More of The "Chicago Way"

[rwarn17588]

Just shut the he!! up for once. We are still hearing about how Bush was selected as president in 2000, despite the  numerous newspaper recounts in Florida and how Bushco stole the 2004 election. Another example of your bs (oops, I said a baddy) double standards.

Show me where I've ever said that Bush stole the election. I never thought that.

[we vs us]

Show me where I've ever said that Bush stole the election. I never thought that.

Welcome to the lib Borg, where in Guido's mind we're all responsible for everything every liberal has ever said, ever.

[Red Arrow]

Welcome to the lib Borg, where in Guido's mind we're all responsible for everything every liberal has ever said, ever.

You're not???

[nathanm]

Just shut the he!! up for once. We are still hearing about how Bush was selected as president in 2000, despite the  numerous newspaper recounts in Florida and how Bushco stole the 2004 election. Another example of your bs (oops, I said a baddy) double standards.

To be fair, there was never any clear result of those newspaper recounts. The newspapers, in the interest of getting along, decided to push the story that Bush won their recount, despite something like only one of the 5 recount methods producing him as the winner. It truly was too close to call. I would respect a coin toss more than I do Bush v. Gore. Of course, if there had been a coin flip to determine the winner, we'd still be arguing about whether Mother Teresa's corpse should have been making the toss instead of the Republican Secretary of State.

That said, people arguing that the 2004 election was stolen are idiots. Yes, there were some irregularities, but there are always irregularities. Moreover, there is no clear evidence that those irregularities were responsible for enough miscast votes to switch the election. It was a very good example of how lack of transparency breeds suspicion of the results, however. It also provides an excellent example of why electronic voting machines should be required by law to produce a voter-verifiable paper audit tape. Not because anything went wrong in a major way, but because that's about the only thing that will put this idiocy to bed.

[Gaspar]

One thing I think we all agree on is . . .

[we vs us]

You're not???

Well, personally, I can tell you that I can't vouch for PETA, EarthFirst, or in general any radical student group that throws rocks/bombs/gang signs. 

I plead the fifth, however, on the 1848 Socialist Revolution in Europe.

[rwarn17588]

To be fair, there was never any clear result of those newspaper recounts. The newspapers, in the interest of getting along, decided to push the story that Bush won their recount, despite something like only one of the 5 recount methods producing him as the winner. It truly was too close to call. I would respect a coin toss more than I do Bush v. Gore. Of course, if there had been a coin flip to determine the winner, we'd still be arguing about whether Mother Teresa's corpse should have been making the toss instead of the Republican Secretary of State.

I remember those stories, mostly for the fact they were all over the place on who would've won. The race in Florida was too close to call, and any number of variables could have changed the result.

Still, I said at the time that Gore deserved to lose because he didn't even win in his home state of Tennessee. Any presidential candidate who loses in his home state is doomed.

As for 2004, feh. The election was close in the electoral count, but not in the actual vote numbers. Bush won by 3 million votes nationwide, and by 120,000 in Ohio, which put him over the top.

[Red Arrow]

Well, personally, I can tell you that I can't vouch for PETA, EarthFirst, or in general any radical student group that throws rocks/bombs/gang signs. 

I plead the fifth, however, on the 1848 Socialist Revolution in Europe.

PETA, People Eating Tasty Animals

[we vs us]

So what's up with this ACORN fetish?  Why are we pressing this?  "Because of voter-fraud" isn't enough.  Conservative organizations have been accused of -- and convicted of -- similar things.  We know fraud happens. So far these details summarize about what we've all heard about ACORN. 

So if this is about winning some moral point, what IS it?  Obviously a whole lot of people are fighting to finally say "YES YES YES I TOLD YOU ACORN WAS A CROCK YOU DIDN'T KNOW IT BUT I DID AND I TOLD YOU SO NYAH NYAH!"  Is it that the Pres's favorite organization is supposedly corrupt to the core?  Is it that nonprofits run for and by the inner city poor deserve to fail?  I'm trying to decipher what this level of obsession with ACORN is supposed to tell me and I'm coming up blank. 

Any of you conservatives out there get any talking points that can shed light on this?  Inquiring minds want to know!

[Red Arrow]

Inquiring minds want to know!

Copyright violation.... be prepared to get the crap sued out of you!