> Julian Pinko further inciting Roderick Commie:
Hey ! At least _I_ live in an unashamedly monarchical utopian city-state, which is more that any of you guys can boast of !
And _we_ are going to have *twenty eight* Twin Towers too, so there !!!
> > > Florida. Texas. California. The Reps have
> > > shown that they have less interest
> > > in the Democratic process than in winning.
> >
> > They are no longer a democratic political
> > party, that's obvious, and if you're
> > a Republican This Means You <snip>
> >
> > I think it's clear that the 2000 election was
> > basically a coup d'état. *
>
> Oh, please. First off, the Democrats started it, back
> with Bork;
Who Bork ? Can I have the commie RR version, please ? :-)
> if you think there's no connection, ask any
> Republican activist why they are willing to play
> dirty.
...
> Second, nothing illegal has happened.
I'm sorry, but when the USA proves itself incapable of organising a SIMPLE RECOUNT of cast ballots, then it's just blindingly obvious that democracy has taken the back seat. Not to mention the fact that the unelected Supreme Court decided that its powers were superior to the Electoral College (that "fine" "democratic" institution) in matters of, well, elections ...
Constitutional crises'R'US ?!
Not to mention the fact that, constitutionally, Florida ought to have either a) recounted (duh !) b) returned a 'contested' decision if outcome remained uncertain (as it was) and therefore have sent no electors to the College
> What
> we're talking about here is the perverse adaptation of
> legitimate constitutional mechanisms to deal with
> matters not intended by the mechanism.
Frankly, your Electoral College system is outmoded, outdated, and just plain SUCKS !!
Face facts !
> Finally, Bush won Florida, which meant he won the
> electoral college. Yeah, it was close,
Goddamn close : next time 'round I hope his brother will be more skilful in organising prison sentences for the pinko riff-raff (with accompanying removal of voting rights) and more effective anti-nigger road blocks on election day.
> > It's sickening. Well, to look on the bright
> > side** at least we Old Europeans can
> > now simply laugh at US presidents using
> > the D-word.
>
> And that would be because your governments have been
> so enthusiastic about putting the new EU constitution
> to popular referenda? Exactly how democratic is it to
> fundamentally reform such an institution without wider
> buy in, against what the polls say are a sizable
> majority opinion against the new constitution?
In fact, the "new" EU Constitution is basically a compilation of texts from previous EU treaties.
The one contentious proposal is that decisions be made by a qualified (2/3rds I believe) majority (AKA democracy) instead of requiring unanimous agreement (AKA paralysis).
Right, 17/25 governments instead of 15/15. My God, how Evil, the big states are taking over, let's head for the bomb shelters !!!
I mean, let's not mention the fact that any lobby of nine countries will be able to effectively scrap anything they want to, ooooh no, don't want to give the wrong impression here do we ?
I understand that the Bush administration is keen to have the new constitution blocked. Hmmm. Wonder why ?
> This seems to me like another case of the loser of an
> election not being satisfied with the results. I
Oh please, some of us actually live in Europe, and we are quite used to the concept of the protest vote.
> > The crazy thing is that these people are too
> > stupid to realise what the long-term
> > consequences of this _will_ be.
>
> Not stupid. Just inexperienced.
AKA stupid.
> I agree that the consequences will be bad.
Yeah, unfortunately. For everyone.
> I think
> the parallel to draw is what has happened to the
> judicial nomination process since the Democrats Borked
> Bork.
I just wish that the WASP was a less violent beast.
> > Unless they're planning cool new pro-neo-con
> > anti-choice election laws,
> > enforced by heavily-armed police, I guess
>
> The real risk in election laws is the idea of making
> voting "electronic".
The whole concept of the voting machine just totally SUCKS !
But yeah, you're right : electronic records can be tracelessly modified by anyone with any level of skill in computer hacking, not to mention ...
> ... immense fraud
> by the three companies in the US that make election
> equipment. I believe it has happened in the recent
> past, at least here in Dallas. There was a certain
> district in Dallas in the 1984 election that voted
> exactly 60-40; interestingly, that district was a
> river bottom with no residents and no voting booths.
> Nonetheless, the computer-tabulated vote showed the
> ballots.
Omigod, you guys are sooooo screwed.
Unfortunately, you have all the WMDs, and so are we. :-(
:-(
> > Heck, I say call in the UN and demand that
> > the US destroy its huge stockpile of totally
> > illegal WMDs and dismantle all of its WMD
> > research programmes. (beautiful dreamer)
>
> The US is in compliance with all relevant
> international treaties, so how, exactly, are our
> weapons illegal?
Because you guys routinely veto any international treaties you dislike, and also unilaterally denounce any past treaties that may become personally irksome to your present commanders-in-chief ?
Not signing the treaties you dislike doesn't make your chemical and biological weaponry any less illegal.
Using your rationale, Saddam's old US-financed arsenal (that he destroyed) was perfectly OK according to Iraqi law, and so is North Korea's nuclear one, for similar "legal" reasons.
> And if you hadn't noticed, Bush has unilaterally
> destroyed more US nukes in the last two years than
> Clinton did in eight.
He has ? Hah ! Didn't know !
Score one to Bush.
> Julian, seriously, be more balanced in your criticism.
> You are too easy a target.
It takes one to know one ... :-)
Seriously, what pisses me of most about Bush (and Blair)
is that they didn't have the brains to say the simple truth :
they wanted Saddam removed NOT because of any
non-existent WMDs, but because he was
a blood-thirsty dictator who ordered a genocide or three,
and needed punishing and removal.
If _this_ had been given as the reason for the war, well, I think far more people would be supporting you now.
Julian
Powered by hypermail