|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 2:53 pm
Okay Bush has done a lot of sleezy things in the past, ranging from calling people against the war in Iraq unpatriotic, to using the lives of gay and lesbian people for political gain, and even getting the pro-life vote when he in reality has done little to advance our cause. Through all this I've tolerated him because he was democratically elected, but when I read this I got sick to my stomach: http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_stolenI suggest you read the article before you respond, but what it says in brief is that there is a good chance that the 2004 elections were rigged. I read the evidence it presented, and it sounded fairly convincing. I say there needs to be a full and immediate investigation into the claims of the article, and if proven that bush would have lost the election were it not for fraud then he needs to be impeached. I've not ever before now argued that bush should be impeached but this outrages me to no end.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 3:01 pm
honestly, i've always thought it was rigged. whoever the people above the president want in, will be in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 3:20 pm
Bah. I don't believe it was rigged. I mean, really, this is a conspiracy theory. It may not be a crazy one, but nonetheless, think about it: In order for this to have worked, thousands of people in high up positions would have to have been involved. And, frankly, I don't believe that that many people would do something like that without there being a Watergate-type incident, with someone coming out about it. Especially since there has already been a Watergate incident; People are a lot less afraid to blow the whistle these days. Look at Enron.
It just doesn't seem feasible to me. And I'm too lazy to read that whole article; I skimmed it, but the stuff I read doesn't sound all that believable, honestly. I mean, the people claiming things like that are people who wanted Kerry to win, right? Otherwise there would be no use looking into it. Well the only thing that I can think of that they could have used to figure out if the "many problems" were for or against Kerry would be to a) Ask people to send letters, call them, etc. if their vote had had problems or b) the exit poles.
Well the exit poles aren't exact fool proof; I don't know if I'd fill one out. And as for people calling in to tell them about problems, obviously the Bush voters would have no reason to call in; Their guy won. So it's like, "Meh. Why bother calling?" It's really pretty much the same thing for the rest of it too; If I was planning on voting for Kerry and there ended up being a problem with my application for a ballot or whatever, of course I would blame the government! Why not? I mean, it's a lot easier then blaming yourself for waiting too long (Which I would surely do), or for putting the wrong information on there, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 11:43 pm
divineseraph honestly, i've always thought it was rigged. whoever the people above the president want in, will be in. Wow, i'm not the only that though that. Yah I though it was rigged too. I never trusted him much (or at all really).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 02, 2006 1:17 am
I.Am Bah. I don't believe it was rigged. I mean, really, this is a conspiracy theory. It may not be a crazy one, but nonetheless, think about it: In order for this to have worked, thousands of people in high up positions would have to have been involved. And, frankly, I don't believe that that many people would do something like that without there being a Watergate-type incident, with someone coming out about it. Especially since there has already been a Watergate incident; People are a lot less afraid to blow the whistle these days. Look at Enron. It just doesn't seem feasible to me. And I'm too lazy to read that whole article; I skimmed it, but the stuff I read doesn't sound all that believable, honestly. I mean, the people claiming things like that are people who wanted Kerry to win, right? Otherwise there would be no use looking into it. Well the only thing that I can think of that they could have used to figure out if the "many problems" were for or against Kerry would be to a) Ask people to send letters, call them, etc. if their vote had had problems or b) the exit poles. Well the exit poles aren't exact fool proof; I don't know if I'd fill one out. And as for people calling in to tell them about problems, obviously the Bush voters would have no reason to call in; Their guy won. So it's like, "Meh. Why bother calling?" It's really pretty much the same thing for the rest of it too; If I was planning on voting for Kerry and there ended up being a problem with my application for a ballot or whatever, of course I would blame the government! Why not? I mean, it's a lot easier then blaming yourself for waiting too long (Which I would surely do), or for putting the wrong information on there, etc. People who voted for Bush DID call in problems. The article doesn't mention that?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 02, 2006 7:16 am
Yeah, but what I mean is, they are less likely to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 02, 2006 1:33 pm
sachiko_sohma divineseraph honestly, i've always thought it was rigged. whoever the people above the president want in, will be in. Wow, i'm not the only that though that. Yah I though it was rigged too. I never trusted him much (or at all really). it's not bush, really. bush might not even know. all they need is a meat-puppet who will start a war for them. i mean, think about it... how easy would it be to alter data when you control all of it? they can hide information, destroy information, make up false information. no, it is not a theory, it is called "classified". anything they don't want you to know, you WON'T know. and if you find out, you'll be killed and called a traitor, a crackpot, what have you. and even if a giant scandal is uncovered, who gets blamed? their meat-puppet gets the boot and they lose nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 02, 2006 2:05 pm
...Seriously, there's a reason that stories with plotlines like that are put in the "Fiction" section.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 02, 2006 7:05 pm
I.Am ...Seriously, there's a reason that stories with plotlines like that are put in the "Fiction" section. Fiction right... If you think about it power has been used and abused since the beginning of time. People in power, use that power, and after a while they begin to use that power for their own purposes. No group is exempt, government, dictators, the church, aristocrats, hell tell me a group that has never corrupted and I will be amazed. Currently republicans control two of the three brances of government while the third is split down the middle. Somehow it doesn't seem feasible to me that people with that much power wouldn't use it to thier own advantage, look at the ambroff scandle, or the CIA leak. Not saying the democrats haven't done the same thing in the past, but that doesn't make it any more exusable now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 02, 2006 11:35 pm
Nonono, you misunderstood me: Your situation is... Plausable, but I don't believe it. -Divine-'s, "Bush is just a puppet chosen because he'll start wars, and if you disagree with the government... You disappear." Isn't. I mean, come on. If that were true, we wouldn't have two parties, or at least one party would be a puppet that would never win. You wouldn't have people saying, "Oh, the media's all liberal, but God bless Fox for being balanced," because there would be no news station on the air besides Fox.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 04, 2006 7:07 am
I.Am. There is no sence in arguing this. Let them have it. Befor elong some thing else will come along for them to cling to. Its nothing more then the latest bush-hate idea that some liberal thought up because he can't stand the idea of a republican conservative in the white house.
For the past 6 years every one has been saying those elections were rigged. This is only gettign atention because it makes it sound veasable. There is probably no truth to it, it's only what the liberals want to hear.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 04, 2006 5:11 pm
I AM: gotcha.
PO: I'm not saying he did anything, but I think that it sounds plausible and needs to be investigated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 04, 2006 5:39 pm
I.Am Nonono, you misunderstood me: Your situation is... Plausable, but I don't believe it. -Divine-'s, "Bush is just a puppet chosen because he'll start wars, and if you disagree with the government... You disappear." Isn't. I mean, come on. If that were true, we wouldn't have two parties, or at least one party would be a puppet that would never win. You wouldn't have people saying, "Oh, the media's all liberal, but God bless Fox for being balanced," because there would be no news station on the air besides Fox. if one party never won, then it would be obvious. doublethink. i'm sure you're not gullible enough to agree with everything anyone of power tells you. that doesn't make all of it false, but that doesn't mean that all of it is absolute truth either. of course it's not completely totalitarian, there is no one ringmaster. but there ARE people of power who can and undoubtedly do tilt the scales in their favor, often at the cost of lives.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 04, 2006 6:10 pm
divineseraph I.Am Nonono, you misunderstood me: Your situation is... Plausable, but I don't believe it. -Divine-'s, "Bush is just a puppet chosen because he'll start wars, and if you disagree with the government... You disappear." Isn't. I mean, come on. If that were true, we wouldn't have two parties, or at least one party would be a puppet that would never win. You wouldn't have people saying, "Oh, the media's all liberal, but God bless Fox for being balanced," because there would be no news station on the air besides Fox. if one party never won, then it would be obvious. doublethink. i'm sure you're not gullible enough to agree with everything anyone of power tells you. that doesn't make all of it false, but that doesn't mean that all of it is absolute truth either. of course it's not completely totalitarian, there is no one ringmaster. but there ARE people of power who can and undoubtedly do tilt the scales in their favor, often at the cost of lives. Again, I disagree. I certainly hope you actually read 1984. Although, you don't really sound like you did. Doublethink means holding two contradicting beliefs and believing both equally. It has nothing to do with what you just said. In fact, part of the reason for the term "doublethink" was to refer to the fact that -everyone- knew that what was going on wasn't right. Everyone knew some of what was going on; For instance, that their leader would change the news at will, that the news wasn't true. But at the same time, they had to believe that the news was always the truth. That their leader really did look over them and care for them all. But there was no truly hidden secrecy involved. In that novel, if I remember correctly, there was only one party in power at all times. What they did was convince the masses that there was a war going on at all times, and that they had to trust the current administration because no one else could get them through it. There was only one media, and the media changed the news and the past whenever they felt like it. One day a man would exist, the next day he never had, because they would go back through the entire history and delete him from their databanks. Again, I say to you, there is a reason that novels with those sort of plotlines are labelled "Fiction." There is no cabal of powerful businessmen, puppeteering all Presidents that have ever been. Yes, there are businesses. Yes, there are secret deals made behind closed doors to get things done. But these "getting things done" are things like, limiting the restrictions on pollution. There is no one group that controls all of America. I can't believe that there is. Because if there was, it would do no good to believe in them anyways. Because if the bad guys really had that much control, you are right, they would snuff out everyone and anyone who didn't believe in them. I refer you again to the novel, 1984. Have you read it? I hate to give away the ending, so I'll white out the next part.
The people who try to change things accomplish -nothing.- I can't remeber exactly, but in the end, the main character either dies or lives out his life as "that crazy old guy."
Speaking of which, if there is some cabal out killing everyone who tries to spread the "truth," how come you are still alive?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 05, 2006 10:21 am
When you think about how many people in this country hated Bush even before 2000, it makes sense that they'd do whatever they could to skew things a little here and there.
But frankly, rigging an election doesn't surprise me at all. He and his cronies are rotten to the core.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
