I don't mean to beat a dead horse, but ...

[karmadude]

I am still on this subject about my friend and this software he developed that is used by the State of Florida and the FBI. Not only Florida, but 13 other states are now using it. When I was searching Google, it is called Accurint, developed by a company called Seisint in Boca Raton, this is the most pwerful, fastest database ever used to aid Public Safety. The thing is, it is being used by Ashcroft-types to compile databases of Iraq war-dissenters and other non-supporters of government activities. This is the mother of all big-brother behind the scenes technologies that the general public knows nothing about. I am not trying to diminish what happened in Florida, or our current administration's problems. I am not in any way a chicken little or crying wolf. My day job is working with the Office of Homeland Security's network to find funds for my clients (Police, State to Municipal) to purchase hardware communications systems, so I know what I am talking about. The Patriot Act is one of the most controversial laws ever enacted. On one hand it was born out of fear, but has the seeds sown to control the general population. The Patriot Act alone has allowed the climate for the Accurint to exist and used by a government with questionable intent.

[henryrobinett]

Yeah man. This is real scary shit.

[the stranger]

[quote]Originally posted by Lee Flier: [b]Total, 1000% agreement with every word Craig said. The whole system makes me sick. And I definitely would've voted for McCain too. :mad: [/b][/quote]Me too. He has his flaws, but he does have some integrity.

[Deathtoallwhoopposeme]

[quote]Originally posted by GZsound: [b][b]Originally posted by Anderton: As I live in Florida, I got a pretty good perspective on what happened. Yes, Gore should indeed have won in Florida. Several tens of thousands of black voters were not able to vote because they had been mistakenly listed as felons. There were many other examples of voter irregularities.[/b] Craig, just a question. Were these tens of thousands of lacks mistakenly listed as felons in the democratic controlled counties? It sure seems that those were the counties where the biggest difficulties with ballots and counting took place. I have had a hard time trying to figure out how there can be a conspiracy in the voting system of counties that were in pretty much complete control of the democratic party.. Do I have my facts straight?[/b][/quote]Look, if you don't want to research the whole debacle you are not going to understand how it went down. The counties were NOT EVEN REMOTELY in control of the voting and many thousands of voters were "Purged" such as My uncle and myself.. Neither one of us has ever been arrested...Many many people have investigated what went down and there are many pages writen about it and the bottom line is most experts agree Gore won, and there was SERIOUS meddling done by the Republican party and the Governers Office....If you dont' want to believe just because you blindly believe the partyline, why should we waste or time trying to educate someone who can't be educated....open up your eyes, use Google, and learn what happened man....Mark, we are all Americans here and you were duped just like the rest of us whether you choose to believe it or not...

[Anderton]

Regretfully, I must agree with this. I wish it wasn't true, but all evidence points to election fraud on a fairly significant scale.

[Biggus]

[quote]Win, win, win, at all costs - smear campaigns, outright lies -- what was done to John McCain in North Carolina sickens me. The guy was a friggin' POW, has more than served his country, and just before the Republican primary, a circular appeared out of nowhere talking about "John McCain's black child." The implication was that it was some kind of out of wedlock example of miscegenation. It's true, McCain has a black child -- an ADOPTED black child. How sick can these people be to turn an examplary, selfless act into an albatross around a hero's neck? How low is that?!? But how pathetic it is that the electorate BELIEVES what they hear, and that those lies influenced the primary. [/quote]I don't quite remember this, but wow, what a travesty. Anyone who has an adopted child--whatever race, color, creed, etc -- (and I have a nephew who is adopted from a foreign country)should be absolutely outraged. John McCain would have made a good President. What a dirty filthy pathetic business politics is.

[GZsound]

[b]Originally posted by Sventvkg: Look, if you don't want to research the whole debacle you are not going to understand how it went down. The counties were NOT EVEN REMOTELY in control of the voting and many thousands of voters were "Purged" such as My uncle and myself.. Neither one of us has ever been arrested...Many many people have investigated what went down and there are many pages writen about it and the bottom line is most experts agree Gore won, and there was SERIOUS meddling done by the Republican party and the Governers Office....If you dont' want to believe just because you blindly believe the partyline, why should we waste or time trying to educate someone who can't be educated....open up your eyes, use Google, and learn what happened man....Mark, we are all Americans here and you were duped just like the rest of us whether you choose to believe it or not...[/b] Look you misunderstand my question. It is not about blindly believing anything. Here is what my question is: There are extremely powerful democrats in Florida, right? However, they have been unable to make any of these charges stick, right? If I remember correctly, you have a state supreme court that is certainly not a friend of the republicans, right? The state supreme court has not been able to jail the governor, Katherine Harris? Why not? "Many, many people were investigated". O.K. that's how it should be done if there is an indication of wrong doing. How many were convicted? The Miami Herald and every single other democratic party and liberal organization that could muster the energy counted the ballots using every possible method of counting hanging chad, partial chad, phantom chad, etc. It is my understanding that Mr. Bush won every single count. Or did the Miami Herald, a bastion of conservatism, report something different. I have signed petitions in my own state. Because there is an indication one or more of the signatures on the petition could be forged, my signature has been thrown out by our democratic secretary of state. That is his job.. They frequently disregard ballots or voters if they are lumped into a group with higher than normal forged or otherwise illegal signatures. All the states do it. I would like to see the major news network reporting on how Gore won in Florida. I do not need to do a Google search since that proves nothing. Can you show me the Time, Newsweek, Miami Herald article that "proves" Gore won? And again, if Florida is run like most states, the governors office does not control the county election locations, the voting machines, etc. They are the responsibility of the counties. I do believe this is why the fiasco with the hanging chad in the democratic controlled counties. I may be wrong. The governor and secretary of state of Florida may be handing out ballots, checking signatures, fixing voting machines, etc. I will do a Google search on how the voting system works in Florida.. how's that? And you can let me know how many folks were indicted for blocking thousands of blacks from voting? Thanks..I look forward to the info.

[StoneinaPond]

[quote] There are extremely powerful democrats in Florida, right? However, they have been unable to make any of these charges stick, right? [/quote]Rarely do I agree with Mark, but I have to side with him on this question. Why, if this is a [i]clear[/i] case of voter fraud, has not Jimmy Carter or other Democrats stepped up to the plate? And before anyone thinks I am getting cozy with Mark, I am sure that our motivations for having the question answered are quite different. ;)

[Peake]

[quote]Originally posted by SFOracle: [b]However, when you put the Florida results in the context of recent other GOP actions (Texas redistricting, California Recall) to tip the electoral scales in their favor through less than democratic means, you begin to understand democratic fears of a vast republican power grab. Don.[/b][/quote]Yep. By hook or by crook. Look at the time and energy spent by Ken Starr on Clinton. Where is the Ken Starr for Bush?

[Anderton]

<> You are correct, that's what was reported and by all indications, those numbers are correct, or as correct as they could be under the circumstances. The problem is the number of people who were not able to vote because they were inaccurately listed as felons. One of the people posting here experienced that. Estimates run into the tens of thousands. There cannot be a definitive answer as to how many of these there were except by asking every person in the state whether they tried to vote, and if so, whether they were turned away because they were listed as felons. Then you would have to check whether they actually were felons, and if not, the mechanism by which they were listed as such. THEN you would have to prove malicious intent, not just human or computer error, in order to come up with criminal charges. That is why it is such a daunting task to come up with enough evidence to satisfy a court of law, or even know who to charge, or even if charges are justified. Anyway, in what is considered probably not a coincidence, most of these denied voters were in traditionally democratic districts. Now, let's assume 10,000 voters were identified in some way that would not allow them to vote (estimates run as high as 90,00, but as those are from people with agendas, let's assume a drastically lower number). Let's assume they would vote in about the same numbers as the general electorate - 40%. That means 4,000 people who wanted to vote were not able to. In those traditionally democrat areas (mostly black), the vote is around at least 80% democrat. It's reasonable to assume that 3,200 people would have voted for Gore, 1,800 for Bush. According to the most reliable estimates agreed to by most parties, Bush carried the state by about 530 votes. Had the votes of those denied been counted in, it is reasonable to assume that Gore would have carried the state by around 800 votes. Again, this is taking a very conservative view of the figures. Granted, this doesn't represent an overwhelming mandate for Gore any more than 550 votes represented an overwhelming mandate for Bush. Nor is there any guarantee that there wasn't fraud elsewhere. Maybe thousands of Republicans were tricked into voting for someone else in Jacksonville and we just don't know about it. It is impossible to say with any certainty, even now, exactly who won the presidential election in Florida. And due to the magnitude of the task of finding out once and for all who won, we never will. Now, if Bush had won by 20,000 votes, it wouldn't matter -- even if half those votes had been obtained fraudulently, he still would have won handily. It's only because the margin was so razor-thin that this issue is being brought up at all. But I think most unbiased observers would say that Gore not only won the popular vote, but it is *likely* -- although not absolutely certain -- that he won in the electoral college. This is not intended to be an endorsement of Gore or his policies. He might have become the best or worst president of all time; we'll never know. But what happened in a Florida was an embarrassment. I wouldn't even go so far as to say it was Jeb Bush or Harris, although the responsibility is technically theirs. It could have been low-level people "just doing their part." In any event, we'll never know.

[marsmgr1]

Guys, I don't understand why we're even still discussing this...The election was over long ago...And you Bush "haters" might wanna do a little background search on Al Gore as to how much he is "loved" NOT! in his own home state. Perhaps we should try to get Bill "Have A Cigar" Clinton run again? I think not! Sorry but this is REALLY a dead issue that needs no further discussion and I will not waste anymore of my valuable time visiting this forum because it has turned into more political/social issue discussion than anything to do with music. Apologies to you, Craig, as I have the greatest respect for your talent and knowledge but I visit here to learn and discuss music issues. Local papers' OP-ED sections are more well balanced to handle socio-politico issues. :bor:

[jlahib.no]

yeah, its only a question about the functionality of your democracy.. why should anyone care :eek:

[Peake]

"You'll lose your audience if you question the government" is a nice one as far as manipulation goes, almost as nice as "If you're not with us, you're with the terrorists".

[Super 8]

[quote]Originally posted by marsmgr1: [b]Guys, I don't understand why we're even still discussing this...The election was over long ago...[/b][/quote]I personally don't care if the election is over or yesterdays news. It's not to me! I have a real issue with any party's agenda being so vital to them that they would undermine the will of the people in order to get their man in office! This is important stuff! If you feel you can't win by fair and honest means, then if you value what the office of President stands for, you must NOT run for it! I have always supported the side of the President on this issue over who won the election. I honestly felt that this big issue over him 'stealing the election' was just the left-wing talking typical partisan crap. But this info that Craig is bringing up really bothers me! I don't mind us talking about it at all. I think it's important!

[GZsound]

This whole discussion is a prime example of the difficulties we have on this forum. Craig, not to be insensitive, but your original premise was that "thousands" of blacks were denied the right to vote. That because of the Bush connection Neil Bush got a sweetheart business deal. Then you attempt to moderate the statement by saying all parties do it and all other kinds of disgraceful behavior like "Haliburton" deals. Herein lies the problem. A rather biased un provable charge is thrown out. Sixty percent of the readers agree out of hand. A couple challenge the premise and it turns out the allegations have little, if any, factual basis. Then we get the "best guess" using somebody's idea of ratios and math to prove the results were or could have been, if it rained, false. Then the discussion gets either rational or it gets personal. The idea there are problems with the voting systems is valid. Suggestions as to how to fix the problems with the voting system would be helpful. Making broad unsubstantiated statements with no other goal but to express partisan feelings helps no one. Now, bottom line. The basic premise in this entire discussion relys on the fact that the voters are complete illiterate idiots. That must be how you all feel. Every ballot contained clear concise directions for complete removal of chad, for checking your ballot and tearing it in half and asking for another one if you made a mistake. I just voted today on an Oregon tax increase measure (any guesses how I voted?) and the directions for punching the chad, making sure it is removed completly, etc. are very clear. So, basically, those of you who still claim, with no proof whatsoever, that Al Gore got more votes in Florida, that thousands of blacks were kept from voting, etc. are saying the voters of Florida are idiots. And Craig, I don't know but I'm sure you were equally outraged by Roger Clinton taking money from clients by promissing them presidential pardons..huh? And remember Billy Beer? Thank goodness nepotism is only a republican issue.

[henryrobinett]

Mark, the problem is this: you are right. You have to be right. You cannot be wrong, under any circumstances. You have a bias that you must defend, under any and all circumstances. You cannot see anything clearly because you must defend a position, whether that position is right or tenable at all. It can't be wrong. Why? Because you're right. Why? Simply because you're right. If you're right that means every one else must be wrong. Right? It's tiring. You will die being right.

[Anderton]

<> I think I adequately explained the rationale for that number a couple posts up. I on purpose took a number far lower than what is generally accepted and still came up with 4,000 people, mostly black (because of the districts in which they were located, which are predominantly black), who didn't get to vote. <> If you knew much about Neal Bush's background, you would find it hard to believe that he was chosen for his business acumen. Do a search on "Silverado Savings and Loan" to find out just how much his lack of business acumen cost US taxpayers. Maybe he does make bitchin' software these days. I hope so. <> It wasn't an "attempt" to moderate the statement, I did in fact moderate the statement. Please take what I say at face value. Both parties are guilty of disgraceful behavior. Surely you have to agree with that assessment. If not, then I would like to buy a pair of your rose-colored glasses for reading the morning paper! <> Huh? Did you read my post? THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT PEOPLE WHO WANTED TO VOTE WERE NOT ALLOWED TO DO SO. The only thing that cannot be established was how great that number actually was, and whether it would have been sufficient to change the outcome of the election. Using the best possible figures obtainable through conventional means and basing results on conservative estimates, the LIKELY answer is yes. I have been very careful to make a differentiation between what is CERTAIN and what is LIKELY. <> We can get a much, much more accurate number if you talk to every voter in Florida and ask them if they tried to vote but were not able to. Be my guest. Any polls or extrapolations are conducted based on sampling methods which virtually all people who understand basic mathematics and sampling theory agree have validity within a stated margin of error. Enough people stepped forward to say they had been denied the chance to vote that the number was, and continues to be, statistically significant and worthy of consideration. <> If only it WOULD get rational. You will also notice that my answers have nothing to do with "personal." They are based on the best data avaiable to me as a citizen of Florida. You are welcome to show me contradictory evidence, e.g., that people were lying when they said they weren't allowed to vote, and have since recanted. <> There are no partisan expressions in what I have said. Zero. Zip. It is not my fault that a Republican, who is brother to the presidential candidate, occupies the Governor's mansion. That is a fact. If Al Gore's brother was the Governor and I suspected that fraud had been used to insure his election, I'd be bitching about that. I have no party affiliation and don't plan on starting now. As to my suggestion regarding how to fix the voting system, it's simple: Don't deny people the right to vote without a valid, legal reason. That would be a good start. I made no broad, unsubstantiated statements. However, certain estimates BASED ON HISTORICAL PRECEDENTS were made. These were not figures pulled out of the air, but based on history. It is unlikely, for example, that districts that voted more than 75% democrat for the past several decades would all of a sudden vote 75% Republican. It is POSSIBLE, but UNLIKELY. <> No, the bottom line is that there is evidence of serious irregularities with the voting process in the last presidential election in Florida. There is PROOF that people who should not have been denied the right to vote were not able to vote. That is not in dispute by anyone, except possibly you. <> Dude, MY POINT WAS ABOUT PEOPLE WHO WERE DENIED THE RIGHT TO VOTE. THEY DIDN'T EVEN GET TO THE POINT WHERE THEY GOT TO PUNCH THE LITTLE HOLES IN THE BALLOTS. What you're saying has zero relevance to my comments. Zero. <> I am not saying that at all. I'll say it again, slowly and clearly: THERE WERE PEOPLE IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA WHO WERE ENTITLED TO VOTE AND WERE PREVENTED FROM DOING SO. BASED ON THE BEST AVAILABLE INFORMATION (see previous post), THESE WERE PEOPLE GENERALLY DISPOSED TOWARD VOTING FOR DEMOCRATS. You may consider it a malevolent plot by corrupt politicians, a cruel twist of fate, bad luck, human error, computer error, coincidence, alien intervention, incompetence, whatever. How you INTERPRET that statement is up to you. But you cannot shrug off that statement as being invalid or unsubstantiated. There is at least one person in this forum who experienced it first hand. <> Yes, I was equally outaged. And I was outraged by Bill Clinton lying to a grand jury. And renting out the White House for sleepovers by contributors. And joking at Ron Brown's funeral then getting all solemn when the camera was on him. And the Gulf of Tonkin resolution being based on a fictitious event. And Richard Nixon being into do-it-yourself wiretapping. And LBJ's crude arm twisting. And the pork that works its way into the budget each year from Republicans and Democrats alike. And Gerald Ford's pardon of Nixon. And J Edgar Hoover investigating MLK's sex life to try to blackmail him. And I could go on and on and on and on, unfortunately. <> You have no knowedge of history. Remember Bobby Kennedy? Okay, he was a competent attorney general...competent enough to get killed before he did any more dismantling of the mafia, and those two events may or may not have been related. He was the brother of the president, in case you didn't know that. Enough. I cannot state things any more clearly than I have. I have tried to be completely objective in what I say. If you detect an agenda, you are correct: I want to find out the truth about this situation. I would sleep much better at night if I knew it was simply human error on the part of the elections people.

[Deathtoallwhoopposeme]

Craig....Pay no attention to GZ..He's obviously not going to believe anything about the Facts because he's got his mind made up about everything already. He thinks everything is just great!!! Bush is the KING!!! :eek: :evil: :freak:

[GZsound]

Gee whiz.. why is it that any disssent to any statement is always a defense of the Bush administration? If laws were broken, have there been arrests? If there are FACTS that PROVE these allegations, someone should be indicted, someone should be in jail. The powerful democratic party in Florida should and would do anything in it's power to indict every republican that committed voter fraud, broke the law, etc. If there are FACTS, where are the criminal indictments. I could give a rats ass who did what to who in the back seat of who's car how many times. The issue is making broad statements about FACTS. If the republicans committed a crime..jail them. If the republicans stopped anyone, black, white, green from voting..jail them. Give me the huge number of republican law breakers caught and convicted. Do not simply make a post and call it fact. Period. And please stop with the "defense of the Bush administration crap", if any politician breaks the law they should be punished..period. I just find it really hard to believe the only people with these irrefutable FACTS are on this list and the law enforcement agencies, state government, county law enforcement and the federal government can't seem to find anybody to indict. For crying out loud, the American Trial Lawyers will indict a ham sandwich. I cannot make it any clearer. Why does asking questions that might challenge a statement made here always becomes a defense of the Bush administration? What do you all want? Someone makes a statement and everybody says "yeah!, I agree! right on!"? Do you just want total agreement no matter how outrageous the statement? If there is no room for questioning the validity of "FACTS" posted here without being called a stooge of the administration then what you need to do is call this list "Liberal Musicians Forum" and I'll go back to writing polka music for little people..

[Wow]

If the Democratic Senators could get ANYTHING on GWB, they would have produced it.

[schmee]

"ain't news." heh, we'll see if it's news in 2004. i saw the one time palast was on some version of msnbc and it was amazing. he comes on against 3 "pundits" who all disparage his work from beginning to end. the amazing part is that throughout the entire 10 minute segment - they never said why. all they did was call him names, "this is shoddy investigative journalism!", said one guy and greg then countered by asking him how, and the man couldn't answer. let's be clear - newsnight is equivalent to something like 60 minutes in the states, only it's a twice weekly or nightly show (been awhile since i've been there). it's probably their most legit news analysis show and they are merciless when it comes to things like interviews and holding government and industry accountable for their actions. which is why i used to watch jeremy paxman - the host - every chance i could while living there. this is not some fly-by-night internet operation with some has-been internet hack kicking out propaganda. greg palast was an investigator of corporate fraud for over 10 years, previous to becoming an investigative reporter. this guy has credibility, he has facts, he has paperwork that backs up everything he says, he's got video of the CEO of this vetting company walking out half way through when greg produces the documents signed by katherine harris and asks who put the deal together. the people who want you to believe that greg palast is an unreliable sensationlist are the very same people who would really like you to pick up a copy of ann coulter's latest book, or perhaps sean hannity's. the people who want to ignore him, are the people in denial about what is happening in this country. the people who were convinced the safest thing for america would be to lump all of it's enemies into one big group that could fight us while we're stretched out in the desert with little planning or direction, support or even empathy from the rest of the world, because the safest approach was to tell everyone else in the world to go screw themselves. because they're all jealous, right? isn't that how it goes? sawry, i didn't get my tshirt at the barbque, and can't remember the latest mantra. but basically, despite the fact that our secret services were responsible for erecting every single dictator in the region since the 50s, as well as terrorizing any moderate political force in the region for fear of them shutting the doors on our gas men - it's because they're jealous that we now face a hostile middle east. :wave:

[Peake]

[quote]Originally posted by Anderton: [b]Enough. I cannot state things any more clearly than I have. I have tried to be completely objective in what I say. If you detect an agenda, you are correct: I want to find out the truth about this situation. I would sleep much better at night if I knew it was simply human error on the part of the elections people.[/b][/quote]Craig, they aren't interested. At all. They _want_ those of us with a perspective to tire and leave. Then, they can say or do anything that they want. Or, some will challenge you endlessly, hoping to simply force you out of the conversation (see Mr. Wow in the Jail Bush thread trying to get me angry :-) Neat trick, eh? Make it not worth using your freedom of speech. How American.

[Wow]

[quote] Craig, they aren't interested. At all. They _want_ those of us with a perspective to tire and leave. Then, they can say or do anything that they want. Or, some will challenge you endlessly, hoping to simply force you out of the conversation [/quote]You sound like a little BABY. There are about 3 conservatives on this board and we ALL have an agenda to get peak off the board. PLEASE, dont flatter yourself, your not that good. We use YOU and johnny bralala for entertainment. :wave:

[Peake]

At least babies have open minds :-)

[Peake]

I'd like to see Wow actually address Craig's long post on this page, if he can, instead of his typical "noise" posts which add nothing to the conversation except, well, noise. :-) I suppose "I live here" or "A bush told me" will be the expected response... When Clinton was President, did you live here? I expect that you supported him to the death as well, through thick and thin.

[KenElevenShadows]

[quote]Originally posted by ha ha faa_Q: [b]... I don't remember seeing this in the news while I was living in the U.S.[/b][/quote]Um, actually, it was discussed quite a bit. In on the actual day of the election, there were people calling in to NPR stating that they were barred from the polling areas and not allowed to vote. Others were calling in and saying that they had witnessed scores of people being turned back from the polling areas. People talked of polling problems, snafus, and many other things, often going on in primarily Democratic (often poor or black neighborhoods). This was being reported on national radio on the day of the election, *before* the results of the election were even in!!!

[Wow]

[quote] I'd like to see Wow actually address Craig's long post on this page [/quote]Nice try, are you having a hard time keeping up peak? Peak is like a school kid, "Oh yea, I'll bet you can't beat up craig." I think peak needs major help with his old arguments.Wait a minute, he has no arguments,never mind. :wave:

[Griffinator]

[quote]Originally posted by Ken/Eleven Shadows: [b] [quote]Originally posted by ha ha faa_Q: [b]... I don't remember seeing this in the news while I was living in the U.S.[/b][/quote]Um, actually, it was discussed quite a bit. In on the actual day of the election, there were people calling in to NPR stating that they were barred from the polling areas and not allowed to vote. Others were calling in and saying that they had witnessed scores of people being turned back from the polling areas. People talked of polling problems, snafus, and many other things, often going on in primarily Democratic (often poor or black neighborhoods). This was being reported on national radio on the day of the election, *before* the results of the election were even in!!![/b][/quote]Ironically, the day of the election Jeb "promised" Florida to G.W. That fact is indisputable. That statement was on every major news broadcast on election night. It's no surprise that Florida went to Dubya even though all the early exit polling had Al Gore winning handily, and enough so that all 4 (including the Republican Stronghold, Fox) major networks were predicting Gore taking Florida... But our Republican friends will never, ever, admit such a despicable act came from the Republican Party (home of Nixon/Watergate, McCarthy, and J. Edgar)...

[Super 8]

FIRST... I REALLY REALLY want to thank Craig for his contribution to this thread. Insofar as I can tell, his posts have been without bias and appear well informed and thought out. This has got to be the first political thread I have enjoyed reading. Thanks Craig. NEXT... [quote]Originally posted by peake@pacificnet.net: [b]At least babies have open minds :-)[/b][/quote]When I read your comments, I see very little to associate with open-mindedness. I've read Craig's words with a great deal of interest. I have also paid particular attention to GZ's reactions. Clearly he is sticking to his guns and is not quick in accepting everything Craig says as fact... But I have to agree with GZ when he says that questioning a statement is immediately taken as defending Bush. He has said that many times, and the response he gets is usually about the same: "You are defending Bush"... I don't think he gets a fair shake. I believe him when he says that if Bush or any politician does wrong then they should be held accountable for their actions. And he does make a good point when he asks 'why the Florida Democrats haven't started bringing people up on charges?'. Why haven't they???

[Dogfur]

[quote]Originally posted by Super 8: [b] And he does make a good point when he asks 'why the Florida Democrats haven't started bringing people up on charges?'. Why haven't they???[/b][/quote]Its not in the script.