Ah, the old correlation between being an anti-socialist and being full of crap holds true once again.
If your goal is government-based theft and the removal of incentive and responsibility, socialism is swell.
Go watch Sicko. Despite the terrible socialist boogyman, doctors who work under socialist medicine are quite capable of making $200,000+ per year and living in million dollar homes.
Socialism by its very nature requires a big government, which increases the probability of tyranny.
Tell that to the Republican party.
The claim that socialistic health care has been proven to be the best again depends upon your goals, but if your goal is health, the claim is a lie. Not a mistake, a lie.
Pot. Kettle. Black. Again, watch Sicko. The U.S. generally pays twice as much per person for worse health care. Hell, Cuba has nearly caught up to us, and they spend about 1/30 per person.
I didn't need any affirmation of your status as a complete and total idiot. Thoughtfully, however, you've provided some more anyway.
Lol. Ray Charles could see how little the American celebration of Christmas has to do with Christ. And he's blind. And dead. But you have to ask? You are a tool and a fool, un.
How about "when someone who happens to be Muslim kills someone in the name of Allah"?
How about "that only happens in action movies". You can find a lot of religious rhetoric, but the same goes for the U.S. - take Ann "kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity" Coulter or the dumbass general who said that his god was superior to Allah, when it's the same damn entity. But the vast majority of violence committed by Muslims is done for political/economic/ethnic reasons - same as violent Christians.
And, try reading that link I posted to see just who is responsible for "radical Muslims" in the first place.
The point was that Christmas as it is celebrated in the U.S. has virtually nothing to do with Christianity or Christ. And the little that does is mostly made up of seasonal songs and decorations.
I've always wondered this: If you aren't Christian, why do you celebrate Christmas?
You'll find the answer to that question in the chapter of the Bible that deals with Santa Clause, Christmas trees and spending large sums of money in department stores.
Remember that it's acceptable to make fun of Geeks, Christians, Buddists, Jews, Scientologists, Atheists, and LoS (Libertarians on Slashdot). But never make fun of Islam, the religion of peace, because they might cut off your head and car bomb your friends.
Ha! That is so funny! You know what else is funny? Christians who freak the fuck out when they go into a Target in December and see a sign that says "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas". Or the Southern Baptists' long boycott of Disney for, among other things, offering benefits to gay couples. And that's in a stable, prosperous nation. I wonder what Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell would have done if they'd been on the shit end of 100 years of western imperialism
Or how about when someone who happens to be Muslim kills someone, it's Islamic violence, but when a Christian kills someone, it's for other reasons. Like the KKK, the IRA, killers of abortion doctors, and millions of people that have died in wars and coups in Africa and South America. What does the Blame Islam First Crowd explain Seung-Hui Cho saying he wanted to be "Christ like" when he started killing people at Virginia Tech?
Apple has attempted to monopolize every market is possibly could, to equal or greater extent than Microsoft, except that the opportunity was greater for Microsoft. Specifically, Apple has controlled the three markets it historically ever controlled: the Apple II market, the Mac OS market, and the iPod market. Apple ruthlessly excluded all possible competition in those three arenas.
Could you come up with an example that isn't stupid? A company is a monopoly when they dominate a market to the detriment of consumers, not because they are the only source for their own products. By your logic, every single manufacturer is a monopolist because they are the sole source of the products they make. Ford is the only source of Mustangs. Nike is the only source of Air Jordans. McDonalds is the only place where you can find a Big Mac.
The fact that Fox News is so popular is indicative that the mainstream (non-Fox) media is, in fact, not as conservative as the majority of viewers want(ed) it to be.
No, it's because Fox created it's own pond where it could be the big fish. Non-fascist viewers vastly outnumber fascist viewers, but they are spread across CNN, MSNBC and broadcast stations. However, if you want fascist fact-free news, Fox is the way to go.
Other stations occasionally try and woo Fox viewers with wingnuts like Glenn Beck, who tries to make up for all the nice Mormons in this country by being the biggest asshole on the planet, but are just wasting their time. It's like the DLC pushing Democrats to basically be Bud Light Republicans: why go Light when you can get the real thing?
While you're getting some cheese to go with that whine, could you try and come up with a real example of Apple coming remotely close to being as unethical as Microsoft?
Why should he pay for a bunch of crap he doesn't want?
my only alternative is to steal?
Copyright infringement is not stealing. Never has been and never will be. And aside from the copyright violation, do you know what the difference is for NBC between someone who will never pay for something and will never watch it and someone who will never pay for something but will download it? Absolutely nothing, because either way they will never get paid.
There is no difference between someone who will never pay to watch something and someone who downloads it off Mininova: either way NBC gets no money. Quitchyerbitchin.
Remember the high-school senior who got a blowjob from a 15 year old? He's doing time, because a law designed to catch sex offenders was badly written.
That, and the fact that the prosecutor was a complete fucking jackass.
BILL MOYERS: Critics point to September eight, 2002 and to your show in particular, as the classic case of how the press and the government became inseparable.
Someone in the administration plants a dramatic story in the NEW YORK TIMES And then the Vice President comes on your show and points to the NEW YORK TIMES. It's a circular, self-confirming leak.
TIM RUSSERT: I don't know how Judith Miller and Michael Gordon reported that story, who their sources were. It was a front-page story of the NEW YORK TIMES. When Secretary Rice and Vice President Cheney and others came up that Sunday morning on all the Sunday shows, they did exactly that.
TIM RUSSERT: What my concern was, is that there were concerns expressed by other government officials. And to this day, I wish my phone had rung, or I had access to them.
BILL MOYERS: Bob Simon didn't wait for the phone to ring.
It doesn't really make since for him to be harder on Dems though since he used to be the chief of staff for a Democrat senator before he started work for Meet the Press
Doesn't necessarily mean much. Republicans donated a ton of money and support to Joe Lieberman's last campaign because he attacked other Democrats all the time. And Dick Morris has made a career out of attacking Democrats, especially his former employers.
That's not true. For one thing all of the candidates have been invited to appear on Meet the Press and be interviewed by Tim Russert.
That's no substitute since Tim Russert is a tool. He was a total asshole to Dean for not knowing exactly how many enlisted men were in the military in 2004, when he gave Bush a complete pass on that question. It wouldn't be so bad if he was that tough on all politicians, except like Chris Matthews he plays hardball with Democrats but softball with Republicans.
I find this frustrating because in reading some of your other post we agree on a lot of things.
Very well, lets continue while keeping the snottiness to a minimum.:)
Yes, and let's compare the flight time to NH from DC (less than 90 minutes) to one of your mentioned states, WA (5 hours?). Now double that for a round trip to a one or two day swing through the state. Notice something relevant here for a time constrained, exhausted candidate who has more to do than collect frequent flyer miles?
I don't have a copy of their current travel schedules, but generally candidates who are campaigning already miss a lot of votes, only returning to DC for important ones. For example, John McCain, arguably the biggest Iraq war supporter in the Senate, didn't even show up to vote on the supplemental bill that runs through September, IIRC. In this aspect I don't see much of a difference between campaigning in Iowa and campaigning in Montana.
Furthermore, 33 Senators and 435 Representatives manage this kind of juggling every two years. If Sam Brownback can be a Senator in DC and run for re-election in Kansas, why would it be so much harder for him to be a Senator in DC and campaign for the presidency back in Kansas?
If you don't grasp the concept of retail politics and the value it adds to the political process then this discussion is truly hopeless.
I understand retail politics just fine, thank you. What I don't understand is why the other 48 states should not be entitled to it.
In TX, with 25 times the population of NH, they will do this by rarely, if ever, leaving the major cities.
Not necessarily. How may politicians haven't had a photo op on a farm? And a debate in Texas in a town of 5,000 people will be covered by the same local media networks as a debate in a city of 5,000,000.
They will do it by staged media events and there will be nothing open about the forums. To be effective gatherings will need thousands, not hundreds, of attendees and they will be tightly scripted and controlled.
Having primaries in small states is no guarantee of openness. Every event Bush has had in every campaign has been tightly scripted and controlled, in states large or small.
A candidate in NH can easily visit 2 or 3 towns in a weekend and personally meet (not herd into an auditorium) 700 people - 1 of every 1000 of the voters.
Of course it can happen in Texas, minus the 1 in 1000 voters part. But the rest would surely prefer the chance of meeting a candidate someday versus never meeting one because the important primaries are always in New Hampshire or Iowa.
Early primaries are freaking different in many, many subtle ways.
Okay, name me one difference (besides DC travel) between a presidential primary and, oh, we'll say one for governor. And then tell me why Iowa and New Hampshire are the only states fit for the job.
250 million dollars divided by 1 million people equals 250 dollars. Divided by 4 years equal $62.50 per resident per year, little of which ever reaches the average person.
If it's no big deal, they shouldn't have any problem giving it up, but it seems they have a *big* problem with that.
But for the sake of argument, we'll say the primaries need to be in small states and need be at least as close to DC as Iowa. There are plenty that fit the job. Why can't Vermont hold the first primary? It is very similar to it's neighbor New Hampshire in physical size and demographics, but has *half* the population. If reaching a high percentage of voters is important, Vermont should go before its neighbor. Or how about Rhode Island? It has a tenth the land area of New Hampshire, and less than 3% of Iowa's, while having less population than either.
I'm haveing trouble understanding why this late in the game, people are still misled and seriously confused on the matter.
I don't know dumbass, why are you misled and confused? If this was so serious, why was the only conviction during the trial was of Linda Tripp for taping Monica without her knowledge? Sure he was disbarred and fined - by other partisan Republicans. I repeat, if there was real justice, Starr and Republicans in Congress would have gone to gone to jail for malicious prosecution. Especially the ones who latter called for a pardon for Scooter Libby over his conviction for perjury.
Ah, I see we've reached the part of the conversation where you babble like a drunken idiot.
if I jerked off all over one of my co-workers, are you going to tell me to tell me she can't come back to file a sexual harassment lawsuit against me?
WTF does this have to do with anything, anywhere?
Being that the activity between Bill and Monica was consensual, it was still a sexual relationship.
But it wasn't sexual relations. You do know there can be a difference between what words say and what they mean, right? Like how someone learning the English language might hear "Sally is sleeping with Tommy" and think they are two people who sleep in the same bed, when "sleeping with" means they are having sex. Similarly, you might read "sexual relations" and think it applies to everything from a hand job to a rim job, but it means penis in vagina. But those are the difficulties you run into when you try and come up with nice diplomatic phrases for various methods of fucking.
Were talking about a man whome was elected to the highest politcal office in this country. And you, can honestly say it's none of OUR fucking business and have NO right to an honest answer?
No, it's not your fucking business, anymore than it's my fucking business that Bush is an alcoholic. Except that he saw fit to ask it of Ann Richards when he was running against her in Texas. Any more stupid questions? Oh yes, I guess you have one more:
Hah, I'll remember that next time you ever bitch about Bush misleading the American public on Iraq. Cause remember, it's noneoftheirfuckingbusiness!!!
3700+ Americans would slap your face for making such an unbelievably asinine analogy, if they were still alive to do so.
Oh, but today's Iraq "war" is no more a war than the Clinton presidency wars
Large scale? Check. Prolonged? Check. Violent? Check. It may not be a War in the Constitutional sense (since Congress hasn't declared it) but it is vastly more deserving the war label than our brief, bloodless (for us) action in Kosovo.
I didn't know that Katrina was a war either.
I didn't know went through elementary school and never picked up basic reading comprehension. I never said Iraq was a war, dumbass, much less Katrina.
The U.S.A. is there to assist the citizens and the democratically elected government in maintaining peace.
Dick Cheney, is that you? Sorry, no one is buying your bullshit anymore.
Of course I did know that Bush was and is responsible for hurricanes and other weather phenomena.
He is responsible from turning FEMA from a very well run federal agency into a place to appoint slacker political buddies with zero experience in disaster management. He is responsible for being warned point blank about the danger Katrina posed to the Gulf coast and doing nothing about, just as he did nothing when warned that Al Queda was determined to attack the U.S., and that they might use planes to do so. Not only did he do nothing to prepare for the storm, he stayed on vacation after it hit. He is also responsible for FEMA taking volunteer fighter fighters from all over the United States and keeping them going into the city so they could watch training videos on how to hand out cards with FEMA's phone number.
Of course! Because I state facts that goes against what you THINK
You are entitled to your own opinion. You are not entitled to your own set of facts.
That stated, if you count the votes that were properly cast using the rules set by each precinct before the first vote was cast, Bush won, every time, every recount. That is no lie! To say otherwise, is.
Or, more properly stated: you are completely full of shit. More people voted for Gore than for Bush not just nationally, but also in Florida. You are a tool and a fool, Archer.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah, the old correlation between being an anti-socialist and being full of crap holds true once again.
If your goal is government-based theft and the removal of incentive and responsibility, socialism is swell.
Go watch Sicko. Despite the terrible socialist boogyman, doctors who work under socialist medicine are quite capable of making $200,000+ per year and living in million dollar homes.
Socialism by its very nature requires a big government, which increases the probability of tyranny.
Tell that to the Republican party.
The claim that socialistic health care has been proven to be the best again depends upon your goals, but if your goal is health, the claim is a lie. Not a mistake, a lie.
Pot. Kettle. Black. Again, watch Sicko. The U.S. generally pays twice as much per person for worse health care. Hell, Cuba has nearly caught up to us, and they spend about 1/30 per person.
I didn't need any affirmation of your status as a complete and total idiot. Thoughtfully, however, you've provided some more anyway.
Lol. Ray Charles could see how little the American celebration of Christmas has to do with Christ. And he's blind. And dead. But you have to ask? You are a tool and a fool, un.
No, the point sailing right over your head. And your dumb ass.
How about "when someone who happens to be Muslim kills someone in the name of Allah"?
How about "that only happens in action movies". You can find a lot of religious rhetoric, but the same goes for the U.S. - take Ann "kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity" Coulter or the dumbass general who said that his god was superior to Allah, when it's the same damn entity. But the vast majority of violence committed by Muslims is done for political/economic/ethnic reasons - same as violent Christians.
And, try reading that link I posted to see just who is responsible for "radical Muslims" in the first place.
*Whoosh*
The point was that Christmas as it is celebrated in the U.S. has virtually nothing to do with Christianity or Christ. And the little that does is mostly made up of seasonal songs and decorations.
I've always wondered this: If you aren't Christian, why do you celebrate Christmas?
You'll find the answer to that question in the chapter of the Bible that deals with Santa Clause, Christmas trees and spending large sums of money in department stores.
Remember that it's acceptable to make fun of Geeks, Christians, Buddists, Jews, Scientologists, Atheists, and LoS (Libertarians on Slashdot). But never make fun of Islam, the religion of peace, because they might cut off your head and car bomb your friends.
Ha! That is so funny! You know what else is funny? Christians who freak the fuck out when they go into a Target in December and see a sign that says "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas". Or the Southern Baptists' long boycott of Disney for, among other things, offering benefits to gay couples. And that's in a stable, prosperous nation. I wonder what Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell would have done if they'd been on the shit end of 100 years of western imperialism
Or how about when someone who happens to be Muslim kills someone, it's Islamic violence, but when a Christian kills someone, it's for other reasons. Like the KKK, the IRA, killers of abortion doctors, and millions of people that have died in wars and coups in Africa and South America. What does the Blame Islam First Crowd explain Seung-Hui Cho saying he wanted to be "Christ like" when he started killing people at Virginia Tech?
All the evidence? What evidence? Some you just made up?
Try reading some history.
There is no evidence of that; just the opposite: the concept of "monopoly" came with and relies upon governmental privilege.
What privilege?
Apple has attempted to monopolize every market is possibly could, to equal or greater extent than Microsoft, except that the opportunity was greater for Microsoft. Specifically, Apple has controlled the three markets it historically ever controlled: the Apple II market, the Mac OS market, and the iPod market. Apple ruthlessly excluded all possible competition in those three arenas.
Could you come up with an example that isn't stupid? A company is a monopoly when they dominate a market to the detriment of consumers, not because they are the only source for their own products. By your logic, every single manufacturer is a monopolist because they are the sole source of the products they make. Ford is the only source of Mustangs. Nike is the only source of Air Jordans. McDonalds is the only place where you can find a Big Mac.
The U.S. does not engage in aggressive wars---that's for the likes of Hitler.
I think a few million Iraqi's might disagree with you on that one.
The fact that Fox News is so popular is indicative that the mainstream (non-Fox) media is, in fact, not as conservative as the majority of viewers want(ed) it to be.
No, it's because Fox created it's own pond where it could be the big fish. Non-fascist viewers vastly outnumber fascist viewers, but they are spread across CNN, MSNBC and broadcast stations. However, if you want fascist fact-free news, Fox is the way to go.
Other stations occasionally try and woo Fox viewers with wingnuts like Glenn Beck, who tries to make up for all the nice Mormons in this country by being the biggest asshole on the planet, but are just wasting their time. It's like the DLC pushing Democrats to basically be Bud Light Republicans: why go Light when you can get the real thing?
While you're getting some cheese to go with that whine, could you try and come up with a real example of Apple coming remotely close to being as unethical as Microsoft?
Getting cable.
Why should he pay for a bunch of crap he doesn't want?
my only alternative is to steal?
Copyright infringement is not stealing. Never has been and never will be. And aside from the copyright violation, do you know what the difference is for NBC between someone who will never pay for something and will never watch it and someone who will never pay for something but will download it? Absolutely nothing, because either way they will never get paid.
Moron. Taking is removing. When you copy something, you aren't removing it, you are making a copy.
There is no difference between someone who will never pay to watch something and someone who downloads it off Mininova: either way NBC gets no money. Quitchyerbitchin.
Remember the high-school senior who got a blowjob from a 15 year old? He's doing time, because a law designed to catch sex offenders was badly written.
That, and the fact that the prosecutor was a complete fucking jackass.
Wait'll 2008 and you'll find out.
Find out what? What exactly are you expecting?
Try this, this, this and especially this. And there was the exchange between Russert and Moyers on Moyers' "Buying the war":
It doesn't really make since for him to be harder on Dems though since he used to be the chief of staff for a Democrat senator before he started work for Meet the Press
Doesn't necessarily mean much. Republicans donated a ton of money and support to Joe Lieberman's last campaign because he attacked other Democrats all the time. And Dick Morris has made a career out of attacking Democrats, especially his former employers.
Why don't you read my responses to this guy elsewhere in the thread and then get back to me.
That's not true. For one thing all of the candidates have been invited to appear on Meet the Press and be interviewed by Tim Russert.
That's no substitute since Tim Russert is a tool. He was a total asshole to Dean for not knowing exactly how many enlisted men were in the military in 2004, when he gave Bush a complete pass on that question. It wouldn't be so bad if he was that tough on all politicians, except like Chris Matthews he plays hardball with Democrats but softball with Republicans.
I find this frustrating because in reading some of your other post we agree on a lot of things.
:)
Very well, lets continue while keeping the snottiness to a minimum.
Yes, and let's compare the flight time to NH from DC (less than 90 minutes) to one of your mentioned states, WA (5 hours?). Now double that for a round trip to a one or two day swing through the state. Notice something relevant here for a time constrained, exhausted candidate who has more to do than collect frequent flyer miles?
I don't have a copy of their current travel schedules, but generally candidates who are campaigning already miss a lot of votes, only returning to DC for important ones. For example, John McCain, arguably the biggest Iraq war supporter in the Senate, didn't even show up to vote on the supplemental bill that runs through September, IIRC. In this aspect I don't see much of a difference between campaigning in Iowa and campaigning in Montana.
Furthermore, 33 Senators and 435 Representatives manage this kind of juggling every two years. If Sam Brownback can be a Senator in DC and run for re-election in Kansas, why would it be so much harder for him to be a Senator in DC and campaign for the presidency back in Kansas?
If you don't grasp the concept of retail politics and the value it adds to the political process then this discussion is truly hopeless.
I understand retail politics just fine, thank you. What I don't understand is why the other 48 states should not be entitled to it.
In TX, with 25 times the population of NH, they will do this by rarely, if ever, leaving the major cities.
Not necessarily. How may politicians haven't had a photo op on a farm? And a debate in Texas in a town of 5,000 people will be covered by the same local media networks as a debate in a city of 5,000,000.
They will do it by staged media events and there will be nothing open about the forums. To be effective gatherings will need thousands, not hundreds, of attendees and they will be tightly scripted and controlled.
Having primaries in small states is no guarantee of openness. Every event Bush has had in every campaign has been tightly scripted and controlled, in states large or small.
A candidate in NH can easily visit 2 or 3 towns in a weekend and personally meet (not herd into an auditorium) 700 people - 1 of every 1000 of the voters.
Of course it can happen in Texas, minus the 1 in 1000 voters part. But the rest would surely prefer the chance of meeting a candidate someday versus never meeting one because the important primaries are always in New Hampshire or Iowa.
Early primaries are freaking different in many, many subtle ways.
Okay, name me one difference (besides DC travel) between a presidential primary and, oh, we'll say one for governor. And then tell me why Iowa and New Hampshire are the only states fit for the job.
250 million dollars divided by 1 million people equals 250 dollars. Divided by 4 years equal $62.50 per resident per year, little of which ever reaches the average person.
If it's no big deal, they shouldn't have any problem giving it up, but it seems they have a *big* problem with that.
But for the sake of argument, we'll say the primaries need to be in small states and need be at least as close to DC as Iowa. There are plenty that fit the job. Why can't Vermont hold the first primary? It is very similar to it's neighbor New Hampshire in physical size and demographics, but has *half* the population. If reaching a high percentage of voters is important, Vermont should go before its neighbor. Or how about Rhode Island? It has a tenth the land area of New Hampshire, and less than 3% of Iowa's, while having less population than either.
I'm haveing trouble understanding why this late in the game, people are still misled and seriously confused on the matter.
I don't know dumbass, why are you misled and confused? If this was so serious, why was the only conviction during the trial was of Linda Tripp for taping Monica without her knowledge? Sure he was disbarred and fined - by other partisan Republicans. I repeat, if there was real justice, Starr and Republicans in Congress would have gone to gone to jail for malicious prosecution. Especially the ones who latter called for a pardon for Scooter Libby over his conviction for perjury.
Ah, I see we've reached the part of the conversation where you babble like a drunken idiot.
if I jerked off all over one of my co-workers, are you going to tell me to tell me she can't come back to file a sexual harassment lawsuit against me?
WTF does this have to do with anything, anywhere?
Being that the activity between Bill and Monica was consensual, it was still a sexual relationship.
But it wasn't sexual relations. You do know there can be a difference between what words say and what they mean, right? Like how someone learning the English language might hear "Sally is sleeping with Tommy" and think they are two people who sleep in the same bed, when "sleeping with" means they are having sex. Similarly, you might read "sexual relations" and think it applies to everything from a hand job to a rim job, but it means penis in vagina. But those are the difficulties you run into when you try and come up with nice diplomatic phrases for various methods of fucking.
Were talking about a man whome was elected to the highest politcal office in this country. And you, can honestly say it's none of OUR fucking business and have NO right to an honest answer?
No, it's not your fucking business, anymore than it's my fucking business that Bush is an alcoholic. Except that he saw fit to ask it of Ann Richards when he was running against her in Texas. Any more stupid questions? Oh yes, I guess you have one more:
Hah, I'll remember that next time you ever bitch about Bush misleading the American public on Iraq. Cause remember, it's noneoftheirfuckingbusiness!!!
3700+ Americans would slap your face for making such an unbelievably asinine analogy, if they were still alive to do so.
Oh, but today's Iraq "war" is no more a war than the Clinton presidency wars
Large scale? Check. Prolonged? Check. Violent? Check. It may not be a War in the Constitutional sense (since Congress hasn't declared it) but it is vastly more deserving the war label than our brief, bloodless (for us) action in Kosovo.
I didn't know that Katrina was a war either.
I didn't know went through elementary school and never picked up basic reading comprehension. I never said Iraq was a war, dumbass, much less Katrina.
The U.S.A. is there to assist the citizens and the democratically elected government in maintaining peace.
Dick Cheney, is that you? Sorry, no one is buying your bullshit anymore.
Of course I did know that Bush was and is responsible for hurricanes and other weather phenomena.
He is responsible from turning FEMA from a very well run federal agency into a place to appoint slacker political buddies with zero experience in disaster management. He is responsible for being warned point blank about the danger Katrina posed to the Gulf coast and doing nothing about, just as he did nothing when warned that Al Queda was determined to attack the U.S., and that they might use planes to do so. Not only did he do nothing to prepare for the storm, he stayed on vacation after it hit. He is also responsible for FEMA taking volunteer fighter fighters from all over the United States and keeping them going into the city so they could watch training videos on how to hand out cards with FEMA's phone number.
Too bad you can't mod people "idiot".
Too bad you can't be modded "-1, Fucktard".
Of course! Because I state facts that goes against what you THINK
You are entitled to your own opinion. You are not entitled to your own set of facts.
That stated, if you count the votes that were properly cast using the rules set by each precinct before the first vote was cast, Bush won, every time, every recount. That is no lie! To say otherwise, is.
Or, more properly stated: you are completely full of shit. More people voted for Gore than for Bush not just nationally, but also in Florida. You are a tool and a fool, Archer.