| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Eris" |
| Date: |
18 Jan 2005 01:52:17 AM |
| Object: |
Why are Presidents sworn in the second time |
My beloved ditto heads are discussing this.
.
|
|
| User: "Ike" |
|
| Title: Re: Why are Presidents sworn in the second time |
18 Jan 2005 03:44:52 PM |
|
|
"Eris" <vithant01@yaya.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:atqou0p9nu5ci4hq75ulrbatv3s66fab5t@4ax.com...
My beloved ditto heads are discussing this.
Because they need a break from being sworn at.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Why are Presidents sworn in the second time |
19 Jan 2005 06:38:54 PM |
|
|
Eris wrote:
My beloved ditto heads are discussing this.
Just in case they were lying about protecting and defending the
Constitution the first time? Just a guess... But your dittoheads will
love it. :-)
Jeff
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Why are Presidents sworn in the second time |
18 Jan 2005 09:33:33 PM |
|
|
In our last episode <atqou0p9nu5ci4hq75ulrbatv3s66fab5t@4ax.com>, Eris
lept out of the bushes shouting:
My beloved ditto heads are discussing this.
Because they thought he was president for life?
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Alt-atheism website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful."
-- Seneca the Younger
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Why are Presidents sworn in the second time |
18 Jan 2005 11:50:39 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 15:33:33 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> said in alt.atheism:
In our last episode <atqou0p9nu5ci4hq75ulrbatv3s66fab5t@4ax.com>, Eris
lept out of the bushes shouting:
My beloved ditto heads are discussing this.
Because they thought he was president for life?
Or because they didn't think dictators had to be sworn?
--
"I am a deeply religious nonbeliever.... This is a somewhat new kind of religion."
- Letter to Hans Muehsam March 30, 1954; Einstein Archive 38-434
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "jwk" |
|
| Title: Re: Why are Presidents sworn in the second time |
18 Jan 2005 05:07:35 PM |
|
|
It is a futile attempt to get the guy to listen. I try it with my kids
all the time. I tell them not to throw their stuff on the floor. They
do anyway. I tell them again, hoping it'll stick the second time.
(Then I scream, yell and finally swat. Wish we could treat George Jr
the same way.)
jwk
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Why are Presidents sworn in the second time |
18 Jan 2005 06:06:16 PM |
|
|
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in news:1106064868.512898.323350
@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
It is a futile attempt to get the guy to listen. I try it with my kids
all the time. I tell them not to throw their stuff on the floor. They
do anyway. I tell them again, hoping it'll stick the second time.
(Then I scream, yell and finally swat. Wish we could treat George Jr
the same way.)
You had your chance last November.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
Support bacteria! That's all the culture many people will ever have.
.
|
|
|
| User: "jwk" |
|
| Title: Re: Why are Presidents sworn in the second time |
19 Jan 2005 01:54:26 PM |
|
|
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in news:1106064868.512898.323350
@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
It is a futile attempt to get the guy to listen. I try it with my
kids
all the time. I tell them not to throw their stuff on the floor.
They
do anyway. I tell them again, hoping it'll stick the second time.
(Then I scream, yell and finally swat. Wish we could treat George
Jr
the same way.)
You had your chance last November.
To do what? Get Georgie to listen? He's unmanagable. The man
considered his small election victory to be a mandate. How can you get
someone so out of touch with reality to listen?
jwk
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Why are Presidents sworn in the second time |
19 Jan 2005 03:36:31 PM |
|
|
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1106142866.455719.42430@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in news:1106064868.512898.323350
@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
It is a futile attempt to get the guy to listen. I try it with my
kids
all the time. I tell them not to throw their stuff on the floor.
They
do anyway. I tell them again, hoping it'll stick the second time.
(Then I scream, yell and finally swat. Wish we could treat George
Jr the same way.)
You had your chance last November.
To do what? Get Georgie to listen? He's unmanagable.
Meaning that he doesn't fall over for the losing party.
The man
considered his small election victory to be a mandate. How can you
get someone so out of touch with reality to listen?
Fifty percent plus one vote is a "mandate". Not to mention that the Reps
added seats in the House and the Senate, which is quite rare for
second-term Presidents.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
Support bacteria! That's all the culture many people will ever have.
.
|
|
|
| User: "jwk" |
|
| Title: Re: Why are Presidents sworn in the second time |
21 Jan 2005 04:50:29 PM |
|
|
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1106142866.455719.42430@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1106064868.512898.323350
@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
It is a futile attempt to get the guy to listen. I try it with
my
kids
all the time. I tell them not to throw their stuff on the
floor.
They
do anyway. I tell them again, hoping it'll stick the second
time.
(Then I scream, yell and finally swat. Wish we could treat
George
Jr the same way.)
You had your chance last November.
To do what? Get Georgie to listen? He's unmanagable.
Meaning that he doesn't fall over for the losing party.
The man
considered his small election victory to be a mandate. How can you
get someone so out of touch with reality to listen?
Fifty percent plus one vote is a "mandate". Not to mention that the
Reps
added seats in the House and the Senate, which is quite rare for
second-term Presidents.
He won by a very small percentage of the popular vote Fred. That does
not constitute a mandate. He only has a 51% *for him leaves 49%
*against him. A mandate comes from a landslide. Not from squeaking
by.
jwk
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Why are Presidents sworn in the second time |
21 Jan 2005 09:19:03 PM |
|
|
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1106326229.763179.256790@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1106142866.455719.42430@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1106064868.512898.323350
@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
It is a futile attempt to get the guy to listen. I try it with
my
kids
all the time. I tell them not to throw their stuff on the
floor.
They
do anyway. I tell them again, hoping it'll stick the second
time.
(Then I scream, yell and finally swat. Wish we could treat
George
Jr the same way.)
You had your chance last November.
To do what? Get Georgie to listen? He's unmanagable.
Meaning that he doesn't fall over for the losing party.
The man
considered his small election victory to be a mandate. How can you
get someone so out of touch with reality to listen?
Fifty percent plus one vote is a "mandate". Not to mention that the
Reps added seats in the House and the Senate, which is quite rare for
second-term Presidents.
He won by a very small percentage of the popular vote Fred. That does
not constitute a mandate. He only has a 51% *for him leaves 49%
*against him. A mandate comes from a landslide. Not from squeaking
by.
That's the "reasoning" used by the losers to try to get the winners to
wimp out on their agenda. The President and the Congress have all the
authority granted by the Constitution regardless of their respective
margins of victory.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
Support bacteria! That's all the culture many people will ever have.
.
|
|
|
| User: "jwk" |
|
| Title: Re: Why are Presidents sworn in the second time |
22 Jan 2005 09:27:30 PM |
|
|
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1106326229.763179.256790@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1106142866.455719.42430@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1106064868.512898.323350
@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
It is a futile attempt to get the guy to listen. I try it
with
my
kids
all the time. I tell them not to throw their stuff on the
floor.
They
do anyway. I tell them again, hoping it'll stick the second
time.
(Then I scream, yell and finally swat. Wish we could treat
George
Jr the same way.)
You had your chance last November.
To do what? Get Georgie to listen? He's unmanagable.
Meaning that he doesn't fall over for the losing party.
The man
considered his small election victory to be a mandate. How can
you
get someone so out of touch with reality to listen?
Fifty percent plus one vote is a "mandate". Not to mention that
the
Reps added seats in the House and the Senate, which is quite rare
for
second-term Presidents.
He won by a very small percentage of the popular vote Fred. That
does
not constitute a mandate. He only has a 51% *for him leaves 49%
*against him. A mandate comes from a landslide. Not from
squeaking
by.
That's the "reasoning" used by the losers to try to get the winners
to
wimp out on their agenda. The President and the Congress have all the
authority granted by the Constitution regardless of their respective
margins of victory.
No Fred, that's the commonly accepted meaning of "mandate". I never
said anything about what they should *do with their agenda. (See if
you can guess what I think they should do with it, though.) Just
because you need an excuse for your hero to do any damn thing he
pleases, doesn't mean you can re-define the English language. Bush and
you didn't need an excuse the first four years, why invent one now?
jwk
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Why are Presidents sworn in the second time |
23 Jan 2005 12:18:30 AM |
|
|
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1106429250.565725.176680@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1106326229.763179.256790@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1106142866.455719.42430@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1106064868.512898.323350
@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
It is a futile attempt to get the guy to listen. I try it
with
my
kids
all the time. I tell them not to throw their stuff on the
floor.
They
do anyway. I tell them again, hoping it'll stick the second
time.
(Then I scream, yell and finally swat. Wish we could treat
George
Jr the same way.)
You had your chance last November.
To do what? Get Georgie to listen? He's unmanagable.
Meaning that he doesn't fall over for the losing party.
The man
considered his small election victory to be a mandate. How can
you
get someone so out of touch with reality to listen?
Fifty percent plus one vote is a "mandate". Not to mention that
the
Reps added seats in the House and the Senate, which is quite rare
for
second-term Presidents.
He won by a very small percentage of the popular vote Fred. That
does
not constitute a mandate. He only has a 51% *for him leaves 49%
*against him. A mandate comes from a landslide. Not from
squeaking
by.
That's the "reasoning" used by the losers to try to get the winners
to wimp out on their agenda. The President and the Congress have all
the authority granted by the Constitution regardless of their
respective margins of victory.
No Fred, that's the commonly accepted meaning of "mandate". I never
said anything about what they should *do with their agenda. (See if
you can guess what I think they should do with it, though.) Just
because you need an excuse for your hero to do any damn thing he
pleases, doesn't mean you can re-define the English language. Bush
and you didn't need an excuse the first four years, why invent one
now? jwk
It's called "representative government". The majority gets to do what
majorities do in Congress and the White House. Bush doesn't need any
excuses to implement his agenda with the cooperation of the Congress.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
Support bacteria! That's all the culture many people will ever have.
.
|
|
|
| User: "jwk" |
|
| Title: Re: Why are Presidents sworn in the second time |
25 Jan 2005 02:32:29 PM |
|
|
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1106429250.565725.176680@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1106326229.763179.256790@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1106142866.455719.42430@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1106064868.512898.323350
@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
It is a futile attempt to get the guy to listen. I try it
with
my
kids
all the time. I tell them not to throw their stuff on the
floor.
They
do anyway. I tell them again, hoping it'll stick the
second
time.
(Then I scream, yell and finally swat. Wish we could
treat
George
Jr the same way.)
You had your chance last November.
To do what? Get Georgie to listen? He's unmanagable.
Meaning that he doesn't fall over for the losing party.
The man
considered his small election victory to be a mandate. How
can
you
get someone so out of touch with reality to listen?
Fifty percent plus one vote is a "mandate". Not to mention that
the
Reps added seats in the House and the Senate, which is quite
rare
for
second-term Presidents.
He won by a very small percentage of the popular vote Fred.
That
does
not constitute a mandate. He only has a 51% *for him leaves 49%
*against him. A mandate comes from a landslide. Not from
squeaking
by.
That's the "reasoning" used by the losers to try to get the
winners
to wimp out on their agenda. The President and the Congress have
all
the authority granted by the Constitution regardless of their
respective margins of victory.
No Fred, that's the commonly accepted meaning of "mandate". I
never
said anything about what they should *do with their agenda. (See
if
you can guess what I think they should do with it, though.) Just
because you need an excuse for your hero to do any damn thing he
pleases, doesn't mean you can re-define the English language. Bush
and you didn't need an excuse the first four years, why invent one
now? jwk
It's called "representative government". The majority gets to do what
majorities do in Congress and the White House. Bush doesn't need any
excuses to implement his agenda with the cooperation of the Congress.
I thought we were debating the term "mandate". That wasn't even a good
dodge.
jwk
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Why are Presidents sworn in the second time |
25 Jan 2005 06:24:56 PM |
|
|
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1106663549.803131.212850@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1106429250.565725.176680@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1106326229.763179.256790@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1106142866.455719.42430@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1106064868.512898.323350
@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
It is a futile attempt to get the guy to listen. I try it
with
my
kids
all the time. I tell them not to throw their stuff on the
floor.
They
do anyway. I tell them again, hoping it'll stick the
second
time.
(Then I scream, yell and finally swat. Wish we could
treat
George
Jr the same way.)
You had your chance last November.
To do what? Get Georgie to listen? He's unmanagable.
Meaning that he doesn't fall over for the losing party.
The man
considered his small election victory to be a mandate. How
can
you
get someone so out of touch with reality to listen?
Fifty percent plus one vote is a "mandate". Not to mention that
the
Reps added seats in the House and the Senate, which is quite
rare
for
second-term Presidents.
He won by a very small percentage of the popular vote Fred.
That
does
not constitute a mandate. He only has a 51% *for him leaves 49%
*against him. A mandate comes from a landslide. Not from
squeaking
by.
That's the "reasoning" used by the losers to try to get the
winners
to wimp out on their agenda. The President and the Congress have
all
the authority granted by the Constitution regardless of their
respective margins of victory.
No Fred, that's the commonly accepted meaning of "mandate". I
never
said anything about what they should *do with their agenda. (See
if
you can guess what I think they should do with it, though.) Just
because you need an excuse for your hero to do any damn thing he
pleases, doesn't mean you can re-define the English language. Bush
and you didn't need an excuse the first four years, why invent one
now? jwk
It's called "representative government". The majority gets to do what
majorities do in Congress and the White House. Bush doesn't need any
excuses to implement his agenda with the cooperation of the Congress.
I thought we were debating the term "mandate". That wasn't even a
good dodge.
I wasn't a dodge at all. A "mandate" is what you get when you win an
election, the margin of victory is a non-issue.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
Support bacteria! That's all the culture many people will ever have.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Clothaire" |
|
| Title: Re: Why are Presidents sworn in the second time |
19 Jan 2005 10:59:21 PM |
|
|
On 19 Jan 2005 05:54:26 -0800, "jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote:
Fred Stone wrote:
"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in news:1106064868.512898.323350
@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
It is a futile attempt to get the guy to listen. I try it with my
kids
all the time. I tell them not to throw their stuff on the floor.
They
do anyway. I tell them again, hoping it'll stick the second time.
(Then I scream, yell and finally swat. Wish we could treat George
Jr
the same way.)
You had your chance last November.
To do what? Get Georgie to listen? He's unmanagable. The man
considered his small election victory to be a mandate. How can you get
someone so out of touch with reality to listen?
jwk
What Mandate. I am no Bush fan, but half of the public hated him
before the election and they hate him even more now.
Clothaire #1392 An atheist for 50 years and still counting.
Creationists.
"Imagine the people who believe such things
and who are not ashamed to ignore, totally,
all the patient findings of thinking minds through
all the centuries since the Bible was written.
And it is these ignorant people, the most uneducated,
the most unimaginative, the most unthinking among us,
who would make themselves the guides and leaders of
us all; who would force their feeble and childish beliefs
on us; who would invade our schools and libraries and
homes. I personally resent it bitterly..."
-- Isaac Asimov
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: Why are Presidents sworn in the second time |
18 Jan 2005 06:39:23 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:52:17 -0500, Eris <vithant01@yaya.comcast.net>
drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following
My beloved ditto heads are discussing this.
You're kidding, right? Because the President's term is only four
years. On 1/20 Bush will begin a new term, requiring that he be sworn
in again.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Why are Presidents sworn in the second time |
18 Jan 2005 11:16:20 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:52:17 -0500, Eris <vithant01@yaya.comcast.net> wrote:
My beloved ditto heads are discussing this.
And what do you suppose is the obvious answer?
duke
In God We Trust
*****
Matthew 7
21"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,'
will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he
who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eris" |
|
| Title: Re: Why are Presidents sworn in the second time |
18 Jan 2005 02:51:48 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 05:16:20 -0600, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:52:17 -0500, Eris <vithant01@yaya.comcast.net> wrote:
My beloved ditto heads are discussing this.
And what do you suppose is the obvious answer?
I don't know, why take the oath a second time, Is it time specific?
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Why are Presidents sworn in the second time |
18 Jan 2005 11:32:40 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:51:48 -0500, Eris <vithant01@yaya.comcast.net> wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 05:16:20 -0600, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:52:17 -0500, Eris <vithant01@yaya.comcast.net> wrote:
My beloved ditto heads are discussing this.
And what do you suppose is the obvious answer?
I don't know, why take the oath a second time, Is it time specific?
Of course it is.
duke
In God We Trust
*****
Matthew 7
21"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,'
will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he
who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
*****
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
