Pan Ohco > wrote in
:
> On 27 Aug 2004 20:36:52 GMT, Michel Boucher >
> wrote:
>
>>What I suspect is that the Republicans wanted one of theirs to be
>>president so badly after Clinton that they were willing to lie,
>>cheat and defraud for it. The Democrats on the other hand were
>>unwilling to participate in a mockery of the whole electoral
>>system, so they backed down. That has been touted by neocons as a
>>weakness of the Democrats which convinces me that it may well
>>their strength.
>>
>>Prove me wrong, Pan. Don't just claim it, don't parrot others.
>>Find the evidence and put it before me that this is not true. I
>>dare you.
>
> Well this lie is about four years old by now.
There you go again, making unsubstantiated assertions. I'm asking
YOU to provide the research. I have done this in the past and every
time you've either skirted the issue of gone silent on me. Why?
Don't you have the nuts to own up to the fact that you have no
evidence to disprove this hypothesis of mine?
I know what my conclusions are based on many years of reading and
actually *thinking* about what I read, the "left" as well as the
"right", and I this is my conclusion. To this, all you can say is:
> So it will take some time for you to Google for the evidence.
Not very convincing, Panbo...not very convincing at all.
> There were three recounts by the media, after Bush became
> President. All found that Bush had won in Florida by about 500
> votes. This has been reported numerous times.
But those had no impact on his becoming president. He was made
president *before* those recounts had been completed and *before* the
results were known. In the case of elections, "close enough for folk
music" doesn't count. Those things happen in banana republics and
corrupt states. What would have happened if those recounts had
demonstrated that he had in fact lost Florida by 500 votes? Do you
think there would be a hope in hell he'd be removed from office? Not
on your bippy. Those dexter masturbators wanted that presidency so
badly they were willing to falsify results, twist the truth and deny
people the right to vote to get him elected. Just reading about and
listening to the bilious rhethoric of the "right" is indication
enough that the will to pervert the system was there.
A summary of the Florida issue: "The Bush campaign sued to prevent
additional recounts on the basis that no errors were found in the
tabulation method until subjective measures were applied in manual
recounts. This case eventually reached the United States Supreme
Court, which ruled 5-4 to **stop**the**vote**count, which allowed
Katherine Harris to certify the election results. This allowed
Florida's electoral votes to be cast for Bush, making him the winner.
The Supreme Court also found that the additional recounts requested
by Gore to be unconstitutional, in a 7-2 vote."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._pr...election,_2000
You don't smell a rat? Really? The results were not confirmed and
measures were taken to ensure that whatever the results were, they
would not affect Bush's run at the presidency.
Oh, I can just see the next Subject line:
READ WHAT MICHEL BOUCHER SAYS ABOUT THE US ELECTORAL PROCESS--
SHOCKING!
Nancree, this is your call to arms! Hurrah! Huzzah!
I get a kick out of such total disingenuity...:-)
--
German to Picasso in front of Guernica: Did you do this?
Picasso to German in front of Guernica: No, it was you.