Welcome to Emulationworld

Forum Index | FAQ | New User | Login | Search

Make a New PostPrevious ThreadView All ThreadsNext Thread*Show in Threaded Mode


Subjectbush wins... if kerry just realizes he lost -nt- fucking lawyers new Reply to this message
Posted bySilentAce
Posted on11/03/04 08:38 AM



a


SubjectRe: bush wins... if kerry just realizes he lost -nt- fucking lawyers new Reply to this message
Posted bylux_92886
Posted on11/03/04 09:07 AM



> a
>
What's with the Democrats? Bush is 4 million head in the popular vote. I'm sorry Kerry, you cannot catch up. Concede you S.O.B.!!!


SubjectThat didn't help Gore now did it? You guys should really re-work that system of yours. new Reply to this message
Posted byDeath Knight
Posted on11/03/04 09:39 AM



That whole electoral college shit is bullshit. This might be the second election in a row in wich the public vote was eaten out by the electoral.


Gives us a kiss precious.


Subjectguess why it works like that [nt] new Reply to this message
Posted byTerry Bogard
Posted on11/03/04 10:50 AM



> That whole electoral college shit is bullshit. This might be the second election
> in a row in wich the public vote was eaten out by the electoral.
>
>
> Gives us a kiss precious.
>


OKKAY!


SubjectNo it didn't new Reply to this message
Posted byCereal Killer
Posted on11/03/04 11:06 AM



> That whole electoral college shit is bullshit. This might be the second election
> in a row in wich the public vote was eaten out by the electoral.

If Kerry wins then popular vote was eaten out by the electoral college. America is not a Democracy, it's a Republic. No where in the Constitution does it ever say Democracy. The Electoral College is check and balance, designed to keep smaller heavily populated areas, from controlling larger less dense areas. It's only when races are ever this close that people get pissed off.

>
>
> Gives us a kiss precious.
>





SubjectThe USA is a republic, not a democracy -mt- learn the difference inside new Reply to this message
Posted byitchyNADZ
Posted on11/03/04 11:26 AM




Here's a letter that I wrote and sent into our local
newspaper. Of course they didn't print it; that would
require thought and attention.




I would like to raise local awareness regarding the
differences between a Democracy and a Representational
Republic form of government.

The government of the United States is not a Democracy, but
rather a Representational Republic. While a
Representational Republic can work for a populace of any
size, a Democracy doesn't scale beyond a few thousand
people. In a Representational Republic, representatives
are elected who make decisions for us. In a Democracy,
every citizen votes on every decision.

No state may join the United States unless it is a
Republic. The U.S. Constitution guarantees to every state
a Republican form of government (Article 4, Section 4).
Minority individual rights are the priority. The people are
protected by the Bill of Rights from the majority and have
natural rights instead of civil rights. One vote in a jury
can stop all of the majority from depriving any one of the
people of his or her rights.

In a Republic, the sovereignty resides in the people
themselves, whether one or many. One may act on his own, or
through his representatives, as he chooses to solve a
problem. Further, the people have no obligation to the
government. Instead, the government, since it has been
hired by the people, is obliged to its owner the people.

In a Democracy, the sovereignty is in the whole body of the
free citizens. The sovereignty is not divided into smaller
units such as individual citizens. Individuals have duties
and obligations to the government, and the government's
only obligations to the citizens are those legislatively
pre-defined for it.

In a pure democracy, 51% controls 49%. In a democracy there
is no such thing as a significant minority. There are no
minority rights except civil rights (privileges) granted by
a condescending majority.

Out of the first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution,
only five of them apply to citizens of the United States.

In simple terms, a democracy is a dictatorship of the
majority, otherwise known as mob rule.

In the United States, we do not have a democracy. Educate
yourself on the fate of ancient Greece, and you'll
understand why.





Finally, a favorite saying of mine that I made up:

How many times in the history of mankind has a government
not abused a power that the people have given it?











SubjectSorry DK new Reply to this message
Posted byitchyNADZ
Posted on11/03/04 11:34 AM




Do you understand why the Electoral College was created in the first place?

Educate yourself on that first, and then educate yourself on the different
governmental systems and how they have fared throughout history.

I'm not being mean; I want you to become better informed before you
start making comments like "That whole electoral college shit is bullshit."

As for "This might be the second election in a row in wich (sic) the public
vote was eaten out by the electoral."

If the USA was a democracy, then I agree, but it is not; the USA is a representational republic.










SubjectSome states have more than others -nt- new Reply to this message
Posted bylux_92886
Posted on11/03/04 11:36 AM



> That whole electoral college shit is bullshit. This might be the second election
> in a row in wich the public vote was eaten out by the electoral.
>
>
> Gives us a kiss precious.
>



SubjectThanks for the correction, it's a shame your representatives don't know that... new Reply to this message
Posted byDeath Knight
Posted on11/03/04 11:46 AM



They ceartenly don't know what their own country is, given the constant missuse of the term democracy.

Hell, i wish we were less barbaric a race, then we might have a shot at a working state of Anarchy, but alas, that's an utopic dream.


PS. What the hell is the correct form to use in that "wich"? I always fuck that up. Checked dictionary.com and i'm still unsure how to spell/use that properly.


Gives us a kiss precious.


SubjectAt least the politcal comedy shows won't be dull for the next 4 years -nt- new Reply to this message
Posted byBuveed
Posted on11/03/04 11:51 AM



nt-nt- bt--nt-n-t-nt-n-tn-t-tn-




SubjectTeresa Hienz would have been great comedy Reply to this message
Posted byCereal Killer
Posted on11/03/04 12:13 PM



White trash bitch would have turned the White House into a reality show.




SubjectWhich *nt* new Reply to this message
Posted bywildcat
Posted on11/03/04 12:31 PM



> They ceartenly don't know what their own country is, given the constant missuse
> of the term democracy.
>
> Hell, i wish we were less barbaric a race, then we might have a shot at a
> working state of Anarchy, but alas, that's an utopic dream.
>
>
> PS. What the hell is the correct form to use in that "wich"? I always fuck that
> up. Checked dictionary.com and i'm still unsure how to spell/use that properly.
>
>
> Gives us a kiss precious.
>





SubjectThat's the damn one, thank you. NT Why do i always forget the H... new Reply to this message
Posted byDeath Knight
Posted on11/03/04 03:15 PM



I can never get that word right. That and while.


Gives us a kiss precious.


Subjectwhich -nT- new Reply to this message
Posted byitchyNADZ
Posted on11/03/04 04:08 PM



> They ceartenly don't know what their own country is, given the constant missuse
> of the term democracy.
>
> Hell, i wish we were less barbaric a race, then we might have a shot at a
> working state of Anarchy, but alas, that's an utopic dream.
>
>
> PS. What the hell is the correct form to use in that "wich"? I always fuck that
> up. Checked dictionary.com and i'm still unsure how to spell/use that properly.
>
>
> Gives us a kiss precious.
>



SubjectRe: bitch -nT- new Reply to this message
Posted byCereal Killer
Posted on11/03/04 04:53 PM



> > They ceartenly don't know what their own country is, given the constant
> missuse
> > of the term democracy.
> >
> > Hell, i wish we were less barbaric a race, then we might have a shot at a
> > working state of Anarchy, but alas, that's an utopic dream.
> >
> >
> > PS. What the hell is the correct form to use in that "wich"? I always fuck
> that
> > up. Checked dictionary.com and i'm still unsure how to spell/use that
> properly.
> >
> >
> > Gives us a kiss precious.
> >
>





Subjectuh? didn't Bush get more votes anyway? new Reply to this message
Posted bynewsdee
Posted on11/03/04 06:39 PM



Bush would have won even without the electoral college system, apparently, based on the number of votes I've seen reported...

I don't like the result but at least I appreciate the fact that the voter turnout was bigger, so according to my calculations Bush was elected by 30% of the voting population versus 25% last time. So this time it's more democratic. (calculations: voter turnout of 2000 was about 50%, apparently this time it was about 60%, so if Bush won by 50%, that means 25 and 30% of those that could have voted).









[download a life]


SubjectThis year he won both new Reply to this message
Posted byRyu_Saotome
Posted on11/03/04 11:53 PM



Versus Gore, he did not win the popular vote.


Am tired to hear that what is you point. mine its very clear sun. shit uuuuuuuuppppppppp - Dany




SubjectProbably because new Reply to this message
Posted bywildcat
Posted on11/04/04 09:07 AM



you don't say it "right." Nobody I've ever heard speak English, with the exception of English teachers, says "wh-" "right." Myself included. There's supposed to be more of a... whistling/whispering sound (for lack of a better term) than "w-" has. Most modern English speakers just substitute one for the other, saying "wich," "wile," and "wat" instead of "which," "while," and "what." And since you're non-native English (I assume), you're not used to the stupid little idiosyncracies of English in the same way that you'd be used to the stupid little idiosyncracies of Portuguese (I assume).

Check "Voiceless labial-velar fricative" and "Labial-velar approximant" on Wikipedia. Sounds are much better than descriptions of sounds.


Previous ThreadView All ThreadsNext Thread*Show in Threaded Mode