Read it and weep-but not for the veep : LUSENET : TB2K spinoff uncensored : One Thread

"If more than one petition for recount is filed and more than one method of counting is requested, a manual recount takes precedence over an electronic recount. And an electronic recount using a corrected program takes precedence over electronic recount using the same program as the original count."

Here is the wording in the Texas Law, folks. A law which Mr. Bush amended. I challenge anyone to reconcile this law with what is being said in Florida by the Bush team.

-- FutureShock (gray@matter.think), November 14, 2000


Now I understand the confusion about the ballots in Palm Beach County.Decmocrats have no READING COMPREHENSION.

In Texas there is no law that requires a recount - unlike Florida where it is automatic. The Texas law is giving the candidate contesting the election his preference for how it is conducted. And it does not provide for multiple recounts.

There has been an automatic recount in Florida. Gore lost.

-- Nadine (, November 14, 2000.

So what? We are in Florida now, not Texas. Florida law counts, not Texas law.

-- Maria (, November 14, 2000.

Hold of with the personal insults. I think you can do better than that.

For one, this was not posted to compare Texas Law with Florida law, or to say that one set of statutes is better than another. The Bush campaign is on record stating that they do not trust the veracity of the manual recount. This is the crux of the matter-we have heard the moaning about "subjectivity" in the hand counting.

This is posted to show the inconsistency between questioning the veracity of the manual recount, and Texas Law which Bush himself signed, which CLEARLY states that a manual recount hold rank over an electronic recount.

Sorry, but I do believe my reading comprehension skills are just fine. I will not, however, post my LSAT or GMAT scores to prove this. If you would like to contest exactly what I said about a PARTICULAR inconsistency, feel free.

The personal insults, however, are unwelcome.

-- FutureShock (gray@matter.think), November 14, 2000.

Just because Bush signed a bill into law does not mean that he personally has to agree with it.

Also circumstances alter conditions. In Texas most voting is done by voting machines or paper ballots. In neither method does a person doing the recount have to determine a voters intent by holding ballots up the light to interpret "pregnant chads", "hanging chads", etc. Apples and Oranges.

-- Nadine (, November 14, 2000.


Not that ya need it buddy but us not "infected" understand what your point is ;);).

-- Doc Paulie (, November 14, 2000.

Future Shock,

You are correct and I apologize. I should not have made that remark.I am sorry.

-- Nadine (, November 14, 2000.

Nadine-thank you. no harm done.

Here is a qoute from a Bush spokesperson:

"but his communications director, Karen Hughes, said a hand count of ballots shouldnBt be allowed to decide the election. Only the machine count can be trusted, she insisted."

To a degree, you may be right that just because a governor signs a bill, it does not mean he agrees with it. It may be that he does not wish to have an override of his veto, or if he just lets the bill die without signature. However, if he totally believed it was the wrong thing to do, I would hope he would have the gumption to risk the override, and make it a matter of public record that he disagreed with the provision.

On the one hand we have state law which in part says a manual recount overrides an electronic count. On the other, above, the woman is insisting that electronic is more accurate. You cannot have it both ways.

-- FutureShock (gray@matter.think), November 14, 2000.

Future Shock,

I think the point is that the manual recount of the type of ballot used in Florida is not as accurate as a machine count because of the "chads" and this ballot has been designed to be counted by machine.

In Texas this type of ballot is not widely used, if at all, so how can you reconcile the law governing Texas recount with Bush objecting the the manual recount of a ballot that is not designed to be counted that way?

-- Nadine (, November 14, 2000.

I just wanted to add that my entire county votes by paper ballot. We color in a bubble or an arrow for the candidate of our choice. There is not way that these ballots could be counted by machine. Because it is such a sparsely populated county, I doubt that we will ever have a different method of voting.

-- Nadine (, November 14, 2000.

Hey Future Shock, YOU threw out the gauntlet with this statement:

BHere is the wording in the Texas Law, folks. A law which Mr. Bush amended. I challenge anyone to reconcile this law with what is being said in Florida by the Bush team.B

So the first time someone who DOES know what they are talking about attempts to correct you it becomes a personal insult. Poor fucking baby. Keep your liberal bullshit to yourself and you can then avoid the ugly reality of the truth.

-- I (h@ve.spoken), November 14, 2000.


Wow! I'm trying to imagine someone color in a bubble. That must be a BIG BUBBLE!

Anyway, this is the most stupid election I have ever witnessed, and it's nowhere close to being resolved.

-- dinosaur (, November 14, 2000.

It is not large at all. It is shaped like the little bubble in a level and you fill it in with a very soft lead pencil - a special one provided by the election judges. I have voted these paper ballots most of my adult life. I lived in Pasadena, Texas, for about eight years and we had voting machines with the levers there.

-- Nadine (, November 14, 2000.

I Have:

Okay. So you want another war do you? You fucking igmoramus redneck motherfucker. Take your ku klux clan lovin, buttfucking birdbrain and shove it up your ass. Your kind makes me puke. I am sure if it were up to you them fucking niggers and women would not have the vote. You slimy piece of shit. I have been reading your pithy rhetoric for days now-When was the last time you beat your wife?

Your one track mind has been going down the wrong way of a one way road for years I am sure. You want to lower this to a pure insult level-hey I am game, you slimy piece of toad shit-you worthless piece of human scum-I hope, no, I pray that someday you need workers compensation, or you need some kind of public assistance because your stupid ass blew your life savings gambling or fucking some teenage prostitutes-and the government says no-motherfucker-you do not want hand outs and we are not going to start now.

Why dont you just crawl back into the primordial ooze you rose from not too long ago, because all you have in your head is 1/10th of a reptilian brain. I look forward to the day when you rise to the level of a multi-cellular organism. Then we might be able to take anything you say seriously.

Until then, you can remain the bloated, beer-belly bud loving idol of beer commercials, and tell your buck-tooth drinking buddies about how if you ever meet me one day you will kick the shit out of me. I am sure that is what you are thinking now, pea-brain, because your kind only believes in brute force. Do me a favor, put your dick in a vise and squeeze, squeeze, squeeze, because I am sure it is not doing you any good.

-- FutureShock (gray@matter.think), November 14, 2000.


That was mighty Christ-like of you.

-- J (Y2J@home.comm), November 15, 2000.

Hey J:

jesus flipped over the tables of the money changers, right? this asshole opened up a can of worms with the name calling-Now I AM going to have some fun with it.

As my good buddy Hawk used to say "i am just reflecting back on you who you really are". J, If you cannot see that "I have" brims with the kind of anger I have reflected, then try again.

-- FutureShock (gray@matter.think), November 15, 2000.

Right on FS!

They look in the mirror, but they don't like what they see. That is THEIR problem. Sooner or later they have to accept it and change for the better, or they'll just keep seeing the same ugly face in the mirror.

-- (you@tell.em.dude), November 15, 2000.


Yes, Jesus did flip over the money changers' tables. His anger was justified because it was righteous. Is your anger with "I Have" because he has wronged God, or because he has wronged you?

I know where you are at. Sometimes the carnal man in me wants to rip someone's head off and puke down his neck. I am pretty sure that Christ in me sees it differently, though.

-- J (Y2J@home.comm), November 15, 2000.

Why dont you just crawl back into the primordial ooze you rose from not too long ago, because all you have in your head is 1/10th of a reptilian brain

^^^^ Running around with a huge sign which reads:


see, um, I own a bearded dragon (ask Bingo, he saw the pic) and I love my dragon and he um loves me and he has a bigger brain than that.

In protest, I remain,


-- sumer (, November 15, 2000.

OT Warning -


Say if you were to go to a karaoke bar, & wanted to sing out loud about your great passion...which noxious '70's hit would you transform into 'sumer's 'Reptile Love'?:

Muskrat Love


Radar Love

-- flora (***@__._), November 15, 2000.

LOL Flora! But I beg to differ. Radar Love was not, is not and never will be "noxious". Also, I view 'sumer as more of a 60's singin' karaokeite. Perhaps "Puff The Magic Dragon"?

-- CD (, November 15, 2000.

Hee HEE...CD:

How did cha know his name is Puff? :-)

Flora, Reptile love in the form of Elvis tune with hunk of burning reptile, if you please *wink*

-- (, November 15, 2000.

Aaahh -

OK you two,

I yield, I yield!

-- flora (***@__._), November 15, 2000.

{ CD: could you be one of those who wrote in a presidential "valiant vote" for The Nuge? }.

-- flora (***@__._), November 15, 2000.

LOL Flora. Yeah, I voted for the Tedster. But be gentle on me... I had cat scratch fever that day.

-- CD (, November 15, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ