In talk.abortion, james g. keegan jr.
<keegan@nycap.rr.com>
wrote
on Sat, 21 Jun 2003 21:20:02 GMT
<Xns93A1B053A3E20keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.166>:

DTJ <nospaming@attbi.com> wrote in
news:3nd9fvcmid3c7ekv4prrgt1bv6t1dmsqja@4ax.com:

Even the nytimes count showed Bush won.

please cite the times reference to bush winning the florida
recount.

if you cannot, i'll conclude you lied.

the actual vote counts and recounts are contained here:

http://www.geocities.com/floridavotecount/

in the future, stop lying about things so easily checked else
you'll become a complete bore.

It's a little late *now*, you guys -- Bush won in 2001, either
by means legitimate (he won the Florida count) or by means
illegitimate (the courts declared him the winner, handing
him the Presidency on a silver platter). The irregularities
were considerable but he's been in there for nearly 2 1/2
years. :-)

Perhaps we can instead argue about whether Bush will have
enough votes in *2004* to win the Presidency against a
yet-to-be-determined Democratic opponent -- or even, quite
possibly, a third-party opponent. :-)

And of course fix the process in Floriday so that the infamous
"butterfly ballots" don't confuse everyone. :-)

(I'll admit I'm not entirely certain whether electronic
"touchscreen" voting will solve these issues. Nor is
it clear whether we should impeach him (on what grounds?).
It didn't work for Clinton and it won't work for Bush, absent
far more obviously egregious criminal behavior than he's shown
thus far; being politically non-astute isn't illegal. :-) )