Bush won?

Subject: Bush won?
From: thosp
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 12:54 AM

sorry i couldn't find the thread of a few days ago on this topic - but for those interested use theblueclicketything

peace (Y) thosp

Subject: RE: Bush won?
From: DougR
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 01:11 AM

Right, Thosp, and Consortium News is unbiased, right?

DougR

Subject: RE: Bush won?
From: thosp
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 01:21 AM

so who's not biased? -- the point is check the Miami Herald article of the next day (don't just take the Consortiums' word for it)- peace (Y) thosp

Subject: RE: Bush won?
From: thosp
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 01:28 AM

actually use this From: Ebbie
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 02:05 AM

You're being disingeneous, Doug- this outcome is precisely what you and I agreed on in your thread entitled 'Ugh...the Recount?' I'm beginning to suspect that you are a politician.

Ebbie

Subject: RE: Bush won?
From: Ebbie
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 02:09 AM

disingenuous

Subject: RE: Bush won?
From: Rick Fielding
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 02:09 AM

Ebbie, I don't know Doug THAT well, but he's got far too much integrity to be a politician!

I'll take that fiver now, Doug.

Rick

Subject: RE: Bush won?
From: thosp
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 02:21 AM

hmmmm --it seems ebbie and i have melded a post -- anyway i was tring to post a link to the miami herald article of the following day blueclicketything

peace (Y) thosp

Subject: RE: Bush won?
From: Ebbie
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 02:49 AM

thosp, Doug knows that very well. As I said above, he started the thread about the Recount and himself made the comment that he reads the stats the same way as in this article.

Rick, check the fiver. *G*

Ebbie

Subject: RE: Bush won?
From: Bugsy
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 04:43 AM

On a lighter note, during an iterview I saw on TV last night between, satyrist/impersonater, Rory Bremnar being interviewed on TV by Michael Parkinson, Rory said, "You'd think that if God intended the USA to have a presidential candidate, he have let them have a candidate".

Many a true word is spoken in jest.

Cheers

Bugsy

Subject: RE: Bush won?
From: Bugsy
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 04:44 AM

..........Sorry, that should have been "If God had meant the USA to have a Presidential ELECTION........"

CHeeers

Bugsy

Subject: RE: Bush won?
From: Naemanson
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 07:20 AM

All this points out is that we will never see the end of this argument.

Whether or not he got enough votes Bush is the president now and we have to take our lumps for the next 3+ years. I don't like it any more than many of you but them's the way things is.

I certainly looking forward to the next presidential campaign.

Subject: RE: Bush won?
From: kendall
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 08:55 AM

Actually, that statement, "If God wanted us to vote, he would have given us candidates" is an old one. Utah Phillips used it, but I believe it goes back to Will Rogers.

Subject: RE: Bush won?
From: Walter Corey
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 11:48 AM

This from our local Sunday rag addresses one of the reasons Bush may have won.(The article seems to come through, even with the error message at the top.) I can only hope that people like Powell and Whitman, who are being destroyed by the double play combination of Rummy to Cheney to Bush,will find the integrity to resign from this ultra-conservative administration. They are being badly used.

Subject: RE: Bush won?
From: kendall
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 01:04 PM

Can someone who knows about airplanes explain to me how an old, slow prop engine plane can hit a jet fighter?

Subject: RE: Bush won?
From: catspaw49
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 01:20 PM

Yeah Kendall..........Fly the lumbering thing in a straight line while some fighter jock plays games. At one point or another, you will hit the fighter, especially if he's practicing zooms from below across your nose. This will assure all that YOU hit the fighter with your boxcar and not the other way around.

What a crock..........especially since it was known that the Chinese fighter pilot had a long record of that sort of behavior. Reminds me of the US Air Force pilot who was extremely proficient with the B-52, capable of performing extreme maneuvers thought impossible. They continually reprimanded this guy and yet EVERY TIME they needed some dramatic footage of a B-52, guess who they got to do it? Inevitably, he and his crew were killed in an air show accident.......You see the footage all the time on those "Crash" specials. Needless to say, the cause of the accident was "pilot error." The real cause was allowing this guy to continue flying, although it's real tough to ground a "natural born, stick and rudder man."

Spaw

Subject: RE: Bush won?
From: Naemanson
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 01:46 PM

If you want to see one of these planes flying come out to the Naval Air Station in Brunswick, Maine. They are actually quite maneuverable but not enough to hit a fighter jet.

We will have an air show in September where the P-3's agility will be demonstrated. Ya'll come out and see it, ya hear?

Subject: RE: Bush won?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 02:11 PM

I'd have thought all you need to do is change direction just as he's passing you. You can do it on the road anyday, no matter how slow your motor is, if you're that way inclined. Do it with a lorry, and the fastest motorcycle in the world wouldn't have a chance.

But I'd call this thread lurch rather than thread drift - and when there's another thread going on exactly the subject of the lurch, intentionally disruptive.

Though arguing about who actually won ceases to be relevant after a time, since it doesn't affect the actual result .

However the issue that does not cease to be relevant is whether the actions of Bush and his cronies in setting out consciously and deliberately to stop the recount was ethical, honourable or consistent with loyalty to the democratic process. And that is a totally separate issue, - and perhaps one that is far more important in the long run than which pathetic creep managed to slink into the White House this time around.

If it turned out that a recount would have given the victory to Bush, all that would mean would be that, as well as being dishonourable, it wasn't even necessary. He'd have shamed his country and subverted its politics all for nothing.

Subject: RE: Bush won?
From: catspaw49
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 02:35 PM

Okay .... You hit me with your Jaguar XJ Saloon while I was buzzing about you with my Honda 1100. If I hadn't been acting like a jackass, you wouldn't have hit me. The situation still stinks and the issue of why is still relevant, especially considering satellite technology.

As to Bush..........It's over, dead, done, fine, finished..........Why beat the horse? Four years and a better selection will be just fine as long as we make it through the next four years.

Spaw

Subject: RE: Bush won?
From: Walter Corey
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 03:09 PM

It matters that the country (and the world) keeps in mind that this is an accidental presidency, and that a nearly 600,000 vote deficit in the popular vote is hardly a mandate to reverse 50 years of our history.

Subject: RE: Bush won?
From: catspaw49
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 03:24 PM

The BEST the world will keep in mind is that we have some problems in our election process. For every argument to be made that Bush should not be president, there are an equal number saying he should.....and no one has changed their mind through any numbers or recounts.

The Bushy dorks claim a mandate on numbers of states and I agree with you, the popular vote sure as hell isn't one, but in their definition...different story. The people of this country need to actively involved at letting their reps know what they feel and perhaps we can get through this period without too much embarassment, although that already looks doubtful.

And.........Much as I would like to see more than two parties, can you imagine Nader handling this spy plane thing? New crash protection standards for spy planes?

Spaw

Subject: RE: Bush won?
From: thosp
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 04:45 PM

honestly Spaw - i think your selling Nader short - too bad we will never know -

peace (Y) thosp

Subject: RE: Bush won?
From: kendall
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 06:06 PM

I see a big difference between a big truck on the road and a big plane in the air. In any case, maybe it is possible, I'm not a flyer. So, what the hell was that spy plane doing so close to China? Are they really necessary now? Didn't we learn anything from the U2 incident?

Subject: RE: Bush won?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 06:20 PM

Define "won".

- LH

Subject: RE: Bush won?
From: DougR
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 06:55 PM

Ebbie: nope, I'm not a politician, just a pore ole man who happens, philosophically to be to the right of most folks here on the Mudcat, and doesn't believe the sky will fall because GWB is our president.

DougR

Subject: RE: Bush won?
From: Bert
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 07:46 PM

I'm not sure if your choice of words was wise there Doug; With Dubya's recent performance on environmental issues The sky is in imminent danger.

But folks, it's not Doug's fault that the bush baby is president. It's the fault of the Democrats who's candidate was so pitiful that he couldn't beat even him.

I don't think Dubya is as good as his Daddy and the only person that Daddy could could find for VP that wouldn't appear superior to him was Dan Quayle.

Subject: RE: Bush won?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 08:32 PM

At the risk of boring people senseless, I repeat: the question of who actually won that election isn't actually the central issue, and never has been. Or at least it shouldn't have been. But it appears that for Americans, that really is the central issue.

What matters is whether the man sitting in the White House, attempted (and succeeded) in subverting the democratic process, by interfering with the process, which is part of any democratic election, under which votes are counted and recounted until it a fair and agreed conclusion has been reached.

I think for most people outside of America who have taken any interest in this whole thing, that has been the key issue, and continues to be the key issue, largely because it provides a green light for other bent politicians around the world to do the same as the bent politicians in Washington and Florida.

That isn't about party politics - if it had been Gore doing this it would have been just as shameful. And, perhaps naively, I would have assumed that anybody with any regard for democracy would see it that way, whatever their politics. To have seen how people have divided neatly on this issue along party lines, simply on the basis of who they would prefer to have won, is grotesque and shameful.

(As for the jetplane stuff - I was just pointing out that it's just as easy for a slow vehicle to hit a fast vehicle as the other way round. It had been suggested that this was not the case.)

Subject: RE: Bush won?
From: Naemanson
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 08:33 PM

Good Point Bert!

Subject: RE: Bush won?
From: Amos
Date: 15 Apr 01 - 01:22 PM

I think a bush in the face is worth two in the White House.

A

Subject: RE: Bush won?
From: kendall
Date: 15 Apr 01 - 01:33 PM

Amen Amos!