 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups Platforms PCXboxPlayStationNintendoGames ActionStrategyRole Playing GamesSimulatorsSport Games |
Game Forum / Role Playing Games / Final Fantasy / January 2007America Hates Democracy
Another case of Americans pretending they care about democracy but when push comes to shove it's complete bullshit. Someone should tell the leaders of Hamas that any educated person knows America doesn't give a sh.t about democracy. If America cared about democracy George Bush would never have been "elected" in the first place. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060214/ap_on_re_mi_ea/hamas_regime_change Hamas: No Plan to Recognize Israel By AMY TEIBEL, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 28 minutes ago JERUSALEM - Hamas protested "interference" by the United States and Israel on Tuesday following reports the nations were exploring ways to topple the militants' incoming government unless they renounced their violent ideology and recognized Israel's right to exist. In Washington, the White House and the Israeli ambassador to the United States denied there was such a plot. The State Department said it was reviewing U.S. aid to the Palestinians and would make a decision within two weeks. Exiled Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal said in Sudan that his group had no plans to recognize Israel. "There will be no recognition of Israel and there will be no security for the occupation and colonization forces," Mashaal told a rally in Khartoum. "Resistance will remain our strategic option." The New York Times, citing U.S. and Israeli officials it did not identify, reported Tuesday that the United States and Israel were considering a campaign to starve the Palestinian Authority of cash so Palestinians would grow disillusioned and bring down a Hamas government. Israeli security officials said they were looking at ways to force Hamas from power and were focusing on an economic squeeze that would prompt Palestinians to clamor for the return of President Mahmoud Abbas' ousted Fatah Party. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter with the media. A Hamas official protested the reports, saying attempts to bring down a future Hamas government were hypocritical. "This is ... a rejection of the democratic process, which the Americans are calling for day and night," incoming legislator Mushir al Masri said. "It's an interference and a collective punishment of our people because they practiced the democratic process in a transparent and honest way." No, no, you have it slightly off. America doesn't hate DEMOCRACY. We just hate DEMOCRATS. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Now just throw your hands in the motherf**kin air And wave the motherf**kers like ya just don't care Yeah roll up the dank, and pour the drank And watch your step (why?) cuz Doggy's on the gank My bank roll's on swoll My s**t's on hit, legit, now I'm on parole, stroll with the Dogg Pound right behind me and up in yo b***h, is where ya might find me Layin that, playin that G Thang She want the nigga with the biggest nuts, and guess what? He is I, and I am him, slim with the tilted brim What's my motherf**kin name? --Snoop Dogg, "Who (n.N.) Am I (What's My Name)" We will we will rock you. --Queen I AM CORNHOLIO!!! --Cornholio > Another case of Americans pretending they care about democracy but when push > comes to shove it's complete bullshit. Someone should tell the leaders of > Hamas that any educated person knows America doesn't give a sh.t about > democracy. If America cared about democracy George Bush would never have > been "elected" in the first place. America isn't a democracy, dimbulb. It's a REPUBLIC. Big difference. George Bush was "elected" because we followed our long-established election LAWS -- which the Democrats tried repeatedly to circumvent, by the way. * * * Democrat Hypocrisy on Parade: "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons." - Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va. "The war against terrorism will not be finished as long as (Saddam Hussein) is in power." - Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich. "Saddam Hussein, in effect, has thumbed his nose at the world community. And I think that the president's approaching this in the right fashion." - Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. "[It] is Hussein's vigorous pursuit of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons, and his present and potential future support for terrorist acts and organizations, that make him a terrible danger to the people to the United States." - Senator Charles Schumer D-N.Y. "We know that [Saddam] has stored away secret supplies of biological weapons and chemical weapons throughout his country." - President Bill Clinton, September 23, 2002 "Iraq is a long way from [America], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risk that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face. And it is a threat against which we must and will stand firm. In discussing Iraq, we begin by knowing that Saddam Hussein, unlike any other leader, has used weapons of mass destruction even against his own people." - Secretary of State Madelyn Albright, February 18, 1998 >> Another case of Americans pretending they care about democracy but when push >> comes to shove it's complete bullshit. Someone should tell the leaders of [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >America isn't a democracy, dimbulb. It's a REPUBLIC. Big difference. You can always spot the casually uninformed political commentators, cant ya? > >> Another case of Americans pretending they care about democracy but when push > >> comes to shove it's complete bullshit. Someone should tell the leaders of [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > You can always spot the casually uninformed political commentators, > cant ya? You can spot republicans even easier. They sound like holder, only dumber. >> >> Another case of Americans pretending they care about democracy but >> >> when [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > You can spot republicans even easier. They sound like holder, only dumber. I havent laughed this hard since Wallen told us the terrorists would ask each of us if we were democrats before committing a violent act. Talk about clueless BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA H > >> >> Another case of Americans pretending they care about democracy but > >> >> when [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Talk about clueless Clueless is saying "Favre will be focused this year". That means you qualify, boobie! BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA H >> >> >> Another case of Americans pretending they care about democracy but >> >> >> when [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Clueless is saying "Favre will be focused this year". Then why did you say it?????? BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA H >>> Another case of Americans pretending they care about democracy but when push >>> comes to shove it's complete bullshit. Someone should tell the leaders of [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >You can always spot the casually uninformed political commentators, >cant ya? Yes; they cite stuff like the difference between a democracy and a republic when the difference has no relevance to the topic at hand. Rob ploovTeHSPaeMBLoKuR@charter.net  SignatureOwner of 2501 Netstalker Points awarded by Corwin of Amber, mainly because Atma's just too damn attractive to get away from. Gave 7499 Netstalker Points to Cypher because there's no such thing as a good day on AGFF without JT bashing! Owner of David Watson, rec.arts.anime.misc "'Do I have Bucky in a can?' That's in pretty poor taste, mister." --Captain America to Deadpool, Deadpool #69 >>>> Another case of Americans pretending they care about democracy but when push >>>> comes to shove it's complete bullshit. Someone should tell the leaders of [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >Yes; they cite stuff like the difference between a democracy and a >republic when the difference has no relevance to the topic at hand. Except that it does. The United States has never been "majority rule" in concept. >>>>> Another case of Americans pretending they care about democracy but when push >>>>> comes to shove it's complete bullshit. Someone should tell the leaders of [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >Except that it does. The United States has never been "majority rule" >in concept. And your point is? Rob ploovTeHSPaeMBLoKuR@charter.net SignatureOwner of 2501 Netstalker Points awarded by Corwin of Amber, mainly because Atma's just too damn attractive to get away from. Gave 7499 Netstalker Points to Cypher because there's no such thing as a good day on AGFF without JT bashing! Owner of David Watson, rec.arts.anime.misc "'Do I have Bucky in a can?' That's in pretty poor taste, mister." --Captain America to Deadpool, Deadpool #69 >>>>>> Another case of Americans pretending they care about democracy but when push >>>>>> comes to shove it's complete bullshit. Someone should tell the leaders of [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > >And your point is? That the presidency has never been a democratically elected position, obviously. >>>>>>> Another case of Americans pretending they care about democracy but when push >>>>>>> comes to shove it's complete bullshit. Someone should tell the leaders of [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >That the presidency has never been a democratically elected position, >obviously. Just because the United States is not majority-rule does not mean that the President is not democratically elected. He was elected based on each state's popular vote; the fact that some electors could have went against the popular vote is irrelevant because they didn't. This is all moot, anyway. Bush still _talks_ about spreading democracy around the Middle East, and the idea that America might not really be a democracy just supports the original poster's point. Rob ploovTeHSPaeMBLoKuR@charter.net SignatureOwner of 2501 Netstalker Points awarded by Corwin of Amber, mainly because Atma's just too damn attractive to get away from. Gave 7499 Netstalker Points to Cypher because there's no such thing as a good day on AGFF without JT bashing! Owner of David Watson, rec.arts.anime.misc "'Do I have Bucky in a can?' That's in pretty poor taste, mister." --Captain America to Deadpool, Deadpool #69 > >>>>>>> Another case of Americans pretending they care about democracy but when push > >>>>>>> comes to shove it's complete bullshit. Someone should tell the leaders of [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > democracy around the Middle East, and the idea that America might not > really be a democracy just supports the original poster's point. Not at all. The reason Bush is promoting 'democracy' in the Middle East and not new 'republics' is that the whole point is giving the individual citizens of the region a voice they've never possessed in ANY capacity. Trying to install an electoral college would be ill-advised and create far too complex a form of government at this stage. He isn't trying to model any new M.E. governments after the United States, per se. He's trying to help bring about simple democracies these oppressed folks can embrace, governments based in their own Arab heritage. Iraq isn't going to have a House or Senate any time soon. Bush didn't just xerox the US Constitution and say, "Here, do this." * * * Democrat Hypocrisy on Parade: "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons." - Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va. "The war against terrorism will not be finished as long as (Saddam Hussein) is in power." - Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich. "Saddam Hussein, in effect, has thumbed his nose at the world community. And I think that the president's approaching this in the right fashion." - Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. "[It] is Hussein's vigorous pursuit of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons, and his present and potential future support for terrorist acts and organizations, that make him a terrible danger to the people to the United States." - Senator Charles Schumer D-N.Y. "We know that [Saddam] has stored away secret supplies of biological weapons and chemical weapons throughout his country." - President Bill Clinton, September 23, 2002 "Iraq is a long way from [America], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risk that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face. And it is a threat against which we must and will stand firm. In discussing Iraq, we begin by knowing that Saddam Hussein, unlike any other leader, has used weapons of mass destruction even against his own people." - Secretary of State Madelyn Albright, February 18, 1998 > He isn't trying to model any new M.E. governments after the United > States, per se. He's trying to help bring about simple democracies [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Iraq isn't going to have a House or Senate any time soon. Bush didn't > just xerox the US Constitution and say, "Here, do this." During the negociations they pushed hard for central government control of the oil while giving a pass on not letting the shi'a push for islamic law... Weigh it...womens rights vs. crude... SignatureLaurel T "Our military operations have as their object defeat of the enemy and the driving of him from these territories. In order to complete this task, I am charged with absolute and supreme control ...but our armies do not come into your cities and lands as conquerors or enemies, but as liberators ...F.S. Maude, British governor of Iraq on March 19, 1917 >> >>>>>>> Another case of Americans pretending they care about democracy but when push >> >>>>>>> comes to shove it's complete bullshit. Someone should tell the leaders of [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] >install an electoral college would be ill-advised and create far too >complex a form of government at this stage. A country doesn't have to have an electoral college to be a republic. It doesn't even have to have an elected legislature, though both Iraq and Afghanistan do have them now. BTW, I should point out that the definition of "republic" being thrown around--a form of government in which the people are represented by elected leaders--is actually the definition of "representative democracy." So even this is moot, as all republics, including the United States, can be called "democracies." >He isn't trying to model any new M.E. governments after the United >States, per se. He's trying to help bring about simple democracies >these oppressed folks can embrace, governments based in their own Arab >heritage. If the Bush administration really cared about giving the Middle East governments "based in their heritage," then the recent election of Hamas wouldn't trouble them so much, because that sort of thing is the obvious conclusion of what Bush is proposing. That was the original poster's point. Rob ploovTeHSPaeMBLoKuR@charter.net SignatureOwner of 2501 Netstalker Points awarded by Corwin of Amber, mainly because Atma's just too damn attractive to get away from. Gave 7499 Netstalker Points to Cypher because there's no such thing as a good day on AGFF without JT bashing! Owner of David Watson, rec.arts.anime.misc "'Do I have Bucky in a can?' That's in pretty poor taste, mister." --Captain America to Deadpool, Deadpool #69 > against the popular vote is irrelevant because they didn't. > > This is all moot, anyway. Bush still _talks_ about spreading > democracy around the Middle East, I remember in the 2000 campaign saying how the military coup of the elected government in Pakistan was good as it would bring stability...right after he could not remember Musharraf.s name... Must have known he was easily bought... SignatureLaurel T "Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes that you can do these things. Among them are a few Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or businessman from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid." Dwight D. Eisenhower > >> Another case of Americans pretending they care about democracy but when push > >> comes to shove it's complete bullshit. Someone should tell the leaders of [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > You can always spot the casually uninformed political commentators, > cant ya? Democracy (n): A political system of government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives. Republic (n): A form of democracy, typically based on a constitution, in which power is vested in elected or appointed representatives and a head of state usually elected by the citizens. Not to be confused with "democracy" because many republics, past and present, have heads of state who came into power by military force, or were elected by a small minority of the population. >>>>Another case of Americans pretending they care about democracy but when push >>>>comes to shove it's complete bullshit. Someone should tell the leaders of [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >>You can always spot the casually uninformed political commentators, >>cant ya? Yep, they stand out like a moron at a Mensa meeting. > Democracy (n): A political system of government by the people, > exercised either directly or through elected representatives. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > state who came into power by military force, or were elected by a small > minority of the population. Frank, please don't further confuse the muddleheaded among us with facts. They are addled enough. -Johnny (The best way to cool a heated argument is to throw a cold fact on it; but only if one is dealing with reasonably rational people.) >Republic (n): A form of democracy, typically based on a constitution, >in which power is vested in elected or appointed representatives and a >head of state usually elected by the citizens. Not to be confused with >"democracy" because many republics, past and present, have heads of >state who came into power by military force, or were elected by a small >minority of the population. You mean like the electoral college ignoring the popular vote in favor of GWB? Dimitri >>Republic (n): A form of democracy, typically based on a constitution, >>in which power is vested in elected or appointed representatives and a [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > You mean like the electoral college ignoring the popular vote in > favor of GWB? Yes. Just like it was designed to do. LG SignatureThe nobler sort of man emphasizes the good qualities in others, and does not accentuate the bad. The inferior does. - Confucius >>>Republic (n): A form of democracy, typically based on a constitution, >>>in which power is vested in elected or appointed representatives and a [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Yes. Just like it was designed to do. Not complaining about it, just pointing out the head of state was "elected by a small minority of the population" - the electoral college. Dimitri Not complaining about it, just pointing out the head of state was "elected by a small minority of the population" - the electoral college. He was also re-elected by the Majority >>Republic (n): A form of democracy, typically based on a constitution, >>in which power is vested in elected or appointed representatives and a [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >You mean like the electoral college ignoring the popular vote in >favor of GWB? Exactly like that but they only ignored the national popular vote, not their respective states' popular votes. Quiet, Spike <spike@spike.spike> -- I'm transmitting rage. >>>Republic (n): A form of democracy, typically based on a constitution, >>>in which power is vested in elected or appointed representatives and a [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Exactly like that but they only ignored the national popular vote, not > their respective states' popular votes. There is no "national popular vote" for the electoral college to ignore, there is only the states' popular vote. It's been that way since the Constitution was adopted. And if the only reason one wants to change that is because their guy lost out on the electoral college vote -- well, that's a pretty piss-poor reason for amending the Constitution. Signature------------------------------------------------------------------------ James Schrumpf http://www.hilltopper.net We Must Protect this Couch! > Quiet, Spike <spike@spike.spike> -- I'm transmitting rage. > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > out on the electoral college vote -- well, that's a pretty piss-poor reason > for amending the Constitution. IIRC, only 24 states have laws that require the EC to follow the popular vote. the others allow the EC to vote however they want. In rec.sport.football.college James Schrumpf <jaspammenotschrumpf@adelphia.nospamnet> wrote: > Quiet, Spike <spike@spike.spike> -- I'm transmitting rage. > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > There is no "national popular vote" for the electoral college to ignore, Sure there is - that the national popular vote doesn't mean anything doesn't mean it doesn't exist. > there is only the states' popular vote. It's been that way since the > Constitution was adopted. Not even necessarily the states popular vote. Electors DO NOT have to vote the way the people of their state want them to - although no one has gone against the will of their state since 1968. > And if the only reason one wants to change that is because their guy lost > out on the electoral college vote -- well, that's a pretty piss-poor reason > for amending the Constitution. I agree with you there... Personally I like the electoral college. I think some states go about choosing electors in stupid ways, but they should be the one making that choice. SignatureAaron Quiet, <aborgman@redshark.goodshow.net> -- I'm transmitting rage. > In rec.sport.football.college James Schrumpf > <jaspammenotschrumpf@adelphia.nospamnet> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > Sure there is - that the national popular vote doesn't mean anything > doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It was spoken of as though it had meaning to the electoral college. I only meant to point out that as the college does not take that into account in the first place, it can hardly be said to "ignore" it. >> there is only the states' popular vote. It's been that way since the >> Constitution was adopted. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > think some states go about choosing electors in stupid ways, but they > should be the one making that choice. Indeed. Signature------------------------------------------------------------------------ James Schrumpf http://www.hilltopper.net We Must Protect this Couch! Not even necessarily the states popular vote. Electors DO NOT have to vote the way the people of their state want them to - although no one has gone against the will of their state since 1968. Reagan recieved 1 vote in 76 I believe it was from The state of washington. >Exactly like that but they only ignored the national popular vote, not >their respective states' popular votes. They can theoretically ignore any popular vote they want to. Dimitri > >Exactly like that but they only ignored the national popular vote, not > >their respective states' popular votes. > > They can theoretically ignore any popular vote they want to. There are some states that make it a crime for them to vote against that state's popular vote. In rec.sport.football.college Al Mundy <unknownr@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >Exactly like that but they only ignored the national popular vote, not >> >their respective states' popular votes. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > There are some states that make it a crime for them to vote against that > state's popular vote. True - but those laws generally have penalties ranging from just slightly irritating to barely noticeable. The real limiter on this is the effect on the electors future political career and relationships with the party that sent him. SignatureAaron <<You mean like the electoral college ignoring the popular vote in favor of GWB? Dimitri >> Bill Clitton was elected without a majority vote. Trav <travisgod@aol.com> wrote in message news:1140203889.727570.102780@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... > <<You mean like the electoral college ignoring the popular vote in > favor of GWB? > > Dimitri >> > > Bill Clitton was elected without a majority vote. Majority: The greater number or part; the preponderant quantity or share Clinton: 49% everyone else: less than that. At about Fri, 17 Feb 2006 19:28:22 GMT, Al Mundy was dragged into the street and beaten by an angry mob for writing.. :<travisgod@aol.com> wrote in message :news:1140203889.727570.102780@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] :Clinton: 49% :everyone else: less than that. Look up plurality while you're at it. SignatureBryan S. Slick, onyx_hokie at yahoo dot com "To those who have fought for it, freedom has a flavor the protected will never know." > At about Fri, 17 Feb 2006 19:28:22 GMT, Al Mundy was dragged into the > street and beaten by an angry mob for writing.. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Look up plurality while you're at it. That would fit also. <<Majority: The greater number or part; the preponderant quantity or share Clinton: 49% everyone else: less than that. >> A majority is the greater number or part between TWO. Preponderance means "more than half." Idiot. Under most states' rules, Clitton would have been forced into a runoff w/ Bush 1st and would have been beaten soundly. Trav ><<Majority: The greater number or part; the preponderant quantity or >share [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >Trav Whatcha wanna do? Change the system to get your desired outcome? Don't you love America and her democracy? <<Whatcha wanna do? Change the system to get your desired outcome? Don't you love America and her democracy? >> I'm FINE with it. I do not care. Trav <travisgod@aol.com> wrote in message news:1140213424.968971.177350@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > <<Majority: The greater number or part; the preponderant quantity or > share [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Idiot. Speaking of idiot, I included the dictionary definition of majority. You should have read it before you replied, then we wouldn't be calling you an idiot about now. <<Speaking of idiot, I included the dictionary definition of majority. You should have read it before you replied, then we wouldn't be calling you an idiot about now. >> No, you didn't you insufferably pathetic a.s. One can go to merriam-webster.com and look it up. The "greater" does not mean the LARGEST in a plurality, you f.cking idiot. Literally NOTHING you write is even worth reading anymore. You cribbed a PORTION of a definition and tried to pass it off as literal, when it isn't. Webster's definition, along with all others, EXPLICITLY set forth that "greater" is in relation to HALF of the total. f.ck, I don't expect someone of your pitifully low education to understand what preponderate means, but you can at least try to be honest for ONCE. Trav <travisgod@aol.com> wrote in message news:1140465631.416608.110610@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com... > <<Speaking of idiot, I included the dictionary definition of majority. > You [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > don't expect someone of your pitifully low education to understand what > preponderate means, but you can at least try to be honest for ONCE. www.readingisfundamental.com "the greater number or part" <travisgod@aol.com> wrote in message > No, you didn't you insufferably pathetic a.s. > One can go to merriam-webster.com and look it up. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Trav My two cents. Because I can't resist math logic. If three people are running for an office, the one with the majority of votes wins. He/She doesn't have to get "more than half". Thirty four percent would do the trick. A. Group 1 = 33% B. Group 2 = 33% C. Group 3 = 34% Which one is "greater"? Which one is the "majority"? pssst. go with C...you won't be disappointed. Preponderate - To be greater than something else, as in power, force, quantity, or importance; predominate. C is greater than A and B and it's nowhere near "half". > <travisgod@aol.com> wrote in message > > No, you didn't you insufferably pathetic a.s. [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > > C is greater than A and B and it's nowhere near "half". True, but most voting laws define a majority as 50% plus 1. > True, but most voting laws define a majority as 50% plus 1. And you can cite these voting laws? Or is this one of those urban legends that you can just repeat, and we're just supposed to assume you're right? Can you provide us with a url that actually points to this voting law that you're referencing? What's to stop three people from running for my town council seat from my district? Because they do it all the time, and routinely are put into office. What about the Mayor who won his office without getting "50% plus 1" of the vote? In fact, didn't Bill Clinton win the White House without getting that magic "50% plus 1" figure? All he did was win the electoral college, he didn't have the "majority" of people in America vote for him, right? I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just wondering about the validity of the "there are these laws that I've heard of that support my position...but I don't actually have direct links to any of them" argument. > > True, but most voting laws define a majority as 50% plus 1. > > And you can cite these voting laws? Or is this one of those urban legends > that you can just repeat, and we're just supposed to assume you're right? > Can you provide us with a url that actually points to this voting law that > you're referencing? I'll look, but it may be a little while. > What's to stop three people from running for my town council seat from my > district? Because they do it all the time, and routinely are put into [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > college, he didn't have the "majority" of people in America vote for him, > right? But he got a majority (50% +1) of the EC...which are the votes that count. I believe that's in the Constitution. > I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just wondering about the validity of the > "there are these laws that I've heard of that support my position...but I > don't actually have direct links to any of them" argument. I'm also not saying you're wrong, because pluralities are all that's necessary in some elections. Still, there are often run-offs between the top 2 vote getters if no candidate gets over 50% in the first election. > But he got a majority (50% +1) of the EC...which are the votes that > count. I believe that's in the Constitution. Well, actually...the 12th amendment kinda begs to differ. Also, John Quincy Adams and Thomas Jefferson say "hi". You can actually get elected by not getting 270 EC votes and being elected by a "simple majority" of states in the House of Representatives. All of this doesn't change a couple key points. 1. "greater" does not, in no way, ONLY refer to a comparison between two items. 2. the term "greater" actually DOES mean "the largest in a plurality". We can argue about election laws all day, but the point of my post hasn't changed. Any child learning to count learns that out of the list of the following numbers (1, 4, 7, 9) that "9" is the "greater" value or amount, and anyone who's ever put together a pie chart can tell you that if three people have 20% of the pie, the fourth person with 40% has the "greater" slice and is the "majority" holder of pie. >1. "greater" does not, in no way, ONLY refer to a comparison between two >items. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >changed. Any child learning to count learns that out of the list of the >following numbers (1, 4, 7, 9) that "9" is the "greater" value or amount, No, it's the greatest value. I don't know how you could have gotten past second grade without knowing this. Do you go around saying things like "George W. Bush is the worse President ever!"? Do you think that because FDR spent 12 years in office that he holds the majority of the 200+ years of the American Presidency? Rob ploovTeHSPaeMBLoKuR@charter.net SignatureOwner of 2501 Netstalker Points awarded by Corwin of Amber, mainly because Atma's just too damn attractive to get away from. Gave 7499 Netstalker Points to Cypher because there's no such thing as a good day on AGFF without JT bashing! Owner of David Watson, rec.arts.anime.misc "'Do I have Bucky in a can?' That's in pretty poor taste, mister." --Captain America to Deadpool, Deadpool #69 > No, it's the greatest value. I don't know how you could have gotten > past second grade without knowing this. You're talking about *grammatical usage*, which does *nothing* to change the definition and usage of the word. Yours is a ridiculous semantic argument. >> No, it's the greatest value. I don't know how you could have gotten >> past second grade without knowing this. > >You're talking about *grammatical usage*, which does *nothing* to change the Indeed I am. I'm not sure what you're talking about. Rob ploovTeHSPaeMBLoKuR@charter.net SignatureOwner of 2501 Netstalker Points awarded by Corwin of Amber, mainly because Atma's just too damn attractive to get away from. Gave 7499 Netstalker Points to Cypher because there's no such thing as a good day on AGFF without JT bashing! Owner of David Watson, rec.arts.anime.misc "It's been said a million times, so I'm not going to go off on how f.cked up the Japanese are. I mean, just because their culture is dominated by violence and perversion, it doesn't mean they can't make great cameras. What really makes me sick is when they use cartoons to get away with pedophilia. 'Oh it's only a drawing!', the pedo anime apologists will say. 'Maybe she is a 3000 year old spirit trapped in the body of a little girl, so it doesn't really count.' I hate these people." --Something Awful Link of the Day, February 23, 2006 ><travisgod@aol.com> wrote in message >> No, you didn't you insufferably pathetic a.s. [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > >Which one is "greater"? Which one is the "majority"? Well, since "greater" can only refer to a comparison between two items, I would say "not C." "Not A" and "not B" would also work. Rob ploovTeHSPaeMBLoKuR@charter.net SignatureOwner of 2501 Netstalker Points awarded by Corwin of Amber, mainly because Atma's just too damn attractive to get away from. Gave 7499 Netstalker Points to Cypher because there's no such thing as a good day on AGFF without JT bashing! Owner of David Watson, rec.arts.anime.misc "'Do I have Bucky in a can?' That's in pretty poor taste, mister." --Captain America to Deadpool, Deadpool #69 > ><travisgod@aol.com> wrote in message > >> No, you didn't you insufferably pathetic a.s. [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > Well, since "greater" can only refer to a comparison between two > items, I would say "not C." "Not A" and "not B" would also work. Under greater, Websters says "predominate", which is defined as "most frequent or common" or " having superior strength, influence, or authority". Neither seems to have comparing two items as a prerequisite. In fact, since greatest is defined from great also, it would seem clear that there is no limit to how many items can be compared. > Neither seems to have comparing two items as a prerequisite. In fact, > since > greatest is defined from great also, it would seem clear that there is no > limit to how many items can be compared. Absolutely correct. >> ><travisgod@aol.com> wrote in message >> >> No, you didn't you insufferably pathetic a.s. [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] >Under greater, Websters says "predominate", which is defined as "most >frequent or common" or " having superior strength, influence, or authority". Yes, and "not C" is greater than C, for example. C might be the great_est_ out of all three, but the definition is asking for the great_er_ part of the whole. >Neither seems to have comparing two items as a prerequisite. In fact, since >greatest is defined from great also, it would seem clear that there is no >limit to how many items can be compared. That's true about the word "greatest," but not the word "greater." Rob ploovTeHSPaeMBLoKuR@charter.net SignatureOwner of 2501 Netstalker Points awarded by Corwin of Amber, mainly because Atma's just too damn attractive to get away from. Gave 7499 Netstalker Points to Cypher because there's no such thing as a good day on AGFF without JT bashing! Owner of David Watson, rec.arts.anime.misc "'Do I have Bucky in a can?' That's in pretty poor taste, mister." --Captain America to Deadpool, Deadpool #69 > >> ><travisgod@aol.com> wrote in message > >> >> No, you didn't you insufferably pathetic a.s. [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > > That's true about the word "greatest," but not the word "greater." I guess I'll consider myself schooled.... ;-) Rob Browning Boldly typed: >> Neither seems to have comparing two items as a prerequisite. In >> fact, since greatest is defined from great also, it would seem [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Rob > ploovTeHSPaeMBLoKuR@charter.net Ham with Blueberry Sauce Juicy, plump blueberries form the basis of this delicious sauce. (This recipe is high in sodium) Number of Servings: 6 Serving Size: 3 oz 2 lb fully cooked, center slice of ham, cut 1 inch thick 1/3 cup water 1 Tbsp cornstarch or arrowroot powder 1/3 cup low-sugar apricot jam 1 Tbsp brown sugar 2 Tbsp dry red wine 4 Tbsp lemon juice 4 cup juicy, plump blueberries 1. Preheat the oven to 350 degrees. 2. Trim the fat from the edge of the ham slice, if necessary. Place the ham slice on a rack in a shallow baking pan and bake for 30 minutes. In a small saucepan, combine the cornstarch or arrowroot powder and water. 3. Stir in the apricot jam, brown sugar, wine, and lemon juice. Cook over medium-low heat for 5 to 6 minutes until the sauce is thickened and bubbly. Stir in the blueberries and cook 2 to 3 minutes. 4. Spoon the sauce over the ham and serve. Nutrition Information Amount per serving Calories 224 Calories From Fat 56 Total Fat 6 g Saturated Fat 2 g Cholestrol 60 mg Sodium 1463 mg Total Carbohydrate 12 g Dietary Fiber 1 g Sugars 9 g Protein 27 g SignatureSo Say We All, Dale The world wide web at my finger tips and I can't find anything interesting. http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/RivertonCommonRecipeBulletinBoard/ >Rob Browning Boldly typed: >> [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] >Sugars 9 g >Protein 27 g I don't really like ham. :( Rob ploovTeHSPaeMBLoKuR@charter.net SignatureOwner of 2501 Netstalker Points awarded by Corwin of Amber, mainly because Atma's just too damn attractive to get away from. Gave 7499 Netstalker Points to Cypher because there's no such thing as a good day on AGFF without JT bashing! Owner of David Watson, rec.arts.anime.misc "It's been said a million times, so I'm not going to go off on how f.cked up the Japanese are. I mean, just because their culture is dominated by violence and perversion, it doesn't mean they can't make great cameras. What really makes me sick is when they use cartoons to get away with pedophilia. 'Oh it's only a drawing!', the pedo anime apologists will say. 'Maybe she is a 3000 year old spirit trapped in the body of a little girl, so it doesn't really count.' I hate these people." --Something Awful Link of the Day, February 23, 2006 > Well, since "greater" can only refer to a comparison between two > items Since when? That's pure hogwash. great ( P ) Pronunciation Key (grt) adj. great·er, great·est Very large in size. Larger in size than others of the same kind. Large in quantity or number: A great throng awaited us. See Synonyms at large. Extensive in time or distance: a great delay. Remarkable or outstanding in magnitude, degree, or extent: a great crisis. Of outstanding significance or importance: a great work of art. Chief or principal: the great house on the estate. Superior in quality or character; noble: "For he was great, ere fortune made him so" (John Dryden). Powerful; influential: one of the great nations of the West. Eminent; distinguished: a great leader. Grand; aristocratic. Informal. Enthusiastic: a great lover of music. Informal. Very skillful: great at algebra. Informal. Very good; first-rate: We had a great time at the dance. Being one generation removed from the relative specified. Often used in combination: a great-granddaughter. Archaic. Pregnant. Not a single reference to only comparing two items. Come on, you can't honestly think you could get away with making such a ridiculous point, could you? >> Well, since "greater" can only refer to a comparison between two >> items > >Since when? That's pure hogwash. http://web2.uvcs.uvic.ca/elc/studyzone/330/grammar/regcom.htm >great ( P ) Pronunciation Key (grt) >adj. great·er, great·est Nice attempt at trying to BS everyone by posting the definition of "great" instead of "greater," but it's not going to work. Rob ploovTeHSPaeMBLoKuR@charter.net SignatureOwner of 2501 Netstalker Points awarded by Corwin of Amber, mainly because Atma's just too damn attractive to get away from. Gave 7499 Netstalker Points to Cypher because there's no such thing as a good day on AGFF without JT bashing! Owner of David Watson, rec.arts.anime.misc "'Do I have Bucky in a can?' That's in pretty poor taste, mister." --Captain America to Deadpool, Deadpool #69 > Nice attempt at trying to BS everyone by posting the definition of > "great" instead of "greater," but it's not going to work. Bullshit. Go to Dictionary.com and type in "greater". It's the comparative and superlative form of the same word, Einstein. Have a nice day. >> Nice attempt at trying to BS everyone by posting the definition of >> "great" instead of "greater," but it's not going to work. > >Bullshit. Go to Dictionary.com and type in "greater". It's the comparative I got the definition for "great." Now what? Rob ploovTeHSPaeMBLoKuR@charter.net SignatureOwner of 2501 Netstalker Points awarded by Corwin of Amber, mainly because Atma's just too damn attractive to get away from. Gave 7499 Netstalker Points to Cypher because there's no such thing as a good day on AGFF without JT bashing! Owner of David Watson, rec.arts.anime.misc "It's been said a million times, so I'm not going to go off on how f.cked up the Japanese are. I mean, just because their culture is dominated by violence and perversion, it doesn't mean they can't make great cameras. What really makes me sick is when they use cartoons to get away with pedophilia. 'Oh it's only a drawing!', the pedo anime apologists will say. 'Maybe she is a 3000 year old spirit trapped in the body of a little girl, so it doesn't really count.' I hate these people." --Something Awful Link of the Day, February 23, 2006 > > Another case of Americans pretending they care about democracy but when push > > comes to shove it's complete bullshit. Someone should tell the leaders of [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > election LAWS -- which the Democrats tried repeatedly to circumvent, by > the way. And since then, GW BUsh has said the laws don't apply to him. > America isn't a democracy, dimbulb. Hmmm... > User-Agent: MicroPlanet-Gravity/2.60.2060 "dimbulb," gravity... somebody's wearing a sock got a hole in it tho > Another case of Americans pretending they care about democracy but > when push comes to shove it's complete bullshit. Someone should tell [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > our people because they practiced the democratic process in a > transparent and honest way." If this administration is not hard at work on plans to topple Hamas then the President should be impeached on grounds of sheer utter stupidity. Signaturev/r Dread Pirate Rackham "You know one things that's wrong with this country? Everybody gets a chance to have their fair say." - President Clinton 28 May 1993 "There is nothing patriotic about hating your country, or pretending that you can love your country but despise your government." - President Clinton 5 May 1995 Warcraftgolds is your best choice! Thanks and good luck on you adventure!Trust our professional powerleveling team, We will do ou best to solve all of your question! :rolleyes -- flight9 Welcome to .http://www.warcraftgolds.com/ Professional Services an cheepest price,Sell Gold And Powerleveling America isn't about democracy. America is about liberty. Unfortunately, neither party realizes that. They'd rather control people. If democracy serves that purpose, great. If it doesn't, back the f.ck up! -- Mike E. The problem with Ds and Rs is that they don't do anything except fight each other. That's why it takes forever to get sh.t done. > The problem with Ds and Rs is that they don't do anything except fight > each other. That's why it takes forever to get sh.t done. Which is not necessarilly a bad thing......think of all the really stupid sh.t they'd do if they were efficient. <<"There will be no recognition of Israel and there will be no security for the occupation and colonization forces," Mashaal told a rally in Khartoum. "Resistance will remain our strategic option." >> OK, so RIGHT HERE this guy effectively declares or reiterates a declaration of WAR against Israel. << Hamas official protested the reports, saying attempts to bring down a future Hamas government were hypocritical. >> Hamas "government"? What a joke. The people of Palestine voted overwhelmingly for a terrorist organization who will not recognize Israel. I have NO sympathy for these people. NONE. Israel should offer peace. If they accept, fine. If they want war, Israel should DESTROY them completely. As Hamas took some 76% of the vote, I don't see any of the Palestinian people as all that "innocent." They knew who they were voting for. The leader of this party is calling for continued acts of war and you are claiming that attempts to DEFEAT an opponent in war are anti-democratic? You f.cking idiot...HITLER was elected democratically. Trav ><<"There will be no recognition of Israel and there will be no security >for [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > >Trav But Trav... Bush said democracy would fix everything! <<But Trav... Bush said democracy would fix everything! >> You all complain about f.cking gas prices but then complain when we supposedly invade to rape a nation of its oil. WTF is it with you people? You hate yourselves, you hate America, you just have nothing but hate, for everybody. When Republicons are in power, it's their fault, when Democraps are, it's still Repulibcons fault. You are all just hate filled lemmings. Trav ><<But Trav... Bush said democracy would fix everything! >> > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >Trav Get it straight. Our political parties need to go. They are corrupt and incompetent. Both of them. I don't hate America, but I don't have to like oil companies, Halliburton, megachurches, Republicans or Democrats to prove I love America. ><<But Trav... Bush said democracy would fix everything! >> > >You all complain about f.cking gas prices but then complain when we >supposedly invade to rape a nation of its oil. You do realize that invading a nation for its oil is not a viable long-term solution to the problem, right? Hell, considering gas prices, it's not even a viable short-term solution to the problem. Rob ploovTeHSPaeMBLoKuR@charter.net SignatureOwner of 2501 Netstalker Points awarded by Corwin of Amber, mainly because Atma's just too damn attractive to get away from. Gave 7499 Netstalker Points to Cypher because there's no such thing as a good day on AGFF without JT bashing! Owner of David Watson, rec.arts.anime.misc "'Do I have Bucky in a can?' That's in pretty poor taste, mister." --Captain America to Deadpool, Deadpool #69 You do realize that invading a nation for its oil is not a viable long-term solution to the problem, right? Hell, considering gas prices, it's not even a viable short-term solution to the problem. Since we didnmt invade Iraq for its oil i would say its not a problem. Currently Gas prices in Iraq are 5 cents a gallon Amereican money that is which is the cheapest in the world. Other Arab Countries set there prices between 10 and 50 cents a gallon |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.