posted on November 24, 2000 01:43:34 PM new
Yes, like so:
In a move that legal observers call "stunning," the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear the Bush request that all hand counts in Florida be stopped because the
Florida Supreme Court's decision to allow them to continue contradicts citizens' rights expressed in the U.S. Constitution. Oral arguments will be heard on Dec. 1. One
would assume if the present Florida hand count ends Sunday with Bush ahead, the U.S. Supreme Court hearing would only go forward if Gore contests the Florida
results. If Gore does contest the results or if he wins the vote outright, the court would have to provide a decision prior to the meeting of the electoral college on Dec.
18. --Politex, 11/24/00
posted on November 24, 2000 01:43:42 PM new"Really a small loss there, as I cannot recall you ever having offered any site or source for your banalities and guffaws."
If you check my posts you'll usually see (Associated Press) behind the quotes I've used. I admit they don't have the spice that you've been able to supply, I guess my 'banalities' are a result of the more accountable news sources.
If I run across a Joseph Goebbels news site I'll consider using it to make my references more entertaining, even if it results in a loss of credibility.
posted on November 24, 2000 01:44:37 PM new
I certainly agree, Ken, that your words were "quite plain." Wonder then, at the failure to comprehend? [email protected]
posted on November 24, 2000 01:46:41 PM new
Bunnicula,
You're using "uh" just like GW does. If you take the time to click the url provided by uara above, and compare it to any posts that I've made here, you will see that I've added nothing, but cut out a sentence or two, mostly for wordiness.
posted on November 24, 2000 01:50:23 PM new
I would give any cut and paste quote with a cited source such as "11/24/00," or "Doris in DC, 11/23," all the consideration it deserves.
posted on November 24, 2000 01:57:50 PM new
Gosh, I hadn't heard the Bush had patented "uh"! Does that mean that everyone who uses it is a Republican? What a handy-dandy way of classifying people!
Now that I know that all your posts are quotes from Bush Watch, I will take them with a grain of salt regardless of whether you've snipped to spare us "wordiness." If you had just been honest & upfront at the beginning of this thread no one would have questioned your posts.
edited to put the "a" in "what"
[ edited by bunnicula on Nov 24, 2000 01:58 PM ]
posted on November 24, 2000 01:58:40 PM new
All this brings the sixties to mind. A lot of "out-of-staters" were bussed from Northern states to the South. To protest what they saw as injustice. And they disrupted the hell out of everywhere they went...courthouses and all. They were despised as outside agitators. Sounds so familiar.
posted on November 24, 2000 02:02:18 PM new
Can you show me where I said that ALL of my posts are taken from that site, Bunnicula?
I suppose that you're right. "Uh" should not be used to identify republicans. After all , imagine the training and speech therapy that GW must have benefitted from so that he would stop saying "Duh". Expensive 'D'.
posted on November 24, 2000 02:05:51 PM new
Yes, Krs, I understand that everyone is talking. People on chat boards are talking, people on news shows are talking, people in newspapers are talking, people on websites are talking.
But when one quotes someone who is talking, we want some information that will tell us who is doing the talking, not merely on what date some unknown person said something, or in what city someone identified only by a first name said something. That's how to properly attribute a quote and cite a source.
posted on November 24, 2000 02:06:11 PM new
I would not equate the civil rights movement with political dirty tricks. I think that any participant in the former would find that comparison offensive.
posted on November 24, 2000 02:08:11 PM new
Well, krs, when you are asked the source of a post you make on November 24 and you cite an answer you gave to Joice on *November 11* what are we to think?
posted on November 24, 2000 02:10:59 PM new
That's ridiculous, Donny. What citation would you give for a talk show call that you heard during which Tom in Tuamatu expressed his opinion?
Or that of a chatboard user known as wildwilly? (no reflection on any real life wildwilly, living or dead, made here).
posted on November 24, 2000 02:13:54 PM new
Bunnicula,
You COULD think that I don't like repeating myself.
I'm passing things along as I find them, that's all. They aren't my opinions necessarily, and you can take 'em or leave 'em. I really don't give a hoot.
posted on November 24, 2000 02:24:56 PM new
Ah, the old "I don't have a good answer, I'm tired of the discussion because you're on to me, so I don't care what you think" response.
posted on November 24, 2000 02:28:48 PM new
Here's one you'd like, uaru,
"The American Petroleum Institute filed suit against the EPA [and] charged that the agency was suppressing a scientific study for fear it might be misinterpreted... The suppressed study reveals that 80 percent of air pollution comes not from chimneys and auto exhaust pipes, but from plants and trees."
Recognise it? (hint: A political candidate for the presidency)
posted on November 24, 2000 02:36:49 PM new
"I would not equate the civil rights movement with political dirty tricks. I think that any
participant in the former would find that comparison offensive."
I consider the right to have votes counted fairly (not hidden behind closed doors as the M-D canvassing board was attempting) an extremely important civil rights issue. In fact, so did the Northerners bussing into the South in the sixties. Segregationists called these protests "political dirty tricks." A cheap attempt to trivialize legitimate protest, IMO.
Even the media protested that smarmy move by Miami-Dade. I'd have done some yelling in the hall myself, had I been there. No one was arrested...all it was, was noise. Got some attention, too. I believe that was the point.
Edited for clarity.
[ edited by toke on Nov 24, 2000 02:55 PM ]
posted on November 24, 2000 02:58:38 PM newI gave the site weeks ago. I won't apologize for finding your questions ,...uh, disjointed.
That's right, krs. When all else fails lay the blame at another doorstep.
BTW, I like the way you do the Sidestep. You sounded so convincing when you asked "can you show me where I said that ALL of my posts are taken from that site", too. Or are you psychic? Imagine, givng an answer two weeks ago to a question asked today! I must say, it is certainly impressive.
Oh, I know..you'd rather be talking about leftovers, candied yams and such, pies. Didn't I see threads concerning those things?
oooh! A put-down! tsk! tsk! tsk! Next you'll be saying things like "So there!" or "Yeah, well your mother wears army boots!"
You'd save yourself so much trouble if you'd just be upfront & state when you quote from a site such as Bush Watch instead of letting b=people think such gems as "Bushie brownshirts" are to be found on ABC or other news sources.
posted on November 24, 2000 02:59:35 PM new
Perhaps the count should have been done in a city park. Then the Republicans could just say "blowin in the wind" and they couldn't be counted.
posted on November 24, 2000 03:29:33 PM new
When, in your mind, bunnicula, did I become the topic of this thread? I have posted things that I've found, you have addressed and attacked me.
Do you care to make a commentary concerning the topic, rather than making your personal remarks to and about me?
posted on November 24, 2000 03:39:22 PM new
Yes, Toke, it got attention, and was presented as a spur of the moment reaction by local republicans. But the spectre of it's having been generated by some larger disruptive plan is a troublesome idea, and it seems that it may well have been orchestrated in order to cast aspersions on the democratic party and to disrupt the counting wherever it took place.
I'm not sympathetic to the varied practices of the M-D election board but however they see fit to do what they do is a local matter.
Now ABC is reporting that the Gore camp intends to ask the Dept. of Justice to look into what happened.
Surprising that you would mention that noone was arrested yet. I believe that it took quite a while before any of the murders of civil rights activists were accounted for and charges were made. The atmosphere at the time precluded such arrests. Who knows what atmosphere exists in the county involved here.
posted on November 24, 2000 03:44:59 PM new
1) You became the topic when it was learned how cagey you'd been about wording and attribution.
2) I have not "attacked" you at all. I merely asked questions. There is a difference. Nor did I stoop to making implications about your party affiliations or perspicacity, or to put-downs, as you have.
3) I have made no "personal comments" about you at all.
4) commentary about the topic?
a) ABC never used the word "brownshirt"--as we were finally able to establish.
b) both parties are using every trick at their disposal in order to win.
c) neither would be my choice for President, but since we're stuck with that choice, I'd prefer Gore.
d) a site like "Bush Watch" is not a good source for "unaffiliated" or "unbiased" information.
edited to add a "not" and for format
[ edited by bunnicula on Nov 24, 2000 03:47 PM ]
posted on November 24, 2000 03:46:42 PM new
I'm sure you wouldn't like arguement to all your 'commentaries', 'editorals' and all the facts you've accumulated over the weeks, from various sources. They must be factual, and so must be true. Don't worry. Vice President Gore will be our next President.
Hellcat Thank you! for the stuffed carrot recipe, I copied it, and keeping it, haven't had it since 1982 when I lived in TX/OK. Thanks, and sorry for going off topic for a moment.
posted on November 24, 2000 03:59:13 PM new
Of course it was orchestrated...most of the protests on both sides are. Look at Jesse's planned marches and demonstrations, just as a for instance.
M-D planned to go into a closed room to count over 10,000 disputed ballots. This was totally unacceptable. The protest stopped that little ploy.
I didn't say "no one was arrested, yet." I said no one was arrested. There were no arrests because there was no violence. It's hardly local matter when it could decide a national election for president. Not any more, it's not.
A protest was definately called for by the circumstances...I'm very glad there was one, and that it effectively stopped a private vote counting effort. We don't need any more suspicions of chicanery...on either side.
