Answers below... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andy Ousterhout" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 21, 2002 6:58 PM Subject: RE: CRUISE OF A LIFETIME
> So, according to the recounts he won? So walk me thru how the Supreme Court > action did anything but enforce the election and call an end to the fixing > that was going on? > It was not the court's decision to make. Also, there were conflicts of interest and the justices involved did not recuse themselves: Clarence Thomas's wide worked at the Heritage Foundation and had just been hired by GW. Antonin Scalia's son was a lawyer with Gibson, Dunn And Crutcher which, BTW, was the law firm representing GW in front of the Supreme court. BTW - the Washington Post reported that "Bush's lead would have vanished if the recount had been conducted under the severely restrictive standards that some Republicans advocated...The review found that the result would have been different if every canvassing board in every county had examined the undervote...[Under] the most inclusive standard [that is, a standard that sought to include the true will of ALL the people] Gore would have won by 393 votes...On ballots that [suggested] a fault with either the machine or the voter's ability to use it...Gore would have won by 299 votes." The Palm Beach Post also reported that an estimated 3000 voters, mostly elderly and Jewish, who thought they were voting for Al Gore ended up punching the wrong hole - for Pat Buchanan. Even Buchanan went on TV to decalre that no way in hell did those Jewish voters vote for him. > So it looks like we can close out that discussion and move onto your > concerns on his policy decisions vis a vis foreign policy, education and > defense spending. Which one shall we address first. How about foreign > policy: > > 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 ). > In case you missed it or have forgotten, GW went on record in a speech and personalized the entire thing, stating that Saddam was the man who tried to kill his daddy. Not, in my opinion, a reason to risk American lives. He also keeps claiming that there is evidence that clearly shows that Saddam is a present threat yet there has been no such evidence presented to the UN. > 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? > Texas had one of the worst Education systems during GW's tenure as Governor. I have also not seen him do anything positive for education in this country. > 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? > I remember GW accusing the Clinton administration of "nation building" yet, here we are doing the same thing in Afghanistan and, if he has his way, we would be doing the same thing in Iraq. If it weren't for GW the US would not be focusing on Iraq right now so, guess who's holding the purse strings on that? > Great discussion. But I didn't get anything done today. > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_community Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm
