posted on December 21, 2000 09:54:08 AM new
Zazzie - I agree with what you said in regards to one presidency being passed to another with or without problems. I just think that *most* people are able to see things with a little less bias. Like in your example of Carter and Reagan, I think most voters were aware of what Carter had done (the footwork) while also being aware that Reagan was the one there to celebrate in the joy. To me, that is a much different issue than what our nation is facing right now. That was a positive to be passed along, the state of our economy is very much a negative.
..."not whine and pass the buck by saying "It's not my fault, I wasn't here" That's were we disagree. I don't feel it's right to blame problems on an administration which isn't even in office yet and while another administration was in control for the past 8 years.
"Bush will have to play with the hand that was dealt to him because in the long run it will be 'HIS' economy--nobody else's. That's very true, and I totally agree. I am one that sure hopes he, and his advisors, can pull it off. (And I'm not a Republican - just someone that will also be affected by what decisions this new president and his administration makes.)
What I am asking is that we at least give him a chance to do that.
posted on December 21, 2000 09:56:04 AM new
I agree with everything LindaK said. Now, if they (whoever they are) are going to count the ballots, they should count them in every state in this country. I wouldn't be surprised at all to find 'uncounted' votes, or undervotes, or even votes that were not counted, on both sides. If they count, count the entire nation. Just because it came down to a tight tight race in Florida, so everything was focused on Florida. Lets look at every state in the union.
Bush didn't start any problems, he's coming into problems. Yes watch the next 4 years, and I doubt its going to be watching him playing with his new train set.
posted on December 21, 2000 10:04:09 AM newJust because it came down to a tight tight race in Florida, so everything was focused on Florida. Lets look at every state in the union.
Baloney, Florida was put in the position of deciding this election. That's why the focus has been on Florida. That and the fact that Florida has long held the reputation for "voter irregularities", or in other words, "election fraud". Sweeping it all under the rug by destroying the cast ballots so they cannot be examined in the light of day, will do nothing for American confidence in it's election system, nor will it put to rest any "pall" on the legitimacy of Bush's Presidency.
What I am asking is that we at least give him a chance to do that. Oh, he's getting his chance even as he is setting up his administration with the bastions (or is that bastards?) of Corporate America. Like I said before, there is some heavy debt owed, and no question about whose wallet it's going to be paid from.
KatyD
(ubb)
[ edited by KatyD on Dec 21, 2000 10:05 AM ]
posted on December 21, 2000 10:09:11 AM new
"but what sort of a leader is it that predicts an economic recession and a fuel crisis even before he is the president?"
The sort of president who wants a trillion dollar plus tax cut and to drill in the Alaskan wilderness, who knows that most people think those are bad ideas and knows too that most people who voted voted for his opponent. (Gore ended up with about 540,000 more votes than Bush nationwide by the time all states certified their votes, up from the 300,000 something lead he had after election night.)
Don't get too excited over those 130 Gore votes in Lake County. If the recount ordered by the Fl. Supreme Court had gone ahead, those votes wouldn't have been counted, Fl. Supreme Court only ordered undervotes examined, not overvotes like this batch in Lake County and the Democratic Party itselft, in their contest action, only wanted undervotes examined, not overvotes.
Pat Caddell, that bearded guy who was always on "Hardball," kept on saying, before this, that the Democratic Party should have been looking at the overvotes, that's where the Gore votes were, not in the undervotes. Caddell is a freak, but he knows his numbers.
And I said, before this, that the Democratic Party was making a mistake by not looking for votes in Republican counties, because Democrats, whether in Democratic or Republican counties, have a higher rate of voter error than Republican voters.
But, the Democrats didn't listen either to Pat Caddell, or to me. And it wouldn't have mattered if they had. The Florida State legislature had been set up to deliver the presidency to Bush weeks before the legislature talked about it publically.
posted on December 21, 2000 10:10:15 AM new
KatyD- I recognize that this whole election issue has been much more upsetting to you than it has been to me. I didn't vote for either so I agree, I'm less emotional about it.
"My question had to do with what "harm" looking at the actual ballots in the light of day will do? The truth is going to come out, as it should." What harm you ask? While I know it won't matter to you and other democrats, I feel that the US Supreme court should have been the final word/decision. I personally would like to not see our nation torn apart by this anymore than has happened already. I would like to see us 'go on' from here with solving our nations challenges.
It appears that you believe that the news media has some "bias" reflected in the method in which they are looking at the ballots cast. I do believe that different media have different bias' or slants on issues...just as Republicans and Democrats do. It's a normal thing.
Seems like your mind is made up. Personally, I would like to know WHO DID get the popular vote in Florida, but small details like that don't seem to bother you, because the Supreme Court has ordained that Bush is to be our next President. In my mind it's over....that's all.
Life is so easy when our choices are made for us. When there are issues that need decisions made the US Supreme Court IS who we turn to. They are the final decision maker...and I respect that.
posted on December 21, 2000 10:22:20 AM new
I think the release of our POWs was the result of Kissinger's and Nixon's work in the Paris Peace Talks that concluded our active involvement in Vietnam.
The release of the U.S. Embassy hostages held by Iran was the event that took place just after Reagan was installed in office.
posted on December 21, 2000 10:31:58 AM new
Codassaurus---I believe you are correct--it was Iran.
But I always thought that the outgoing President should have there to for the return of the hostages...and that Reagan took the glory and did none of the work.
posted on December 21, 2000 12:37:05 PM newKatyD- I recognize that this whole election issue has been much more upsetting to you than it has been to me. I didn't vote for either so I agree, I'm less emotional about it. What do you agree about, LindaK? How would you know how "emotional" or not, I am? For the record, I'm not "emotional" about it at all. There's been no outbursts of tears, no tantrums, no stomping of feet. I have opinions and beliefs, but these are not grounded in my "emotions" but rather the facts that are available to anyone who chooses not to keep their head buried in the sand, in the hopes that the election "mess" (as you put it) will be put behind us and we can live up to our American reputation as having the 15 minute attention span of the average 3 year old.
When there are issues that need decisions made the US Supreme Court IS who we turn to. They are the final decision maker...and I respect that. Not all issues, LindaK. Our government is not set up with the Supreme Court as the sole and final arbiter of all issues, only federal issues. The sad truth is that what we saw with the action of the Supreme Court was the politicizing along partisan lines on an issue that should have been decided solely on legal and idealogical grounds. And if this country is "torn apart" it is that decision that is the fray that began the rip in the fabric.
As for the next four years, yes, Bush will be President, but will never have my respect or acceptance unlike any other President in my lifetime, whether I voted for him or not. He will always be the "naked emperor" who is a Pretender to the throne. And that's not an emotional statement; it's a cold hard fact to me.
posted on December 21, 2000 01:24:20 PM newAlmost unnoticed in the 24-hour stream of cable punditry, the GOP demanded and got a hand recount in New Mexico after opposing one for weeks in Florida. W. picked up 125 votes on the recount of Roosevelt County, narrowing Gore's lead to 368.
Incredibly, Mickey Barnett, the GOP national committeeman for New Mexico and a lawyer for the party, wrote a district court judge that there was "of course, no other way to determine the accuracy of this apparent discrepancy, or machine malfunction, other than the board reviewing the votes by hand."
I thought the GOP trusted the machines? I thought they felt hand recounts were unacceptable because of possible biases? Isn't that why they stalled and thwarted manual recounts in Florida for FOUR godforsaken weeks?
Right, unless it favors their corrupt, moron of a candidate. Cretins.
posted on December 21, 2000 01:34:49 PM new
Hello Zazzie,
If I recall correctly there was always a question about the timing of the release that some folks chose to believe was evidence that Reagan and Khomeini had struck some sort of deal.
Later to be tied in with the Iran-Contra hearings. Arms for hostages...
posted on December 21, 2000 01:38:17 PM new
okay--I'll shut up now. can't get my history straight. I didn't pay much attention to the Iran-Contra hearing---but did watch the release because of the participation of the Canadian Embassy ( or have I got my hostages wrong too???)
I was just a babe in arms then anyways--partying was far more important than current events.
posted on December 21, 2000 01:38:48 PM new
KatyD - It was not my intent to upset you more. It's just that I disagree with some of the statements posters are making and I'm sharing my views.
How would you know how "emotional" or not, I am?" Just the way it is coming across to me. Maybe better words would have been how much this whole thing has upset you, or is affecting you.
Not all issues, LindaK. Our government is not set up with the Supreme Court as the sole and final arbiter of all issues, only federal issues. That's right and this was a national election. What was happening in Florida was going to affect the whole US, not just the state of FL. The US Supreme court agreed there were some federal issues or they would not have even heard the case.
You've made it more than clear how you feel about Bush. That is your right. Others who feel differently also have a right to speak their views.
posted on December 21, 2000 01:52:15 PM newKatyD - It was not my intent to upset you more Here it is yet again in "Bush speak" which may be a language you understand. Read my lips. I am not upset. You do not have the power to upset me. There. Better?
The US Supreme court agreed there were some federal issues or they would not have even heard the case. That has to be the most naive statement I have ever seen posted here, either by Republican OR Democrat. Read Julsey's post above. Can't have it both ways now can we?
Others who feel differently also have a right to speak their views. Please point to any post of mine where I've indicated differently. Can't? Well then, nuff said.
posted on December 21, 2000 02:22:17 PM new
Some observations about this thread:
Definition of Recession- when your neighbor is out of work
Definition of a Depression- when you are out of work.
Supreme Court authority- limitless, the only issues that the Supreme Court can not address are decided by the Supreme Court. The Constitution is the Supreme law of the land, no entity may offend the Constitution, the Supreme Court is the final authority of what the Constitution means and how it is applied.
All law is politics.
Bush "gained" the office of President, and the markets reacted accordingly.
If you cheat, cheat to win, the Bush brothers motto.
[ edited by reamond on Dec 21, 2000 02:23 PM ]
posted on December 21, 2000 02:27:40 PM new
KatyD - Yep....."nuff said". I've already stated my views on the issues. Because we see things differently, doesn't make either one of us right or wrong....just different.
posted on December 21, 2000 05:04:48 PM new
Zazzie: "Back in the 80's when Carter lost to Reagan---there was the release of the POW's from Vietnam." To set the record it was the release of the hostages in Iran just hours after Regan was sworn in. You can count all you want, but a different result will be found each time depending on the counter.
posted on December 21, 2000 08:21:40 PM new KatyD:, "Oh, I never blamed GW for our current economic woes"
You are being too kind, KatyD!
In 1981, the GOP finally admitted to the media that they had PAID OFF THE IRANIANS to hold onto our embassy hostages for another six months, just so that the GOP could embarrass Carter and make him look weak for the election!
Now, with the Bush Oil Dynasty and Dicky Cheny's massive Oil concerns, is it so implausible that they twisted the arms of our "Friendlies" at OPEC to raise oil prices in an election year in order to help GW become president? After all, OPEC members are so flooded with money that they couldn't spend it all in a dozen lifetimes -- now they want more and are willing to throw the economies of the industrial world into chaos? If they do that, then DEMAND drops down too far and the LOOSE MONEY! So you just KNOW that something sneaky had to happen.
Why would they do it? Because its hard to argue with success. The Democratic party was all set for the "we Did It! We Made You Rich!" prosperity platform and who would want to derail that? GW and the GOP would have no chance at all in winning the Presidency. BUT! But if somehow the economy could be slowed, crippled for a time . . .
posted on December 21, 2000 08:57:08 PM new
"I suggest that anyone truly concerned with the irregularities that surfaced in this election spend the next
four years working to ensure that it doesn't happen again. "
Code: I can see that you do not live in the charming state of Florida. Thanks for the suggestion, and yes, I will volunteer my services. I knew that their was some voter irregularities in Fla.,but this bordered on just plain fraud ,which is nothing new for Florida..... I think the term equal protection is a plain joke. Who are they kidding? What a way to get elected. The fun is just beginning, wait until Congress reconvenes. They are calling for cooperation and bipartisanship. Ha----all bets will be off after the Inaguaral. Congress will be the Hatfields and McCoys. Just my predictions.
As for the economy-seems Bush and Cheney are just trying to let us all know that they are inheriting this economy. Rush Limbaugh summed it up today. He stated that Clinton inherited an economy that senior Bush already had on the road to recovery. And Junior Bush is inheriting an economy that Clinton has already messed up. And I am Snow White
[ edited by zeldas on Dec 21, 2000 09:06 PM ]
