Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[QUOTE=jsarno;328724]Because only if you're guilty of something should you worry about it.
What the far left needs to realize that in order to be very protected there has to be some "rights" that need to be bent. It's give and take. No one is infridging on my constitutional rights, and I like it that way.[/QUOTE]

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."

"Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security."

--Benjamin Franklin

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[QUOTE=Crazyhorse1;328779]Facts you don't seem to be aware of:

The Bufferfly ballot in Palm Beach cost Gore thousands of votes.

Florida declared 80,000 black voters inelgible by falsely declaring them to be felons. Florida imported a felon list from Texas and eliminated every black in Florida who had the same name as a Texas felon.

Gore got more votes for president in Florida than Bush did. This was by final count. I realize that you think otherwise with some reason, but you are wrong. The count you are familiar with was the result of votes cast in disputed districts. Long after the election, a complete vote count of all of Florida showed Gore to be the winner, inspite of the felon's list, and inspite of the Butterfly ballot.

Gore didn't just win Florida by actual count, he should have won Florida by tens of thousands of votes, not just a few thousand.

Note: Opinion is one thing; being wrong about the facts is another. Curiously, however, in regard to the state vote count, the correct numbers wouldn't have mattered anyway. Gore didn't ask the whole state to recount votes, so was technically not entitled to a statewide recount,

What the recount did, however, was vindicate the maligned exit poll, which turned out to be correct and, indeed, did show that the Bush campaign had indeed engaged in funny business.

As we now know, the Bush machine has been fundamentally dishonest to an appalling degree since first appearing on the national scene. The Iraq war, tax giveaways to the rich, corruption, violations of civic liberties, spying, etc. had just been predictable aspects of its nature.

No other administration has ever been just a threat to the truth and liberty as well. Bush is truly not just the worse, but the most destructive and dangerous president in U.S. history. He has disgraced everyone who has ever believed in him.[/QUOTE]

Well if Gore wins his own damn state of Tennessee then he gets enough electoral votes and Florida isn't even an issue. Where's the outcry over that?

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[quote=Crazyhorse1;328780]Total nonsense.[/quote]
Because a right winger said it, or because there is evidence he is still alive?

Just curious...

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

didn't they just release a new bin laden video? i really think if anyone in this administration thought he was dead, it would be a big announcement on fox news

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[QUOTE=Crazyhorse1;328775]Try reading something or watching a news show.[/QUOTE]

This will likely be the only response I make to you since you have no clue what it takes to debate, rather you prefer to assume and throw insults.
So my suggestion to you sir is to try to read OBJECTIVE articles, and actually see things for what they really are.
If you choose to listen to all the same left wing drivel then that is your choice, but don't assume things are not the way they are just because you read something at one point. Trust me, I read more than most people, and I am very well educated, you might actually know that if you were here for longer than 107 posts.
You don't have to like what I say, hell that's America...I know I am the minority in my thinking, but use links to disprove me, not say you need to read more. That just makes you look lazy and unwilling to debate. Especially since you don't seem to know your ass from your elbow.
So the ball is in your court. You can either get pissed at my comments, or you can take them to heart and try to make an actual debate.

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[QUOTE=GhettoDogAllStars;328823]"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."

"Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security."

--Benjamin Franklin[/QUOTE]

Sadly, I agree with you...and Ben.
Either way you look at it, we're not in a good scenario. If we don't boost safety, we are in more danger, if we do boost safety we then we infringe on rights. It's basically a catch 22. Fact is, we have been "hated" so long that this was bound to happen. That's what happens when you're #1, everyone wants to take you down a peg. This is why every great government in history has failed at some point. Make no mistake about it, this one will too.

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[QUOTE=70Chip;328791]I've never blocked any poster, but you are temting me. [/QUOTE]


You're not the only one.
While I have been on the other side of your wrath :D I have always respected you and most people here with your willingness to have a constructive argument. I will never in a million years agree with anything the left says, but I can certainly respect it, and think about what you've said.
Fact is, 99.999999% of us will never change our minds here, but all of us can open our ears and listen without being a jackass.

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[quote=dmek25;328820]matty, you started out civil, but have got more and more intense with your posts. why? because some people see a spade, but yet call it a diamond?[/quote]

huh? I've barely contributed to this thread.

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[QUOTE=jsarno;328843]Sadly, I agree with you...and Ben.
Either way you look at it, we're not in a good scenario. If we don't boost safety, we are in more danger, if we do boost safety we then we infringe on rights. It's basically a catch 22. Fact is, we have been "hated" so long that this was bound to happen. That's what happens when you're #1, everyone wants to take you down a peg. This is why every great government in history has failed at some point. Make no mistake about it, this one will too.[/QUOTE]

Yes, it is a catch 22 -- you can't have both. I just wish America would understand that. IMO, it is one of those very rare absolutes. If you sacrifice any liberty for security, it is only a matter of time until you have no liberties -- and therefore no security.

I think those quotes offer good insight into the minds of the Founders, and the purpose they saw for the government. It is clear to me that the Founders did not deem personal security a responsibility of the government. Instead, the government's role was to ensure that the people's liberties were protected. I guess we have just gotten lazy and weak over the years, and now we expect the government to protect us.

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;328852]huh? I've barely contributed to this thread.[/QUOTE]

Some of us are still waiting for your 1 positive on GW.

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[QUOTE=GhettoDogAllStars;328854]Yes, it is a catch 22 -- you can't have both. I just wish America would understand that. IMO, it is one of those very rare absolutes. If you sacrifice any liberty for security, it is only a matter of time until you have no liberties -- and therefore no security.

I think those quotes offer good insight into the minds of the Founders, and the purpose they saw for the government. It is clear to me that the Founders did not deem personal security a responsibility of the government. Instead, the government's role was to ensure that the people's liberties were protected. I guess we have just gotten lazy and weak over the years, and now we expect the government to protect us.[/QUOTE]

I 100% agree. Very good post.

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[quote=jsarno;328855]Some of us are still waiting for your 1 positive on GW.[/quote]

I've probably gotten more laughter out of him than any other President.

Anytime he opens his mouth something laughable is bound to come out.

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;328857]I've probably gotten more laughter out of him than any other President.

Anytime he opens his mouth something laughable is bound to come out.[/QUOTE]


While I admit, I chuckled at that comment from you, that is in no way a positive. Try again.

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;328787]So, on the one hand the Gore camp said, "The butterfly ballot was confusing and we should look beyond the voter technical mistakes to try to discern whom they really wanted to vote for" and on the other hand said, "The military personnel technically submitted their votes late and we shouldn't count them even though we know whom they wanted to vote for." The hypocrisy is almost laughable. The notion that Bush stole the election and Gore didn't try to do the same thing makes me laugh.

Finally, I've never heard about 80,000 black voters being disenfranchised via some criminal scheme. The numbers I heard about were much lower and due to various computer glitches. Those allegations were investigated by the Civil Rights Commission and various other independent organizations and there was no solid evidence of a criminal conspiracy.[/quote]

Frankly, you don't know what you are talking about. Sixty minutes reported on what you never heard of, as well as virtually every talk show and newspaper in the country. Blacks from the House of Delegates went to the Senate with the material. All that was needed was for one Senator to back the protest for there to be a major investigation of the already proven disenfranchisement. Gore asked all the Senators in the Senate not to support the House protest. He was apparently in a patriotic mood and decided not to vote for the Congressional investigation. Gore voting "no" was shown on nation television, over and over. No disenfranchisements resulting from computer cliches were protested or alledged.
I realize you believe what you keep saying, but you are factually incorrect again and again. People cannot develope worthwhile opinions without correct data. The prevailing fault of the Bush supporters in this thread is that they are reasoning from incorrect data or attitudes that derive from ignorance of data. Virtually everything jsarno say is wrong, not because of his logic, which is fine, but rather the nonsensical myth and pseudo knowledge he reasons from.
Jeb Bush himself was suspected of being behind employing the Florida Computer firm that used the Texas felon list to knock identically named blacks from the the Florida voting list. There is no doubt that the fraud occurred, only doubt about the identities of the people who sat it up. The computer firm that perpetuated the fraud was paid by the state of Florida with taxpayer money.

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;328824]Well if Gore wins his own damn state of Tennessee then he gets enough electoral votes and Florida isn't even an issue. Where's the outcry over that?[/quote]

That has nothing to do with anything.

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[quote=jsarno;328841]This will likely be the only response I make to you since you have no clue what it takes to debate, rather you prefer to assume and throw insults.
So my suggestion to you sir is to try to read OBJECTIVE articles, and actually see things for what they really are.
If you choose to listen to all the same left wing drivel then that is your choice, but don't assume things are not the way they are just because you read something at one point. Trust me, I read more than most people, and I am very well educated, you might actually know that if you were here for longer than 107 posts.
You don't have to like what I say, hell that's America...I know I am the minority in my thinking, but use links to disprove me, not say you need to read more. That just makes you look lazy and unwilling to debate. Especially since you don't seem to know your ass from your elbow.
So the ball is in your court. You can either get pissed at my comments, or you can take them to heart and try to make an actual debate.[/quote]

Thanks for the challenge. Here are some things you should absorb before debating. I'm new to this type of communication. Please inform me if I have posted links so that they can be accessed.

[I]Published [/I][I]Monday, November 29, 2004[/I][I] by CommonDreams.org [/I]
[B]How To Take Back A Stolen Election [/B]
[B]by Thom Hartmann[/B]

"Never again!" says the slogan in an email I received from an activist friend. "Never again will we allow a stolen election in the USA!"
But how are we going to stop it?
The major American political parties have an answer - it's already working for them in the Ukraine - but it's very much a sword that can cut two ways.
Interestingly, it was first used in the US.
On December 4, 2000, in time to change the outcome of the Electoral College vote, Greg Palast published an article in [URL="http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=55&row=1"]Salon.com[/URL], made into a [URL="http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/cta/progs/newsnight/palast.ram"]BBC television documentary[/URL] shortly thereafter, that laid out solid evidence of massive electoral fraud in Florida, perpetrated against the majority-Democratic-voting African American community by Katherine Harris and Jeb Bush. Without this fraud, Gore would have easily carried the state.
Even more glaring, a consortium of news organizations found and reported on the front page of The New York Times (and other papers) on 12 September 2001, that in Florida "...a statewide recount -- could have produced enough votes to tilt the election his [Gore's] way, no matter what standard was chosen to judge voter intent." (The Times apparently chose to bury this fact - that Gore actually won the 2000 election - in the 15th paragraph and behind a misleading headline because the nation had been attacked on 9/11 the day before.)
Not only was the election of 2000 stolen by the Bush brothers, but it was proven by the later statewide recount that - even after Jeb's knocking thousands of African Americans off the rolls - Gore still would have won Florida had all the votes been counted.
This was outrageous news, enough to bring people into the streets. And there were demonstrations - loud and angry ones. But they were round-the-clock in front of Al Gore's VP residence in Washington DC (shouting with bullhorns "Get out of Dick Cheney's house!"), outside (and often within) vote-counting headquarters' in Florida, and entirely composed of Republicans.
Where were the protesting Democrats? Other than those in a few of Florida's African American communities and the Congressional Black Caucus, they were largely invisible. If Democrats and progressives had taken to the streets in mass numbers nationwide that November and December, it's entirely probable that the Supreme Court would have backed off and allowed a statewide recount to continue, and Al Gore would have been president for the past four years, instead of George W. Bush.

[B][I]Salon[/I][/B]
[B][I][URL="http://archive.salon.com/politics/feature/2000/12/04/voter_file/print.html"]Salon.com Politics | Florida's flawed "voter-cleansing" program[/URL][/I][/B]

[B][I]Civil Right Commission[/I][/B]
[B][URL="http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/vote2000/report/ch7.htm"]Chapter 7: Casting a Ballot[/URL]
There are many chapters of the CRC that should be consulted, including this one. There are also different interpretations of the report on the Web, some blaming the system for errors, other crying fraud and laying blame on Harris and Jeb Bush for intent.
[/B]
[B][I]Midwest[/I][/B][B][I] Today[/I][/B][B], December 2000[/B]

[B][COLOR=red][FONT=Arial]C O M M E N T A R Y[/FONT][/COLOR][/B]

[B]Scary Facts About the Florida Vote[/B]

[B]By Larry Jordan[/B]



With their typical inability to focus on more than just a few issues at a time, the national media have been doing a very inadequate job of covering the election controversy in Florida. Lost amidst all the blather have been some significant facts which have either not been covered at all, or at least have not been sufficiently stressed. For example:

Confounding the predictions of most polls and pundits, and despite having been outspent by millions, Al Gore won the popular vote by more than 325,000 ballots nationwide, with over 50 million votes in his column -- the second-highest total ever and the largest vote tally by any non-incumbent President in U.S. history. He did all this despite the fact that Ralph Nader siphoned off critical votes in key states.

Gore also took the lead in electoral votes, and now stands at 266. Meanwhile, Bush's margin of win in Florida shrank by 85 percent, to a slim few hundred votes, after that state's mandatory first recount, and has been fluctuating ever since.

With so many voting irregularities apparent even on the day of polling, it only stood to reason that the Democrats would seek to ascertain a more accurate vote tally. They have been criticized for having requested recounts in largely Democratic counties, but they did so primarily because that's where most of the problems occurred.

Interestingly, an investigation by the [I]Orlando Sentinel[/I] revealed that these counties had been relegated some problem-prone voting machines, which were known to have an error rate five times higher than the more accurate equipment which was used in Republican dominated counties.

This may have been the Republicans' secret weapon, and the reason why Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, brother of the GOP Presidential nominee, was so sure Dubya would carry the state. It allowed Bush to squeeze out the maximum number of votes in friendly precincts while Democrats waged an uphill battle to record all the votes due them.

As has been previously reported, an analysis suggests that Gore may also have lost about 13,000 votes in Palm Beach County because of voter confusion over an illegally designed "butterfly" ballot. [COLOR=red]+[/COLOR]

After the election, Reform Party candidate Pat Buchanan acknowledged that his anomalous blip of 3,704 votes in the staunchly Democratic county, with a large Jewish population, almost certainly resulted from confusion. Buchanan said he believed those votes were intended for Gore.

Buchanan's total in Palm Beach County exceeded his tally in any other county by about 2,700. So those could be factored in for Gore too.

Gore lost even more votes -- an estimated 10,622 ballots -- when voters tried to correct their error by punching a second hole for Gore after mistakenly punching one for Buchanan.

But that's not all. In Duval County (Jacksonville, Fla.) double-marked ballots substantially affected Mr. Gore's showing, an analysis of voting data suggests. More than 20% of the votes cast in predominantly African-American precincts were tossed out, nearly triple the number in majority white precincts. In two largely black precincts, nearly one-third of the ballots were invalidated. Altogether, 21,942 ballots were rejected because the voter, in confusion, punched the hole beside the name of more than one candidate.

Aside from the mechanical problems with the vote tabulations, evidence now suggests that on election day, many white Florida officials were doing their utmost to make sure blacks and other minorities (who historically favor the Democrats) didn't vote. That's the [I]real[/I] scandal.

In a maneuver that smacks of the civil rights fights in the old South, substantial numbers of blacks were turned away from polling booths in various parts of the state.

These facts notwithstanding, Republicans who were bussed into Miami on Wednesday staged a near-riot, storming the county canvassing board. Democratic personnel were physically assaulted within yards of the vote counting while prominent Republicans launched vituperative attacks on the canvassing board members and its staff.

If African-American voters led by Jesse Jackson had done the same, Republican spinners would be on all the talk shows complaining about how thugs and brownshirts were trying to undermine democracy. The GOP intimidation tactics no doubt prompted the Miami-Dade canvassing board to its cowardly decision that it would not count thousands of ballots that would potentially help make Gore President.

Sanctimonious Republicans, goaded by Gov. George W. Bush and his supporters, keep chanting that Gore is trying to "steal" the election. This is truly egregrious, given the fact that voter intimidation, ballot mishandling and other suspicious activities took place in the decisive state of Florida, whose Governor, Jeb Bush, had a personal stake in the outcome. Mere coincidence? Consider:
Republicans sent out postcards over Jeb Bush's signature in a get-out-the-vote effort that ran afoul of the laws intended to prevent abuse of absentee voting. In Oskaloosa County in the Florida panhandle, which is heavily Republican, officials sent out more than 17,000 absentee ballots, including to people who did not request them - a clear violation of state law.

*Ballots ran out in certain precincts.

*Carpools of African-American voters were stopped by police. In some cases, officers demanded to see a "taxi license."

*Polls closed with people still in line in Tampa.

*In Osceola County, ballots did not line up properly, possibly causing Gore voters to have their ballots cast for Harry Browne. Also, Hispanic voters were required to produce two forms of id when only one is required.

*Dozens, and possibly hundreds, of voters in Broward County were unable to vote because the Supervisor of Elections did not have enough staff to verify changes of address.

*Voters were mistakenly removed from voter rolls because their names were similar to those of ex-cons.

*According to Reuters news service, many voters received pencils rather than pens when they voted, in violation of state law.

*The [I]Miami Herald[/I] reported that many Haitian-American voters were turned away from precincts where they were voting for the first time.

*The mayoral candidate whose election in Miami was overturned due to voter fraud, Xavier Suarez, said he was involved in preparing absentee ballots for George w. Bush.

*CBS's Dan Rather reported a possible "computer error" in Volusia County, Florida, where James Harris, a Socialist Workers Party candidate, won 9,888 votes. (He got only 583 in the rest of the state).

*Many African-American first-time voters who registered at motor vehicles offices or in campus voter registration drives did not appear on the voting rolls, according to a hearing conducted by the NAACP and televised on C-SPAN

*The [I]London Times[/I] has reported a suspected pro-Bush vote fraud operation in Miami involving thousands of ballots.

*Jewish precincts had a suspiciously high number of double-punched ballots, and another lost its computerized votes altogether when a poll worker "accidentally" erased them.

*The Florida Highway Patrol confirmed that the department did conduct what it called a "routine" check point near a black precinct in Tallahassee on election day. Police asked black men to get out of their vehicles and produce identification.

*African Americans received calls the weekend before the election from a speaker who falsely claimed to be with the NAACP, asking them to vote for Bush. Similar calls were reported in Michigan and Virginia.

*Sandy Goard, supervisor of elections of Seminole County, admitted allowing two Republican operatives to add missing voter-identification numbers to 4,700 incomplete absentee ballot requests, mostly GOP voters -- actions that were illegal.
The Bush minions have been harping about the military ballots which they claim the Gore team got thrown out. Ironically, the election officials who passed judgment on these ballots used criteria established weeks ago by Republican Secretary of State Katherine Harris.

The GOP apparently has no qualms about the disenfranchisement of thousands of other voters, who would be missed if hand recounts did not go forward. Nor do they care about many of the veterans whose votes have not yet been counted.

As Carl Bernstein of the [I]Washington Post[/I] commented on MSNBC recently, no doubt somebody somewhere is, at this very moment, compiling a book which will be published after this controversy is over. Surely it will be a blockbuster. Only then will we find out more about the behind-the-scenes machinations going on in this election dispute.

It is sad, indeed, that our national media are not up to the task of keeping the public informed of the broader complexities of this matter as they unfold.
[COLOR=red]+[/COLOR]In Palm Beach County, there were 19,120 ballots disqualified because of double-voting. The Palm Beach County canvassing board analyzed a sample of these disqualified ballots. From that sample of 144 ballots, 80 ballots -- or 56 percent -- showed punches for both Buchanan and Gore, according to the Nov. 21 [I]New York Times[/I].. If that sample percentage reflects the entire batch, Gore may have lost as many as 10,622 votes.

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[quote=RobH4413;328827]Because a right winger said it, or because there is evidence he is still alive?

Just curious...[/quote]

Because a new Osama tape surfaced today. Try reading the news.

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[quote=Crazyhorse1;328875]Gore lost even more votes -- an estimated 10,622 ballots -- when voters tried to correct their error by punching a second hole for Gore after mistakenly punching one for Buchanan. [/quote]So either the Florida Bush voters knew how to correctly punch a ballot whereas the Gore voters did not, or this article is selectively using facts to draw readers to an incorrect conclusion.

Either way, this is pretty bad for your case.

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[QUOTE=Crazyhorse1;328875]Thanks for the challenge. Here are some things you should absorb before debating. I'm new to this type of communication. Please inform me if I have posted links so that they can be accessed. [/quote]

You're welcome.

ps- that post about the election...that wasn't my debate, that was someone elses. I don't care to debate that, Bush won and is president, even if they decide today that he didn't REALLY win, there is still nothing that can be done. So I don't debate that, I really don't care.

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[QUOTE=Crazyhorse1;328881]Because a new Osama tape surfaced today. Try reading the news.[/QUOTE]

OK, in the spirit of posting links, I will take the first step here:
[url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Gulf/New_Osama_tape_surfaces_after_year/articleshow/2205968.cms]New Osama tape surfaces after year-Gulf-World-The Times of India[/url]

In case you missed it, #1- it was from "a year ago", #2- it was not dated at all.
Do you really think a millionaire or his friends can't come up with tapes or even old clips from Bin Laden???? There have been several "fake tapes" to this point (2001 and 2004 to name a couple), so to assume just cause your news station played a tape doesn't make it real. The tape you are referring to is very old and is not any sort of verifiable evidence that Bin Laden is alive.

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;328883]So either the Florida Bush voters knew how to correctly punch a ballot whereas the Gore voters did not, or this article is selectively using facts to draw readers to an incorrect conclusion.

Either way, this is pretty bad for your case.[/QUOTE]

I tend to agree with you here.

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[QUOTE=Crazyhorse1;328873]That has nothing to do with anything.[/QUOTE]

Of course it does. It's like spending all day complaining about Alstott's elbow not crossing the line but then ignoring the fact you let a QB making just his 5th NFL start rack up over 30 points on your defense. (Granted the comparison isn't exactly perfect because there's no question Alstott's elbow didn't cross the goal line)

But the point is why doesn't anybody ever point the finger at Gore for not getting things done elsewhere in the campaign? Why does it have to be some big conspiracy?

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[quote=jsarno;328728]This is why I thought this would be a bush bashing thread. If you really think he has done nothing right, you're not looking, or prefer just to focus on the negative. I have mentioned several things that he has done well, you could have regurgitated one of them.

PS- 9/11 everyone thought he handled very well, the war was a decision that Dems decided to go to, the economy is in GREAT shape (yes gas prices suck but not really his fault) and Katrina was the fault of thoughless morons that couldn't lift a finger to get themselves out of the way. I think he has given too much to rescue the idiots that didn't want to leave. All those morons on their roof bitching about being rescued should have been left. No one, and I mean no one can convince me that they didn't have time. I was sitting here watching it on tv, and as soon as it passed Florida the projected path was right into New Orleans. Even if you waited just to be sure, 2 days before hand they KNEW it was coming. If 48 hours isn't enough for you to realize that you live 10+ feet BELOW sea level and need to evacuate, then you're a dee, dee, dee and I'm not concerned about your safety. I'm not going to be concerned about you if you choose not to be concerned about youself.
Why would Bush send people in early when it was dangerous? Why put others in danger for the stupidities of others? And what the "armed bandits" making life difficult...shooting helpers? Bush did the right thing by waiting, and has done too much to date. I know that is not the politically correct thing to say, and it's not the dems view, but I am not going to apologize for it. Where was all that help when Charlie hit Punta Gorda / Fort Myers? Where was all that help when Andrew hit? The problem there is the people in New Orleans have a poor me attitude and since they are "poor" they feel they should be heard and lay there until someone helps. The people in Florida are deemed as "having money" so they take care of themselves. But fact is, Punta Gorda was full of trailer parks too. Just goes to show you that Florida is full of republicans (Lee county is 80% republicans) and New Orleans is full of Democrats. DO you think it is a coincidence? I don't. Republicans are taught to fend for themselves while Dems have been taught if they can't take care of themselves (or don't want to) then someone will do it for them. Of course that doesn't apply to EVERY person, but it applies as an in general statement.[/quote]


Guess what, big guy. Florida has many more democrats than republicans and you don't have any idea what people from New Orleans feel, much less documentation of any such thing. Also, New Orleans was not "full" of trailor parks by any standard I know of and the dems don't teach poor people to avoid taking care of themselves, even as the republicans break our budget with gifts to the rich (see below). Also, under Clinton, FEMA performed as brilliantly in Florida as FEMA performed poorly in New Orleans under Bush, who had deliberately downsized it into ineffectiveness. And while we're discussing reality here instead of a good old boy version of it, here's the House of Representatives report on the consequences of Bush's great tax policy.
[URL]http://www.majorityleader.gov/docuploads/WAYSANDMEANSTAXREPORT.pdf[/URL]

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[QUOTE=70Chip;328791]I've never blocked any poster, but you are temting me. I think this is complete horseshit. Or Crazyhorseshit. Then again, it would take someone like you to try and disqualify military votes. Sorry mods, couldn't help it.[/QUOTE]

I don't blame you.

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[QUOTE=Crazyhorse1;328889]Guess what, big guy. Florida has more democrats than republicans and you don't have any idea what people from New Orleans feel, much less proof of it. Also, New Orleans was not "full" of trailor parks and the dems don't teach people to not take care of themselves. Also, under Clinton, FEMA performed very well in Florida. And while we're discussing reality here, here the House of Representatives report of the consequences of Bush's great tax policy.
[url]http://www.majorityleader.gov/docuploads/WAYSANDMEANSTAXREPORT.pdf[/url][/QUOTE]


Please, for the love of God tell me what you're smoking. I would love to live in an alternate world.
1- My point was about LEE COUNTY and the percentage of republicans there cause that is where hurricane Charlie hit. (I guess if you read the news you'd know that. Now two wrongs don't make a right...I guess I shouldn't say that.
2- I never said there were trailer parks in New Orleans. I said the trailer parks in PUNTA GORDA which is in FLORIDA, about 10 miles from Fort Myers which is in LEE COUNTY which has an overwhelming majority of REPUBLICANS.

I thought you would read what I actually said...but now your stance makes sense. You tell us to read, but apprarently what your eyes see becomes all jumbled by the time it gets to your head.

Thank you for the insignificant debate, I will move on to posters that know how to do it properly.

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[quote=Mattyk72;328384]Reading this article got me wondering, when it's all said and done what do you think W's legacy will be? In 25 years when we look back, how do you think he will be perceived?

I mean c'mon, let's face it the guy came into office riding a mountain of controversy over the 2000 election, and he's enjoyin "rock-bottom poll numbers" as this article puts it.

I think the question is worth asking, is he the worst President we've seen to date?

[URL="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/07/13/BUSH.TMP"]Unpopular Bush risks little by staying course[/URL][/quote]

Andrew Johnson and Ulysses S. Grant were phenomially worse presidents. Johnson was nearly the 1st Impeached President in U.S. history. Primarily because of his stubbornness and laziness. Grant had the most corrupt administration in history primarily using his presidency to get rich. He was a master of the Quid pro Quo.

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[quote=jsarno;328892]Please, for the love of God tell me what you're smoking. I would love to live in an alternate world.
1- My point was about LEE COUNTY and the percentage of republicans there cause that is where hurricane Charlie hit. (I guess if you read the news you'd know that. Now two wrongs don't make a right...I guess I shouldn't say that.
2- I never said there were trailer parks in New Orleans. I said the trailer parks in PUNTA GORDA which is in FLORIDA, about 10 miles from Fort Myers which is in LEE COUNTY which has an overwhelming majority of REPUBLICANS.

I thought you would read what I actually said...but now your stance makes sense. You tell us to read, but apprarently what your eyes see becomes all jumbled by the time it gets to your head.

Thank you for the insignificant debate, I will move on to posters that know how to do it properly.[/quote]

Try reading your own posts. You said that Florida was full of Republicans and implied with the word "too" that New Orleans also had an unusual number of trailers. If you misspoke by means of poor grammar, that's fine. If not, it's not.
But, you don't get a pass because I read what you wrote. You said you wanted a debate and I have given you material in two posts that contradict the facuality of what you have said. Now, it's clear to me that you are making up an excuse to bail.

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

........

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[quote=Crazyhorse1;328881]Because a new Osama tape surfaced today. Try reading the news.[/quote]

[I]As-Sahab [[URL="http://blog.wired.com/defense/2007/05/alqaeda_ramps_u.html"]Al-Qaeda's media wing[/URL]] produced videos always contain tons of old footage mixed together in documentary style. In fact just a few weeks ago one was released that showed an old video clip of Osama bin Laden. Much like the case for that one this upcoming release reportedly has a 50-second clip of OBL. We do not have final confirmation yet but we believe this clip to be OLD, which means that it was either previously released and is just being reaired or it was recorded awhile ago but never shown till now. Either way in the language of as-Sahab videos a 50-second clip on a 40-minute produced video does not make a "new" Osama bin Laden "video". These videos always have old clips of OBL.

All of this is not to say that this video is not significant. Almost all produced as-Sahab videos are for a variety of reasons. These videos take a lot of time and energy for al-Qaeda to produce and generally they only do so for things they feel are important. For example this new video has a new animated intro which would have taken a lot of work and computing power to do.

So, yes on significant... No, this is not a new OBL video.[B] It is a 40-minute video with a short clip of Osama bin Laden that we have likely seen before.

[/B][/I]fromhttp://blog.wired.com/defense/2007/07/new-osama-vid-n.html

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[QUOTE=jsarno;328841]This will likely be the only response I make to you since you have no clue what it takes to debate, rather you prefer to assume and throw insults.
So my suggestion to you sir is to try to read OBJECTIVE articles, and actually see things for what they really are.[/QUOTE]

We might as well post links from the "dark side" as well

[url=http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/lott200312100915.asp]John R. Lott Jr. on Florida 2000 on National Review Online[/url]

[url=http://www.glennbeck.com/news/08092004.shtml]The 2000 Election: Where's the Disenfranchisement?[/url]

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;328891]I don't blame you.[/quote]

You don't blame him for what, precisely? For not knowing there was a statewide recount in Florida that found Bush got more votes than Bush in Florida or for being angry that I have now shown I was right about it and have put him down as arrogantly as he put me down in denying it.

Or do you not blame him for doubting my credentials, which he apparently does without benefit of research?

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[QUOTE=Crazyhorse1;328903]Try reading your own posts. You said that Florida was full of Republicans and implied with the word "too" that New Orleans also had an unusual number of trailers. If you misspoke by means of poor grammar, that's fine. If not, it's not.
But, you don't get a pass because I read what you wrote. You said you wanted a debate and I have given you material in two posts that contradict the facuality of what you have said. Now, it's clear to me that you are making up an excuse to bail.[/QUOTE]


Honest to goodness, I can think of no good things to say to you because you are so off base.
Using the word TOO would have to mean I mentioned New Orleans in the previous sentence, I did not. Maybe it wasn't the best word to use, but by it's context, you misread it. No biggie.
About the republicans if you noticed, which obviously you didn't, right next to it I wrote (Lee county is 80% republicans) which means it is CLARIFYING my previous comment.
Last but not least, you have yet to come to me a debate that we are having. You did a huge post and quoted me for some reason and it was about the election...something I have made no mention to. Please feel free to go back, you'll notice I never made a comment to it. So you have YET to debate with me. You are spewing random thoughts, or can't follow who you are debating with. You then make comments like "you should read more" when in fact it is you that are saying incorrect statements (I even made a quote to that "tape" you're talking about, but you have been remarkably silent).
So before I end up getting really irritated with you and saying something that I shouldn't, you will be blocked and I will have no temptation to respond to you.
I hope your tenure here turns around cause you are most certainly heading in the wrong direction.

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[QUOTE=RobH4413;328910][I]As-Sahab [[URL="http://blog.wired.com/defense/2007/05/alqaeda_ramps_u.html"]Al-Qaeda's media wing[/URL]] produced videos always contain tons of old footage mixed together in documentary style. In fact just a few weeks ago one was released that showed an old video clip of Osama bin Laden. Much like the case for that one this upcoming release reportedly has a 50-second clip of OBL. We do not have final confirmation yet but we believe this clip to be OLD, which means that it was either previously released and is just being reaired or it was recorded awhile ago but never shown till now. Either way in the language of as-Sahab videos a 50-second clip on a 40-minute produced video does not make a "new" Osama bin Laden "video". These videos always have old clips of OBL.

All of this is not to say that this video is not significant. Almost all produced as-Sahab videos are for a variety of reasons. These videos take a lot of time and energy for al-Qaeda to produce and generally they only do so for things they feel are important. For example this new video has a new animated intro which would have taken a lot of work and computing power to do.

So, yes on significant... No, this is not a new OBL video.[B] It is a 40-minute video with a short clip of Osama bin Laden that we have likely seen before.

[/B][/I]fromhttp://blog.wired.com/defense/2007/07/new-osama-vid-n.html[/QUOTE]

Good link. Enjoy your "debate" with him (and I use that term loosely), I'm done.

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[QUOTE=Crazyhorse1;328889]Also, under Clinton, FEMA performed as brilliantly in Florida as FEMA performed poorly in New Orleans under Bush, who had deliberately downsized it into ineffectiveness.[/QUOTE]

Which hurricane are you referring to in Florida?

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

Back to the legacy of Bush...


It's no lie that this is probably one of the hardest times for any U.S. presidents to be in power. He's had to deal with terrorist attacks, hurricanes, scandals, and record low approval ratings.

I'd like to say, he stared adversity in the face, and failed. Does that mean Gore or Kerry would have succeeded? That's up for debate, albeit a pointless one.

He's going down in the history books as a president that did a lot wrong, and the presidency will be weaker for years to come because of it. The balance of power will probably shift towards the senate, and the greatest government of all time will come in and do what it's supposed to do; gather ourselves and change strategy.

Certain presidents of the past have sweet talked congress to pass every bill, but I have a strong feeling that this will become increasingly difficult for the incumbent president.

Regardless of it all, George Bush's legacy will be felt for years to come.

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[QUOTE=Crazyhorse1;328921]You don't blame him for what, precisely? For not knowing there was a statewide recount in Florida that found Bush got more votes than Bush in Florida or for being angry that I have now shown I was right about it and have put him down as arrogantly as he put me down in denying it.

Or do you not blame him for doubting my credentials, which he apparently does without benefit of research?[/QUOTE]

You didn't show you were right about it. You posted a link from one side, just like I (in fairness) posted a link from the other.

I don't blame him for blocking, or wanting to block, you. If I am to be perfectly candid. I think you offer nothing of value to this site. Clearly, all you want to do is constantly push your anti-Bush agenda (so much so that I think you even embarrass those who are philosophically on your side), and berate and belittle those who have the audacity to disagree with Mr. College Professor with a Master's Degree. Hopefully, as the season rolls around you will remember why this site primarily exists; to discuss the Washington Redskins. But I find it curious that you've started nearly 40 threads on multiple Redskins message boards and only two had anything to do with the Redskins.

Admittedly, I am a Republican (Moderate Republican I suppose) but I can respect healthy debate with the Mattyk's, SGG's, Dmek's, and 12thMan's of the world. Sure it can get heated and I get annoyed by what they say sometimes. A lot of times in Dmek's case (no offense D) but at least I know they want to discuss, not preach. I can't say the same for you. But this has nothing to do with your views. It's the arrogance behind the views. You're like a liberal Ann Coulter

I don't know you personally obviously, nor do I care to quite frankly. Of course, many others here feel the same I'm sure. Just as I'm sure there are those who feel that way about me. I'd like to think though that if I stopped posting on this site, something of value would be lost. I understand that I do post a lot of nonsensical stuff (and especially in the off-season) but I think that's balanced by compelling posts and threads (not to toot my own horn too loudly). Again, I can't say the same for you.

What's worse is that, as a professor you're seemingly influencing the minds of tomorrow. I can only hope that those students are smart enough to challenge you (whether to confirm you're right or prove that you're wrong), and that you're enough of a professor to allow them to challenge you.

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;328929]Which hurricane are you referring to in Florida?[/quote]
Probably Floyd, but the situations are far from parallel.

The storm took a northerly turn, weakened, and FEMA still struggled.


[URL="http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/9/7/134914.shtml"]1999 Hurricane Swamped Clinton's FEMA[/URL]

The article doesn't seem to be that convincing to me, I'll look for something a little more font friendly.

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;328883]So either the Florida Bush voters knew how to correctly punch a ballot whereas the Gore voters did not, or this article is selectively using facts to draw readers to an incorrect conclusion.

Either way, this is pretty bad for your case.[/quote]

You are unintentionally showing that you don't know how the ballot was designed. Also, your remark seems to be that of a racist, since ballot confusion was pretty much limited to minority districts.

I know you probably aren't exactly a racist, but you do seem to be suffering from the delusion that dems are stupid. You should acquaint yourself with the ballot's design before making pronouncements.

By the way, studies show dems more likely to achieve advanced degrees than republicans.

The ballot was perfectly clear in relation to where to vote for Bush. How to vote for Gore and not Buchanan was unclear. The poor design was probably accidental.

The ballot's design probably did cost Gore the election but it was only one of many things. Others things were probably not accidental. The case for Fraud is not affected one way or another by the ballot controversy. Nor does the fact that Gore received more votes in Florida rely in any way in counting those lost votes for Gore.

Gore had more votes in Florida than Bush anyway. The materials I've cited are pretty clear about that. Try reading them again.

I think many of you guys must be very young. You seem not to be aware of the basics of the election controversy. I was fifty six at the time. People usually don't start following the news in any detail until their forties.

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

Well said Smooty. I honestly don't get people who are still stuck in 2000. The man won and not only that but he won again in 2004. Time to move on and look to the future.

I don't even read the stuff Crazyhorse1 writes anymore because it's just a big rant along with some preaching. It's old and tired.

p.s. Obama for president because it feels right.

Re: The legacy of 'W'?
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;328857]I've probably gotten more laughter out of him than any other President.

Anytime he opens his mouth something laughable is bound to come out.[/QUOTE]

He helped launched Will Ferrell's career!