the Republicans (and Bush) are also taking risks with their partisan stance.

They seem to be winning their public relations campaign today, but who knows what will come to light over the next few days and weeks?

So far, nothing has changed my opinion on who I voted for.
 
XFSUgimpLB41X
Posts: 3961
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2000 1:18 am

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Thu Nov 30, 2000 8:31 am

welp..actually Gore only gained an additional 180 votes from the palm beach recount also. hence... he still lost. Gore blows.
Chicks dig winglets.
 
TWFirst
Posts: 5752
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2000 5:30 am

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Thu Nov 30, 2000 8:37 am

I would love for it to be over, but the fundamental issue that keeps entering my mind is:

If this were the other way around, the other camp would be acting the EXACT SAME WAY, and don't try and tell me otherwise. I mean, Christ, we're talking about the PRESIDENCY OF THE UNITED STATES here. If there was evidence that you may have won enough votes to win the election but the "official" results in a state governed by your opponent's brother said otherwise by a mere handful of votes, wouldn't you do what you could to ensure that your opponent really did win the election fairly? As an American citizen, I want to know that the guy who won the office was really supposed to win the office. If that's not the person I voted for, then so be it.

There definitely is a point where the effort becomes moot, but I'm not sure Gore has reached that yet (although he's getting pretty close). Whomever prevails is damaged goods, and a definite one-termer. Bush will be dealing with an exact 50-50 split in the Senate and the slimmest of margins in the House. There will always be questions about his legitimacy, and he will undoubtedly embarrass himself with public speaking mistakes. He has a really tough job ahead of him and if against all odds he manages to succeed, then he does deserve the office.
An unexamined life isn't worth living.
 
Guest

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Thu Nov 30, 2000 9:13 am

It is a win-win situation for the Dems. If Gore wins, we have 12 years of Democratic rule. If Bush wins, we get control of the House and Senate in '02. Personally, I think the Reps should be rooting Gore on, it's a better deal for them in the long run.
 
AerLingus
Posts: 2280
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2000 9:22 am

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Thu Nov 30, 2000 9:19 am

I am really, quite sick of the whole affair. I don't like Bush, but I don't like Gore, Nader, and Buchanan.
Gore's credibility remains questionable at best.
Bush's public speaking skills are also questionable, as I am not to eager to 'put America in the solar system.'
Get your patchouli stink outta my store!
 
Greeneyes53787
Posts: 817
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2000 10:34 am

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Thu Nov 30, 2000 1:05 pm

Most of you responding to this question are quotable and mostly secure in your heart, I think. One problem I have with Gore continuing as he is doing is the twisting of truth.

I listened to Gore's Tuesday TV speech on the radio in my car. At the time I thought it was one of the best he has delivered. But then I heard it again, this time in my house, and realized he wasn't telling the truth much of the time. The "mob" wasn't a persuading force for stopping the Dade hand count. All the ballots (but some military ones) have been counted. And other things he said weren't true.

Due to this credibility challenge Gore isn't worth waiting for.

But, in fairness, Gore perhaps should continue his fight if (and this is a long shot) he suddenly becomes honest with the American people. His facts aren't facts and his ways aren't true, I perceive. But truly were he to stop the false witnessing he might credibly find enough ballots that don't say Bush, Nader or Buccanin on them to claim for himself as the President of the country.

He cannot be effective as the leader though.

Greeneyes
 
redngold
Posts: 6673
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2000 12:26 pm

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Thu Nov 30, 2000 1:19 pm

Gore's credibility now = zero.
Gore's "crybaby" rating now = 100%

Bush's tit-for-tat rating now = 100%

I say we should go back to the loser becomes the Vice President, except this time we split the term. First two years, Bush is Prez and Gore is VP. Second two years, Gore is Prez and Bush is VP.

By the end of that four years, two things will happen:

1. Half of Florida's population will be dead, and the other half will be new
2. We will never make the 49% to 49% mistake EVER again!  

redngold
Up, up and away!
 
Guest

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Thu Nov 30, 2000 2:01 pm

The Florida Election is driving down the road at 5MPH with its left turn signal on. We may be here for a while 
 
lax2000
Posts: 525
Joined: Tue May 25, 1999 9:12 am

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Fri Dec 01, 2000 3:40 am

I personally think the embarrassing speaking mistakes will make the Bush administration all worth while.

I was looking forward to having a Jewish V.P. even though he was a bit conservative. Maybe this will open some doors for others besides the usual white Christian/Catholic Heterosexual male. I think Jackson and Leiberman would be a spicy ticket for 2004.


I sort of enjoy things I don't like or understand, for example Republicans, 7thHeaven, Family Values ect. So I am prepared for the next four years, if Bush wins, to sit back and watch the administration like a bad, but entertaining sitcom.

Adam
 
G Dubya
Posts: 387
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2000 1:10 am

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Fri Dec 01, 2000 4:19 am

Yeah Mr. Know-it-all, give it up!!! I yam prezdent dats what daddy told me! If you keep tis up, I will hold my breast, oops sorry I mean breath (do'nt want to offend Bob Jones) until I turn blue and it'll be your fault!

The American people have spoken and most voted for me. dats no fuzzy math...

Gore 50,140,140 - 49 %
Bush 49,782,288 - 48 %



P.S. I met with Colin Powell today coz am lookin' for a butler.
 
N312RC
Topic Author
Posts: 2584
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2000 10:58 am

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Fri Dec 01, 2000 4:41 am

RE: LAX2000

Maybe this will open some doors for others besides the usual white Christian/Catholic Heterosexual male

We havent had a Catholic prez since Kennedy!

Jackson/Lieberman??? That would never get off the ground. That ticket would be as popular as Buchanan/Foster (outside of Palm Beach County, that is). The American people arent ready for a Black Prez or VP. We arent ready for a women yet either. Look at Elizabeth Dole.

P.S. Any of you Michigan folks out there, remember when Geoffrey Fieger ran against John Engler for Governor??
N/A
 
lax2000
Posts: 525
Joined: Tue May 25, 1999 9:12 am

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Fri Dec 01, 2000 6:04 am

If Kennedy has been the only Catholic president I stand corrected I think you get the gist of what I am talking about. What do the American people have to do to "get ready" for a black, woman or Jewish Pres. 10 more years of Will Smith doing shitty white movies like Bagger Vance or maybe Woody Allan could merge with Disney and create a Universal City Walk with cool Jewish shops and fast food deep fried matzoh balls for the Mid West.

I think Hilary would have a decent chance of winning in 2004 especially if dumb redneck Bush wins the election.

Adam
 
TWFirst
Posts: 5752
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2000 5:30 am

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Fri Dec 01, 2000 6:11 am

I would like to see a black Jewish lesbian be president...

Did Sammy Davis Jr. have a daughter?? 




Seriously though, I would love to see a woman and/or Jewish and/or black president.
An unexamined life isn't worth living.
 
nwa man
Posts: 1752
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 1999 3:24 am

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Fri Dec 01, 2000 6:51 am

"The American people arent ready for a Black Prez or VP. We arent ready for a women yet either. Look at Elizabeth Dole."

Ahhh, ignorance at its finest. Yeah, the American people aren't ready for an African American president...that's why if Colin Powell ran, he would beat any of the candidates that Americans just voted for...it's an accepted fact from polling after the 1996 election. Bush-Powell would have won the election hands down.

And the woman president situation...like it or not, Hillary would win if she ran for president. America could definitely handle a female president...the Republican party could not. You think a majority of women vote Democratic now? 70-75% of women would probably vote for her, and she would have (key Electoral College states) Illinois and New York virtually locked up. Maybe you aren't ready for an African-American or a woman in the White House, but I sure as hell am.

NWA Man

Create your own luck.
 
Matt D
Posts: 8907
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 1999 6:00 am

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Fri Dec 01, 2000 9:05 am

That is something that has always scared me about politics...people voting along gender, racial, and ethics lines. As for whether or not they will be good for the country is usually a very distant second.
Hillary would garner most, if not all of the female vote ONLY BECAUSE she is female.
Same thing with Lieberman. You really think Gore chose him because he would make a good VP?
Hell no. He picked him solely and entirely because he is a Jew, and that would sweep up the Jewish vote, which has usually been favorable to the Dems in the past. And I guess the fact that he is a Dem also was an incidental plus.
Jesse Jackoff, same thing. He is one of the biggest racists on the planet. That still won't stop the black folks from voting for him. Why? Because he's a fellow "brutha."
Now why do the Gays suddeny want a gay president? Just because he is gay? Would the gays vote for someone who was otherwise a Pat Buchannan clone except for his sexual orientation?
Would the blacks vote for a black candidate even if he pledged to end welfare?
Would the Latino population vote for a Latino candidate even if he promised to close off the borders with Mexico, and deport all illegal aliens?

I would like to think that the answer to all three above would be a solid resounding NO!!!

But who are we kidding?
America...the land of the melting pot?
In the year 2000, that is the biggest oxymoron in decades...
We haven't as a society been as divided and partisan as we are since the pre-Civil War era.
And guess what???
What do you bet that all of this tension we see today will eventually culminate into a second civil war?
But that's the topic of a thread all on it's own.
 
Guest

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Fri Dec 01, 2000 10:59 am

Matt D, if you don't behave, I'll call D L X 

Bush chose Cheney because he is the only person in the Republican party with enough intelligence and patience to run the country from behind Bush.

But with Cheney's bad heart, who knows, Bush might be President someday....
 
sccutler
Posts: 5582
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2000 12:16 pm

Interesting Thread (sociologically)

Fri Dec 01, 2000 11:15 am

Lax2000- What, to you, does "redneck" mean. Since the term has several different connotations (some good, some bad, the difference generally requiring context), we need that information so we can better understand your last post.

--------------------

Does anyone out there know who "G Dubya" is? Is he/she a regular member operating under a "nom de plume," or a newcomer here to impress us with rapier wit and well-crafted logic?

--------------------

Some of us are "ready" for any candidate who appears and exhibits the character, honor and dignity to ably represent our republic. Others are unprepared to consider anyone who looks/thinks/acts/believes differently from themselves.

So, if you don't like a candidate, tell us why in terms of policies, actions and record, not with silly but meaningless snippets like "[s]he's a moron."

In the law, there is an amusing saying. "If you have good facts, argue the facts. If you have good law, argue the law. If you have neither, pound the table really hard!" Resorting to name-calling in a political debate is table-pounding at its worst, sort of a verbal masturbation.

And, by the way, it appears (based upon the facts, the law and his arguments) Vice-President Gore is pounding the table like crazy.

But then again, table-pounding sometimes works... it has for me, before. I'll tell you in a month or two if it works for Mr. Gore(!)

Ciao.
...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
 
Matt D
Posts: 8907
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 1999 6:00 am

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Fri Dec 01, 2000 11:49 am

Send DLX and Brissie over.....let them have their say, and then I'll plant a big wet sloppy kiss on both of them. 
 
D L X
Posts: 11663
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

Matt D

Fri Dec 01, 2000 4:23 pm

Did someone call my name?

First off, Matt D, you're hardly the voice of Black America.  

Not all Blacks (including myself) are in love with Jesse Jackson.

But other than that, I'm not going to shoot down your post because believe it or not, I agree with it, except that you may have exaggerated the situation a bit.

Yes, the Black vote is a pretty solid block in most cases. That's because most Blacks are in the same or similar situation, so it should make sense that we vote similarly.
The Gay population is a very strong block as well simply because Republicans are more against Gay marriage than liberals. (BTW, I'm not gay, so you can keep your kisses to yourself.   )The Latinos are a block of votes also, but not nearly as strong as Blacks and Gays.

Now about them women... I actually don't think that a woman candidate would necessarily get all the woman vote. A woman candidate for the Dems would probably not pull any conservative women to her side. However, I think a woman for the Republicans could pull some women from the Dem side because of the perception of being more compassionate.


Now back to the topic of the thread: One poll says that 59% of the voters want Gore to concede. Hmmm. Let's analyze that for a second. 48% of the voters voted for Bush. You can bet that all of them want Gore to concede cuz that means their guy wins. So, only 11% of non-Bush voters want Gore to concede. Compare that to 41% that don't want him to concede. That's not too hard to understand is it? What is more important imo is that over 3/4 of Gore voters want him to push on. If 3/4s of your backers said push on, wouldn't you push on?
 
Guest

Matt D

Fri Dec 01, 2000 4:55 pm

Told ya so     
 
TWFirst
Posts: 5752
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2000 5:30 am

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Fri Dec 01, 2000 10:23 pm

For clarification, I want to assure all that I would never vote for anyone JUST BECAUSE they are female, black or whatever. Certainly, I would have to believe they are QUALIFIED for the office before I would vote for them. This is the reason I didn't vote for Bush.

However, that being said, I would love it if someone from a different background other than a wealthy middle-aged white protestant male would run for president and be qualified to be president. My point is I think the country could benefit from someone who brings a different perspective.
An unexamined life isn't worth living.
 
lax2000
Posts: 525
Joined: Tue May 25, 1999 9:12 am

RE: Interesting Thread (sociologically)

Sat Dec 02, 2000 3:50 am

Redneck = Narrow minded, only drinks Budweiser cuz Millers for queers, likes shooting guns/hunting ect. never seen the ocean (except FL. SC. and NC rednecks), doesn't like blacks fags Jews Mexicans or any one that different than him except women, and there only there to clean and cook and procreate. knows at least one clan member, a simpleton.

Obviously my definition of redneck is a bit extreme for Bush. Is it?


Adam
 
N312RC
Topic Author
Posts: 2584
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2000 10:58 am

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Sat Dec 02, 2000 12:40 pm

Adam,

I think you gave us a pretty good description of yourself...
N/A
 
G Dubya
Posts: 387
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2000 1:10 am

RE: Sccutler (Interesting Thread)

Sat Dec 02, 2000 1:47 pm

or a newcomer here to impress us with rapier wit and well-crafted logic?

Thanks, no one else thinks am witty...nitwit yes, witty no.

Anyhow here goes a sample of my rapper wit: yo! yo! yo! Algore gotto go, go, go....silly 'ol me, better leave the rappin', singin' and dancin' to the negroes, thier mo' better. 

cheers,

Prezdent-defect Goerge W. Bush

P.S. I learned "yo!" from my favorite rap artist Matt D ...or is dat Chuck D?  



 
Guest

RE: Sccutler (Interesting Thread)

Sat Dec 02, 2000 3:16 pm

N312RC, at least I care about America's less fortunate more than myself.

Grow up.
 
N312RC
Topic Author
Posts: 2584
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2000 10:58 am

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Sun Dec 03, 2000 12:25 am

I see "america's less fortunate" day in and day out, usually they are sitting on their big rumps collecting SS Disability checks when their is nothing wrong with them, Welfare, Medicaid, all those checks. They refuse to get a job, even though they can. We (the middle class) pays for that through higher taxes. These "less fortunate" take so much, but return so little.
N/A
 
sccutler
Posts: 5582
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2000 12:16 pm

Lax2000 & "Redneck"

Sun Dec 03, 2000 3:15 am

I was just curious; based upon your definition, then Governor Bush (at least based upon his record and public actions) is not a "Redneck."

It's good to be careful about terminology, what means what in different places.

Here in Texas, "Redneck" is not (or at least, need not be) an insult; it means someone who works outdoors (frequently a farmer or rancher) and whose neck gets red from the sun. It doesn't generally reflect anything about the person's beliefs.

I know that, in the LA area (I've lived there), there is not a great deal of knowledge about things rural, or, for that matter, about things outside of southern California, and most of what is "known" is based upon what the network writers tell you to know. So don't believe everything you see on TV; there are a lot of pretty good folks who might fall under the banner, "redneck."

Ciao.
...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
 
G Dubya
Posts: 387
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2000 1:10 am

RE: Lax2000 & "Redneck"

Sun Dec 03, 2000 3:34 am

I ain't no redneck either, I yam a preppy from Maine...move to Texas to try to make money with daddy's friends and his name.


N312RC, Poor welfare queens, nickle and diming the government, brother Neil is mo' better...can you say $4 billion, heheheh

bye, gotta go pottie...

G. Dubya

 
D L X
Posts: 11663
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Sun Dec 03, 2000 3:51 am

N312RC,

ho hum. How many poor people have you actually met? For every example of a lazy poor person you can give me, I can give you an example of 3 that work hard and can't get out of their situation.

For instance, here in San Francisco, I know a man whom I see regularly on the streets in SOMA. He works a full job, has a bank account, and everything. Everything except a house. The rent is so high here, that he can't afford a house on his Skilled Construction Worker salary.
 
Guest

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Sun Dec 03, 2000 8:08 am

It is a vicious cycle, 312RC. You are born into poverty, so you cannot get a good education and therefor you haven't the skills needed to hold a job with a salary high enough to get you out of your situation. And what do you tell them? Try harder. Disgusting!

Stop trying to justify your greed and selfishness.
 
Lindy
Posts: 4722
Joined: Wed May 19, 1999 10:42 pm

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Sun Dec 03, 2000 1:34 pm

I dont understand this. Over 300 000 more people voted for Gore but his still losing??? What the hell is going on?
BWIADCA - Nikon D100
 
cba
Posts: 4228
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2000 2:02 pm

N312RC

Sun Dec 03, 2000 4:44 pm

You just said that you know someone who can't afford a home or apartment. This is a terrible situation, but under Dubya's plans, this man will get no relief. Bush will give breaks to corporate America, the people who need them least. That man will remain homeless. Yet republicans say, work harder, you can dig yourself out of the hole. It is possible to get out of poverty, but when you're starting at zero like this man, you need support of some kind. The republicans give no support to this man. Sick. And Bush wants morals. There are more important things to worry about for now.
 
Guest

RE: N312RC

Sun Dec 03, 2000 6:45 pm

The fact of it is, the people Bush will give relief to have way more money than they need to run their lives on. Why should America's economy rely on the poor? If you can afford to pay more, you should pay more. It is all relative.

Think of it this way. You and a college student are going to buy cars. You, being the white-bred, rich man that you are, decide to buy a luxury sedan while your college friend can only afford a hatchback. Now, should your college friend have to pay more in tax on the less expensive car just because he is living off of student loans and money from his parents while you worked for yours? Sounds awfully stupid, huh?
 
G Dubya
Posts: 387
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2000 1:10 am

RE: N312RC

Mon Dec 04, 2000 3:42 am

To the poor, all I can say is "Qu'ils mangent de la brioche."

To non-hispanics it means "Let them eat cake"...or buns (they must be gay, get it, heheh), or whatever, I do'nt speak good hispanic anyhow...or good english, either.


 
sccutler
Posts: 5582
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2000 12:16 pm

Huh?

Mon Dec 04, 2000 11:35 am

Nuts-

What's this about paying less in taxes on a more-expensive car?

The concept of tax relief is simply this:None of the money that the government has, belongs to the government. It get's everything it has from us, the taxpayers. So it is disingenuous to suggest that a tax cut "gives" money to the rich; it simply reduces the amount of money impounded from taxpayers.

And surely you cannot be daft enough to suggest that, if taxes are reduced, there will be no collateral benefit in the form of additional productivity, higher wages and better jobs? Read economic theory (from someone other than K. Marx, if you please), and observe the effect of success.

See, the real problem is, if you have a tax structure which disgorges too much wealth from those who produce it, the incentive to risk the capital to create more (invest in new businesses, new technologies, etc.) is reduced. The amusing irony of the tax-it-away crowd is this: the rich (truly rich, not just folks who've gotten a good bonus at the old job) can afford to get by in any event, true enough, but without their collective cash to be invested for growth, there is no job or wealth growth to bring up the non-rich.

And claiming that, because a construction worker in the highest-cost real estate market in the nation (SFO) cannot afford to buy a house, a working person cannot work themselves up, is just plain ludicrous, and damned cynical to boot. A skilled-trade construction worker in Dallas, or nearly anywhere else, can afford to buy a home, provided they (1) save for a while to have a reasonable down-payment; and (2) manage their affairs so as to have a reasonable credit rating (don't buy stuff you can't afford).

I speak from my personal experience when I tell you that it can be done. Many nights in classes after a long day of work, years and years of no vacations, no new cars, no luxury goods.

Governor Bush's proposals for tax reductions don't propose giving extra breaks to the wealthy- merely reducing the confiscation of wealth by the government.

I will not be drawn into a long and dirty tax policy discussion sequence, other than to say this: do some research, real research, not just reading partisan position papers, and see whether you can find any society which has taxed itself to prosperity. It has been tried ad infinitum, and always, it has failed.
...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
 
D L X
Posts: 11663
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Mon Dec 04, 2000 12:35 pm

whoa, whoa, whoa, Cutler. You need to read the thread from the beginning before you attack my post. My post was simply a counterargument to N312RC who thinks that all poor people are that way because of their own doing. In no way can you read into my post that this one example should be extrapolated into showing that no poor person anywhere can get out of their situation even through hard work. One very notable case right now is President Bill Clinton, who grew up quite poor, and through lots of hard work (and possibly marrying rich  ), certainly isn't poor anymore.

In a nutshell, here is my point: there are many poor people that got that way because of poor life decisions, or lack of motivation to get out of their situation. However, there are a great many poor people in this country that were born that way, and have had insurmountable obstacles in relieving their problems over the years.

Trying to bring this back on topic a little, I'd like to know what Bush plans to do about these poor folks that actually do try unsuccessfully to advance their situations.
 
Guest

Sccutler...

Mon Dec 04, 2000 2:14 pm

My point remains undefeated. The analogy I used is identical to the Republican way of thinking.
 
sccutler
Posts: 5582
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2000 12:16 pm

...

Mon Dec 04, 2000 10:07 pm

1. DLX- thanks for the clarification; no attack intended. I don't have the answers, though we can be fairly certain now that the "great society" experiments of the sixties have failed; government rarely fixes anything.

2. nuts, I don't know what the "Republican way of thinking" is, since an organization, by definition, does not "think"; that is left to individuals. There is nothing in Republican policy that I am aware of that promotes a policy or way of taxation as you've described; please clarify, including citation to sources. What you've described would be most onerous, and worthy of greater exposure.
...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
 
na
Posts: 9170
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 1999 3:52 am

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Tue Dec 05, 2000 2:23 am

The 2000 US election is a joke. None of this duo of mediocre candidats deserves to become president of Earth´s most powerful nation after this 50,0001% to 49,9999% outcome.

To vote again is the only solution that makes sense.
 
lax2000
Posts: 525
Joined: Tue May 25, 1999 9:12 am

RE: ...Scutler/Redneck

Tue Dec 05, 2000 3:04 am

Thanks for the peaceful rebuttal on Rednecks. I am definitely not an expert. I just don't like G.W.
Alas as we speak it looks like he will be our next president.
guess I will just have to deal with it.

Cheerio!
Adam
 
Greeneyes53787
Posts: 817
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2000 10:34 am

RE: Don't Give It Up Gore!

Tue Dec 05, 2000 3:54 am

You know what I think?

This election was way too expensive- for both mainline parties. The media could be working with both camps to continue this fodder on TV until the advertisement pays for their campaigns.

Now, I don't really believe this, but were there a lot of advertisement during this continuing spinning treatment for the "will of the people" I'd say that both camps stand to gain something were they getting kickbacks for keeping it going.

G
 
sccutler
Posts: 5582
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2000 12:16 pm

The Song Of The Supremes

Tue Dec 05, 2000 5:02 am

The Supreme Court has issued its warning.

There may be a great deal of soul-searching at Blair House as we write.

Judge Sauls no doubt hopes that someone will make a move which will then make the controversy before him moot.

Will statesmanship prevail?
...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
 
ctbarnes
Posts: 3269
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 2:20 pm

Will Statesmanship Prevail?

Tue Dec 05, 2000 5:07 am

Don't hold your breath.

Charles
The customer isn't a moron, she is your wife -David Ogilvy
 
Greeneyes53787
Posts: 817
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2000 10:34 am

RE: Cutler

Tue Dec 05, 2000 5:47 am

Soul searching?

Once you've sold it I don't think you can get it back.

G

Ps-this is a war between principalities and powers, not just the Rs and the Ls! It is right vs wrong, not just right vs left! (Gore [in church one day] was correct about that [but he was wrong to discuss it there])
 
ctbarnes
Posts: 3269
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 2:20 pm

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Tue Dec 05, 2000 6:25 am

Ps-this is a war between principalities and powers, not just the Rs and the Ls! It is right vs wrong, not just right vs left! (Gore [in church one day] was correct about that [but he was wrong to discuss it there])

Yes, but what does that actually mean? No one has been able to articulate this without having to indulge in emotivistic posturing and empty rhetorical gibberish.

To borrow a saying from Henry Kissinger (he was originally taliking about university politics, but this fits beautifully):

The reason party politics is so vicious this year is because the stakes are so incredibly low.

Charles
The customer isn't a moron, she is your wife -David Ogilvy
 
N312RC
Topic Author
Posts: 2584
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2000 10:58 am

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Tue Dec 05, 2000 7:16 am

Greed and selfishness??!!

Ok, We're Nuts, you want to raise taxes so you can support the "less fortunate"?? I (and my parents) work hard for our money, and we don't want it going to some (fill in adjective here) on welfare! Of course we say "Try Harder" but most of them don't. They know that they have welfare to fall back on, therefore, they don't want to work. Come on, if you were getting free money, would you want to work? Welfare Reform is badly needed. Here in Michigan, our governor, John Engler (R), has instituted welfare reform, requiring that you get a job! In turn, he has cut taxes here. Of course, most of the poorer areas (Detroit, Flint) hate him now, because they don't want to work!

N/A
 
G Dubya
Posts: 387
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2000 1:10 am

RE: Sccutler...

Tue Dec 05, 2000 7:18 am

We're Nuts

Listen to Mr. Kotter, just contrast teh Reagan and Clinton Admenstruations. Teh Reagan tax cut resulted in teh biggerest economic expansion ever and no budget deficit, on the other hand, teh Clinton tax increase gave us dis current economic recession and ballooning budget deficit dat where in...oops, does'nt sound right...thinkin' like Arnold Horshak, never mind.

Dats ok, am back at my ranch relaxin' and doin' nuthin' while Dick Cheney is preparing to run the country. Way to go Dick, done good job pickin' my admenstruation and keep telling Mr. Know-it-all to quit coz am prezdent.



 
Pilot1113
Posts: 2276
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 1999 1:42 pm

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Tue Dec 05, 2000 7:34 am

Thank god! I think we're almost there! After the "loss" in the supreme court and the supreme loss in Tallahassee, Gore's options are quickly running out.  

You want to know how well welfare works? Let's take a look at Massachusetts in the 1980s. The requirements were so loose that a woman was making $1 million dollars to pay for her 4 children. When the investigation was concluded, she was single without children. From what I hear, the checks were actually quite impressive.

You want to know what happened as a result? NO ONE WORKED!! Massachusetts' economy mirrored the Soviet Union. In fact, Wang computers (the Dell of yesterday) had gone bankrupt because they were taxed heavily! IBM ran to California to save their life. Many experts agree that had Massachusetts' economy prospered, we would have been Silicon Valley, instead of California.

- Neil Harrison
 
G Dubya
Posts: 387
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2000 1:10 am

RE: Give It Up Gore!

Tue Dec 05, 2000 7:44 am

In fact, Wang computers (the Dell of yesterday) had gone bankrupt because they were taxed heavily! IBM ran to California to save their life. Many experts agree that had Massachusetts' economy prospered, we would have been Silicon Valley, instead of California.

Thank God California is a Republican state. Imagine if it had a Democrat governor or state legislature...or Senators and House Reps.

soon-to-be real prezdent, not just prezdent-defect...
G. Dubya Bush

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: LAX772LR, SOBHI51, WarRI1 and 8 guests