On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 08:25:19 -0800, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 23:09:46 -0700, the inscrutable Mark & Juanita
spake:

On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 05:55:22 GMT, Kevin wrote:

Swingman wrote:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message


Yeah, a few percent difference is a "mandate." Go figure.
49+ million votes against don't mean a thing to him.


The election is over. The American _people_ made a decision ... quit your
whining and get over the fact you were in a minority.

Actually, in terms of total eligible voters, only about a third of the
people voted for Bush II. Guess Fox didn't carry that tidbit.

... and in terms of eligible voters, those who did not vote also made a
decision -- to let the rest of the voters make the choice for them, thus,
the OP's comment is still correct, the American people made a decision,

The fate of the entire world has been determined by non-voters and
gullibles. Ironic, isn't it? I should have said "tragic."



So, since the vote didn't agree with your viewpoint, those who didn't
agree couldn't have reached the conclusion they did through logical or
rational thought, could they? It isn't possible that through reasonable
deduction, they decided that "peace through strength" might be a reasonable
route to sending a message to future would-be attackers. Nope, they had to
have been gullible and deluded.


the election is over. get over it.

I'll get over it when the global threats he has caused are gone, Mark,
and not before. The world (including America) has become a less-safe
place since GWB has been in office. Many Americans, myself included,
are not too happy about that. I used to _believe_in_ the President of
the United States. I love my country and will not sit quietly by while
it gets trashed by an avaricious mob in D.C.


The global threats *he* caused? He'd barely been in office 9 months when
the worst attack on US soil since Pearl Harbor was launched against us.
The training camps in Afghanistan had been in operation for years before he
took office. Homicide bombers were launching attacks on Israel long before
Bush was in office. Enron and the MCI debacle were hatching well before
the election of 2000, so the accusation of "avaricious mob" hardly seems to
carry much weight when applied to the present administration. The first
attack on the WTC happened during the previous administration, the debacle
in Africa, the attack on the USS Cole -- appeasement and ignoring the
situation sure wasn't working and wasn't making the world any safer.



Oh, I changed the topic to OT while I was replying.


---------------------------------------------------------------
Never put off 'til tomorrow | http://www.diversify.com
what you can avoid altogether. | Dynamic Website Applications
---------------------------------------------------------------



+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

The absence of accidents does not mean the presence of safety

Army General Richard Cody

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+