In a message dated 11/16/2000 3:08:49 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > *Only a clear count of the votes, no matter the cost will settle > the dust! I say COUNT ON! Then they ALL need to be counted - not just the votes in states where that " other" party typically wins. :>) The really annoying thing is IF the vote had not been close, say like 20,000 more for Bush, then the votes that were thrown out wouldn't even be an issue - because that happens EVERY TIME. Besides, how do you fairly count all the ballots? With one Democrat and one Republican counting? Who decides in ties? Or like some of the counties were doing - with 2 Democrats and 1 Republican. EVERY TIME there was a disagreement the Democrats outvoted the Republican. And finally, how do you determine how someone intended to vote? Accept the count and the recount. That's what the law says and that's where it should end. And yes, I am fearful of who the winner might be. I know at least one who's morale will not be lifted or encouraged if Al wins. And don't bother telling me that the ultimate winner will be the one that God wants there. Not everything that happens in this world is His will - I know that may sound like heresy to some but it's truth - and I won't debate it. Now Duane, in spite of the fact that "your man" was never a contender, I can't believe you'd rather have a baby-killing, gun-stealing, tree-hugging, semi-communist/socialist for a president than GW - who at the very least isn't any of those things! I know you sometimes like to PLAY the antagonist and other times the peacemaker but in this instance, it's almost as if in trying to be one - you're becoming the other! Make sense? Anyways, gotta run. Love ya bro! Michael _______ To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe rangernet" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://rangernet.org/subscribe.htm and fill out the form. "Eat the hay & spit out the sticks! - A#1's mule" RTKB&G4JC! http://rangernet.org Autoresponder: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
