|
08 Jul 04 - 02:24 PM (#1221552) Subject: BS: Voting Conundrum From: GUEST,heric If a group claiming Al Qaeda sponsorship launches a Madrid-style massacre shortly before the US national election, which of the following be proper responses on election day? 1. Stay Kerry 2. Switch to Bush 3. Stay non-viable other 4. Switch to non-viable other 5. Stay Bush 6. Switch to Kerry |
|
08 Jul 04 - 02:27 PM (#1221554) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: Bert 1 |
|
08 Jul 04 - 02:36 PM (#1221560) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: akenaton None of the above ,as none of the choices would make the slightest difference to the "terrorist threat" In my opinion no one should vote!! |
|
08 Jul 04 - 03:00 PM (#1221576) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: GUEST Is it my imagination, or does it seem whenever things are not looking rosy for the Bush crowd,lo and behold, we have news of a "new" credible terror threat. Never at all specific, just enough to unnerve the fainthearted fools who actually beleive this administration is doing something. One begins to think the terror possibilities could be endless now that the whole fucking world knows how ineptly the government responds. |
|
08 Jul 04 - 03:07 PM (#1221581) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: Bert If the people in power, whoever they are, aren't doing what you want then you should vote for the other person, whoever it is. Eventually, if enough people do it, then politicians will learn that to stay in power they should do what people want. Of course it will never happen 'cos most people vote for the biggest liar. |
|
08 Jul 04 - 03:07 PM (#1221582) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: CarolC Vote for Kucinich! |
|
08 Jul 04 - 03:12 PM (#1221584) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: Don Firth Watch for the October surprise. We don't know for sure what it will consist of, but there will be one. It's become a standard political tactic in election years. Don Firth |
|
08 Jul 04 - 03:21 PM (#1221588) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: GUEST vote for Fillmore |
|
08 Jul 04 - 03:25 PM (#1221593) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: Bobert It does *not* matter since Diebold, who is doing the counting and fighting all attempts to have a paper trail, has promised to "deliver" the election to Bush... Bobert |
|
08 Jul 04 - 06:23 PM (#1221722) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: kendall we may need a coup to get our government back. |
|
08 Jul 04 - 06:29 PM (#1221724) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: GUEST Wear a conundrum for sex. Not to vote. Just wash your hands after voting and that should be enough to keep you disease free. (Unless Bush gets in a gain.) |
|
08 Jul 04 - 09:27 PM (#1221821) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: Genie [i]Quote:Bobert It does *not* matter since Diebold, who is doing the counting and fighting all attempts to have a paper trail, has promised to "deliver" the election to Bush...[/i] I'm afraid you may be right, Bobert! Arrgghhh! [i]Quote: kendall we may need a coup to get our government back. [/i] Um. ... We already had one. Back in 2004. I guess it may take another one to fix that. [i]quote:GUEST Wear a conundrum for sex. Not to vote. Just wash your hands after voting and that should be enough to keep you disease free. (Unless Bush gets in again.) [/i] Yeah, but if the Republicans do to us again what they did in '04, I'm not sure even a conundrum will keep us disease free. :-( |
|
08 Jul 04 - 09:55 PM (#1221828) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: Alaska Mike *synopsis* Major Al Qeida attack right at the end of October. Bush imposes Martial Law and cancels November elections. Bush refuses to allow change of government due to National Security concerns. |
|
08 Jul 04 - 10:00 PM (#1221830) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: Once Famous Don Firth knows because Osama told him. |
|
08 Jul 04 - 10:11 PM (#1221835) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: Ebbie A worrisome thought is the realization that IF the bush 'wins', we will not know whether it was an honest election. As the bush himself said, in a slightly different context: Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice... ah, ah, you can't fool me twice. (What a twit) Judging by the announced poll results, the bush's stats have been going steadily down. I see very little reason to believe that an honest election would install him in the Oval Office. What I wonder is what the people in this nation will do IF the bushits get in? |
|
08 Jul 04 - 10:49 PM (#1221847) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: GUEST Jenie, Do you meen '00 and not '04? Don't mess with my mind like that. Gets me all effed up, ya know? Thaough four MORE years had whizzed by. |
|
09 Jul 04 - 02:33 AM (#1221932) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: Nerd First of all, the former government of Spain lost ITSELF the election. The soundbite that the US media is trying to foist on us is that "The Terrorists" wanted a change in government and the compliant Spanish gave it to them because they were chicken shit. What actually happened was that the Spanish government tried hard to blame the terrorist attacks on Basques and use ethnic prejudices within Spain to their own political advantage. When the people of Spain saw through that, they did the right thing and voted the bastards out of office. Anyway, a terrorist attack in the US prior to election day probably should not change how you vote. Once a large-scale terrorist attack happens, there is necessarily a period of retrenchment and regrouping. There will not be another major terror attack for a good long while, more than enough time for a government transition to take place. I think non-viable others are not good choices on foreign policy. I think Kerry is a wiser choice than Bush, but some will disagree with me. |
|
09 Jul 04 - 05:26 AM (#1222014) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: GUEST Doesn't matter who you vote for; the government always gets in. |
|
09 Jul 04 - 05:59 AM (#1222037) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: GUEST,Anarchist There's no government like no government. |
|
09 Jul 04 - 11:09 AM (#1222288) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: saulgoldie Coupla people here seem to have forgotten that national-level elected officials were likely once state house representatives, county commisioners, school board members, dog-catchers, and long ago, regular people. The people who eventually make up the bigger picture were once our neighbors who got involved because they wanted things to be better. And government is necessary so that we can make certain things happen that we want to happen. Roads, school systems, law enforcement, international relations, all require some sort of government structure to exist with any sort of order. Without it, these and many more systems would all be horribly chaotic and worse than we can imagine. The government is not the enemy. The government is us. And unsatisfying elected officials only get into office because the electorate fails to inform itself and vote accordingly. What was the question? Oh yeah. As already mentioned, I don't think either Kerry or Bush are terribly inspired. On terrorism, I don't think there is much different. But Bush is far worse on almost every other score. Like Jim Hightower says, "First, we get rid of Bush, then we get rid of Kerry." |
|
09 Jul 04 - 08:56 PM (#1222661) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: GUEST Saul, in this case the government is NOT us. This government cares nothing about people in or out of the US. It cares about itself. We have lost control. Face that. |
|
09 Jul 04 - 10:03 PM (#1222685) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: DougR By golly! At least Carol C says something that makes sense. Vote for Kucinich! If not Dennis, RALPH! DougR |
|
09 Jul 04 - 10:47 PM (#1222701) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: Genie Doug, you wouldn't happen to be one of those Repubs who worked so hard to get Nader on the ballot here in Oregon, would you? §;-) Guest, even before I logged on today I had a hunch I goofed and typed "2004" when I meant to say "2000." (Any Joe Clones lurking about, feel free to correct my post above.) Ebbie , you actually misquoted Dubya just a bit. What he actually said was, "Fool me once, ... shame on ... ... ...uh ...shame on ... you. ... ... Fool me twice... ah, ...ah, ... can't fool me twice." §;-D |
|
10 Jul 04 - 01:09 AM (#1222732) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: GUEST Genie: and Mr Bigshot here correcting you misspells your name. I was just kidding anyway, and everyone knew what you meant. I did. But, it threw me for a few seconds. Like the Dr Hook song, ya know: "I got stoned and I missed it . . .". Then I thought, "Crap, he got in AGAIN!" LOL |
|
10 Jul 04 - 09:02 AM (#1222833) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: McGrath of Harlow which of the following be proper responses on election day? That's not the relevant question, surely - the point is, what woudl the likely effect be. Here's what a comment writer in today's Guardian had to say about that: "Travelling in the US recently, I asked most Americans I met what they thought the effect on the election of an October spectacular would be. "All, whatever their politics, believed that a second 9/11 would buy Bush a landslide second term." And that is why I would expect Al Qaeda to try just that, because a Bush victory would be what they would surely want to see. |
|
10 Jul 04 - 10:00 AM (#1222845) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: Midchuck Don't vote for a Yale graduate, member of Skull and Bones, who's a millionaire. Peter. |
|
10 Jul 04 - 11:26 AM (#1222885) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: Ebbie You're so right, Genie. I didn't give the gorgeous smooth-talker proper credit. Tell me again: How did we get in this mess? The fact that the bush even got close enough for the Supine Court to install him into the presidency is the real point. The man is a disaster- and has always been. |
|
10 Jul 04 - 12:55 PM (#1222912) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: Blackcatter I'll probably be boting for Kerry, but if you think that that will make the terrorists any happier, that's just silly. Under Kerry, America will still think it has the right to screw around everywhere in the world. That's why Muslim extremists target America. Kerry is a war monger too. He's just better than the idiot in office now for other reasons. |
|
10 Jul 04 - 03:51 PM (#1222975) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: McGrath of Harlow Pretty obviously the last thing Al Qaeda would want would be to have Bush replaced by someone with his head screwed on slightly better. If there's a pre-election special, the aim will be to try to ensure that Bush wins. |
|
11 Jul 04 - 02:09 PM (#1223369) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: Nigel Parsons Vote for Ronnie Reagan; a politician who will tell you no lies! Nigel |
|
11 Jul 04 - 02:53 PM (#1223381) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: Fishpicker Vote *Republicrat* to maintain the one party system! |
|
11 Jul 04 - 02:54 PM (#1223382) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: DougR McGrath:the logic of your statement re Osama wanting Bush to be re-elected escapes me. You think he enjoys being pursued all over Afghanstan, Pakastan, and points beyond by U.S.and British Special Forces? Kerry would probably invite him to the White House for a little "peace" chat, and a snifter of Brandy. DougR |
|
11 Jul 04 - 04:34 PM (#1223408) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: Bat Goddess Anybody notice this little item in today's news? And I thought for months that I'm just paranoid. Don't have time for a blue clicky -- gotta take a friend to the emergency room. http://story.news.yahoo.com/fc?cid=34&tmpl=fc&in=US&cat=Terrorism Yahoo! News Sun, Jul 11, 2004 Top Stories - Reuters U.S. Mulling How to Delay Nov. Vote in Case of Attack Sun, Jul 11, 2004 WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. counterterrorism officials are looking at an emergency proposal on the legal steps needed to postpone the November presidential election in case of an attack by al Qaeda, Newsweek reported on Sunday. Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge warned last week that Osama bin Laden (news - web sites)'s al Qaeda network may attack within the United States to try to disrupt the election. The magazine cited unnamed sources who told it that the Department of Homeland Security asked the Justice Department (news - web sites) last week to review what legal steps would be needed to delay the election if an attack occurred on the day before or the day of the election. The department was asked to review a letter to Ridge from DeForest Soaries, who is the chairman of the new U.S. Election Assistance Commission, the magazine said. The commission was created in 2002 to provide funds to the states to the replace punch card voting systems and provide other assistance in conducting federal elections. In his letter, Soaries pointed out that while New York's Board of Elections suspended primary elections in New York on the day of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, "the federal government has no agency that has the statutory authority to cancel and reschedule a federal election." Soaries wants Ridge to ask Congress to pass legislation giving the government such power, Newsweek reported in its latest issue that hits the newsstands on Monday. Homeland Security Department spokesman Brian Rochrkasse told the magazine the agency is reviewing the matter "to determine what steps need to be taken to secure the election." |
|
11 Jul 04 - 05:13 PM (#1223423) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: Don Firth Ebbie, "Supine Court." Absolutely brilliant! Don Firth |
|
11 Jul 04 - 05:23 PM (#1223426) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: McGrath of Harlow "You think he enjoys being pursued all over Afghanstan, Pakastan, and points beyond by U.S.and British Special Forces? I can't imagine he's too worried about that. If he was after a quiet peaceful life he'd have stayed home and enjoyed his riches. The point is, as a result of the actions of Bush, especially the Iraq occupation, the Al Qaeda operation is probably much stronger and the agenda of setting up a conflict between the Muslim world and the West is much further advanced. And that is what must surely be what matters - set against that, what is the loss of a few followers? |
|
11 Jul 04 - 05:29 PM (#1223428) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: Ebbie Thanks, Don! :) |
|
13 Jul 04 - 07:29 PM (#1224970) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: Bat Goddess So, is anyone else as concerned as I am about the administration's research into ways to postpone the November election? Am I just being paranoid, or is it a logical response to everything this administration has tried to pull -- starting with stealing the 2000 election? "I regret for my country when I reflect that God is just." -- Thomas Jefferson "Revolutions are caused by those who try to stop them." -- Voltaire Linn |
|
13 Jul 04 - 08:40 PM (#1225015) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: Fishpicker "So, is anyone else as concerned as I am about the administration's research into ways to postpone the November election?" If they are not , they should be! Anyone that fears living under a totalitarian regime should consider that this is one of the primary steps to implementing it. FP |
|
22 Jul 04 - 01:45 AM (#1231139) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: GUEST Fishbicker, why would they need to postpone the November election? The neo-con Repubs have already stalled all efforts to bring legislation to a vote in Congress that would require a paper trail (thus allowing a recount if needed this fall), and the voting software is "proprietary" and owned by pro-Bush companies. I.e., our voting system is being "privatized" as we speak. Ebbie, actually, I misquoted Dubya myself. His actual statement was "Fool me once, ... shame on ... ... ...uh ...shame on ... you. ... ... Fool me twice... ah ... ... ... can't get fooled again." §;-D I've been told since then that the "Can't get fooled again" is a lyric from The Who, BTW. |
|
22 Jul 04 - 02:28 AM (#1231152) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: DougR Upon reflection, I cannot, for the life of me, imagine why condoms should be brouht into the voting process. Things are complicated enough as they are...Oops, sorry, it's conundrum isn't it. DougR |
|
22 Jul 04 - 02:51 AM (#1231160) Subject: RE: BS: Voting Conundrum From: Fishpicker Voting system---------- HA! just smoke and mirrors. Nader is the only honest person running IMO. Too bad he has no chance under the one party system. FP |