"and using the pythagorems theorem I learned in the 8th grade. It's highly unlikely that anyone uses their tower computer less than one meter away from their ears."
I didn't know the Pythagorean theorem could find out the chance of something happening! Cool!
So yeah. No senator who would want to get re-elected (or gain presidency?) would vote against it. 'cuz if they did, they'd be collaborating with the terrorists.
But when will it stop? When will there finally be a president who both sides like 'enough' that there is no 'need' for the other side to basically state that the country would go to Hell if the other side wins? It seems that ole Shrubby has created a climate where this won't happen for many years.
And about your challenge: I'm not sure why you included it. Both parties are fraudulent when it comes to votes. Last election, the Republicans out-frauded the Democrats. The 2000 election, the Democrats actually won (Gore won Florida in the popular vote), but the Supreme Court voted along party lines, and appointed Bush.
I would be interested in seeing the incidences you refer too. Have a link?
I believe that the reason *why* there isn't a lot of support for these third-party parties is becuase quite simply, they aren't given a chance to have themselves heard. If these parties were given the amount of attention the two big parties had, they too would have many supporters.
The "other guy"-problem that you reference is rooted in American's want for quick satisfaction. If people would actually vote for those they supported, not the guy who could usurp the current president, then they will probably be disappointed at first. Why? Becuase the current president would most likely be in power. But if they kept on voting this way (As opposed to 'band'ing together like the Democrats and other parties did last election) to get rid of president, eventually things would get better. It would take a while, but soon the elections wouldn't be so predictable. There could be a third party who had a chance. Remember the Green Party in 2000? What about the Moose Party a while ago? That one won a nice size of the population.
Bush is losing control right now. It's gradual now, but I doubt even the Republicans would allow him to stay. They were the ones who introduced the bill to limit the amount of time in the Oval Office someone could spend. (As far as I remember)
But that would let third-party parties have the same amount of money as the two big ones. The Democrats and Republicans don't agree on many things, but keeping a third party out of the picture is something they do agree on.
I remember reading something about how in the last election, two presidential candidates got court orders to be allowed into the 'Presidential Debates' on some large media network (I think it was ABC). The guards wouldn't let them in, regardless of a judicial order.
The problem with Feingold is that it's too late. Anything he does now will be labeled as "political grandstanding." I'm from Wisconsin, and I like the guy. He's calling for a censure of Bush on the illegal wiretapping issue. Nevermind the fact that he is correct, the Republicans will label his motives as purely for getting his name into the minds of the people. I'm sure that's a part of his motives, that's just smart politics, but by focusing on this issue, the truth of his move will never be seen by the people of this nation.
I believe Jon Stewart once said that after Watergate, all journalists were so happy with their work, that they took the rest of the century off. I guess that break is still in effect.
Slashdot Mirror
So then they'll say you willfully did it to throw off the governmnet, to evade the law.
"and using the pythagorems theorem I learned in the 8th grade. It's highly unlikely that anyone uses their tower computer less than one meter away from their ears."
I didn't know the Pythagorean theorem could find out the chance of something happening! Cool!
They can 'take you out of the game' in more ways than one ;)
Would you have rather not gotten any of the money?
So yeah. No senator who would want to get re-elected (or gain presidency?) would vote against it. 'cuz if they did, they'd be collaborating with the terrorists.
From what I remember, the Real ID Act was hidden in either a Katrina repair fund or an Emergency Act To Give More Money To The Army In Iraq.
Becuase you generally don't drive to have fun.
But when will it stop? When will there finally be a president who both sides like 'enough' that there is no 'need' for the other side to basically state that the country would go to Hell if the other side wins? It seems that ole Shrubby has created a climate where this won't happen for many years.
And about your challenge: I'm not sure why you included it. Both parties are fraudulent when it comes to votes. Last election, the Republicans out-frauded the Democrats. The 2000 election, the Democrats actually won (Gore won Florida in the popular vote), but the Supreme Court voted along party lines, and appointed Bush.
I would be interested in seeing the incidences you refer too. Have a link?
I believe that the reason *why* there isn't a lot of support for these third-party parties is becuase quite simply, they aren't given a chance to have themselves heard. If these parties were given the amount of attention the two big parties had, they too would have many supporters.
The "other guy"-problem that you reference is rooted in American's want for quick satisfaction. If people would actually vote for those they supported, not the guy who could usurp the current president, then they will probably be disappointed at first. Why? Becuase the current president would most likely be in power. But if they kept on voting this way (As opposed to 'band'ing together like the Democrats and other parties did last election) to get rid of president, eventually things would get better. It would take a while, but soon the elections wouldn't be so predictable. There could be a third party who had a chance. Remember the Green Party in 2000? What about the Moose Party a while ago? That one won a nice size of the population.
Bush is losing control right now. It's gradual now, but I doubt even the Republicans would allow him to stay. They were the ones who introduced the bill to limit the amount of time in the Oval Office someone could spend. (As far as I remember)
But that would let third-party parties have the same amount of money as the two big ones. The Democrats and Republicans don't agree on many things, but keeping a third party out of the picture is something they do agree on.
I remember reading something about how in the last election, two presidential candidates got court orders to be allowed into the 'Presidential Debates' on some large media network (I think it was ABC). The guards wouldn't let them in, regardless of a judicial order.
Yes, but he can be beheaded.
The problem with Feingold is that it's too late. Anything he does now will be labeled as "political grandstanding." I'm from Wisconsin, and I like the guy. He's calling for a censure of Bush on the illegal wiretapping issue. Nevermind the fact that he is correct, the Republicans will label his motives as purely for getting his name into the minds of the people. I'm sure that's a part of his motives, that's just smart politics, but by focusing on this issue, the truth of his move will never be seen by the people of this nation.
I believe Jon Stewart once said that after Watergate, all journalists were so happy with their work, that they took the rest of the century off. I guess that break is still in effect.
"The only thing more dangerous than an idiot is an idiot with a gun."
Or idiots in places of power. They can do more harm to people than any gun can.
Is Armistice Day really that special?
Well, I make up one of those two people.
I wonder who the other is. I hope it's a girl.
Wouldn't The Fonz need to be there?
What if you didn't want to?
No, it's "Y + Right Trigger" to cast your Almsivi spell.
There was a story behind Tribunal?
Aliens? I thought it was the Mossad!
"My great great great great grandfather may or may not have invented the phone"?
Impressive.
"and lots of shrubbery in the woods to block sound and line of sight to roadways."
So the quest for peace is a quest for shrubbery?
Those Knights Who Said Ni were on to something...
Please sir, elaborate on these flying monkeys and midgets.