Quit picking on Obama……

DaSleeper

Trolling Hypocrites
May 27, 2007
33,676
1,666
113
Northern Ontario,
........and the koolaid drinkers keep defending all of Obama's "boo" "boo" while they all cheer and consider his replacement of General McChrystal with General Petraeus "Amazing"...:smile:
As if he had a choice......:roll:
 

AnnaG

Hall of Fame Member
Jul 5, 2009
17,507
117
63
has a well known bias to the right or the left, why should anybody give any credence to what he is saying about politics? We know what he is going to say about any issue without the bother of reading what he is saying.
Because it is usually good for a laugh. Exactly.

It is a forgone conclusion that a right wing columnist is going to trash Obama every chance he gets and is going to praise Republican politicians to high Heaven every chance he gets (and a left wing columnist would do it in reverse).

Florida Supreme Court was handling the issue according to Florida laws. All the Republican justices on the US Supreme Court had been bleating about states’ rights all these years. Being a conservative meant supporting state rights.

However, all this conservative philosophy went straight out the window when it came to rescuing their friend, Bush. Then these same Republican justices had no problem at all trampling all over state rights, the rights of Florida.

If these Republicans, Scalia, Thomas and others had remained true to their conservative principles, they would not have interfered with the process underway in Florida. But their aim was to award the presidency to a fellow Republican and in doing that they trampled on their own philosophy, state rights.

It was easily the most shameful episode in the history of the Supreme Court which will be remembered for a long time.
No left bias there. Right? lmao

........and the koolaid drinkers keep defending all of Obama's "boo" "boo" while they all cheer and consider his replacement of General McChrystal with General Petraeus "Amazing"...:smile:
As if he had a choice......:roll:
Amazing .... and funny, too. :D
 

A4NoOb

Nominee Member
Feb 27, 2009
83
3
8
By all means, feel free to apply the same logic to every poster, not only in this thread, but in the entire forum. There is noting wrong with that. When it is well known that a columnist or a journalist has a well known bias to the right or the left, why should anybody give any credence to what he is saying about politics? We know what he is going to say about any issue without the bother of reading what he is saying.

It is a forgone conclusion that a right wing columnist is going to trash Obama every chance he gets and is going to praise Republican politicians to high Heaven every chance he gets (and a left wing columnist would do it in reverse).

Great, so almost 100% of the posts coming from you should never be taken seriously because of your obvious political biases. Glad we come to a mutual agreement.

SirJosephPorter said:
Florida Supreme Court was handling the issue according to Florida laws. All the Republican justices on the US Supreme Court had been bleating about states’ rights all these years. Being a conservative meant supporting state rights.

However, all this conservative philosophy went straight out the window when it came to rescuing their friend, Bush. Then these same Republican justices had no problem at all trampling all over state rights, the rights of Florida.

If these Republicans, Scalia, Thomas and others had remained true to their conservative principles, they would not have interfered with the process underway in Florida. But their aim was to award the presidency to a fellow Republican and in doing that they trampled on their own philosophy, state rights.

It was easily the most shameful episode in the history of the Supreme Court which will be remembered for a long time.

This is absolutely hilarious. SirJoseph, I am not sure how ambivalent you are regarding the voting system. Recall that this election boiled down to the Florida state voting polls. Hence, Florida's jurisdiction. To be honest, you will never find in ANY state much different recounting policies. Not once, but TWICE was the votes recounted as the democrats in counties called for. The net result was more incoming votes for Republicans because if there was any side that "interfered" with the voting process, it would be those who disregarded the mail-in votes. Your argument is based on nothing but vapid excuses to defame a clear-cut outcome. Bush clearly won the electoral vote of Florida.
 

ironsides

Executive Branch Member
Feb 13, 2009
8,583
60
48
United States
PSALM 2010

Obama is the shepherd I did not want.
He leadeth me beside the still factories.
He restoreth my faith in the Republican party.
He guideth me in the path of unemployment for his party's sake.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the bread line,
I shall fear no hunger, for his bailouts are with me.
He has anointed my income with taxes,
My expenses runneth over.
Surely, poverty and hard living will follow me all the days of my life,
And I will live in a mortgaged home forever.
I am glad I am American,
I am glad that I am free.
But I wish I was a dog ..... And Obama was a tree.
 

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
Great, so almost 100% of the posts coming from you should never be taken seriously because of your obvious political biases. Glad we come to a mutual agreement.

If you don't take my posts seriously, I would be OK with that, A4N.

This is absolutely hilarious. SirJoseph, I am not sure how ambivalent you are regarding the voting system. Recall that this election boiled down to the Florida state voting polls. Hence, Florida's jurisdiction. To be honest, you will never find in ANY state much different recounting policies. Not once, but TWICE was the votes recounted as the democrats in counties called for. The net result was more incoming votes for Republicans because if there was any side that "interfered" with the voting process, it would be those who disregarded the mail-in votes. Your argument is based on nothing but vapid excuses to defame a clear-cut outcome. Bush clearly won the electoral vote of Florida.
If that was the case, why was it necessary for the US Supreme Court to halt the recount? If the outcome was more votes for Bush as you claim, then he would have won after the recount, where was the necessity to stop the recount?

US Supreme Court evidently was not confident that Bush would win the recount, that is why they decided to trample on state rights (state rights, which these same Justices claim to support big time) and order the recount halted.

PSALM 2010

Obama is the shepherd I did not want.

Obama is the Shepherd that US voters wanted.

He leadeth me beside the still factories.

Still factories caused by Bush, by 8 years of economic mismanagement.

He restoreth my faith in the Republican party.

What? Are you saying that you had lost faith in Republican Party? Surely not, isn't that a blasphemy?

He guideth me in the path of unemployment for his party's sake.

Unemployment caused by the economic mismanagement by the Republicans.

Yea, though I walk through the valley of the bread line,

With him at least there is a bread line. With Republicans in charge, you people would be back to depression days ("Brother, can you spare a dime?")

I shall fear no hunger, for his bailouts are with me.

Quite. Bush or Republican bailout was the good bailout, Obama or the Democratic bailout was the bad bailout.

He has anointed my income with taxes,

He anointed your income with reduced taxes, you mean.

My expenses runneth over.

If your expenses runneth over, that is because you probably are profligate. Inflation has been low since Obama took office, taxes have been cut since he took office, people have more take home pay.

Surely, poverty and hard living will follow me all the days of my life,

Not to worry. Republicans will come to power and bring peace, prosperity, paradise and Second Coming to USA in short order.

And I will live in a mortgaged home forever.

Thanks to Bush and Republicans.

I am glad I am American,

I thought you are ashamed to be an American, since Obama became the president. You will of course be a proud American once again when God's Party comes back to power.

I am glad that I am free.

Really? I thought Obama has enslaved you all.

But I wish I was a dog ..... And Obama was a tree.

No need to wish that. Go to any of the extreme right wing, Obama hating websites and vent to your heart's content.
 

A4NoOb

Nominee Member
Feb 27, 2009
83
3
8
If you don't take my posts seriously, I would be OK with that, A4N.

Your contention is that anything worth notable bias should be disregarded. This doesn't mean I'm the only one who shouldn't take your posts seriously, but anyone who bothers to read your posts.

SirJosephPorter said:
If that was the case, why was it necessary for the US Supreme Court to halt the recount? If the outcome was more votes for Bush as you claim, then he would have won after the recount, where was the necessity to stop the recount?

US Supreme Court evidently was not confident that Bush would win the recount, that is why they decided to trample on state rights (state rights, which these same Justices claim to support big time) and order the recount halted.

First of all, let's establish that during the time frame of early November, Bush appealed to the federal courts to bar the manual recount. The federal courts refused to stop the manual recount. The Florida Supreme Court specifically outlined a deadline for the recounts to finish. The recounts that could not meet the deadlines were abruptly stopped and that is all the US Supreme Court was supporting. It was against US LAW to continue the manual recounts. If the situation was reversed, the exact same thing would've happened.
 

Curiosity

Senate Member
Jul 30, 2005
7,326
138
63
California
I think the USA has it backwards

They should elect two Presidents (fergit the Vice guy).... One to be serious and work all day and go home to be serious with his family.... and one cartoon guy to muddle words, start wars, trip on sidewalks and
drop food in his lap....give achingly funny sound bites on the television.

We could be entertained while the silent intellect could get on with the business of the nation!
 

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
Your contention is that anything worth notable bias should be disregarded. This doesn't mean I'm the only one who shouldn't take your posts seriously, but anyone who bothers to read your posts.



First of all, let's establish that during the time frame of early November, Bush appealed to the federal courts to bar the manual recount. The federal courts refused to stop the manual recount. The Florida Supreme Court specifically outlined a deadline for the recounts to finish. The recounts that could not meet the deadlines were abruptly stopped and that is all the US Supreme Court was supporting. It was against US LAW to continue the manual recounts.

The recount was proceeding according to Florida law. As such it was a matter for Florida Supreme Court, not US Supreme Court.

If the situation was reversed, the exact same thing would've happened.

Exact same thing? Surely you jest. You mean if Gore had been winning, the five Republican judges on the US Supreme Court would have voted to stop the recount and would have given the presidency to Gore (and not Bush)?

You mean the right wing extremists like Clarence Thomas or Scalia would have voted to give presidency to a Democrat, over a Republican?

If you believe that, I have some prime waterfront property you may be interested in. It is called Brooklyn Bridge.
 

A4NoOb

Nominee Member
Feb 27, 2009
83
3
8
The recount was proceeding according to Florida law. As such it was a matter for Florida Supreme Court, not US Supreme Court.

SirJoseph, it was the Florida Supreme Court which disbanded the manual recounts. Gore appealed to the US Supreme Court, which turned in favour of Florida jurisdiction.

SirJosephPorter said:
Exact same thing? Surely you jest. You mean if Gore had been winning, the five Republican judges on the US Supreme Court would have voted to stop the recount and would have given the presidency to Gore (and not Bush)?

Uhm evidence?

SirJosephPorter said:
You mean the right wing extremists like Clarence Thomas or Scalia would have voted to give presidency to a Democrat, over a Republican?

I have no idea where you come from accusing Clarence Thomas as a right wing extremist. He just defended the gay-rights advocacy from the Texas GOP platform. He thinks banning Sodomy is ridiculous.
 

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
I have no idea where you come from accusing Clarence Thomas as a right wing extremist. He just defended the gay-rights advocacy from the Texas GOP platform. He thinks banning Sodomy is ridiculous.

I don’t know what he said in Texas, but he was one of the two Justices (I think the decision was 7-2) who voted not to overturn Texas Sodomy law, which made sodomy punishable by ten years of imprisonment. He was all in favour of letting Texas imprison homosexuals.

SirJoseph, it was the Florida Supreme Court which disbanded the manual recounts. Gore appealed to the US Supreme Court, which turned in favour of Florida jurisdiction.

Florida Supreme Court did nothing of the sort, I just looked it up.

United States presidential election, 2000 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris announced she would reject any revised totals from those counties if they were not turned in by November 14, the statutory deadline for amended returns. The Florida Supreme Court extended the deadline to November 26, a decision later vacated by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Florida Supreme Court ordered the recount to continue, US Supreme Court put a stop to that, by a political, partisan 5 to 4 vote.
 

A4NoOb

Nominee Member
Feb 27, 2009
83
3
8
I don’t know what he said in Texas, but he was one of the two Justices (I think the decision was 7-2) who voted not to overturn Texas Sodomy law, which made sodomy punishable by ten years of imprisonment. He was all in favour of letting Texas imprison homosexuals.

This is what I wanted evidence for.

Florida Supreme Court did nothing of the sort, I just looked it up.

United States presidential election, 2000 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris announced she would reject any revised totals from those counties if they were not turned in by November 14, the statutory deadline for amended returns. The Florida Supreme Court extended the deadline to November 26, a decision later vacated by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Florida Supreme Court ordered the recount to continue, US Supreme Court put a stop to that, by a political, partisan 5 to 4 vote.
You are confusing your timelines. The date which the US Supreme Court made their decision was on December 1st. By which it was already decided by the Nov 26th-deadline that Florida elected Bush. So I am still confused as to what your issue is. The manual recount was in effect until Nov. 26th, at which point Bush was the announced president.
 

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
This is what I wanted evidence for.

Why didn't you specify it?

Lawrence v. Texas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The decision was 6-3, not 7-2. Those who voted to keep the Texas Sodomy law on statute book were, Scalia, Rehnquist and Thomas.

This is what I wanted evidence for.

You are confusing your timelines. The date which the US Supreme Court made their decision was on December 1st. By which it was already decided by the Nov 26th-deadline that Florida elected Bush. So I am still confused as to what your issue is. The manual recount was in effect until Nov. 26th, at which point Bush was the announced president.

My issue is that US Supreme Court overruled the Florida Supreme Court, as the website says. I stand by what it says. If you are saying that US Supreme Court did NOT overrule Florida Supreme Court, let us see you put up some websites.
 

ironsides

Executive Branch Member
Feb 13, 2009
8,583
60
48
United States
I don’t know what he said in Texas, but he was one of the two Justices (I think the decision was 7-2) who voted not to overturn Texas Sodomy law, which made sodomy punishable by ten years of imprisonment. He was all in favour of letting Texas imprison homosexuals.



Florida Supreme Court did nothing of the sort, I just looked it up.

United States presidential election, 2000 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris announced she would reject any revised totals from those counties if they were not turned in by November 14, the statutory deadline for amended returns. The Florida Supreme Court extended the deadline to November 26, a decision later vacated by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Florida Supreme Court ordered the recount to continue, US Supreme Court put a stop to that, by a political, partisan 5 to 4 vote.

What are you guys debating? That part of Presidential history is over, we now have a President with much more interesting things to talk about. (qualifications, his background, associates, birth for examples). Any one if proven could be very harmful to his future in politics, not to mention years of chit chat for all of us.
 

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
69
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
Most of the post-electoral controversy revolved around Gore's request for hand recounts in four counties (Broward, Miami Dade, Palm Beach, and Volusia), as provided under Florida state law.

Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris announced she would reject any revised totals from those counties if they were not turned in by November 14, the statutory deadline for amended returns.

The Florida Supreme Court extended the deadline to November 26, a decision later vacated by the U.S. Supreme Court.


I thought Gore was hypocritical in not asking to recount ALL THE VOTES in Florida. He preached to us on TV intoning like the voice of God, "LET US COUNT EVERY VOTE."

But instead he jerrypicked the counties ran by the Democratic Party, counties where the vote contained mostly Democratic voters. He also tried to throw out the military absentee votes, when he himself has been a big advocate of absentee voting liberally applied to anyone finding it inconvenient to vote on election day.


So a lot of the press and the voters were starting to see that hypocrisy, and so the Florida Supreme Court picked 70000 votes statewide to recount and then saw that was jerrypicking selectively and so decided to recount all the Florida votes all over again.

BUT READ THE SCARIEST PART :


On January 6, 2001, a joint session of Congress met to certify the electoral vote. Twenty members of the House of Representatives, most of them Democratic members of the Congressional Black Caucus, rose one-by-one to file objections to the electoral votes of Florida. However, according to an 1877 law, any such objection had to be sponsored by both a representative and a senator. No senator would co-sponsor these objections, deferring to the Supreme Court's ruling. Therefore, Gore, who presided in his capacity as President of the Senate, ruled each of these objections out of order.
Subsequently, the joint session of Congress certified the electoral votes from all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Bush took the oath of office on January 20, 2001


IMAGINE, there are provisions in the constitution whereby the House of Representatives decide the election. What a circus that would have been.

By the way I would have loved every minute of it.

However the court used the SAFE HARBOR deadline that if the vote was not certified in time then the circus would continue forever in the House of Representatives.

If only we could have seen that show !!!!


On December 12, the Supreme Court ruled in a 5–4 vote that the Florida Supreme Court's ruling requiring a statewide recount of ballots was unconstitutional, and that the Florida recounts could not be completed before a December 12 "safe harbor" deadline, and should therefore cease and the previously certified total should hold.


The Supreme Court's decision was an unsigned or "Per Curiam" ruling; the ruling was “limited to the present circumstances” and could not be cited as precedent
 

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
IMAGINE, there are provisions in the constitution whereby the House of Representatives decide the election. What a circus that would have been.

By the way I would have loved every minute of it.

I believe it has happened once before, where the election was throw to the House and was decided by the House.
 

YukonJack

Time Out
Dec 26, 2008
7,026
73
48
Winnipeg
A friendly reminder, obviously neglected the moderators:

THIS THREAD IS ABOUT OBAMA, NOT BUSH!!!!

Or Clarence Thomas.

And another friendly reminder to the crying dinosaurs who still bemoan 2000:

Thomas was confirmed and like it or not, he is there for life.
BUSH was elected in 2000 and then he was elected AGAIN in 2004.

Get over it. Get used to it.
 
Last edited: