BT: Jackson Baker Thinks You Could Be Right

[sirs]

Sirs, Source, I hope you have statistics to back up your claim. The fact is when a Republican get only 10% of the votes in any state, that raises a red flag. In any other election year the Republicans would be in court demanding a recount and an investigation. Take my word for it, Sirs, Republicans elected their man, by what ever means became necessary.

Larry, to be bluntly honest, I have no clue what you just said.  Ami provided the statistics, and what's been made clear is that a candidate running on a pure anti-war/anti-Bush platform is not going to do well.  

And your continued harping on non-validated claims of stolen elections under Bush, now completely debunked as this current election cycle had just as many if not more close razor thin elections, that happened to go the Democrats way, yet you don't see the GOP going ape snot demanding recount after recount, investigation after investigation.

[Amianthus]

The fact is when a Republican get only 10% of the votes in any state, that raises a red flag.

Not when Republicans only amount to 26% of the voters. Even if every Republican voted for the Republican candidate, that candidate would have lost. As BT said, they made a pragmatic vote - the race was down to Lieberman and Lamont, they made sure the one who was closest to their viewpoint won.

[larry]

Sounds like they were being pragmatic and wanted their vote to count.



Good afternoon, BT, I can live with that. I'm not sure Democrats are going to be happy with the veto-proof democrats. Gun control, for example. Civil liberties may become an issue with the dems as much as it did with the Reps. Like they say, be careful what you ask for.

[Plane]

"In any other election year the Republicans would be in court demanding a recount and an investigation."

Also known as "going Gore" .

I think you are projecting, Republicans are not famous for attempting to overturn an election in the court , they are known for respecting the process.

[larry]

I agree Sirs, a lot of things don't make sense about this election. There were a lot of deals being cut to avoid recounts and court battles. Personally, I would like to have seen a more balanced result. Too much power in the hands of one party, often lead to a bad deal for the country.

[Brassmask]

So, they wanted their vote to count BY VOTING FOR THE THIRD PARTY CANDIDATE.

How novel.

[Plane]

So, they wanted their vote to count BY VOTING FOR THE THIRD PARTY CANDIDATE.

How novel.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha


But don't it give you hope?

[sirs]

I agree Sirs, a lot of things don't make sense about this election. There were a lot of deals being cut to avoid recounts and court battles.

Where do you get that from?  Who?, what deals?  A source would be a nice addition to that claim

[Brassmask]

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

But don't it give you hope?

some but not much.

[larry]

Well Sirs, that is just a total assumption on my part. I mean, Bush could have faced cirtan impeachment, but the dems made Bush an offer he could not refuse. Don't give us any trouble and we want impeach you. Thats just my guess of how it went down.

[sirs]

Well Sirs, that is just a total assumption on my part. I mean, Bush could have faced cirtan impeachment, but the dems made Bush an offer he could not refuse. Don't give us any trouble and we want impeach you. Thats just my guess of how it went down.

Ahh, so its complete unverifiable, unstubstantiated uncorroborated guess?  Yet you proclaim it with such factual certainty "There were a lot of deals being cut to avoid recounts and court battles."
I wonder why's that 

[larry]

I confess Sirs, I can't explain it, its just a gut feeling that dems are going to let Bush get away with mass murder and insurrection.

[Plane]

I confess Sirs, I can't explain it, its just a gut feeling that dems are going to let Bush get away with mass murder and insurrection.

Historians are unflinching.

The passage of time will reveal all.


How will you feel if you find that what you thought was honesty and what you thought was deception reverses?

[larry]

That is what is most scary of all.

Most people think the new World Order is just a conspiracy theory. The NWO is a coalition of State subsidized corporate entities. The so-called new world order came into existence at the end of WW II. The power was shared between NATO and the Warsaw Pact, until 1991. The failure of the Soviet system ended the relevance of the Warsaw Pact. Iraq is now under occupation and the Soviet Block Nations are unstable. The (Order) is changing and duplicity is a constant among ally. I am smart enough to know, I don't know what is really going on. Thats why Americans must demand more oversight.

[Plane]

That is what is most scary of all.

Most people think the new World Order is just a conspiracy theory. The NWO is a coalition of State subsidized corporate entities. The so-called new world order came into existence at the end of WW II. The power was shared between NATO and the Warsaw Pact, until 1991. The failure of the Soviet system ended the relevance of the Warsaw Pact. Iraq is now under occupation and the Soviet Block Nations are unstable. The (Order) is changing and duplicity is a constant among ally. I am smart enough to know, I don't know what is really going on. Thats why Americans must demand more oversight.

Haahahahahahaa
Quo custodiet ipso custodes?

Or oversight? let me oversight!

If there was that much collusion how could the USSR have failed at all?