Finally, someone who wants to do something other than call Bush a moron! (...Rounds of Applause...) I would love to debate these issues. It's much more intellectually rousing that arguing why or why not Bush is a moron, or why he got the grades he got!
Kevin > > 1. Bush's war-mongering: This all depends on whether or not you believe > Suddam is a threat to world peace or safety of US Citizens. If he is, then > Bush's position may be the only thing that actually keeps us from having to > fight. Bullies only understand the willingness to use force and this is > supported by Saddam's recent actions. If he is not a threat, then Bush's > threats and eventual use of force is wrong. Do you agree with this? If so, > educate me on why I shouldn't be concerned about Iraq? I don't know enough > to agree or disagree with Bush and I don't know how I can better informed. > By the way, I am less concerned with the war then the cost of the clean-up. > If we attack, we take the responsibility to fix. I am not sure that we are > smart enough ( collective we, not just GW ). > > 2. Education - Spending on education should clearly be a priority. Do you > believe that more money should be put into the current public infrastructure > or that this system needs to be fixed and only alternative school systems > and potentially even competition is required to fix the issue? > > 3. Defense spending - We truly waste too much money hear. However, > proposed cuts are regularly reversed by senators not willing to give up jobs > in their states. I seem to remember Bush's team actually trying to stop > some major programs to only have congress slap his wrists. Since ultimately > Congress controls the purse strings, who did you vote for in congress and > what is their record on defense spending? > > Great discussion. But I didn't get anything done today. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Cantrell, Adam [mailto:Acantrell@;kentlaw.edu] > Sent: Monday, October 21, 2002 4:58 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: RE: CRUISE OF A LIFETIME > > > No, it's just a really old/tired debate that has already been beat to death. > Some people feel he was appointed, some people think it was absolutely fair > and square. Since the govt. isn't really going to do anything about it, most > people are willing to just wait to vote dumbya out of the office instead of > sitting around for 4 years being unproductive. All I was asking is what > position would you feel more honorable in - holding the popular vote and not > being president; or having your brother's state create mass amounts of > scandal/accidents/chads/bullshit which in turn resulted in the court > appointing you president? > > By court decision (4 people sitting in a room twiddling their balls, > wondering how their decision will affect them), yes, Dumbya is our > president. You win. > > By recount (in a state where the highest elected official happens to be his > brother, with months/years preparation before the actual recounts), yes, > Dumbya is our president. You win. > > How does all of this not make Dumbya a complete ass hat for wanting to wage > war, cutting Education, and increasing defense spending in a time where the > world couldn't possibly be in a better position for global peace? > > Adam. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Andy Ousterhout [mailto:andy@;omygoodness.com] > > Sent: Monday, October 21, 2002 4:41 PM > > To: CF-Community > > Subject: RE: CRUISE OF A LIFETIME > > > > > > Beth, > > > > I agree with you. I find it interesting the resounding silence of the > > "Stolen Election" camp when asked to discuss the facts. This > > camp seems > > much more comfortable name calling then truly discussing the issues. > > > > Andy > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: BethF [mailto:dawg@;alaska.com] > > Sent: Monday, October 21, 2002 3:51 PM > > To: CF-Community > > Subject: Re: CRUISE OF A LIFETIME > > > > > > > Would one of you from the "GW is a court appointed > > president" team please > > > discuss all of the recounts that have been performed? How > > many would have > > > swayed the election if the Supreme Court hadn't interfered. > > Again, I > > don't > > > remember seeing a single one. So if you can't show a > > recount that supports > > > your view and there are recounts that support Bush won with > > and without > > the > > > Supremes, are you just avoiding reality? > > > > > > Its not a matter of saying that Bush didnt' win the electoral vote, he > > clearly did - its a matter of whether the electoral college > > is relevant and > > fair. At the time of the creation of the electoral college > > it was created > > because the "common man" supposedly didn't have the smarts to vote for > > himself so he voted for someone smarter than him to do it. > > I personally > > find that notion offensive & outdated and would prefer to > > see the president > > elected solely on the basis of the public vote. > > > > Does anyone know if there were any other times a president was elected > > without winning the popular vote? > > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_community This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting.
