Author Topic: We didn't have to HAVE Bush in 2000  (Read 499 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline two-blocked

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1155
We didn't have to HAVE Bush in 2000
« on: April 30, 2013, 02:33:41 AM »
O'Connor suggests misgivings over Bush vs. Gore
 
 Retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor is suggesting for the first time that she's not sure the court should have chosen to rule in 2000 presidential election dispute between George W. Bush and Al Gore.
 
The 83-year-old O'Connor tells the Chicago Tribune editorial board that perhaps she and her colleagues should have turned down the Bush campaign's appeal of a Florida Supreme Court decision to allow a recount requested by the Gore campaign.
 
O'Connor was in the majority in the high court's 5-4 decision that stopped the recount and sealed Mr. Bush's election. She has long lamented the controversy over the decision she said gave the court a "less-than-perfect reputation."
 
 But in the past, O'Connor has said the court had no choice but to take on the case. She retired in 2006.
 
 "It took the case and decided it at a time when it was still a big election issue," the newspaper quotes her as telling its editorial board Friday. "Maybe the court should have said, 'We're not going to take it,
 
The case, she told the Tribune, "stirred up the public" and "gave the court a less-than-perfect reputation."
 
 "Obviously the court did reach a decision and thought it had to reach a decision," she said. "It turned out the election authorities in Florida hadn't done a real good job there and kind of messed it up. And probably the Supreme Court added to the problem at the end of the day."
 
 O'Connor, named to the high court by President Reagan in 1981, was its first woman justice. "Though she tended to side with the conservatives, O'Connor was known as the court's swing vote," the Tribune notes.
 
 
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57582023/oconnor-suggests-misgivings-over-bush-vs-gore/
 

Offline ChungDoQuan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1417
  • Eisenhower Conservative
Re: We didn't have to HAVE Bush in 2000
« Reply #1 on: April 30, 2013, 02:38:25 AM »
 :)
If you give up, THEY don't have to win.

"'Cause what they do in Washington, they just take care of number 1. And number 1 ain't you. $__t, you ain't even number 2!" Frank Zappa

The greatest idea the right ever had is personal responsibility; the greatest idea the left ever had is social responsibility. Both take effort.

The Founding Fathers had complete access to the Bible, but they came up with the Constitution as our governing document.

Offline Dixie Dude

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4129
  • Gender: Male
Re: We didn't have to HAVE Bush in 2000
« Reply #2 on: April 30, 2013, 03:03:41 AM »
A recount was done, by the State of Florida on its own, after the decision, and Bush still won, actually by an even greater margin than originally posted.  Of course this was NOT on the liberal drive by media.  I live in the south, and we know.  Also, Obama wasn't qualified to be on Indiana's ballot through forged signatures in 2008.  Also isn't it strange that in the so called toss up states, many districts reported 108% and 140% of the voters voted, and they were 100% for Obama.  hmmm.  Hillary did qualify for Indiana, but Obama legally did not.  That alone would have thrown the nomination to Hillary.  I think she would have won over McCain, and been a better president than Obama, especially using Bill's advice.  He was good at working up compromise deals and actually getting things done.  Not as polarising as Obama is.  Obama is a narcisist (sp), (spell check doesn't work on this computer).  He is arrogant, and does a temper tantrum when he doesn't get his way.  At least Bush just shut up when he didn't get his way.  He respected the congressional power leg of the government, didn't try to write executive orders around what he didn't get.  His administration also warned congress in 2006 of the impending housing bubble, but they did NOTHING, because the economy was just booming, yet he is blamed for the failure. 

Offline coyotejoe

  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2937
  • Gender: Male
Re: We didn't have to HAVE Bush in 2000
« Reply #3 on: April 30, 2013, 05:03:08 AM »
True Dixie Dude, the Gore crowd are sore losers and like to pretend they really won but got cheated. The US Supreme Court was right to intervene to overturn the verdict of the Florida supreme court which had no legal authority to involve itself in the process, their action was in clear violation of the Florida state constitution which gives the State Attorney General the authority to call a close election.
The story of David & Goliath only demonstrates the superiority of ballistic projectiles over hand weapons, poor old Goliath never had a chance.

Offline powderman

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32823
  • Gender: Male
Re: We didn't have to HAVE Bush in 2000
« Reply #4 on: April 30, 2013, 06:59:49 AM »
DIXIE DUDE, COYOTEJOE. Good posts guys, gas was also $1.60 per gal and a brick of 22 LRHPS was $12. This was a stupid thread to begin with. POWDERMAN.  >:( >:(
Mr. Charles Glenn “Charlie” Nelson, age 73, of Payneville, KY passed away Thursday, October 14, 2021 at his residence. RIP Charlie, we'll will all miss you. GB

Only half the people leave an abortion clinic alive.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAiOEV0v2RM
What part of ILLEGAL is so hard to understand???
I learned everything about islam I need to know on 9-11-01.
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDqmy1cSqgo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_u9kieqGppE&feature=related
http://www.illinois.gov/gov/contactthegovernor.cfm

Offline ChungDoQuan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1417
  • Eisenhower Conservative
If you give up, THEY don't have to win.

"'Cause what they do in Washington, they just take care of number 1. And number 1 ain't you. $__t, you ain't even number 2!" Frank Zappa

The greatest idea the right ever had is personal responsibility; the greatest idea the left ever had is social responsibility. Both take effort.

The Founding Fathers had complete access to the Bible, but they came up with the Constitution as our governing document.

Offline Dixie Dude

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4129
  • Gender: Male
Re: We didn't have to HAVE Bush in 2000
« Reply #6 on: April 30, 2013, 08:59:58 AM »
Well, we all know Obama cheated to get on the ballot in Indiana, which would have given Hillary the nod for the Dem president.  This is a FACT.  We all know he also cheated in predomiantely black districts of swing states with over 100% of the vote in several preciencts (sp, no spell check on work computer), with Romney getting NONE.  Romney was surging before the election and would probably have won without the cheating.  Also, why isn't Obamas college records made public like everyone elses were.  Hmm, maybe he cheated by getting foreign student status grants to go to school, along with affirmative action.  Bush so far was the only president with a masters degree.  He also went to Yale and Harvard, and because he was white, he wasn't moved on because of his race, he had to EARN his degrees, so he was actually smarter than any other president. 
 
Also doesn't matter about popular vote, it matters about STATES.  We are the United STATES.  Low populated states have just as much say so as a handful of heavy populated states.  One could win the election with probably only New York, Florida, Texas, and California by popular vote, but that leaves 46 states with various issues that don't even affect these states.  The electoral college does seem to work best for a better balance. 

Offline nw_hunter

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5172
  • Gender: Male
Re: We didn't have to HAVE Bush in 2000
« Reply #7 on: April 30, 2013, 09:45:35 AM »
DIXIE DUDE, COYOTEJOE. Good posts guys, gas was also $1.60 per gal and a brick of 22 LRHPS was $12. This was a stupid thread to begin with. POWDERMAN.  >:( >:(


LOL! Why bother responding then? ;)
Freedom Of Speech.....Once we lose it, every other freedom will follow.

Offline ChungDoQuan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1417
  • Eisenhower Conservative
Re: We didn't have to HAVE Bush in 2000
« Reply #8 on: April 30, 2013, 11:21:58 AM »
Y'all did NOT go to the "gas prices" argument!  :o Try comparing the highest Bush gas prices to the highest Obama gas prices, not the lowest Bush gas prices to the highest Obama prices. Hint: both lowest prices were the same (economic collapse, remember?), and the Bush peak 'way passes Obama's peak.

(Some of y'all could give hypocrite LESSONS!  ;D )
If you give up, THEY don't have to win.

"'Cause what they do in Washington, they just take care of number 1. And number 1 ain't you. $__t, you ain't even number 2!" Frank Zappa

The greatest idea the right ever had is personal responsibility; the greatest idea the left ever had is social responsibility. Both take effort.

The Founding Fathers had complete access to the Bible, but they came up with the Constitution as our governing document.

Offline lakota

  • Trade Count: (26)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3472
  • Gender: Male
Re: We didn't have to HAVE Bush in 2000
« Reply #9 on: April 30, 2013, 03:45:25 PM »
Nope we sure didn't have to have Bush.We could have all pulled our heads out of our asses and voted for Harry Browne and been far better off than we would ever be with any mainstream garbage liberal or republicrat candidate. I don't know about 2008 and Bob Barr(not libertarian enough for me based on his history) but he couldn't be any worse than the two worthless mainstream pieces of garbage they paraded out for our consideration. and as far as 2012 goes, again we had another chance to pull our heads from our asses with two quality candidates, one being Ron Paul in the primary and Gary Johnson in the general election. Both were head and shoulders above ObaRomaney and we would be far better off with either of them, but again we failed miserably. I guess we are reaping what we have sown.
Hi NSA! Can you see how many fingers I am holding up?

Offline Oldshooter

  • GBO subscriber and supporter
  • Moderators
  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6426
Re: We didn't have to HAVE Bush in 2000
« Reply #10 on: April 30, 2013, 04:16:05 PM »
Quote
This was a stupid thread to begin with.

Well I feel better! I missed the "Great lessor evil" Thread where the list was made.
 
I feel closer to all you guys now that i have been included in this one!
“Owning a handgun doesn’t make you armed any more than owning a guitar makes you a musician.”

"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."

Offline SwampThing762

  • Trade Count: (10)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2367
Re: We didn't have to HAVE Bush in 2000
« Reply #11 on: April 30, 2013, 04:16:56 PM »
I live in Florida, and met the Gorebot when I was a high school senior.    I am glad that Bush won the election, as Gore would have really pushed for a permanent AWB and an offensive towards repealing all concealed carry laws.

ST762
We learned the true nature of Islam on 11 Sept 2001.

Show your appreciation for Islam....eat more bacon.

"Non nobis Domine, non nobis, sed nomini tuo da gloriam." (Not to us Lord, not us, but to your name give the glory)  -- Knights Templar motto

Offline Anna

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2263
  • Gender: Female
Re: We didn't have to HAVE Bush in 2000
« Reply #12 on: April 30, 2013, 05:13:37 PM »
:)


No kidding, they glorify a man who stares like a monkey in the headlights . Oh I'm sorry that was
only because there was nothing there! All godly and such yet its his policy's that are being used
today to cripple us. So what if Obama uses them it's you cowards who did nothing about it.
The most powerful country in the world in relation to small arms in the hands of its citizens.
Stockpiled ammunition rivaling many country's millitary stockpiles. A law that actually allows those
citizens to have all this stuff. And what do we do?
We are going to go get them with our forums by golly.Just look how bad a$$ we are with each other.
A huge pack of mall ninjas so overweight and old they would be lucky to carry that gun much less
use it. Cut off their meds they would whither and die. Leave them to their forum based discussions
and they will oft themselves. Stir that pot with a few of them acting like they are one of them and
they will all follow eliminating each other one by one .
Plant a real communist in one of their more popular sites engaging in mock battles with one of
their more favored religious members and let the world see how they really are.
I mean, who is going to help a bunch like that they would be better off dealing with the ones who
were successful in destroying them from within. Bubba go get your gun your going to have to be
a lot more organized than that. I've got my ammo by golly go get your own you can not have any
of mine.