It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bush Calling The Kettle Black...

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 16 2005 @ 02:06 PM
link   
www.washingtonpost.com...


Lol......Bush on Thursday released a criticism of the upcoming Iranian elections, calling them "unfair," and stating,
"Power is in the hands of an unelected few who have retained power through an electoral process that ignores the basic requirements of democracy."

You know, sometimes a particular press release or political event will strike me as especially blatant and ridiculous......I can't believe that there are people who actually eat this up as holy writ..........




posted on Jun, 16 2005 @ 02:09 PM
link   
I am not sure I follow your quote. Americans elect their president, he is not appointed. Shall I assume this is yet another "bash Bush" thread? If so, perhaps we could just make a bash Bush forum so it is easier to keep all the threads together. Sorry for the snip but this is starting to get real old, real fast. But still, have a great day!!!



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 07:46 AM
link   
MD,

Is the fact that the Bush camp stole two elections something you would rather ignore?

If so I suggest you are on the wrong website and the wrong planet.

Cheers

BHR



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 12:25 PM
link   
After the last two elections, Bush talking about anyother countries electoral process is BS. His first term was despite the fact that he lost the popular vote and his second term appears to be a fluke as well......diebold issues and such.....Bush has no room to talk.



posted on Jul, 1 2005 @ 04:14 AM
link   
Memory,

And yet talk he does. On and on and on.

I think his motto for speech making is "Never make sense, never have a point".

He sticks to it with vigour.

Cheers

BHR



posted on Jul, 1 2005 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by BillHicksRules
I think his motto for speech making is "Never make sense, never have a point".


I think you'll find that to be a running theme for all politicians, though. Especially in this day of lawsuits and legalese, the more vague and safe your speeches, the easier it is to backtrack later. How many times has this aministration backtracked thus far on the War in Iraq/On Terror........seems like every time I turn around, there's another reason.........

I believe there is alot more to our society than meets the eye.......people are too distracted by hollywood and their own personal lives to really consider the actions of what for all intents and purposes doesn't really concern them......and because nobody is broadening their horizons, noone gets any wiser and you have something like the emminent domain ruling that sneaks by and there you go....we have one less freedom.

But I'm certain that people withh booka buckaroos have a ton of time to ponder that which we the little people do not......sociology and attitudes.......if they weren't versed in those arts, how else can we explain the apathy of the American Public in letting Bush have another turn.



posted on Jul, 5 2008 @ 07:40 PM
link   
Why does the winner have to take blame for winning. What about the loser taking some of the blame for his loss.

I am talking about Election 2000. Everyone likes to bring up Florida, but what about Tennessee? Did we really want to elect a President that couldn't carry his homestate, like ALGORE? If Bush would have won the election but would have happened to lose Texas, he would have never heard the end of it. HA HA Bush couldn't even win his homestate!

ALGORE losing Tennessee cost him the election. He couldn't convince his own constituents whom he had served over the years to vote for him. Did ALGORE just take Tennessee for granted?

You can't blame someone for winning without blaming the loser for losing.

Election 2004 was a landslide compared to 2000. I guess popular votes only matter when it suits your agenda?



posted on Jul, 5 2008 @ 07:50 PM
link   
My agenda..I have none.

You should consider the fact that it doesn't matter who 'won' what.

Florida is a great point of ponderance because Jeb was Governor at the time. Not to say that the Bush's have such a huge stranglehold, but it is to say that political propaganda leading to the decision was likely slanted toward the Bush camp...meaning that people were manipulated into acquiescing.

At this point in the story, there really should be no question as to Bush manipulation. The Bush family is Rich. The common American is not. Class issues are as they are, the upper class wants to remain in the upper class, much as the lower class wants to be the upper class....

Social Issues need to be dealt with by people who do not have a vested interest in national resources....



posted on Jul, 5 2008 @ 07:56 PM
link   
So ALGORE is not rich?

His "richness" couldn't guarantee his homestate of Tennessee could it?

The point is Florida would never had mattered if ALGORE wins his homestate. How can you run for President and not have your homestate locked up?

Look at Hubert Humphrey and the 1972 Presidential election, and Walter Mondale in 1984. Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan won 49 States. Hubert Humphrey, and Mondale won 1, it was their homestates of Minnesota. Even in a huge landslide Humphey and Mondale at least won their homestates, something ALGORE could not do. That cost him the election not Florida.

[edit on 5-7-2008 by RRconservative]



posted on Jul, 5 2008 @ 08:04 PM
link   
reply to post by RRconservative
 


I have a few questions.

1- Why did you dig up this old thread?
2- Why when a topic is about a Republican you continually change the topic over to someone else? In this case Gore.
3- Are you afraid to discuss the problems within the GOP?

Those are merely rhetorical.

Now back to the topic, Bush and his comments on Irans political process.



posted on Jul, 5 2008 @ 08:07 PM
link   
reply to post by MemoryShock
 


Fell on the floor laughing in tears.....
What a duffus. Indeed calling the kettle black... good one...



posted on Jul, 5 2008 @ 08:10 PM
link   
reply to post by RRconservative
 


I think that you are missing the bigger picture. If Bush lost the election, then that would have called into question the Iraq war and the reasoning for its inception. I started a thread several years ago (I'll edit in the link) that pretty much was Bush justifying the Iraq War because he was re-elected.

However, in light of recent events, Bush was a liar and a public manipulator.

I don't give a rats anything about Gore and the potentially manipulated results of his election.

My question to you is this:

How much faith do you put in a billion dollar industry to care about your concerns?

Because they spend more money than the average American does telling them what to think.

You should know...I don't think it matters at all that Gore didn't carry his home state...I think it's all a show.

I prefer the bigger picture, my friend.



posted on Jul, 5 2008 @ 08:16 PM
link   
The link I promised...

All the mistakes that were made are being disregarded simply because he was re-elected in a still very controversial election!

I implore my countrymen to see past the ADD influenced aspects of our daily lives and remember what happened back when....rather than retorting with partisan crap...



posted on Jul, 5 2008 @ 08:17 PM
link   
reply to intrepid

Good for you! Sticking up for a fellow moderator!

I was just curious to see the political leaning of our moderators. I didn't even realize that this post was 3 years old. I just saw the last post was July 1st and did not look at the year. My bad, sorry for the mistake.

Running for President and locking up your homestate is mandatory. I was looking at recent elections and this is what I found.

2004 Kerry loses but wins Massachutes
2000 We all know about this one ALGORE loses Tennessee.
1996 Dole loses but wins Kansas
1992 Bush loses but wins Texas
1988 Dukakis loses but wins Massachutes
1984 Mondale loses in a landslide 49-1. The one state he win is Minnesota...his homestate.
1980 Carter loses but wins Georgia
1976 Ford loses buts wins Michigan
1972 Humphrey loses but wins Minnesota
1968 Goldwater loses his homestate of California. Wow I finally found another one!

I am curious to see if a President has ever won election WITHOUT carrying his homestate. I'm checking now!



posted on Jul, 5 2008 @ 08:19 PM
link   
reply to post by RRconservative
 


Which AGAIN has what to do with this topic? NOTHING. Post to topics please.



posted on Jul, 5 2008 @ 08:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by MemoryShock
www.washingtonpost.com...


Lol......Bush on Thursday released a criticism of the upcoming Iranian elections, calling them "unfair," and stating,
"Power is in the hands of an unelected few who have retained power through an electoral process that ignores the basic requirements of democracy."



Isn't that what the Bilderbergs are about? Isn't that how Bush got in? Do we really believe Bush won cause he is so wonderful. I think not. Who does he think he is kidding.



posted on Jul, 5 2008 @ 08:23 PM
link   
reply to post by RRconservative
 


I hope that you pay attention to what my point is..because I seriously don't think that a home state victory is relevant....

This (ages old) thread seems relevant in light of the current Iran to war chants....

America must question her authority figures

Period.

Gore isn't making policy. Period



posted on Jul, 5 2008 @ 08:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Memorialday1999
 





I am not sure I follow your quote. Americans elect their president, he is not appointed. Shall I assume this is yet another "bash Bush" thread? If so, perhaps we could just make a bash Bush forum so it is easier to keep all the threads together. Sorry for the snip but this is starting to get real old, real fast. But still, have a great day!!!


I am not sure I follow you! Bush won both elections undemocratically in a country with a democratically electable president. I thought that was well documented!

2004 was Diebold election voting machines that determined the outcome of the election - I know that and I live 3000 miles away from the said country - where do you live?
Voting Fraud *1
Voting Fraud *2
Voting Fraud *3
2000 Vote

This could go on all night!!

Check this out:


And this - Hacking Democracy:


And this:

Why did your Chief Executive say, ''I am committed to delivering Ihio' vote to G. Bush in 2004''. - classic. (4.20mins onward)


Re-count - we don't need no stinkin re-count!!!

Thats my weekly rant over.

P.s. the OP is right on the money with this one.

Cheers,

Breifne

(Sorry if I am a little off topic with this - just wanted to prove a point, clearly).




[edit on 5-7-2008 by Breifne]



posted on Jul, 5 2008 @ 08:26 PM
link   
As promised....

The last President to win an election without carrying his homestate was Woodrow Wilson in 1916, the only other one was James Polk who lost Tennessee in 1844.

So as you can see by the history, winning your homestate is imperative to winning the nomination! ALGORE could not do it in 2000.



posted on Jul, 5 2008 @ 08:32 PM
link   
reply to post by RRconservative
 


You are off topic. Al Gore is not even relevant in this thread.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join