Michael Moore for President

Post #91,762 by andread 3/26/03 9:53:47 AM Reply	Michael Moore for President Play I Some Music w/ Papa Andy Saturday 8 PM - 11 PM ET All Night Rewind 11 PM - 5 PM Reggae, African and Caribbean Music [link\|http://wxxe.org\|Tune In]
Post #91,767 by rcareaga 3/26/03 10:07:31 AM Reply	Not until he faces up... to his complicity (through loud beating the drum for the execrable Nader in the 2000 campaign) in the cock-up that ended with the installation of these swaggering thieves in the White House. cordially, "Die Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist."
Post #91,782 by jake123 3/26/03 10:29:11 AM Reply	That's a crock It's called democracy, which means you can't blame your failure to win on the fact that an opponent ran. Perhaps it's because elections up here commonly have four or five candidates in a riding that the very idea that there might be more than two candidates doesn't send us into paroxysms of blame because someone failed to get a majority and only got a plurality. In most political systems, this is actually normal. You can perhaps blame it on the fact that ballot counting disputes were sidelined by the courts, but you certainly can't blame it on the mere fact that someone ran. Trying to do so is simply undemocratic. --\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca \n [link\|http://consultron.ca\|http://consultron.ca] [link\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] \n Kingston Ontario Canada [link\|news://news.consultron.ca\|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
Post #91,804 by rcareaga 3/26/03 11:21:28 AM 3/26/03 11:22:29 AM Reply	Re: That's a crock It's called democracy Well yes, that's what it's called. And boxley calls the bulldozed activist in Gaza a "terrorist." The American system might better be called "duopoly," as you implicitly acknowledge in your post. Gore Vidal and others have suggested that the US arrangement is best understood as a single-party system (the "Property Party") with its two principal factions dressed up as separate entities for public consumption. That's as may be, but there are differences between the factions (which will continue indefinitely to maintain their position as the front entities for political participation here) that it's silly to deny, and the Naderites' contention that there was no meaningful distinction between the undistinguished candidates in 2000 has been amply disproved since to all save those who, like the sanctimonious Messrs Nader and Moore, are deeply in denial. What was Nader's vote in Florida? Something north of 97,000? A fifth of those--hell, a tenth of those in Gore's column--would have put the result out of reach of the hastily-improvised fraud and rent-a-mob measures undertaken by the junta-to-be. cordially, [edit: "in Gore's column"] "Die Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist." Edited by rcareaga March 26, 2003, 11:22:29 AM EST Expand All History
Post #91,784 by boxley 3/26/03 10:32:56 AM Reply	Not until he faces up to the fact that "Roger and Me" was an insightful piece of journalistic work and everything else proved he is a one trick pony with an messiah complex and an attitude problem. thanx, bill will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org] Since corporations are the equivelent of human but they have no "concience" they are by definition sociopaths
Post #91,788 by cwbrenn 3/26/03 10:45:24 AM Reply	No thanks. I admire some of what MM has done, but he's far to arrogant and smug to sit well with me. That, and I disagree with him vehemently when it comes to interpreting the second amendment. "We are all born originals -- why is it so many of us die copies?" - Edward Young
Post #91,805 by mmoffitt 3/26/03 11:21:57 AM Reply	Re: 2nd Amendment. Why? He's not of the ridiculous notion that it refers to private ownership is he? bcnu, Mikem Osama bin Laden's brother could fly in US airspace 9/15/01, but I had to wait for FBI and CIA background checks, 'nuff said?
Post #91,810 by cwbrenn 3/26/03 11:27:12 AM Reply	No, I am. Unrepentantly so. "We are all born originals -- why is it so many of us die copies?" - Edward Young
Post #91,814 by mmoffitt 3/26/03 11:38:45 AM 3/26/03 11:39:26 AM Reply	USSC: Miller, 1939. Cited often, never reversed. qed. [Edit]: Mistakenly put "v." in instead of ":" bcnu, Mikem Osama bin Laden's brother could fly in US airspace 9/15/01, but I had to wait for FBI and CIA background checks, 'nuff said? Edited by mmoffitt March 26, 2003, 11:39:26 AM EST Expand All History
Post #91,821 by cwbrenn 3/26/03 11:51:54 AM Reply	Good for them As an american citizen, I am entitled to disagree with the United States Supreme Court. Which I do. I also disagreed with the Dred Scott decision. Go figure. "We are all born originals -- why is it so many of us die copies?" - Edward Young
Post #91,823 by mmoffitt 3/26/03 11:57:58 AM Reply	Yes, and you're free to disagree with The Constitution. :-) Actually, you don't have to. It's not that there is a prohibition against private ownership of firearms, it's just that Amendment II doesn't speak to private ownership. The only time this would ever come up is in the extraordinarily unlikely event that the Congress passes a law banning private ownership. Unless the USSC wanted to reverse the precedent of Miller and at least two other cases I can think of off the top of my head subsequent to Miller (an unlikely, but not impossible track for them to take), it would rule the private ownership ban Constitutional. Then you'd have something to bitch about :-) bcnu, Mikem Osama bin Laden's brother could fly in US airspace 9/15/01, but I had to wait for FBI and CIA background checks, 'nuff said?
Post #91,825 by cwbrenn 3/26/03 12:03:13 PM Reply	... I'm really not interested in debating about this right at the moment. My reason for not wanting Moore in the White House is because he and I (and, apparently, you and I) disagree on the meaning of the second amendment. That's all I was saying. I think it's best we leave the rest of this discussion for another day. "We are all born originals -- why is it so many of us die copies?" - Edward Young
Post #91,831 by mmoffitt 3/26/03 12:14:37 PM Reply	I don't think we need another day, but thanks. I've had this debate a bunch and I don't know if I've ever seen anyone change their position. The USSC interprets The Constitution, if you understand that, you understand that Amendment 2 is not about private ownership (here I leave out the typical argument that "if you can read..."). If you're a gun owner, you "will it" to apply to private ownership. No amount of reasoning will change anyone with such a view - it's an emotional issue with them, they hear some one wanting to take away one of their toys. Conversely, people familiar with the context and case law cannot accept that Amendment 2 applies to something that it doesn't. So, they too, are immoveable. I wouldn't have gone this far except in these days when The Constitution is being shred willy-nilly and with barely a peep from the Murican People, my dander gets a little up when I see a reference to this old misrepresentation. Enjoy shooting, or killing, or whatever trips your trigger. bcnu, Mikem Osama bin Laden's brother could fly in US airspace 9/15/01, but I had to wait for FBI and CIA background checks, 'nuff said?
Post #91,830 by cwbrenn 3/26/03 12:11:01 PM Reply	Sheesh. /me is dumb I completely misread the title of your post, which sorta changed the way I read the body of your post. Bad me, apologies to you, I shouldn't have been as abrupt as I was... gah. "We are all born originals -- why is it so many of us die copies?" - Edward Young
Post #91,832 by mmoffitt 3/26/03 12:15:06 PM Reply	Me 2! Apologies! bcnu, Mikem Osama bin Laden's brother could fly in US airspace 9/15/01, but I had to wait for FBI and CIA background checks, 'nuff said?

Welcome to IWETHEY!