Can someone in this forum please enlighten me on something?

George W. Bush, in the debates and at virtually every campaign stop, stressed the need (ad nauseum) for "Local control," and a tax-cut that would put MORE power in the hands of "the people."

"My opponent trusts the federal government. I TRUST YOU, THE PEOPLE!"

Why then has Bush decided to take this Florida issue into a FEDERAL COURT, and argue for a MACHINE vote count over a hand count (eg, done by THE PEOPLE)?

It looks like Bush has already broken a campaign promise... AND HE ISNT EVEN PRESIDENT YET!

So c'mon you "power to the people" initiative folks! whats the deal here?

-- Merciful Nate (pieinyereye@yahoo.com), November 16, 2000

Answers

Did you expect anything less of Bush? In Texas he signs into law that recounts are more "acurit" by hand. Ah, whose hands? Local control works for him somewhat like Eyman's version. Advantage Bush/Eyman.

How about it Tim, isn't there a local position for you to campaign for? Maybe in Austin?

-- Terry (moonhunter47@yahoo.com), November 16, 2000.

I'll give my 2 cents..

I...am willing to accept a certain amount of tabulation errors, no system is perfect. But ....I am much more comfortable with those errors coming from a non-voting..non-party member...non-biased..voting machine than ANY human being riding the jackass or elephant. Machine counts..machine recounts all the way...no handcount, no revote

-- no chance (kingoffools_99@yahoo.com), November 16, 2000.

"...I am much more comfortable with those errors coming from a non-voting..non-party member...non-biased..voting machine than ANY human being riding the jackass or elephant."

He ditto dude... And while we're at it lets get rid of the initiative process for the same reason! Get the decision-making power out of the mob's control

-- Allan D. (adentrella@yahoo.com), November 16, 2000.

Blah-Blah-Blah no chance. Did Dubya, or did not Dubya break a campaign promise? (about local control and trusting the people)

"My opponent trusts the federal government. I TRUST YOU, THE PEOPLE!" ... and then I will go fight for machine counting (over the people counting) in a F-E-D-E-R-A-L court (that is not a local court or a state court)

(I know, it does all depend on what your definition of "people" is)

Dont give us this crap no chance (and for that matter James Baker). WE all know that if the shoe was on the other foot that you would be fighting for the hand-count as well.

"There is no right and wrong, there is only partisan"

-- Merciful Nate (pieinyereye@yahoo.com), November 16, 2000.

I wondered how long it would take before one of those "Gorey" people would bring this topic into the forum.

"Quick, scoop those teeney little chads up before the cops see them! We don't want the public to know how easy it is to manipulate them into thinking a hand count is fair!"

Or maybe:

"Gee, I think maybe I might have poked the wrong hole! I was confused! I want to vote again!"

Or how about: "Let's get a hand count in these predominately Democratic Counties and change the election outcome!"

Trust? The Democrats? You are kidding, right?

-- Marsha (acorn_nut@msn.com), November 16, 2000.

Nate,

I certainly hope you don't have a problem with a "court" making a decision in this election.

I certainly hope you don't have a problem with the "electoral college" all of a sudden.

As far as "mob" rule, I guess we all now know who the "mob" is.

-- Marsha (acorn_nut@msn.com), November 16, 2000.

hey you want a hand count....fine.....recount the entire state, not just some demo strongholds, and if you can get it done by December 18th great...but I bet ya can't. December 19th comes and they might as well roll up their favorite tabacco in those ballots for all they will matter.

-- no chance (kingoffools_99@yahoo.com), November 17, 2000.

Seen the news lately? A LIBERAL DEMOCRATIC JUDGE has ruled that the Fla Sec of State acted appropriately in cutting off consideration of additional tallies after the one week deadline. Unless the Fla supreme court is willing to over rule both Fla state law, AND this judges decision, this leaves it up to the 1-2 thousand late absentee ballots with Bush hanging on to a 300 vote lead. And the majority of the ballots appear to be in counties that went for Bush.

Apparently the Gore campaign chief doesn't have as much skill at stealing elections as his old man did.


-- (mark842@hotmail.com), November 17, 2000.

"Nate, I certainly hope you don't have a problem with a "court" making a decision in this election.

I certainly hope you don't have a problem with the "electoral college" all of a sudden. -- Marsha (acorn_nut@msn.com), November 16, 2000."

Noooooooooooo problem 'tall (with either)... As I mentioned earlier, checks and balances are part of the nature of this REPUBLIC.

God Bless America

-- Merciful Nate (pieinyereye@yahoo.com), November 20, 2000.

(put that in yer partisan-pipe and smoke it)

-- Merciful Nate (pieinyereye@yahoo.com), November 20, 2000.

And god save us from the "MOB" (read liberal swine) rule!

-- Marsha (acorn_nut@msn.com), November 20, 2000.

Jeb Bush should step in and end this crisis. I am sure he will be fair and impartial. Katherine Harris could watch him to ensure there would be no conflict of interest. To round things out, James Baker could mediate between Jeb and Katherine, just in case a dispute occured. I am sure it would be a smooth process to certify the vote and put GW in office. Then GW could do the country a great service by sending clinton and gore back to their homes, where they could resume their lives as professional HillBillys.

-- Rolex Hoffmann (rolex@innw.net), November 20, 2000.