bush's interview

We're not intoxicated with him, we just take every opportunity to point out the fact that he has the same IQ number as his shoe size. The guy's an idiot and he's making the world pay for it. And what's this about Liberal European agendas?

Adrian

did you check to see where the people in this topic live..theres a fair few yanks.

This guys is in fact an idiot and that is the precise reason -Dick Chaney hand picked him as his co-president (no, that is not an oversight, thats what he is). Bush was picked for he is dumb enough to control. Its all part of Chaney's plan to follow through with Halliburton getting the pipeline in Afganistan and the oil in Iraq...something he has been trying to accomplish since 1997.

Bush is merely a puppet. It is Chaney who is the true evil behind all this making the Chaney-Bush regime the current #1 threat to world peace and security.

Hopefully America will come to its senses and vote them out of office this year. (although, you can't blame the American public because they didn't vote them into power in the first place. They were selected )

Uh,if it were up to Al Gore,we would still be counting the votes in Florida.Bush won Florida plain and simple,and he also won the electoral votes in the country. He wasn't selected just because the supreme court had to put a stop to the ridiculous chad hanging and recounting,and recounting,and recounting.Several newspapers also had the votes recounted and he still won Florida. Funny how none of the Dems/Liberals had a problem with our electoral system until their guy didn't win it. No one said a word about it before,but when Al LOST because of it,suddenly the Dems want something done about it.

http://www.onlineathens.com/stories/...30305033.shtml

Al Gore lost the 2000 election, it wasn't stolen from him

Commentaries and letters that continue to imply Bush ''stole'' or was ''awarded'' the 2000 presidential election ignore two very important facts.
First, even Gore supporters should recognize he lost because he failed to carry seven states that voted for Clinton in the previous two elections, including Gore's home state of Tennessee. If he had carried just one of those states, he would have won without Florida and the courts would not have been involved. Obviously, there were problems in Florida, but the exhaustive recount and study by the news media revealed that ''under any standard used to judge the ballots where Gore sought recounts, Bush would have had more votes, almost triple his margin'' (The Washington Post, Nov. 12, 2001). This was also widely reported by most media. It is ironic that had Gore's legal strategy prevailed in the Florida Supreme Court, he would certainly have lost.
Second, we do not have a pure democratic form of government where the majority rules. We have a republic form governed by laws. While Gore did receive 539,000 more popular votes out of more than 100 million cast, he won only 20 states and only 676 counties nationwide. Primarily, his votes came from heavily populated counties and from areas that depend on a large government for support. Bush won 30 states and 2,436 counties, primarily those that tend to support less government and are more independent. Obviously, neither the popular vote nor the number of counties won had any bearing since according to our laws, the president is elected by the Electoral College.

J.K. Franklin

Published in the Athens Banner-Herald on Wednesday, March 5, 2003.

Uh, I was responding to Krisy's post brainiac....who are you to tell anyone what the point is Ugly? In regards to Bush, no I don't think he's dumb. I don't agree with a lot of what he does, but I am in no position to quantify him as a capable president. That's the job for credential historians, scholars, political analysts, legal experts, national security experts and the likes who get raw and indirect materials, access to confidential information and sources relating to the president to make that decision.

What irritates me is people who do not live in my country, but feel the need to lecture me about the dangers my president may present to the rest of the world. They want me to vote globally, not locally. It's unrealistic to expect me to go into a voting booth, say to myself, lets see, in my opinion, candidate X is better for me and my country. However, the other nominee is better for the world. What was I thinking supporting my choice for president?

Well the dirt is coming out on Kerry now. He may be another Clinton. We shall see how everything unfolds.

Just because they both cheated on their wives doesn't mean they're the same person.

Ponrauil

if that is the case then you should also leave it to those people to vote