-
If you would like to get your account Verified, read this thread -
Check out Tickling.com - the most innovative tickling site of the year. -
The TMF is sponsored by Clips4sale - By supporting them, you're supporting us. -
>>> If you cannot get into your account email me at [email protected] <<<
Don't forget to include your username
Florida's election system still not fixed!
- Thread starter amk714
- Start date
D
Deleted member 2452
Guest
dvnc, sorry if i offended you
but i was simply telling the truth (as i see it).
maybe my manor of speach was over the edge, but i don't see how?
maybe my preoccupation, and stree at home as affected my judgement?
or maybe i gord your ox? hit a little too close to home, and made you see something you don't like seeing?
listen, in the florida primary that is still being counted, reno is saying she will take the decission to cort if she loses, i feel this has proven my point.
shark, and kurtchitovium said their points very well. i am in total agreement. shinning ice, is correct in his asertation that there are corrupt, and worthless republicans. hell, we have as the governor of illinois!
i don't like nor approve of professional politicians, and have always liked the idea of term limits, for all offices. too many (from both sides of the isle) have been at the public trough for far too long!
lastly, i choose respond, or not to respond to some people, for a variety of reasons, i should think can can be understood, and respected.
steve
but i was simply telling the truth (as i see it).
maybe my manor of speach was over the edge, but i don't see how?
maybe my preoccupation, and stree at home as affected my judgement?
or maybe i gord your ox? hit a little too close to home, and made you see something you don't like seeing?
listen, in the florida primary that is still being counted, reno is saying she will take the decission to cort if she loses, i feel this has proven my point.
shark, and kurtchitovium said their points very well. i am in total agreement. shinning ice, is correct in his asertation that there are corrupt, and worthless republicans. hell, we have as the governor of illinois!
i don't like nor approve of professional politicians, and have always liked the idea of term limits, for all offices. too many (from both sides of the isle) have been at the public trough for far too long!
lastly, i choose respond, or not to respond to some people, for a variety of reasons, i should think can can be understood, and respected.
steve
Actually,I was wondering when someone was going to bring up the subject of Republican politics.Just a short list:
Watergate.....Nixon administration
Iran-Contra.....Reagan administration
There were several problems with Edwin Meese,Oliver North,Admiral Poindexter,and reportedly 137 minor and major officials in Reagan's administration who were either under investigation or indictment.
Foreign policy problems include 247 dead Marines who were sent to be policemen in Lebanon....with empty weapons at the ready,don't shoot first orders,and situated in the middle of a crossfire.
Domestically,numbers games were used often.The rising cost of living was curtailed by removing housing from the equation,with the claim that the costs were unstable.Since housing is the biggest cost for the vast majority of Americans,the cost of living will obviously take a tumble.
High unemployment carried over from the Carter administration,and there was no cure for that.The strategy was to change the unemployment figures to only reflect first time claimants,which will obviously lower the numbers as people ran out of benefits.This system is used to this day.
This was long enough ago that I don't recall alot of details.I'm sure
that a web search for those interested will refresh memories.
Locally,a state senator who was anti-union was backing repeal of prevailing wage (another hot topic among some) and stated that the costs were too high.It just so happens that the same guy suddenly "retired" a while later.Here,the "story" is that he was caught in his own little money trap,and was given the choice of not running again or exposure.This will probably never be proven........
There is plenty to garbage to go around.Democrats are just more apt to accepting it as the daily norm,as Republicans tend to hide it. And,of course,the rest of us pay for it one way or another.It HAS to be cleaned up for the US to remain the best place on Earth to live.
That is not a shot at other countries,but I happen to live here and have found no other place I prefer.
Watergate.....Nixon administration
Iran-Contra.....Reagan administration
There were several problems with Edwin Meese,Oliver North,Admiral Poindexter,and reportedly 137 minor and major officials in Reagan's administration who were either under investigation or indictment.
Foreign policy problems include 247 dead Marines who were sent to be policemen in Lebanon....with empty weapons at the ready,don't shoot first orders,and situated in the middle of a crossfire.
Domestically,numbers games were used often.The rising cost of living was curtailed by removing housing from the equation,with the claim that the costs were unstable.Since housing is the biggest cost for the vast majority of Americans,the cost of living will obviously take a tumble.
High unemployment carried over from the Carter administration,and there was no cure for that.The strategy was to change the unemployment figures to only reflect first time claimants,which will obviously lower the numbers as people ran out of benefits.This system is used to this day.
This was long enough ago that I don't recall alot of details.I'm sure
that a web search for those interested will refresh memories.
Locally,a state senator who was anti-union was backing repeal of prevailing wage (another hot topic among some) and stated that the costs were too high.It just so happens that the same guy suddenly "retired" a while later.Here,the "story" is that he was caught in his own little money trap,and was given the choice of not running again or exposure.This will probably never be proven........
There is plenty to garbage to go around.Democrats are just more apt to accepting it as the daily norm,as Republicans tend to hide it. And,of course,the rest of us pay for it one way or another.It HAS to be cleaned up for the US to remain the best place on Earth to live.
That is not a shot at other countries,but I happen to live here and have found no other place I prefer.
Biggles of 266
1st Level Red Feather
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2001
- Messages
- 1,126
- Points
- 36
How come my posts don't count? I'm not letting fly with opinion, it's a fact documented in several newspapers that 173,000 voters were taken off the records. It doesn't matter which country I come from if I tell the truth.
Re: dvnc, sorry if i offended you
It's kind of you to offer an apology, Steve. Offering such with so many defenses for your previous declarations does seem a touch defensive, though. Inspired me to get way more focused in my response, based on your posts in this thread.
I understand that you don't see where your manner of speech was over the edge.
I can guess that your home life is affecting you. Mine certainly affects me, and I see such with everyone I know.
I have already stated, previously, where I saw things I didn't like.
I don't feel your statements hit close to anything, though. You point an accuse an entire political party, millions of Americans, as if it were just one side that caused the problem. Can it be that, within this species we call mankind, there's a predisposition for failure limited to only one's political beliefs?
No. That's irrational, Steve. I figure you're having something going on that helps to influence this most pointed statement. It's just words, though, and not my words. They're yours.
I do disagree with you, as gentlemen will, now and again.
I don't see where Reno taking the current case to court proves anything, yet. In court, it would have to prove something. That's the nature of the US court system.
Clearly, there are folks without ethic, and they don't all have the same political party.
That having been acknowledged, you've statements you've made, that I've addressed, that you don't appear to recognize as I recognized them. Do let me provide examples
"a bunch of whinny liberal dems!"
You said this before. Was it constructive? Nope. Accusatory and derisive? Yep.
"biggles you aren't even american so i'll not address you."
Off the top, you'll only address Americans on America? Do you see where this is interesting, and to me, strange? You posted this to an internationally accessed forum. Biggles *was* contributing. Not so nice, sir. Clearly, Biggles didn't enjoy that, either.
Biggles, I apologize for your treatment, sir. I don't believe that Steve meant to treat you so poorly.
"i'm glad convicted felons were kicked off"
Agreed. Who isn't?
"and fyi; a state wide re-count was finaly done in florida, paid for by a couple of the news papers."
Why? 'Cause that state mishandled their votes.
"the results? bush picked up over 1000 more votes!"
Being that he was already elected by that point, so trivial an amount of votes is less than remotely significant.
"another thing that pissed me off, how the domocrates tried to disinfranchise the military votes. these guys, and gals are over seas doing their duty, and what happens? the liberal democrates try to have their voteing balots thrown away!"
Wait, the recount was a waste of time, when the Democrats wanted it, but you blame the SAME group for disenfrancisement? Steve, what's wrong with that thought? The Republican party wanted that states ballots left alone, as their party's candidate won, but the Democrats wanted it checked. The result? EVERYONE'S vote was seen. No one can legitimately bitch, now, about the president elect, as it was PROVEN, as it SHOULD have been, from the beginning.
AND they're STILL screwing up in Florida on votes, per the story mentioned at the start of this long thread.
"here in illinois we have the same punch system that florida had. and in the 2000 election several 100,000's balots were thrown out due to chad problems, it's what the law says to do! same as in florida. it's up to the voter to make sure their balot is done correctly."
So you, in conclusion, think that, because of a flawed voting system, not used in all states, that without public notification of such, voters should have their votes arbitrarily cast aside for a lack of quality control? Considerate, sir. I do hope more, there and across the US, are interested in correcting what is KNOWN as a flawed system.
"thats the big difference between you whinny dems, and us republicans, we believe in personal responsibility, and you believe in sueing if you don't get your way!
steve"
Steve, that's one of the most ridiculous statements in your prior post. BOTH parties suffer litigious tendencies, or don't you recall the persecution of the previous president, for something as trivial as his personal marital failings. The Democrats sure didn't want that raised as a stink (something I question). The Republicans pressed for impeachment trial, suit, etc.
Then there's the obvious use of "whinny" as a descriptor. Steve, no one finds being called "whinny" by any spelling to be an open-minded or considerate declaration. It's unkind. I don't appreciate it, as an observer. I'm certain that the American Democrats here, on the TMF, thought such was insulting. The exception would be any of them that believed themselves to have a propensity for whining.
Do keep in mind that, while I find the posted statement to be poorly done, it in no way reflects on my personal belief that you're neither ridiculous, nor do I believe you have such negative feelings for those folks, here, who don't share your specific political beliefs.
Again, I dig the verbal sparrin' wit' ya. I think you may have been a bit harsh, but as you apologized, I hold no ill will for ya, sir. I can dig not replyin' to all who commented. I'll not sweat ya that.
While I don't think we can all get along, all the time, I do wish we all would get to where we're enjoining head and heart alike, considerin' our fellow ticklephile while we state our beliefs.
Probably about $0.04 this time,
dvnc
areenactor said:
It's kind of you to offer an apology, Steve. Offering such with so many defenses for your previous declarations does seem a touch defensive, though. Inspired me to get way more focused in my response, based on your posts in this thread.
I understand that you don't see where your manner of speech was over the edge.
I can guess that your home life is affecting you. Mine certainly affects me, and I see such with everyone I know.
I have already stated, previously, where I saw things I didn't like.
I don't feel your statements hit close to anything, though. You point an accuse an entire political party, millions of Americans, as if it were just one side that caused the problem. Can it be that, within this species we call mankind, there's a predisposition for failure limited to only one's political beliefs?
No. That's irrational, Steve. I figure you're having something going on that helps to influence this most pointed statement. It's just words, though, and not my words. They're yours.
I do disagree with you, as gentlemen will, now and again.
I don't see where Reno taking the current case to court proves anything, yet. In court, it would have to prove something. That's the nature of the US court system.
Clearly, there are folks without ethic, and they don't all have the same political party.
That having been acknowledged, you've statements you've made, that I've addressed, that you don't appear to recognize as I recognized them. Do let me provide examples
"a bunch of whinny liberal dems!"
You said this before. Was it constructive? Nope. Accusatory and derisive? Yep.
"biggles you aren't even american so i'll not address you."
Off the top, you'll only address Americans on America? Do you see where this is interesting, and to me, strange? You posted this to an internationally accessed forum. Biggles *was* contributing. Not so nice, sir. Clearly, Biggles didn't enjoy that, either.
Biggles, I apologize for your treatment, sir. I don't believe that Steve meant to treat you so poorly.
"i'm glad convicted felons were kicked off"
Agreed. Who isn't?
"and fyi; a state wide re-count was finaly done in florida, paid for by a couple of the news papers."
Why? 'Cause that state mishandled their votes.
"the results? bush picked up over 1000 more votes!"
Being that he was already elected by that point, so trivial an amount of votes is less than remotely significant.
"another thing that pissed me off, how the domocrates tried to disinfranchise the military votes. these guys, and gals are over seas doing their duty, and what happens? the liberal democrates try to have their voteing balots thrown away!"
Wait, the recount was a waste of time, when the Democrats wanted it, but you blame the SAME group for disenfrancisement? Steve, what's wrong with that thought? The Republican party wanted that states ballots left alone, as their party's candidate won, but the Democrats wanted it checked. The result? EVERYONE'S vote was seen. No one can legitimately bitch, now, about the president elect, as it was PROVEN, as it SHOULD have been, from the beginning.
AND they're STILL screwing up in Florida on votes, per the story mentioned at the start of this long thread.
"here in illinois we have the same punch system that florida had. and in the 2000 election several 100,000's balots were thrown out due to chad problems, it's what the law says to do! same as in florida. it's up to the voter to make sure their balot is done correctly."
So you, in conclusion, think that, because of a flawed voting system, not used in all states, that without public notification of such, voters should have their votes arbitrarily cast aside for a lack of quality control? Considerate, sir. I do hope more, there and across the US, are interested in correcting what is KNOWN as a flawed system.
"thats the big difference between you whinny dems, and us republicans, we believe in personal responsibility, and you believe in sueing if you don't get your way!
steve"
Steve, that's one of the most ridiculous statements in your prior post. BOTH parties suffer litigious tendencies, or don't you recall the persecution of the previous president, for something as trivial as his personal marital failings. The Democrats sure didn't want that raised as a stink (something I question). The Republicans pressed for impeachment trial, suit, etc.
Then there's the obvious use of "whinny" as a descriptor. Steve, no one finds being called "whinny" by any spelling to be an open-minded or considerate declaration. It's unkind. I don't appreciate it, as an observer. I'm certain that the American Democrats here, on the TMF, thought such was insulting. The exception would be any of them that believed themselves to have a propensity for whining.
Do keep in mind that, while I find the posted statement to be poorly done, it in no way reflects on my personal belief that you're neither ridiculous, nor do I believe you have such negative feelings for those folks, here, who don't share your specific political beliefs.
Again, I dig the verbal sparrin' wit' ya. I think you may have been a bit harsh, but as you apologized, I hold no ill will for ya, sir. I can dig not replyin' to all who commented. I'll not sweat ya that.
While I don't think we can all get along, all the time, I do wish we all would get to where we're enjoining head and heart alike, considerin' our fellow ticklephile while we state our beliefs.
Probably about $0.04 this time,
dvnc
kurchatovium
Wielder of 100 Feathers
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2001
- Messages
- 127,637
- Points
- 48
Perhaps one point I think should be made again is that even if you use the most advanced high-tech system, it is up to the voter to take responsibility and make sure their vote is counted. Certainly this should be made as easy as possible, but the responsibility is yours. My Aunt is 80 years old and she casts her ballot in every election no matter how small, she double checks everything, if anything is not to her liking she asks for a new ballot and recasts until she has her votes cast correctly. Their are few people that are as patriotic as her to take so much time to do their duty as citizens this way. My Aunt is also very liberal and so if everyone in Florida had acted in such a manner I think Al Gore might have had a chance to get elected.
And this thread completely backs up what I was writing in another.
Florida is just ONE of 50 governments that the citizens of 49 others have to watch. Now, tell me why I care about France right now? LOL The heat coming off my screen blurs my vision of other countries.....😛
The only prbem with so many rights in this country is that we all think that's what we are. RIGHT! Screw the other guy...he's for gay rights! Screw the other guy...he wants to give farmers more money. Screw the other guy...he supports big business! It's like watching a kindergarten class. "He got the crayons. I want the crayons. He got more glue! I need that glue! He pushed me at recess! Well, he BIT me! "
SHEESH!!!!!! New Zealand is is looking mighty fine...how far away is it again?
Jo
Florida is just ONE of 50 governments that the citizens of 49 others have to watch. Now, tell me why I care about France right now? LOL The heat coming off my screen blurs my vision of other countries.....😛
The only prbem with so many rights in this country is that we all think that's what we are. RIGHT! Screw the other guy...he's for gay rights! Screw the other guy...he wants to give farmers more money. Screw the other guy...he supports big business! It's like watching a kindergarten class. "He got the crayons. I want the crayons. He got more glue! I need that glue! He pushed me at recess! Well, he BIT me! "
SHEESH!!!!!! New Zealand is is looking mighty fine...how far away is it again?
Jo
D
Deleted member 2452
Guest
i was a little confused by your latest reply dvnc
but if you know me, then you know that's not too hard😀
a couple of points you made i'd like to rebut.
in the 2000 election (for president) the democrates tried to go to court to keep the military votes from being counted for the first time! they, your democratic party tried to keep the votes of our brothers, and sisters (of all political parties) from being counted. that my good sir is excreable!
now i may have blinders on, or just ignorent (that means lack of knowledge), but i have never seen a republican going to court to contest an election result. george bush was advised to do so in the 2000 election for such states as wisconsin, and another out west, but i'm not sure which. he declined. his feeling was that the people spoke, and the officals counted. why drag things to courts? but as we all know, mr. gore ran to court like a whiny yupe. and now (well as of last friday) janet reno says she'll go to court! that's two dems. to no republicans.
you are correct, i ment no insult to biggles, and i was rather curt in my manor, for that i am sorry. but i don't like it when people from other countries start in on our system here, w/o full knowledge. i would never dream to try to lecture him about aissie politics (but i could).
yes dvnc, i too love the political sparing, esp. with a gentleman like you.
steve
but if you know me, then you know that's not too hard😀
a couple of points you made i'd like to rebut.
in the 2000 election (for president) the democrates tried to go to court to keep the military votes from being counted for the first time! they, your democratic party tried to keep the votes of our brothers, and sisters (of all political parties) from being counted. that my good sir is excreable!
now i may have blinders on, or just ignorent (that means lack of knowledge), but i have never seen a republican going to court to contest an election result. george bush was advised to do so in the 2000 election for such states as wisconsin, and another out west, but i'm not sure which. he declined. his feeling was that the people spoke, and the officals counted. why drag things to courts? but as we all know, mr. gore ran to court like a whiny yupe. and now (well as of last friday) janet reno says she'll go to court! that's two dems. to no republicans.
you are correct, i ment no insult to biggles, and i was rather curt in my manor, for that i am sorry. but i don't like it when people from other countries start in on our system here, w/o full knowledge. i would never dream to try to lecture him about aissie politics (but i could).
yes dvnc, i too love the political sparing, esp. with a gentleman like you.
steve
Re: i was a little confused by your latest reply dvnc
Steve, one of us needs a run to the local library, to check their data. You do have a lack of information. I'll further clarify.
There's nothing wrong with challenging an illegal activity, AND the law's very clear on voting, and for good reason. Change the law, first, man, and THEN challenge. Right now, you're arguing that the law only applies where YOU see fit. Doesn't that sound a bit odd to you?
No one in this country has ever dared to challenge the right of OUR military to vote, even in the 60s. LATE absentee ballots were challenged, where sometimes the military has been quietly given priviledge not allowed a US citizen outside of service. It's not LEGAL to submit votes late, and EVERYONE knows it, and in so close a race, BOTH major parties were terribly critical.
Given this knowledge, your argument sounds thin, no?
You also know nothing of my family's military history, so challenging me there is also a thin argument. Some of us lost parents in Nam, pal. Don't screw with me, there. Clear? Good. Like anyone wit' such history, having it challenged constitutes a gross insult. Even if you don't mean it, it still don't feel so good, y'know?
If you're going to stick to being lateralist, that's your choice. I'm not. I've declared no party, here. I am a moderator, here. I don't take a side without carefully examining the information of all sides whenever possible. You, sir, declare your party to be Republican. I argue mistakes of a state in it's voting practice. You slam the opposing party, and point fingers as if I HAD to be of such a party to argue. We both know better. I enjoy a good, reasoned discussion, though.
Republicans have also gone to court over voting. This is a weak argument, in that it doesn't account for the fact that Florida screwed up it's voting practices, and was to toss thousands of votes in a very close election. I would expect the same behavior of either party, to be honest. That Jeb Bush was dumb enough NOT to focus on this was his mistake. He HAD to know the whole nation was watching the state of the candidate's brother. Steve, y'don't speak as a man with a lot of historical knowledge here. Check the history books for information about when votes were challenged, and by whom, and you'll find that each and every political party that ever gained dominance in this country has done so. That's legal. What is soft in that avenue of argument is in the declaration that law against a failing is solely political. There were votes lost. What if it was YOUR vote, sir. What if YOUR candidate, of whatever party, lost, and YOUR vote was lost due to a state-wide mishandling of votes. What then when you find that most other states suffer no such problem.
Folks get tired of such a notion.
Going to court is a priviledge all citizens of the United States have. It's part of being American. Don't like that? Move to a country that doesn't allow it's voting system to be challenged. The US does. Always will, judging by the response to that from the national media. Paper sales were boomin'.
As for Biggles, do you KNOW he has no knowledge of our system? I've a grasp of the political systems of England, Canada and Australia. You can't have known that. Few do, or did, until now. The US political system is familiar to many, as it's the basis for democratic politics these days. I can dig your apologizing, and respect it. Please believe that a man can know more than one political system. This is even MORE true outside of the US, especially with CNN broadcast so broadly.
As for Bush declining, why would he not? He won. Who's gonna grouse about such when they have what they want? Not many, clearly.
It's a convolved situation, the questioning of the voting system. Votes could be done better, WITHOUT going to complicated computer systems. Other states have done so. The origin of this thread was about Florida failing to have rectified it's nationally-known screw-ups. They still should, as they're messing up the votes of thousands of Americans. Voting is an American right. Thus, they're messing with the rights of thousands of Americans.
Simple, no?
Wouldn't matter WHICH party was dominant in that state. American rights are clearly drawn. It's just not right to leave such a mess uncorrected. That's where I am, with this.
Jo, New Zealand is beautiful. It's also teeny, and technologically behind over much of the island.
kurchatovium, good point, man! Responsibility for all, please. With fries. It's a known truth that whomever WASN'T checkin' their voter cards before, is now.
futher political ruminations,
dvnc
areenactor said:
Steve, one of us needs a run to the local library, to check their data. You do have a lack of information. I'll further clarify.
There's nothing wrong with challenging an illegal activity, AND the law's very clear on voting, and for good reason. Change the law, first, man, and THEN challenge. Right now, you're arguing that the law only applies where YOU see fit. Doesn't that sound a bit odd to you?
No one in this country has ever dared to challenge the right of OUR military to vote, even in the 60s. LATE absentee ballots were challenged, where sometimes the military has been quietly given priviledge not allowed a US citizen outside of service. It's not LEGAL to submit votes late, and EVERYONE knows it, and in so close a race, BOTH major parties were terribly critical.
Given this knowledge, your argument sounds thin, no?
You also know nothing of my family's military history, so challenging me there is also a thin argument. Some of us lost parents in Nam, pal. Don't screw with me, there. Clear? Good. Like anyone wit' such history, having it challenged constitutes a gross insult. Even if you don't mean it, it still don't feel so good, y'know?
If you're going to stick to being lateralist, that's your choice. I'm not. I've declared no party, here. I am a moderator, here. I don't take a side without carefully examining the information of all sides whenever possible. You, sir, declare your party to be Republican. I argue mistakes of a state in it's voting practice. You slam the opposing party, and point fingers as if I HAD to be of such a party to argue. We both know better. I enjoy a good, reasoned discussion, though.
Republicans have also gone to court over voting. This is a weak argument, in that it doesn't account for the fact that Florida screwed up it's voting practices, and was to toss thousands of votes in a very close election. I would expect the same behavior of either party, to be honest. That Jeb Bush was dumb enough NOT to focus on this was his mistake. He HAD to know the whole nation was watching the state of the candidate's brother. Steve, y'don't speak as a man with a lot of historical knowledge here. Check the history books for information about when votes were challenged, and by whom, and you'll find that each and every political party that ever gained dominance in this country has done so. That's legal. What is soft in that avenue of argument is in the declaration that law against a failing is solely political. There were votes lost. What if it was YOUR vote, sir. What if YOUR candidate, of whatever party, lost, and YOUR vote was lost due to a state-wide mishandling of votes. What then when you find that most other states suffer no such problem.
Folks get tired of such a notion.
Going to court is a priviledge all citizens of the United States have. It's part of being American. Don't like that? Move to a country that doesn't allow it's voting system to be challenged. The US does. Always will, judging by the response to that from the national media. Paper sales were boomin'.
As for Biggles, do you KNOW he has no knowledge of our system? I've a grasp of the political systems of England, Canada and Australia. You can't have known that. Few do, or did, until now. The US political system is familiar to many, as it's the basis for democratic politics these days. I can dig your apologizing, and respect it. Please believe that a man can know more than one political system. This is even MORE true outside of the US, especially with CNN broadcast so broadly.
As for Bush declining, why would he not? He won. Who's gonna grouse about such when they have what they want? Not many, clearly.
It's a convolved situation, the questioning of the voting system. Votes could be done better, WITHOUT going to complicated computer systems. Other states have done so. The origin of this thread was about Florida failing to have rectified it's nationally-known screw-ups. They still should, as they're messing up the votes of thousands of Americans. Voting is an American right. Thus, they're messing with the rights of thousands of Americans.
Simple, no?
Wouldn't matter WHICH party was dominant in that state. American rights are clearly drawn. It's just not right to leave such a mess uncorrected. That's where I am, with this.
Jo, New Zealand is beautiful. It's also teeny, and technologically behind over much of the island.
kurchatovium, good point, man! Responsibility for all, please. With fries. It's a known truth that whomever WASN'T checkin' their voter cards before, is now.
futher political ruminations,
dvnc
D
Deleted member 2452
Guest
dvnc, wait a minute!
i never, and i mean never, said anythinbg insulting in any way about you, and your family, and the military! where you get that is beyond me? i think you're reading something thats not there! you have mis-judged me sir! and don't call me pal. DO YOU GET THAT?
as far as the military votes in the last election, you are the one who is mistaken! they were in on time, and as a rule are counted last. they are all sent to the base in florida, thats why they are counted there, and not in the troops home states.
biggles may well know american politics, just as i know about the political systems of other countries. i just choose not to argue with out siders about an american issue. i won't debate aussie politics with him, but i could, as i stated before. i just feel it's rude to bash someone else's system.
why wouldn't bush go to court? you say cause he won. my point was that he could have, and didn't! there were some very clear instances of voter fraud, and election judge cheating, that could have turned close states, but still he didn't. why? cause he has class, and is not a whiner, like gore! yes, the abitity to go to court in in the election laws. but it took a democrat to do it. you say i am not well read, and don't know the facts (valed insults, but that's ok)and should go to the library. so, enlighten, please. when, and who went to court over an election loss(on the republican side).
as for declareing myself to be a republican. i'm really a conservative, who'll vote for any candidate who expresses views i like. more of those seem to be republican than any other political party.
i never, and i mean never, said anythinbg insulting in any way about you, and your family, and the military! where you get that is beyond me? i think you're reading something thats not there! you have mis-judged me sir! and don't call me pal. DO YOU GET THAT?
as far as the military votes in the last election, you are the one who is mistaken! they were in on time, and as a rule are counted last. they are all sent to the base in florida, thats why they are counted there, and not in the troops home states.
biggles may well know american politics, just as i know about the political systems of other countries. i just choose not to argue with out siders about an american issue. i won't debate aussie politics with him, but i could, as i stated before. i just feel it's rude to bash someone else's system.
why wouldn't bush go to court? you say cause he won. my point was that he could have, and didn't! there were some very clear instances of voter fraud, and election judge cheating, that could have turned close states, but still he didn't. why? cause he has class, and is not a whiner, like gore! yes, the abitity to go to court in in the election laws. but it took a democrat to do it. you say i am not well read, and don't know the facts (valed insults, but that's ok)and should go to the library. so, enlighten, please. when, and who went to court over an election loss(on the republican side).
as for declareing myself to be a republican. i'm really a conservative, who'll vote for any candidate who expresses views i like. more of those seem to be republican than any other political party.
Re: dvnc, wait a minute!
Bein' as my family has military service, the notion of my supporting anything derisive of the military is what's of insult to me, though, again, I can see where you don't understand why this would be insulting to me. Imagine my questioning your support of the services, sir. Your statement questions anyone whose party you don't KNOW to be Republican, and you've made pointed your opinion that your only opposition consists of Democrats. That's it, in a nutshell. If I'm debating you, and I am, then I fall, by your argument, into the camp of those you say unjustly persecute the voting rights of this nation's defense. Follow me? I figure you do.
If a pal you're not, though, so be it. That's your call, and you've now made it. The notion is quizzical, in such a debate, and I question whether this is too heated a discussion for you, with such a statement. No logic behind it, if you follow me.
The military votes that were in on time to the polls weren't questioned. The ones that weren't were questioned. Legally, there's no way to do anything to the military votes otherwise. Legally, they're questionable. Betcha that the military doesn't slack on that one again. Everyone slips eventually, though, and our military is no exception to that rule, nor did they declare complete innocence, there. Again, that's from the papers. A political party in the US can't prevent a military branch from voting within legal bounds.
I still disagree with why Bush didn't go to court. You and I disagree there. The difference between us appears to be that I won't insult either party, nor the individuals running for office. You just did. You just called our former Vice President a whiner, and have repeatedly accused an entire political party of negligent behavior.
A correction of your interpretation of my statement concerning your knowledge of this Florida voter fraud - I meant no insult. I still mean no insult.
As for doing your research for you, when you aren't going to, why bother? Your declared party was responsible for a crimes requiring an impeachment. You do recall former President Nixon, yes? My point was, and still is, that there's no political party that has ever gained dominance in the US that has no court dealings, crime and questionable behavior. They're still men, capable of the same weaknesses as men OUTSIDE of politics.
All of this STILL doesn't take away from the fact that Florida STILL has not corrected it's voting system, and kurchatovium is still correct that folks ought to do better checking of their voter cards.
If you're gonna get heated about this, Steve, I'm not playin'. I'll take my toys and go home, dig? 😉 Seriously, it's a debate, man. Are you finding it's still worth having asked me not to call you pal? Was it worth that?
No longer your pal, at your demand,
dvnc
areenactor said:
Bein' as my family has military service, the notion of my supporting anything derisive of the military is what's of insult to me, though, again, I can see where you don't understand why this would be insulting to me. Imagine my questioning your support of the services, sir. Your statement questions anyone whose party you don't KNOW to be Republican, and you've made pointed your opinion that your only opposition consists of Democrats. That's it, in a nutshell. If I'm debating you, and I am, then I fall, by your argument, into the camp of those you say unjustly persecute the voting rights of this nation's defense. Follow me? I figure you do.
If a pal you're not, though, so be it. That's your call, and you've now made it. The notion is quizzical, in such a debate, and I question whether this is too heated a discussion for you, with such a statement. No logic behind it, if you follow me.
The military votes that were in on time to the polls weren't questioned. The ones that weren't were questioned. Legally, there's no way to do anything to the military votes otherwise. Legally, they're questionable. Betcha that the military doesn't slack on that one again. Everyone slips eventually, though, and our military is no exception to that rule, nor did they declare complete innocence, there. Again, that's from the papers. A political party in the US can't prevent a military branch from voting within legal bounds.
I still disagree with why Bush didn't go to court. You and I disagree there. The difference between us appears to be that I won't insult either party, nor the individuals running for office. You just did. You just called our former Vice President a whiner, and have repeatedly accused an entire political party of negligent behavior.
A correction of your interpretation of my statement concerning your knowledge of this Florida voter fraud - I meant no insult. I still mean no insult.
As for doing your research for you, when you aren't going to, why bother? Your declared party was responsible for a crimes requiring an impeachment. You do recall former President Nixon, yes? My point was, and still is, that there's no political party that has ever gained dominance in the US that has no court dealings, crime and questionable behavior. They're still men, capable of the same weaknesses as men OUTSIDE of politics.
All of this STILL doesn't take away from the fact that Florida STILL has not corrected it's voting system, and kurchatovium is still correct that folks ought to do better checking of their voter cards.
If you're gonna get heated about this, Steve, I'm not playin'. I'll take my toys and go home, dig? 😉 Seriously, it's a debate, man. Are you finding it's still worth having asked me not to call you pal? Was it worth that?
No longer your pal, at your demand,
dvnc
shark said:
Excuse me???????? If this was a discussion that was taking place in a house of American politics and the result would actually affect Americans in some way, I could understand that statement shark. Given that this is an international discussion forum and guys and gals of all nationalitites kick ideas around all day (irespesctive of where said topic originates from) you just left me utterly non-plussed. Where do you get the idea that someone who's not of American birth has no place in a discussion about international politics? America is the most powerful and all-pervasive country on the face of the planet. It's politics, military affairs and economics affect EVERY other country to a greater or lesser degree. Where then, do you get off by refusing to even acknowledge someone's point of view just because they're Australian? (Or at the very least refusing to address their point of view in your answer.)
Aw, see? Now we've got more UK folks upset over exclusionary discussion practices. Sorry, BigJim. I find your input valid. Not everyone here shares shark and areenactor's views.
Steve,
After moments on a silly ole web search engine, I found where Bush was filin' suit in Supreme Court to surpress the count of votes in Florida back in 2000:
http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/Bush-Supreme-Court.htm
That event's online.
Now, if I could find better historical references online, I'd go after the other data you wanted. Pal or not, I'm capable of such searches.
There's another great legal example of what actually happened here:
http://news.findlaw.com/legalnews/us/election/election2000timeline.html
Another here:
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/election/electiontime.htm
Perhaps I'll do more, later. Point is, there's a lot of data on that event, legally documented and available online, even. More in libraries.
Florida's system was proven to have failed. It still does. That was the topic here. Still should be. I hope Florida, and anywhere else usin' that system, updates to somethin' more reliable, though I *still* find kurchatovium's statement concerning personal responsibility in checkin' your voter card to be a good one.
Steve,
After moments on a silly ole web search engine, I found where Bush was filin' suit in Supreme Court to surpress the count of votes in Florida back in 2000:
http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/Bush-Supreme-Court.htm
That event's online.
Now, if I could find better historical references online, I'd go after the other data you wanted. Pal or not, I'm capable of such searches.
There's another great legal example of what actually happened here:
http://news.findlaw.com/legalnews/us/election/election2000timeline.html
Another here:
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/election/electiontime.htm
Perhaps I'll do more, later. Point is, there's a lot of data on that event, legally documented and available online, even. More in libraries.
Florida's system was proven to have failed. It still does. That was the topic here. Still should be. I hope Florida, and anywhere else usin' that system, updates to somethin' more reliable, though I *still* find kurchatovium's statement concerning personal responsibility in checkin' your voter card to be a good one.
D
Deleted member 2452
Guest
dvnc, let's admit what's going on here
you didn't call me pal in a friendly "hey buddy" kind of way.
you said it in a "let's step out side pal" kind of way.
YOU used the term in a threatening, derogitory way. if you can control your self from making any further emotional outbursts of this mannor, then fine we can continue this highly enjoyable discourse.
but i don't take well to threats, and how you said it was a "let's go out side and settle this like men" statement.
as far as the military getting the votes in on time; the law allows for late arrivle, as long as they were activly in transit. this was allowed due the the vageries of the wind during the sailing ship days. as long as the votes were cast by the troops before the dead line, they have been respected, no matter when arrived.
bush went to court to stop an incomplete count. the dems wanted to recount only select districts. bush was not attempting to over turn an election result. big difference by my reconing.
in reading this (for spelling) i realized something; i am saying democrates through out this debate. maybe, just maybe i should be blamming just gore, and not the whole party? i'll have to give this some thought...
till later, and still respectfull.(i have to be, cause you're a mod and can just delete my posts)lol
steve
you didn't call me pal in a friendly "hey buddy" kind of way.
you said it in a "let's step out side pal" kind of way.
YOU used the term in a threatening, derogitory way. if you can control your self from making any further emotional outbursts of this mannor, then fine we can continue this highly enjoyable discourse.
but i don't take well to threats, and how you said it was a "let's go out side and settle this like men" statement.
as far as the military getting the votes in on time; the law allows for late arrivle, as long as they were activly in transit. this was allowed due the the vageries of the wind during the sailing ship days. as long as the votes were cast by the troops before the dead line, they have been respected, no matter when arrived.
bush went to court to stop an incomplete count. the dems wanted to recount only select districts. bush was not attempting to over turn an election result. big difference by my reconing.
in reading this (for spelling) i realized something; i am saying democrates through out this debate. maybe, just maybe i should be blamming just gore, and not the whole party? i'll have to give this some thought...
till later, and still respectfull.(i have to be, cause you're a mod and can just delete my posts)lol
steve
D
Deleted member 2452
Guest
Florida's system was proven to have failed. It still does. That was the topic here. Still should be. I hope Florida, and anywhere else usin' that system, updates to somethin' more reliable, though I *still* find kurchatovium's statement concerning personal responsibility in checkin' your voter card to be a good one. [/B][/QUOTE]
here in illinois we still use the punch card system, but fixed it in a much cheaper way. in the primary last spring the judge just goes over the card, and asks if the voter ment to vote for a cadidate, where the chad isn't removed entirely. if the voter says yes, then the judge removes the chad. see no multi million dollar change, just common sense!
hey dvnc, i said the same thing about personal responsibility! why didn't you like it when i said it???
bigjim, and biggles, and hal, and anyone else can join in this, or any other discussion, i nor shark, nor anyone else said they couldn't! i just said since it is an american election issue, i'll not resond to biggles. he can contribute, i just may, or may not reply to him. see, just that simple🙂
steve
here in illinois we still use the punch card system, but fixed it in a much cheaper way. in the primary last spring the judge just goes over the card, and asks if the voter ment to vote for a cadidate, where the chad isn't removed entirely. if the voter says yes, then the judge removes the chad. see no multi million dollar change, just common sense!
hey dvnc, i said the same thing about personal responsibility! why didn't you like it when i said it???
bigjim, and biggles, and hal, and anyone else can join in this, or any other discussion, i nor shark, nor anyone else said they couldn't! i just said since it is an american election issue, i'll not resond to biggles. he can contribute, i just may, or may not reply to him. see, just that simple🙂
steve
areenactor said:
That's fine Steve, and totally your own choice. You might notice though that I quoted Shark before my reply, not yourself. It wasn't selective replying I was objecting too; it was comments like "they can stick to their own affairs" that riled me slightly. The last person I heard say that in the politcal arena was Robert Mugabwe.
kurchatovium
Wielder of 100 Feathers
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2001
- Messages
- 127,637
- Points
- 48
Actually I don't really mind input from any source, doesn't mean I will agree with it. I will respond to it if I'm awake enough to write coherently.
Couple of points. Steve did mention taking responsibilty for your own vote first I was merely agreeing with those sentiments whole heartedly. I think I acknowledged that in my first post.
Secondly I think that if one strictly stuck to mechanical recounting of votes in a close election you could avoid the all the chad crap and partisan bickering. You load up the ballots, recount, if your candidate is still behind you lose.
The 2000 election was interesting in one other regard had Gore asked for a manual recount of all of Florida precincts he might have won. By limiting himself to heavily Democratic precincts he ended up not finding many more votes for himself and sometimes even more for his opponents. Many of the newspapers that analyzed the results of the election came to this conclusion.
Generally manual recounts are issued only if there is a proven illegal act in a given area or some sort of natural disaster that caused problems in the voting. Mechanical recounts in Florida I think are done whenever an election is extremely close.
Last point. Gore messed up. He alienated enough of his own party to get them to vote for Nader. Any part of that 4-5% of the votes would have easily pushed him over the top. He didn't have Clinton stump for him very much, almost pushed him away. Does not make a lot of sense for a president that was that popular. He could have made the whole Florida thing a non-issue had he had a more intelligent campaign.
Okay here is Kurchatovium's easy voting guide (Florida are you listening):
a) Voting should be made as easy as possible for the populace.
b) Be responsible for your own vote.
c) Any recounts should be done mechanically or by computer if possible to avoid any partisan politics. If manual recounting must be done as a last resort it should be done quickly within 2 weeks to avoid damaging the ballots and those lovely chads. The manual recounting then must be done in the prescence of represenatives of both parties and the media.
d) Only one recount is allowed. Those results are then final.
Anyway I think thats more than my two cents more like a buck forty.
Couple of points. Steve did mention taking responsibilty for your own vote first I was merely agreeing with those sentiments whole heartedly. I think I acknowledged that in my first post.
Secondly I think that if one strictly stuck to mechanical recounting of votes in a close election you could avoid the all the chad crap and partisan bickering. You load up the ballots, recount, if your candidate is still behind you lose.
The 2000 election was interesting in one other regard had Gore asked for a manual recount of all of Florida precincts he might have won. By limiting himself to heavily Democratic precincts he ended up not finding many more votes for himself and sometimes even more for his opponents. Many of the newspapers that analyzed the results of the election came to this conclusion.
Generally manual recounts are issued only if there is a proven illegal act in a given area or some sort of natural disaster that caused problems in the voting. Mechanical recounts in Florida I think are done whenever an election is extremely close.
Last point. Gore messed up. He alienated enough of his own party to get them to vote for Nader. Any part of that 4-5% of the votes would have easily pushed him over the top. He didn't have Clinton stump for him very much, almost pushed him away. Does not make a lot of sense for a president that was that popular. He could have made the whole Florida thing a non-issue had he had a more intelligent campaign.
Okay here is Kurchatovium's easy voting guide (Florida are you listening):
a) Voting should be made as easy as possible for the populace.
b) Be responsible for your own vote.
c) Any recounts should be done mechanically or by computer if possible to avoid any partisan politics. If manual recounting must be done as a last resort it should be done quickly within 2 weeks to avoid damaging the ballots and those lovely chads. The manual recounting then must be done in the prescence of represenatives of both parties and the media.
d) Only one recount is allowed. Those results are then final.
Anyway I think thats more than my two cents more like a buck forty.
ShiningIce
3rd Level Green Feather
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2002
- Messages
- 4,702
- Points
- 36
Oh, and I suppose good ol W had nothing to do with using the police to hold back hundreds of Blacks from voting. Get real! The man's a thief and he's not MY president. 😡 😡 
kurchatovium
Wielder of 100 Feathers
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2001
- Messages
- 127,637
- Points
- 48
If I am not mistaken the incident to which you refer was a legitmate case where the police were pursuing a suspect and yes it did cause traffic problems in a predominantly black area. Even most liberals stopped whining about that one when they heard the facts.
Last edited:
Biggles of 266
1st Level Red Feather
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2001
- Messages
- 1,126
- Points
- 36
Dear Steve,
if you'd like to debate Australian politics, I'd be very glad to. I'm a keen student of state and federal government. Should we do this in another thread or are you happy to use this one?
What do you think of the new leader of the Democrats? I thought that the Australian media, especially the commercial networks, focused in on one aspect of his personality rather than his political credentials.
How about the children overboard thing? Both major parties are arguing about it, and the Liberals seem to have covered up vital information.
Since you said you could debate with me, I'm glad to be able to have someone to talk to about my country rather than theirs.
your pal,
Biggles
ps, if anyone else wants to talk about Australian politics, I'd be very glad to. Add me to msn messenger [email protected]
if you'd like to debate Australian politics, I'd be very glad to. I'm a keen student of state and federal government. Should we do this in another thread or are you happy to use this one?
What do you think of the new leader of the Democrats? I thought that the Australian media, especially the commercial networks, focused in on one aspect of his personality rather than his political credentials.
How about the children overboard thing? Both major parties are arguing about it, and the Liberals seem to have covered up vital information.
Since you said you could debate with me, I'm glad to be able to have someone to talk to about my country rather than theirs.
your pal,
Biggles
ps, if anyone else wants to talk about Australian politics, I'd be very glad to. Add me to msn messenger [email protected]
D
Deleted member 2452
Guest
hey ice, how about the cheating in wisconsin?
democraste judges, not campagine workers, but judges, were caught getting drunks off "skid row" and having them claime to be people that didn't show up to vote. they paid them with cartons of cigarettes. arrests were made, but no votes were thrown out!
you may not like him, but he IS your president! with your attitude you should never join the military, in the military you lose the right to say things like that!
steve
democraste judges, not campagine workers, but judges, were caught getting drunks off "skid row" and having them claime to be people that didn't show up to vote. they paid them with cartons of cigarettes. arrests were made, but no votes were thrown out!
you may not like him, but he IS your president! with your attitude you should never join the military, in the military you lose the right to say things like that!
steve
Re: dvnc, let's admit what's going on here
Steve, you've assumed my intent, and you're wrong. I don't USE the word "pal" in hostile conflict. Not part of my speech pathos, sir. Now that I've clarified your mistake, would you care to reconsider your commentary above?
Concerning military votes, I'll leave it as an excercise for the viewer to re-read the easily-locatable articles concerning this topic, online from 2000, concerning this. Already found them once. Posted some links, even.
If your reconing is like my reckoning, then I reckon you didn't either didn't read, didn't understand, or approve of Bush's actions in that article. A quote for you:
"George W. Bush called on the U.S. Supreme Court to halt the
vote counting in Florida altogether."
This, from the article mentioned in my first link.
Both sides played that, Steve. You're mistaken if you believe they didn't, 'cause there's evidence apparent in the last election, which was WELL publicized. Your supposition, above, is wrong. He was for stopping the vote count altogether.
Blaming any one person or group for the errant vote handling of Florida, and errant political actions of both major US political parties, is simply ridiculous. Both parties already TRIED that, and it made the press easily. All articles are online and read-able. Re-read-able, even.
What does my being a mod have to do with our discussion, sir? That's a strange angle to take. If I was going to remove things, or alter them, would I not already have done so? I don't bother with such actions. Controlling my own actions can do better for me. Mods don't just randomly delete posts, or pull what personally doesn't agree with 'em. There'd be a lot more gone, were that so, as folks DO disagree with me, and make statements with which I don't agree. Part of the ethic of moderating is not enforcing your perspective on the membership. That you bring that into this smacks of distraction. May we please go back to a focus on the Florida election process, as was originally the case with this thread?
Oh, and while you're mentioning spelling, Democrats has no "e". Trivia, but noticable when you keep misspelling your declared opposition.
You said it, alright, but then blamed a whole national political party. That's not personal responsibility. That's finger-pointing. Clearly, I don't find it wholly accurate finger-pointing.
You DID say that Biggles should stay outta this, on 9/16, too:
Remember this? That's what riled up those here of other nations. Please, Steve, read through this thread from the start. I just did, to make sure I wasn't misremembering. Perhaps you're misremembering, sir. In one statement you declare dislike, and in another, a mere desire to ignore. Definite difference, there.
I do agree with you, and others here, that the man in office as President IS the President of the entirety of the United States of America. There's no choice on it anymore. It's an "if you don't like it get out" sort of deal. The man's doin' the job, and handlin' it well enough.
It's still an interesting thread, but if we're all in agreement that Florida needs to handle it's voting better, especially if they can't grow to grasp kurchatovium's simple and effective precepts, then perhaps we should just open a thread to continue whatever other arguments have started here. Props t'ya, kurtchatovium, for the well-stated views.
Still not Steve's pal, by his own declaration, *sigh*,
dvnc
areenactor said:you didn't call me pal in a friendly "hey buddy" kind of way.
you said it in a "let's step out side pal" kind of way.
YOU used the term in a threatening, derogitory way. if you can control your self from making any further emotional outbursts of this mannor, then fine we can continue this highly enjoyable discourse.
but i don't take well to threats, and how you said it was a "let's go out side and settle this like men" statement.
as far as the military getting the votes in on time; the law allows for late arrivle, as long as they were activly in transit. this was allowed due the the vageries of the wind during the sailing ship days. as long as the votes were cast by the troops before the dead line, they have been respected, no matter when arrived.
bush went to court to stop an incomplete count. the dems wanted to recount only select districts. bush was not attempting to over turn an election result. big difference by my reconing.
in reading this (for spelling) i realized something; i am saying democrates through out this debate. maybe, just maybe i should be blamming just gore, and not the whole party? i'll have to give this some thought...
till later, and still respectfull.(i have to be, cause you're a mod and can just delete my posts)lol
steve
Steve, you've assumed my intent, and you're wrong. I don't USE the word "pal" in hostile conflict. Not part of my speech pathos, sir. Now that I've clarified your mistake, would you care to reconsider your commentary above?
Concerning military votes, I'll leave it as an excercise for the viewer to re-read the easily-locatable articles concerning this topic, online from 2000, concerning this. Already found them once. Posted some links, even.
If your reconing is like my reckoning, then I reckon you didn't either didn't read, didn't understand, or approve of Bush's actions in that article. A quote for you:
"George W. Bush called on the U.S. Supreme Court to halt the
vote counting in Florida altogether."
This, from the article mentioned in my first link.
Both sides played that, Steve. You're mistaken if you believe they didn't, 'cause there's evidence apparent in the last election, which was WELL publicized. Your supposition, above, is wrong. He was for stopping the vote count altogether.
Blaming any one person or group for the errant vote handling of Florida, and errant political actions of both major US political parties, is simply ridiculous. Both parties already TRIED that, and it made the press easily. All articles are online and read-able. Re-read-able, even.
What does my being a mod have to do with our discussion, sir? That's a strange angle to take. If I was going to remove things, or alter them, would I not already have done so? I don't bother with such actions. Controlling my own actions can do better for me. Mods don't just randomly delete posts, or pull what personally doesn't agree with 'em. There'd be a lot more gone, were that so, as folks DO disagree with me, and make statements with which I don't agree. Part of the ethic of moderating is not enforcing your perspective on the membership. That you bring that into this smacks of distraction. May we please go back to a focus on the Florida election process, as was originally the case with this thread?
Oh, and while you're mentioning spelling, Democrats has no "e". Trivia, but noticable when you keep misspelling your declared opposition.
You said it, alright, but then blamed a whole national political party. That's not personal responsibility. That's finger-pointing. Clearly, I don't find it wholly accurate finger-pointing.
You DID say that Biggles should stay outta this, on 9/16, too:
Remember this? That's what riled up those here of other nations. Please, Steve, read through this thread from the start. I just did, to make sure I wasn't misremembering. Perhaps you're misremembering, sir. In one statement you declare dislike, and in another, a mere desire to ignore. Definite difference, there.
I do agree with you, and others here, that the man in office as President IS the President of the entirety of the United States of America. There's no choice on it anymore. It's an "if you don't like it get out" sort of deal. The man's doin' the job, and handlin' it well enough.
It's still an interesting thread, but if we're all in agreement that Florida needs to handle it's voting better, especially if they can't grow to grasp kurchatovium's simple and effective precepts, then perhaps we should just open a thread to continue whatever other arguments have started here. Props t'ya, kurtchatovium, for the well-stated views.
Still not Steve's pal, by his own declaration, *sigh*,
dvnc
D
Deleted member 2452
Guest
dvnc, man can you twist!
your post was too long to quote, so i'll just respond to a few points that got my blood pressure up.
1) you, and i both know that when you called me pal, it was not in friendship. try to change your meaning all you like, your words do suit that easily enough, but i'm not fooled. i have always respected you, and enjoyed a cordial online relationship. i am more than willing and hopefull that such can continue, but such also has to have a basis of mutual honesty.
2) my comments about you being a mod, so i have to watch myself, were ment as a joke. it was intended to show that i harbored no grudge. if you'll re-read that post you'll find i also added the "lol" to show it was ment for laughs. your passioned response makes me wonder why you didn't realize this, or are you just trying to nit pick?
3) bush went to the u.s. supreme court cause the florida supreme court was breaking the laws of the state of florida! that is not the same and you know it! on the news this morning janet reno is still behind in the counting, which ends today. they further said that it is expected that she will be going to court to have the election over turned. she is a democrat i believe.
4) again the problem wasn't florida, the problem was, and is the mis-use of the voting system by the gore campagine. fla. has spent millions on a new system, when i believe it wasn't needed. people need to look, and read the instuctions, and check their balot, simple as that. in illinois we still us the punch system, and it's check by the judge when you turn it in. no extra money wasted, just a simple fix.
5) my problem is with biggles, not all non-americans. he is hostile to MY president, and takes any opportunity to belittle, and knock him. biggles "tag line" at the end of his posts is a good example. it is ment to make fun of pres. bush, and is taken out of context. it's continued use is offensive to me! therefore i choose not to discuss politics with him. i'll discuss the terrorist issue, and tickling, and a number of other topics with him, but not internal american politics. his bias is too evident.
your post was too long to quote, so i'll just respond to a few points that got my blood pressure up.
1) you, and i both know that when you called me pal, it was not in friendship. try to change your meaning all you like, your words do suit that easily enough, but i'm not fooled. i have always respected you, and enjoyed a cordial online relationship. i am more than willing and hopefull that such can continue, but such also has to have a basis of mutual honesty.
2) my comments about you being a mod, so i have to watch myself, were ment as a joke. it was intended to show that i harbored no grudge. if you'll re-read that post you'll find i also added the "lol" to show it was ment for laughs. your passioned response makes me wonder why you didn't realize this, or are you just trying to nit pick?
3) bush went to the u.s. supreme court cause the florida supreme court was breaking the laws of the state of florida! that is not the same and you know it! on the news this morning janet reno is still behind in the counting, which ends today. they further said that it is expected that she will be going to court to have the election over turned. she is a democrat i believe.
4) again the problem wasn't florida, the problem was, and is the mis-use of the voting system by the gore campagine. fla. has spent millions on a new system, when i believe it wasn't needed. people need to look, and read the instuctions, and check their balot, simple as that. in illinois we still us the punch system, and it's check by the judge when you turn it in. no extra money wasted, just a simple fix.
5) my problem is with biggles, not all non-americans. he is hostile to MY president, and takes any opportunity to belittle, and knock him. biggles "tag line" at the end of his posts is a good example. it is ment to make fun of pres. bush, and is taken out of context. it's continued use is offensive to me! therefore i choose not to discuss politics with him. i'll discuss the terrorist issue, and tickling, and a number of other topics with him, but not internal american politics. his bias is too evident.
Re: dvnc, man can you twist!
Sorry t'see that my responses got your blood pressure up, sir. Not my intent. Length is as is, though. I'd not short you a proper response.
I still disagree wit' you concerning my use of the word "pal". Find me a context where I've ever used it in hostility. Perhaps there is one, and I'm mistaken. I don't believe that to be the case, and know that it isn't here. I know what I mean, sir.
Glad to know that I misunderstood the mod comment in your post. I get such now and again when folks dislike an effort, and know that I take the role very seriously. My apologies for mistaking you there, sir, and for mistaking your humor. My bad.
Steve, there's articles written, like the one I'd previously posted, which show your statement in error. You've yet to acknowledge that such exists, or find me proof where it is inaccurate. You asked that I find proof in a library, and I've found such. Your turn.
Whether or not a supreme court judge has a political leaning has little to do with their legal action. Florida didn't handle their voting well in 2000, promised correction, and still has not corrected it, which was the original point of this thread. They SHOULD be smacked, legally, until they correct it, since they haven't the sense that kurchatovium illustrates repeatedly (further props t'kurchatovium).
You and I agree on this topic, though. Florida needs to straighten up it's voting system. Clearly, as the originally indicated article proves, they haven't. If Florida was as bright as Illinois, there wouldn't have been this thread. Not that *they* likely care. 😉
Concerning Biggles, do check back in this post. You already apologies for curtness to him, and others were still riled about the notion that only Americans could comment on America. This new revelation, concerning his sig line, is surprising to me, in that it's historically accurate, and shows the President as having a sense of humor. It's funny. Bush himself laughed about it. We all know he's for keepin' the country going well. I see nothing that slams the President, or I'd take offense too, as would the thousands here that are from the US. Whether or not I agree with every last act the man does, he IS the President of the United States, and as a citizen, I stand by the man. It's the unspoken allegiance due him.
After all, you know I argue your positions, yet you respect me. Biggles is just as respectable, and even opened debate on his own country. He's just into politics. Guys like him are usually better debaters than pikers like me. Do please reconsider discourse with the man. I do believe you'll find him every bit the counterpoint that I am, and better.
Gak, this is another long one. I do wish to apply brevity, but more strongly wish to make my statements very clear.
I hope the b.p. is down, life's cool, and you're lookin' at this as the online debate that it is. That we agree on the main topic is sorta amusin', after all, and that there's auxiliary to discuss simply means we're conscious of what's around us, nationally, and social enough to discuss and debate such.
I'm still hurt y'don't wanna be my pal, though. Ain't like ya fell into the ambigous state of bein' called "bub" or the like.
Haven't been in a thread this long, or interesting, since back when qjakal, Strel and I jousted points. I'm diggin' the sensibilities. You folks are an interesting lot!
dvnc
Sorry t'see that my responses got your blood pressure up, sir. Not my intent. Length is as is, though. I'd not short you a proper response.
I still disagree wit' you concerning my use of the word "pal". Find me a context where I've ever used it in hostility. Perhaps there is one, and I'm mistaken. I don't believe that to be the case, and know that it isn't here. I know what I mean, sir.
Glad to know that I misunderstood the mod comment in your post. I get such now and again when folks dislike an effort, and know that I take the role very seriously. My apologies for mistaking you there, sir, and for mistaking your humor. My bad.
Steve, there's articles written, like the one I'd previously posted, which show your statement in error. You've yet to acknowledge that such exists, or find me proof where it is inaccurate. You asked that I find proof in a library, and I've found such. Your turn.
Whether or not a supreme court judge has a political leaning has little to do with their legal action. Florida didn't handle their voting well in 2000, promised correction, and still has not corrected it, which was the original point of this thread. They SHOULD be smacked, legally, until they correct it, since they haven't the sense that kurchatovium illustrates repeatedly (further props t'kurchatovium).
You and I agree on this topic, though. Florida needs to straighten up it's voting system. Clearly, as the originally indicated article proves, they haven't. If Florida was as bright as Illinois, there wouldn't have been this thread. Not that *they* likely care. 😉
Concerning Biggles, do check back in this post. You already apologies for curtness to him, and others were still riled about the notion that only Americans could comment on America. This new revelation, concerning his sig line, is surprising to me, in that it's historically accurate, and shows the President as having a sense of humor. It's funny. Bush himself laughed about it. We all know he's for keepin' the country going well. I see nothing that slams the President, or I'd take offense too, as would the thousands here that are from the US. Whether or not I agree with every last act the man does, he IS the President of the United States, and as a citizen, I stand by the man. It's the unspoken allegiance due him.
After all, you know I argue your positions, yet you respect me. Biggles is just as respectable, and even opened debate on his own country. He's just into politics. Guys like him are usually better debaters than pikers like me. Do please reconsider discourse with the man. I do believe you'll find him every bit the counterpoint that I am, and better.
Gak, this is another long one. I do wish to apply brevity, but more strongly wish to make my statements very clear.
I hope the b.p. is down, life's cool, and you're lookin' at this as the online debate that it is. That we agree on the main topic is sorta amusin', after all, and that there's auxiliary to discuss simply means we're conscious of what's around us, nationally, and social enough to discuss and debate such.
I'm still hurt y'don't wanna be my pal, though. Ain't like ya fell into the ambigous state of bein' called "bub" or the like.
Haven't been in a thread this long, or interesting, since back when qjakal, Strel and I jousted points. I'm diggin' the sensibilities. You folks are an interesting lot!
dvnc
