Subject:
|
Re: Bush fires Guantanamo defence team
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 5 Dec 2003 19:53:44 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
355 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
|
| |
| |
I think that was the gist of Scott’s repetition of the Left’s tired “joke”.
Har, Har, Bush was selected, not elected. The fact is, however, that
Bush’s “selection” was a result of Gore contesting the election. Had not
he gone to court, Bush’s election would have stood. That the Supreme
Court “selected” Bush is entirely the result of the Democrats. And then
they cry that Bush was “selected”, not elected. Whatever.
|
Few Liberals identify the stolen election as a major current issue; we
grudgingly accept that we are, for now, stuck with the President we have, so
let’s move on.
|
Thank you. If for no other reason than its old news, ploughed ground, and
things of this nature.
| |
The lingering issue, however, is that numerous irregularities
have come to light regarding voter registration, voter denial, intimidation,
and electronic “glitches” in the Florida election. These can’t simply be
ignored in discussions of the propriety of the election count.
|
I have a sneaky suspicion that this is a lot of irregularities around the
country, but Florida just happened to receive the spotlight.
| |
Additionally,
it is very likely that Bush, Rove, (Limbaugh, O’Reilly, Hannity, Coulter) et
al would still be attacking the results of the 2000 election if it had gone
in Gore’s favor.
|
Perhaps, but then you would concede that it would be partisan pablum and white
noise on the other side as well. Fair enough by me.
| |
With that in mind, and with the extremely close 2002 election, the Republican
party would serve itself well to remember that it didn’t carry a
supermajority of the public’s opinion, and it should therefore stop ignoring
the close minority and ignoring public sentiment, all while legislating from
the extreme right.
|
A slim majority is a very difficult place from which to govern. You will always
be pissing off about half of your constituents. Better to serve the portion
with whom you agree politically?
| |
Didn’t Dubya endlessly call himself “a uniter, not a divider”? I’d like to
see him perform that role sometime before he’s booted out of office.
|
I don’t think he bargained for such vicious, unprecedented partisan opposition
by the Dems (see judical nominations). So, how much time’s he got-- 5 years?;-)
JOHN
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Bush fires Guantanamo defence team
|
| (...) Few Liberals identify the stolen election as a major current issue; we grudgingly accept that we are, for now, stuck with the President we have, so let's move on. The lingering issue, however, is that numerous irregularities have come to light (...) (21 years ago, 5-Dec-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
46 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
