PDA

View Full Version : Thank You Mr. Clinton, for Being Firm and Not Stepping Down


AustinChief
12-14-2000, 05:28 PM
Because of Bill Clinton's greediness and lack of intelligence to step away after committing felonious perjury while in office, he insured that Al never got the main job.

I believe as close as the race was, if Al had the Oval Office for even a year, he would have taken an incumbent vote over the top.

I never thought I would say this, but THANKS Willy. Because of your greed, the Republicans control all 3 assets for at least the next 2 years.

Baby Lee
12-14-2000, 06:41 PM
Right on, Russ. Now an honest, ungreedy oil man is in office. We're all safe now.

Baby Lee
12-14-2000, 06:42 PM
Did I mention he also has an IQ of a garden slug?

Idahojim
12-14-2000, 06:57 PM
Sheepers Mi...that's better than 2 face Al !

Seems that you are still upset over the election?

Devin Vierth
12-14-2000, 07:16 PM
Mi_C_F

Lets see one has MBA from Harvard, other has flunked 7 classes and been kicked out of Divinity School and was not accepted for Law School. I think you may have it backwards, clearly if either of the two has intellectual problems it must be Al Gore.

------------------
Jim Reynolds
If I were a Democrat I would surely be a sore loser!

AustinChief
12-14-2000, 07:39 PM
Joe - Sorry, I was pointing out what I thought to be a fact. The comment was not condescending to Al Gore in anyway. I truly believe if Al held the OVal Office for more than 6 months he would have won.

I was embittered that the President of the United States could lie to his employers and in Federal COurt and suffer no repercussions for his felonious actions. I couldnt believe he didnt step down. Now, it seems that his selfish actions have bitten the demcrats right on the tush.

As far as the intelligence thing:

#1. George Bush attended one college (and one of the most prestigious in the U.S.) and graduated no problem. Al Gore flunked out of school after school.

#2. George Bush saw he was lacking in foreign affairs so he named one of the most well versed men on the subject in the Free World as his VP. Gore chose someone to help with the minority votes and feebly attempted to steal the religious vote.

#3. Bush gave his speech in a den of lions, offering an olive branch. Gore gave his speech in front of coworkers and friends.


Looking at the three above, I would say that the garden pest intelligence does not belong to George W. Bush.

[This message has been edited by KCWolfman (edited 12-14-2000).]

AustinChief
12-14-2000, 07:46 PM
Joe - And you are definitely spreading uninformed rhetoric with the Oil Man comment. You had better do a little research and see who inherited several hundred controlling shares of Occidental Oil and was over a project to see that natives were displaced to drill for oil in South America.

see: http://www.algore-2000.org/bigoil.html#3
and http://www.commondreams.org/views/050500-103.htm
and http://www.oikos.org/ecology/uwa.htm

So while you complain about George Bush and his oil ties, remember that George has never been linked to driving people out of their homes under the threat of violence and without any type of compensation merely to take the oil from under their lands like your boy UncleAlbert.

Ecto-I
12-14-2000, 08:08 PM
Oil is the lifeblood of capitalism, and the barons will do, and have the power to do anything to secure it. I would be sore afraid to see the list of heads of state that are somehow tied into the oil loop.
"Big Oil" fliped the bill for Dubyah's capaign, therefore they can do no wrong in his eyes. But I'm not suggesting that "W" is the first "powerful" American to thrive under the wing of the Oil Business. But his association cannot be denied.

I would love to see proof that good marks in college make you: A) an intellectual B) a valid candidate for President of the USA

------------------
Chief Justice Pants
(D)- Texas

AustinChief
12-14-2000, 08:12 PM
Chief - I never stated that grades were a qualification. However, it seems a little odd to me to mention a candidate's lack of intelligence while your own candidate didnt have the gumption,intelligence, or dependability to finish school.

Ecto-I
12-14-2000, 08:22 PM
When I listen to a person speak , I gain insight on their intellectual capacity . . . regardless of what they speak of.

Here's how I rank the candidates

1.Cheney
2.Nader
3.Gore
4.Lieberman
5.Bush
6.Buchanan

Much to my misfortune Cheney and I have no social issues on which we agree.

Ecto-I
12-14-2000, 08:24 PM
If Clinton had kept his pee pee in his pants
Al would be the Prez Elect now . . .but why dwell on the past.

milkman
12-14-2000, 08:34 PM
I posted a link to a site a while ago where a guy in France had actually made a car that runs on compressed air, in other words you could fill up with your own air compressor and not pay any money to any oil companies. It was going into production over there and we still have not heard anything over here about it.
http://www.news24.co.za/News24/Wheels24/News/0,2979,2-15-47_929116,00.html

[This message has been edited by morphius (edited 12-14-2000).]

AustinChief
12-14-2000, 10:13 PM
Red Pants - I dunno, maybe I am still influenced by the man Nader was in the late 70's but I would rate him below Buchanan on your list.

AustinChief
12-14-2000, 10:34 PM
Morph - The car reminds me of a VW on steroids... but I am interested. I guess we will have to keep a watch in June to see if production actually begins.

Is the wife home yet? How is she? Has the cat adapted to the "new" company?

milkman
12-14-2000, 10:39 PM
Russ - The car is uglier then spit, but it is french so you can't expect much in looks. It is a very interesting concept and would go a long way to ending all these stupid middle east problems.

The wife is home, things are going really well on that front. We will have to get together after the holiday season is over, way to busy with things now. The cat was a little bitter, but is getting over it for the most part.

AustinChief
12-14-2000, 10:41 PM
Morph - Definitely. You have my number and can call anytime. I would suggest after the first week of January at the earliest. My wife and I are still pushing overtime and will be until then.

Give our regards to the MorphMaid and Morphette.... Beth suggests the name Sean (LOL). Shush, dont say that too loud.

milkman
12-14-2000, 10:46 PM
Russ - Works for me, I will give you a ring. LOL about Sean, I will have to tell my wife that she needs to ask yours about him :) I really would have never guessed that picking a name would be this hard, but I have shot down just about every name I have heard.

milkman
12-14-2000, 10:48 PM
Oh BTW, it is Morphlet not Morphette since it is a boy.

egonzo
12-14-2000, 11:37 PM
How about Mason?

Baby Lee
12-15-2000, 06:09 AM
Roy- I'm not upset at all. THe only thing that upset me was that McCain didn't get the nomination. As a veteran, I lost a tremendous amount of respect for the Bush campaign when his camp insinuated that McCain had suffered too much psychological damage to be an effective leader.
Logical- Didn't Bush go to Yale? Anyway, neither candidate would have gotten into either college without their daddies.
Russ-The only reason I responded like I did is because all right wing extremists do on this board is bad mouth Gore, when he is no worse than Bush. BOTH have ties to big business. Wanna talk corruption? Every time I bring up Bush's role in the S&L bailout, just like in the election, the subject is avoided.

You're threads would be much better if they weren't so blatently one sided.

[This message has been edited by Mi_chief_fan (edited 12-15-2000).]

[This message has been edited by Mi_chief_fan (edited 12-15-2000).]

Chiefaholic
12-15-2000, 09:55 AM
Let's not forget that the U of Texas rejected the coke-snortin' party boy's application to attend. Here's the letter of rejection from Dean Page Keeton:

"I'm sure that there is a place for young George Bush somewhere. However, in light of his grades on the LSAT exams, that place is not the School of Law at the University of Texas."

I rank 'em like so:

1.Lieberman- full package.
2.Nader- really sharp, but a jerk.
3.Cheny- awareness and great people skills.
4.Gore- computer brain, but socially awkward.
5.Bush- dull and aloof.
6.Buchannon- a wacko.

bishop_74
12-15-2000, 10:04 AM
In reference to the topic title.....

Gore and his greedy bunch of henchmen can blame themselves for losing Florida. If they would originally asked for a recount of the entire state instead of just 4 democratic counties the USSC would have allowed it.

Gore got what he deserved.

Chiefaholic
12-15-2000, 10:18 AM
Nope - the USSC decided that the Fla legislature's standard for handcounts was unconstitutional because it violated the equal protection clause by allowing local canvassing boards to set the criteria to decide determining the will of the voter. The Bush campaign would have pushed to have that rule changed after the election was over even if Gore had asked for a state-wide handcount early on.

Phobia
12-15-2000, 10:23 AM
One slight correction, UD, the USSC decided the FSC's standard, actually a lack thereof, for handcounts were unconstitutional.

bishop_74
12-15-2000, 10:37 AM
I should of made myself more clear.

If Gore would have originally asked for recounts in all counties the whole process would have been sped up. Thus giving time for the FLSC to clarify standards, which would give equal protection.<P>

Chiefaholic
12-15-2000, 11:01 AM
Titus - The FLSC said the standard to be used is that set forth by the legislature before the election. The FLSC standard was explicitly the legislature's standard. So a rejection of the FLSC standard is a rejection of the legislature's standard.

Phobia
12-15-2000, 11:13 AM
The legislature did not specify hand counts in the Contest provision of their law 102.168.

Manual recounts are only described in section 166, the Protest provision, and are to be done by the canvassing boards. It's apparent that had this actually come under scrutiny by the USSC, they would have thrown this out.

The FSC created a new manual count procedure for the contest provision (a clear violation of Article II) and the USSC deemed this unconstitutional because of the lack of standards.

The FSC couldnt rule w/o violating the US Constitution to recount the votes w/o creating new law. The fact that they did it speaks volumes as to the problems our country faces with judicial activism--and it's not limited to only one side of the 'aisle'.

[This message has been edited by KCTitus (edited 12-15-2000).]

Ecto-I
12-15-2000, 02:30 PM
wowzers . . .

either yous guys are attorneys or you have an amazing attention span.

that's why its so tough being part of the political minority on this BBS. Many of you GOP types have some serious ammo . . . not just shootin' blanks.

You're still kinda wacky though :D

------------------
Chief Justice Pants
(D)- Texas

milkman
12-15-2000, 02:47 PM
CRP - That is why we vote the way we do, we pay attention to what is going on and get our facts straight and don't believe all the rhetoric. :)

Morphius
Non-football smack.

egonzo
12-15-2000, 03:52 PM
This whole thing could've been avoided if he would've won his OWN state. That's sad when your home town disses you.

Chiefaholic
12-15-2000, 04:12 PM
Titus....Look at the contest provision language. It sez the FLSC can come up with any remedy to fix a broken election. The problem was the undervotes has been prevented from being counted. So the fix was count them using the language set forth by the legislature before the election. Thats not "making new law." Thats following the law that was in place. At least, it was in place until the USSC came in and said the law had to be changed after the fact. The USSC didn't say a handcount was not a valid. They said the canvassing boards could not use the handcount method described by the legislature.