Text 4138, 160 rader
Skriven 2007-07-10 11:23:52 av Roy Witt (1:123/789.0)
   Kommentar till text 4116 av Björn Forsström (2:203/614.61)
Ärende: CIA's Family Jewels
===========================
"Björn Forsström -> Roy Witt" <2:203/614.61> wrote in message
news:54902$FIDONEWS@JamNNTPd...

 BF>>> You are still confusing me, you think the world of GWB and then say
that
 BF>>> the country shold be run by the center.

 RW>> Where did I say that I "think the world of GWB"?

 BF> You have said that you can't think of anthing that he have done was wrong
so
 BF> then it must be true.

There's a lot of things that I think he's done wrong, but they don't outweigh
the good that he's done.

 BF>>> According to you, everything that you don't believe in is far left.

 RW>> No, there are some things on the far right that I don't believe in.

 BF> I've asked you before to mention anything but so far without any answer.

I believe in a woman's right to decide what she will do with a pregnancy. Abort
or carry it to birth, that is her choice. FYI, the far right is against
abortions. The far left is for abortions and at any time during the pregnancy.
The center is for choice.

 BF>>>>> Whatever the left is in your
 BF>>>>> centre eyes. Wasn't it a majority of the American people that voted
GWB
 BF>>>>> into power...?

 RW>>>> As a matter of fact, he did not. His opponent in the 2000 election got
 RW>>>> more of the popular votes than did Bush. However, Bush won the
election
 RW>> by
 RW>>>> a talley of votes by the Electoral College. He who wins the most
states
 RW>>>> with the most Electoral votes, wins the election. Gore won California,
 RW>>>> which has the most Electoral votes and should have swayed the election
 RW>> in
 RW>>>> his favor, it didn't. Had Gore actually won his own home state, he
would
 RW>>>> have won the election. Had he been able to win the state of the POTUS
he
 RW>>>> served under, he would have won the election (he didn't). It was that
 RW>>>> close.

 BF>>> By this you say that USA isn't a democracy.

 RW>> Where did I 'say' that?

 BF> In a democracy, the one that get the most votes wins.

That's how it works here, so it MUST be a democracy. In reality, it's a
democratic republic.

 BF>>> The POTUS isn't elected by a majority of the people but of his buddys
 BF>>> that can make the most money out of him.

 RW>> Wrong. The majority of the people are represented by people appointed to
 RW>> the Electoral College. These people are from the state they represent
and
 RW>> are, for the most part, representative of the majority vote of the
people.
 RW>> i.e. If a Democrat wins the majority votes in, say California, the
 RW>> California Electoral College votes for that candidate, giving him all of
 RW>> the 54 available votes. These votes represent the will of the majority
of
 RW>> voters.

 BF> And the Electrocal College isn't the POTUS buddys?

They're probably members of the same party by the time it comes to vote, but
they're bound by the laws of their state to vote accordingly. See, there are
two
or more state electoral colleges chosen before the election. The losing members
don't get to vote, while the majority does which all depends on the popular
votes by the people.

 RW>> However you may consider this, your country is as you say mine is, in
 RW>> electing your leaders. The big difference is that you vote for a
 RW>> representative, who may or may not vote for your leader, among the
 RW>> majority of his peers.

 BF> We can vote for one particular candidate on the party list.

Yes, but he then votes for your PM as his party directs him to vote - you have
no say in the matter.

 BF>>>>> And yet the left are in majority in everything in USA?

 RW>>>> I think so.

 BF>>> Then you live in just as a pink country that I do.

 RW>> As I pointed out above, slightly less pink than Sweden. But, by being
 RW>> slightly pink, this is how the left gets it's voters. Hand-out programs
 RW>> for those too damned lazy to work for a living.

 BF> Prejudice?

I suppose you like to see all of the government's handouts to undeserving
people, while you work your ass off and pay 50% or more of your income in
taxes.
If that's prejudice, then I'm guilty.


 RW>>>> However, it's not the majority who always wins here.

 BF>>> Oh shit, it is here.

 RW>> I doubt that.

 BF> Believe what you want.

I will. Thanks for your permission.


 BF>>> Why bother having an election at all?

 RW>> So the crooks can make it look like it's our choice, not theirs.

 BF> Isn't it the way it is now?

I don't think so.

 BF>>> How can you be in the center when you worship everything GWB has done?

 RW>> I don't worship everything he's done. I agree with a lot of what he's
 RW>> done, but there are things he's done that I don't agree with.

 BF> The war in Iraq for example or is that to be un-American, un-patriotic and
a
 BF> traitor?

In retrospect, the Iraq war was justified by the information known at the time.
Once SH was out of power, it would have been a good time to leave and let them
worry about their future. However good or bad that turned out to be; It
wouldn't
have made any difference in what the world is experiencing now, as the fanatics
will have their way whether the west likes it or not.

 RW>> There are a lot of people in the USA who are not whackos...you just
 RW>> haven't heard of any since they're not as controversial as the whackos.
If
 RW>> you watch the way the election is going next year, you'll find a lot of
 RW>> people who are on the whacko trail, while the voices of reason will
stand
 RW>> out from the whackos. They'll eventually be loud and clear and heard
above
 RW>> those whackos.

 BF> If you say that the loudest in USA are the wackos it must be like that
 BF> here in Fido as well, don't you think?

Are you feeling guilty?

--- Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807
 * Origin: The Eastern Star - Fidonet Via Your Newsreader (1:123/789.0)