Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Srexley who wrote (582358)	6/12/2004 11:42:48 AM
From: Mr. Palau	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769668

I think we may have covered this ground before, but to set the record straight, Florida law provided for two types of recounts: a mandatory machine recount if the vote for the candidates was one half percent or less (Fla. Elec. Code section 102.141, and a separate recount if requested by a candidate, which could be a manual recount (Section 102.166.)

To: Srexley who wrote (582358)	6/12/2004 2:37:16 PM
From: Johannes Pilch	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769668

Sure I have. I've trashed them myself. When I do it, it is in usually in response to a dickish statement like Bush is a Nazi, Pilch is a racist, Bush is a liar, etc. The same essentially applies to me. Leftists are constantly spewing outlandish claims and failing to cogently support them. The often repeated claim that Bush "stole" the election or was given the election has absolutely no valid support at all. No honest person would ever claim it. But leftists claim it all the time. Tejek is just being flatly dishonest when he claims the left gives valid "criticism" that yet gets insulted here. When leftists give clean and honest commentary, I have never seen it met with anything but clean and honest responses. But it is very rare, almost never happens, that the left does anything like show honor. Leftists constantly lie. I mean they lie flatly and persistently, lie, lie, lie, lie. "America is just a branch of the Likud Party." "Bush is a Chimp." "Congo-liza Rice is incompetent." "Ashcroft is evil" "Ashcroft is a hypocrite" "Ashcroft's church teaches Christians shouldn't befriend non-Christians" "Cheney is a thief." "Bush invaded for oil." "Bush went AWOL." "I don't have an SUV." " I threw away my medals" "I meant only the ribbons." The lies never end with the left. You can just count on a leftist lying his ass completely off and then turning directly to the Washington Friggin' Post to spread the additional lie that his missing rear looks like J. Lo's. It is one thing to speculate and then give valid evidence for it. When we attacked Clinton, for example, we almost ALWAYS supported it with valid support. We, for example, claimed Clinton was a rapist not because of some empty speculation. We claimed it because Democrat women themselves, MANY Democrat women, claimed it. We claimed it by even higher standards employed by the Democrats as they tried to lynch Clarence Thomas on the word of just one ideologically biased and highly antagonistic female. When we claimed Clinton was a liar and a cheat, we didn't just pull that out of our rear end, as Leftists commonly do. The United States government actually supported our claim along with the evidence of the purple dress. The left very rarely, if ever, has valid support for their claims. Close my eyes, spin around, and put a finger down on a leftist comment, made at any time, and what do I find? Irresponsible lies. Here is an example, given just a few moments ago by Kenny "Hyperleftist" Phillipps: "Bush has secret plan to slash veterans’ medical care by $1.9 billion over next two years" Message 20214859 His support? None at all, a slimy mention and corruption of some "secret" memo that is corroberrated by no one. All lies, all the time. That is the left. This is why the left is incessantly trashed here. As long as the left acts like trash, it is appropriate to trash the left.

To: Srexley who wrote (582358)	6/12/2004 3:30:52 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769668

"Cybernazi or Pilch or jallen et al trash liberals?" Sure I have. I've trashed them myself. When I do it, it is in usually in response to a dickish statement like Bush is a Nazi, Pilch is a racist, Bush is a liar, etc. Good. Then everything is even stevens. End of discussion. "When a presidential election is that close, you don't run to the Supreme Ct. to get an edge" When you lose a Presidential election, you concede gracefully and support the new President. There was more than enough reason to question the vote count.......suspiciously incorrect vote tallies particularly in GOP counties that favored Bush; misunderstood ballots; claims that minorities were not allowed to vote; hanging chads etc. This was an important presidential election.......the results should not have been left with so many questions. Algore sent in 75 lawyers to look for loopholes to get himself appointed President. Damn straight you fight like a dog to keep an unprincipaled jerk who is trying to steal an election at bay. Maybe you would concede your victory to this narrow minded idiot, but a principaled person would not. The question NO LIBERAL has been able to answer is: Why did Gore deserve a recount after the state mandated recount that Bush won? The answer is that under the law he did not. But I'm curious if you have an answer. Like I said, this was an important election.......there were too many questions left unanswered and swept under the carpet. Its too late now.......the damage has been done. The country is experiencing probably the worse schism since the Civil War.........My God, RR Jr. and Bush were openly dissing each other during RR's funeral. I was stunned. Curious if you will try to answer the question above. You have disparged the sitting President implying he ran to the courts even though he had legitimately won a close election. Back that up with something more than your emotion. There is no point to backing it up........like I said, the damage has been done. There are nearly two separate countries within these united states.......in part, due to the 2000 election and the way it was handled. "Freedom of speech permits us to say what we like within reason......." Then why are you against the response they got? You can trash our President, that is true. But you can trash the trashers, which is what happened. It is also just about all I do here, because it is NOT CRITICISM to call someone a name. It is a personal attack. They said they were ashamed to be from the same state as Bush. That is not a personal attack, its a statement of how someone feels. It should not result in death threats. "If they are that thin skinned, they don't belong in a democracy." Sounds like you are a bit thin skinned. I condemned the death threats, but I am also sure there were very few of them. That's convenient! There were not just a few against the DCs......and it didn't stop there........one of the DCs had her children threatened and harassed in public. Another's father was threatened. I was stunned at how mean spirited the reaction was. I noticed you did not respond to whether you would view it as criticism or a personal insult if someone said the same thing about your father. You still call it "criticism", which is a bit dishonest imo. Personal insult or criticism.......I would not like it but I would not try to kill someone over it. Besides, you all are not the sons and daughters of Bush.