Republicans should be against a recount in MT and VA.

[TheGoodShepherd]

Let's see if members of this board who were vehemently against a recount in the Bush/Gore election of 2000 will be consistent and be against a recount in VA and Montana.


Will hypocrisy win the day with these posters.....or will their principles?

[rob on the job]

Let's see if members of this board who were vehemently against a recount in the Bush/Gore election of 2000 will be consistent and be against a recount in VA and Montana.


Will hypocrisy win the day with these posters.....or will their principles?

How many present-day Rangers were even here when the 2000 election took place, Chimp?

Talk about your strawmen.

[JLB]

Recounts are a necessary evil here sorry.

[JLB]

Let's see if members of this board who were vehemently against a recount in the Bush/Gore election of 2000 will be consistent and be against a recount in VA and Montana.


Will hypocrisy win the day with these posters.....or will their principles?



http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/153/919837~Ronald-Reagan-1911-2004-Cowboy-Hat-Posters.jpg

He would want a recount lol.

[Green Lantern]

Recounts are a necessary evil here sorry.

What is evil about a recount?

[Green Lantern]

http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/153/919837~Ronald-Reagan-1911-2004-Cowboy-Hat-Posters.jpg

He would want a recount lol.

Looks like he wants a Marlboro...

[TheGoodShepherd]

How many present-day Rangers were even here when the 2000 election took place, Chimp?

Talk about your strawmen.

Strawman? Nope sorry.

A lot of Rangers claimed they were against a recount in conversations that took place well after the election of 2000.

[twosheds]

If the gap of 1,600 votes remains constant, MT won't be eligible for a recount (what's the population of MT, btw? 1900? :D ), because the difference is more than 1%.

[JoeMama]

I have no problem if/when there is a recount.

That's part of the Democratic process.

But obviously the Republicans are total hypocrites. They adamently opposed a recount in FL back in 2000 when the difference in votes was about 500.

Here they're looking at a 7,000 vote deficit in VA & another substantial deficit in MT.

So sure, go for the recount. But I hope the Democrats hammer them for hypocrisy.

[TheGoodShepherd]

I have no problem if/when there is a recount.

That's part of the Democratic process.

But obviously the Republicans are total hypocrites. They adamently opposed a recount in FL back in 2000 when the difference in votes was about 500.

Here they're looking at a 7,000 vote deficit in VA & another substantial deficit in MT.

So sure, go for the recount. But I hope the Democrats hammer them for hypocrisy.


And my job is to expose the hypocrites here.

[Gibby]

We need a recount here, very closely monitored by both parties, because even though it won't aid the GOPers it will make everything nice and legal.

[JoeMama]

And my job is to expose the hypocrites here.

Which is necessary.

These bastards have short memories.

[rob on the job]

Strawman? Nope sorry.

A lot of Rangers claimed they were against a recount in conversations that took place well after the election of 2000.

Name 'em.

Consider this YOUR recount.

[TheGoodShepherd]

Name 'em.

Consider this YOUR recount.

Were you in favour of a recount in 2000? Yes or No?

What is your position on a recount of MT and VA?

[JLB]

If the gap of 1,600 votes remains constant, MT won't be eligible for a recount (what's the population of MT, btw? 1900? :D ), because the difference is more than 1%.


You've been watching exactly correct.

Burns is almost gone.

[rob on the job]

Were you in favour of a recount in 2000? Yes or No?

What is your position on a recount of MT and VA?

Don't dodge my question.

This is your thread. Your very first words in it were:

"Let's see if members of this board who were vehemently against a recount in the Bush/Gore election of 2000 will be consistent and be against a recount in VA and Montana."

And I am asking you which "members of this board who were vehemently against a recount in the Bush/Gore election of 2000" are you talking about.

Because if you can't name those people who vehemently opposed the 2000 recount, then this thread is just a strawman as well as being utter bullshit.

[TheGoodShepherd]

Don't dodge my question.

This is your thread. Your very first words in it were:

"Let's see if members of this board who were vehemently against a recount in the Bush/Gore election of 2000 will be consistent and be against a recount in VA and Montana."

And I am asking you which "members of this board who were vehemently against a recount in the Bush/Gore election of 2000" are you talking about.

Because if you can't name those people who vehemently opposed the 2000 recount, then this thread is just a strawman as well as being utter bullshit.

Were you in favour of a recount in 2000? Yes or No?

What is your position on a recount of MT and VA?

[rob on the job]

Were you in favour of a recount in 2000? Yes or No?

What is your position on a recount of MT and VA?

Again, answer the question I posed to you.

What Rangers posting here today were around and posting at the time of the 2000 general election?

[TheGoodShepherd]

Again, answer the question I posed to you.

What Rangers posting here today were around and posting at the time of the 2000 general election?

Were you in favour of a recount in 2000? Yes or No?

What is your position on a recount of MT and VA?

[rob on the job]

Were you in favour of a recount in 2000? Yes or No?

What is your position on a recount of MT and VA?

OK, everybody remember this thread.

Chimp started off with a statement, got challenged on it, and three times was asked to justify it.

His answer each time was to ask another question to divert attention.

This thread is spam.

[TheGoodShepherd]

OK, everybody remember this thread.

Chimp started off with a statement, got challenged on it, and three times was asked to justify it.

His answer each time was to ask another question to divert attention.

This thread is spam.

Are you threatning to send it to spam rob? Whatsa matter you don't want to go on the record here? This thread and its premise are completely justified.

LOL...you're such a freakin hypocrite.


PS Were you in favour of a recount in 2000? Yes or No?

What is your position on a recount of MT and VA?

[sukie]

Two new questions.

[TheGoodShepherd]

Two new questions.

Were you in favour of a recount in 2000? Yes or No?

What is your position on a recount of MT and VA?

[pmoon6]

And my job is to expose the hypocrites here.No, your job is to mow Shiva's lawn. Now get to it, son.

[rob on the job]

Are you threatning to send it to spam rob? Whatsa matter you don't want to go on the record here?

LOL...you're such a freakin hypocrite.


PS Were you in favour of a recount in 2000? Yes or No?

What is your position on a recount of MT and VA?

Chimp, give it up.

You were asked to defend your opening statement.

You have avoided it.

Why? Is it that hard to name the Rangers here today who opposed a recount in 2000?

Surely you must have somebody in mind when you typed that deathless opening post.

Name 'em.

I dare you.

And no, I'm not threatening to send this to spam. I just want everyone to know what this is in case you keep running away from naming the Rangers.

[sukie]

Were you in favour of a recount in 2000? Yes or No?

What is your position on a recount of MT and VA?

Your answer is in the other thread... Mr. Quizzinator.

[TheGoodShepherd]

Chimp, give it up.

You were asked to defend your opening statement.

You have avoided it.

Why? Is it that hard to name the Rangers here today who opposed a recount in 2000?

Surely you must have somebody in mind when you typed that deathless opening post.

Name 'em.

I dare you.

And no, I'm not threatening to send this to spam. I just want everyone to know what this is in case you keep running away from naming the Rangers.



Were you in favour of a recount in 2000? Yes or No?

What is your position on a recount of MT and VA?

[rob on the job]

Were you in favour of a recount in 2000? Yes or No?

What is your position on a recount of MT and VA?

"Let's see if members of this board who were vehemently against a recount in the Bush/Gore election of 2000 will be consistent and be against a recount in VA and Montana."

Who are they, Chimp?

Name your strawmen.

Who are the members of this board that you are talking about?

Name them.

You can run but you cannot hide.

[rob on the job]

http://sfj.abstractdynamics.org/archives/102104strawmanclimbing.JPG

[rob on the job]

http://www.hydrofrac.com/konglish/straw-man.jpg

[TheGoodShepherd]

"Let's see if members of this board who were vehemently against a recount in the Bush/Gore election of 2000 will be consistent and be against a recount in VA and Montana."

Who are they, Chimp?

Name your strawmen.

Who are the members of this board that you are talking about?

Name them.

You can run but you cannot hide.

Were you in favour of a recount in 2000? Yes or No?

What is your position on a recount of MT and VA?

[Gibby]

:popcorn:

[rob on the job]

A straw man argument is a logical fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "set up a straw man" or "set up a straw-man argument" is to create a position that is easy to refute, then attribute that position to the opponent. A straw-man argument can be a successful rhetorical technique (that is, it may succeed in persuading people) but it is in fact misleading, because the opponent's actual argument has not been refuted.

link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

[TheGoodShepherd]

A straw man argument is a logical fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "set up a straw man" or "set up a straw-man argument" is to create a position that is easy to refute, then attribute that position to the opponent. A straw-man argument can be a successful rhetorical technique (that is, it may succeed in persuading people) but it is in fact misleading, because the opponent's actual argument has not been refuted.

link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

You do ralize the strawmen fallacy doesn't apply to this thread don't you rob?

Were you in favour of a recount in 2000? Yes or No?

What is your position on a recount of MT and VA?

[rob on the job]

Name the names, bright boy.

[TheGoodShepherd]

Name the names, bright boy.

Were you in favour of a recount in 2000? Yes or No?

What is your position on a recount of MT and VA?

[rob on the job]

Were you in favour of a recount in 2000? Yes or No?

What is your position on a recount of MT and VA?

You're a joke.

[sukie]

Tos violation... multiple duplicate postings

[TheGoodShepherd]

You're a joke.

Were you in favour of a recount in 2000? Yes or No?

What is your position on a recount of MT and VA?

[Green Lantern]

Name the names, bright boy.

I think he wants people to step up and name themselves.

Do you read his first post as, people who were posting these opinions on the Buffalo Range in 2000? I read it as, people who are on the Range now who were against a recount.

Just a thought.

[pmoon6]

Were you in favour of a recount in 2000? Yes or No?

What is your position on a recount of MT and VA?How many beans in a pound, Chimp?

[sukie]

What does the laws in each state must happen? That's the way it goes.

[ckg68]

If the gap of 1,600 votes remains constant, MT won't be eligible for a recount (what's the population of MT, btw? 1900? :D ), because the difference is more than 1%.

Exactly. IIRC,there has to be a .25% difference for the recount thing to kick in.

Virginia is a different story. If it's within .5%,it's an automatic recount and the state pays for it. From .5 to 1%,the losing candidate can ask for one,BUT they have to pay for it.

[rob on the job]

I think he wants people to step up and name themselves.

Do you read his first post as, people who were posting these opinions on the Buffalo Range in 2000? I read it as, people who are on the Range now who were against a recount.

Just a thought.

And a good thought it is, Aqua -- unfortunately, Chimp doesn't feel the need to clarify anything he posts.

Considering his extreme reluctance, it's obvious that he is talking about people who posted the anti-recount opinions back in 2000, when Chimp was here.

Chimp is extremely proud of being one of the first Rangers, you know.

[sukie]

What was he... 12-13?

[Green Lantern]

And a good thought it is, Aqua -- unfortunately, Chimp doesn't feel the need to clarify anything he posts.

Considering his extreme reluctance, it's obvious that he is talking about people who posted the anti-recount opinions back in 2000, when Chimp was here.

Chimp is extremely proud of being one of the first Rangers, you know.

Yikes! I didn't know he was that old.

[sukie]

Oh you'll get a clarification after he calls you a liar three times and that will take place midway through page 4 of this thread.

[pmoon6]

Oh you'll get a clarification after he calls you a liar three times and that will take place midway through page 4 of this thread.Don't forget, he'll also try to tie racism in with it.

[Ralonzo]

But obviously the Republicans are total hypocrites. They adamently opposed a recount in FL back in 2000 when the difference in votes was about 500.

Here they're looking at a 7,000 vote deficit in VA & another substantial deficit in MT.

So sure, go for the recount. But I hope the Democrats hammer them for hypocrisy.

Nice try, but some of us can remember what actually happened.

The opposition wasn't to the fact that there was a recount in Florida. That was going to happen regardless, and should have happened regardless. The opposition occured when Democrat trial lawyers were going to Democrat judges in order to selectively apply a "new" recount process for the election boards in Democrat-heavy districts like Dade and Broward. That's where we got things like "hanging chads", "dimpled chads", and the like. In other words, Democrat hacks in Democrats precincts trying to find any way possible to justify their divination of "voter intent" to manufacture the necessary votes. That was the entirety of the controversy, and that's what the Supreme Court put the kibosh on, and rightly so, since A) you cannot change the law and the process post facto, and B) you cannot selectively apply standards in some regions and not others. It's been spun as something entirely different since then of course.

Mainstream media is not nearly done carrying water for the Dems as evidenced by Webb's apparent win, which was largely a result of Webb saying nothing and letting the Washington Post fire daily mortar rounds at Allen on the front page. That's a fairly disturbing result. There will be a recount in Virginia at least - that race is close enough to justify by any empirical measure - although I expect it to change nothing.

[ckg68]

Here's a summary of what's going to go down if Allen decides to contest the vote...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061108/ap_on_el_se/va_eln_virginia_senate_9

The recount couldn't even START until after Thanksgiving. And each side has 10 days from when it starts to request it.

Basically,the decision will be made by about the time the seat comes up again in 2012.

So think about it. Do the Republicans of 2006 want to be seen as(as Ralonzo sees it)the Democrats of 2000?

[rob on the job]

... Basically,the decision will be made by about the time the seat comes up again in 2012. ...

At which point, Chimp will badger the Rangers of 2012 about those who opposed the Great Recount of 2006 as well as 2000.

[TheGoodShepherd]

At which point, Chimp will badger the Rangers of 2012 about those who opposed the Great Recount of 2006 as well as 2000.


Still won't answer will you rob?

Were you in favour of a recount in 2000? Yes or No?

What is your position on a recount of MT and VA?

[JLB]

Chimp your new avatar excellent.

What happened to the monkey?

Did he pass slutland can be tough.

[Ralonzo]

So think about it. Do the Republicans of 2006 want to be seen as(as Ralonzo sees it)the Democrats of 2000?

What in the world are you talking about? When the margin is something on the order of .01 percent, the recount is a no-brainer. Just let the process work as the law stipulates. The Republicans would have to do at least the following to be seen as the Democrats of 2000:

1) Send lawyers in to try to get the recount process changed.
2) Refuse to accept the findings of the recount.
3) Protest in the streets.
4) Whine about "disenfranchisement" and "racism".
5) Bitch and moan for the next 6 years about the "illegitimate" Senator.

Somehow, I don't think that's gonna happen.

[JoeMama]

Nice try, but some of us can remember what actually happened.

The opposition wasn't to the fact that there was a recount in Florida. That was going to happen regardless, and should have happened regardless. The opposition occured when Democrat trial lawyers were going to Democrat judges in order to selectively apply a "new" recount process for the election boards in Democrat-heavy districts like Dade and Broward. That's where we got things like "hanging chads", "dimpled chads", and the like. In other words, Democrat hacks in Democrats precincts trying to find any way possibly to justify their divination of "voter intent" to manufacture the necessary votes. That was the entirety of the controversy, and that's what the Supreme Court put the kibosh on, and rightly so, since A) you cannot change the law and the process post facto, and B) you cannot selectively apply standards in some regions and not others. It's been spun as something entirely different since then of course.

LOL!

Nice spin job.

The standards issue was the reason the Supreme Court decided to close the recount. It had nothing to do with the original opposition to the recount itself.

Mind you, the Florida State Supreme Court OK'd the recount before the federal gov't intervened & imposed itself in a fashion completely contemptuous toward states' rights.

The recount was completely warranted since the margin of victory was well within 1% at a difference of 537 votes.

And even at an individual level, the vast majority of Republicans in this state, as indicated by the polls, opposed a recount for reasons unrelated to "differing county standards." Mostly, people just considered the recount knuckdragging.

I live in Florida. I voted in the election. I know what happened.

Nice attempt at spin, but save it for someone one of your ignorant Republican buddies that might actually buy it.

Mainstream media is not nearly done carrying water for the Dems as evidenced by Webb's apparent win, which was largely a result of Webb saying nothing and letting the Washington Post their fire daily mortar rounds at Allen. That's a fairly disturbing result. There will be a recount in Virginia at least - that race is close enough to justify by any empirical measure - although I expect it to change nothing.

LOL!

Cry me a river.

The mainstream media gave Bush his Iraq War, his PATRIOT Act, his Faith Based Initiatives, pretty much anything he wanted. So don't give me this overwrought nonsense that the mainstream media is liberal.

I love when these self-fashioned Republican individualists embrace victimhood like a bunch of pussies.

[JLB]

Were you in favour of a recount in 2000? Yes or No?


Were you?
Are you now?

[TheGoodShepherd]

Were you?
Are you now?

Yes I was. Yes I am.


Will you and rob now be men and answer the question now?

[Green Lantern]

Were you?
Are you now?

Oh, yeah?

Well, my Senator can kick your Senator's ass!

[Jro]

recounts are part of the system. It's built in. It was the hanging chads and talks of re-voting that the republicans were against.

[TheGoodShepherd]

recounts are part of the system. It's built in. It was the hanging chads and talks of re-voting that the republicans were against.


You were against a recount. I know you were.

[JoeMama]

There were a handful of members on BBI that opposed the FL recount.

I wish I could remember them by name, but I can't.

What's unfortunate is that the FL recount was debated a few times between 2001-2002 when all PR&S material was grouped in with the Asylum.

However, none of those threads are any longer in the BBI archives since the system crashed a few years ago & most of them were deleted.

[TheGoodShepherd]

There were a handful of members on BBI that opposed the FL recount.

I wish I could remember them by name, but I can't.

What's unfortunate is that the FL recount was debated a few times between 2001-2002 when all PR&S material was grouped in with the Asylum.

However, none of those threads are any longer in the BBI archives since the system crashed a few years ago & most of them were deleted.

Oh. I can remember some names. freedomfrypizza, JRO...

[JoeMama]

Oh. I can remember some names. freedomfrypizza, JRO...

Oh, there were plenty.

And isn't it funny that the Republicans on this board refuse to confront the double standard on this issue?

Or even acknowledge their own stance on the FL recount?

Interesting.

Ralonzo made a nice attempt to spin it, but he's about the only one even trying.

[Mouldsie]

A straw man argument is a logical fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "set up a straw man" or "set up a straw-man argument" is to create a position that is easy to refute, then attribute that position to the opponent. A straw-man argument can be a successful rhetorical technique (that is, it may succeed in persuading people) but it is in fact misleading, because the opponent's actual argument has not been refuted.

link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

wowowowowowowowowowowowowowowowowoowowowowowowowow ow

[TheGoodShepherd]

Oh, there were plenty.

And isn't it funny that the Republicans on this board refuse to confront the double standard on this issue?

Or even acknowledge their own stance on the FL recount?

Interesting.

Ralonzo made a nice attempt to spin it, but he's about the only one even trying.

You mean like robonthejob....LOL....I know. You can so tell his posts stink of wussy. You see how mad he got?


LOL at robonthejob.

[Jro]

You were against a recount. I know you were.
Why would i be against a recount if bush won every single one of them? He got more votes! Face it! Let it go!

[TheGoodShepherd]

wowowowowowowowowowowowowowowowowoowowowowowowowow ow



You know what's funny? The fallcy rob pointed doesn't even apply to this thread. Why?

Well for starters, I never named anyone specifically in the openeing thread. But than again, Robonthejob's reading comprehension skills have always been atrocious.

[TheGoodShepherd]

Why would i be against a recount if bush won every single one of them? He got more votes! Face it! Let it go!

You were against the Florida supreme court ordering a recount. You were for the supreme court stopping it. Don't lie.

[Jro]

No, not at all. Get your facts straight.

[TheGoodShepherd]

No, not at all. Get your facts straight.

Yes you were. Stop lying.

[rob on the job]

You were against a recount. I know you were.

Good.

At long last, Chimp names someone.

Jro is on Chimp's list of people who posted against a recount back in 2000.

Wait a minute ... Jro didn't join until 2003.

Try again, Chimp.

[rob on the job]

Oh. I can remember some names. freedomfrypizza, JRO...

FreedomFry didn't join until 2002. Jro joined a year later.

They certainly didn't post at the time of the 2000 election, and if they posted years after the fact, you haven't shown any proof.

[TheGoodShepherd]

FreedomFry didn't join until 2002. Jro joined a year later.

They certainly didn't post at the time of the 2000 election, and if they posted years after the fact, you haven't shown any proof.

Ahhhh. More of your atrocious reading skiils prominently displayed for all to see. I never said he was here in 2000. Not at all. Or that he even said it during the election.

He said it in threads long after the 2000 election. JRO made his position very clear.

And like Joemama said. A lot of the threads were deleted.


Are you gonna stop pussyfooting and answer the question rob?

[rob on the job]

... He said it in threads long after the 2000 election. JRO made his position very clear.

And like Joemama said. A lot of the threads were deleted. ...

Gosh, you should have explained early on in this thread that you were talking about statements made in, say, 2002-2004.

And as for the threads being deleted, that's very convenient for you, isn't it?

Still, you don't have any proof about what anybody said other than your memory.

[Jro]

He used to annoy me now it's just funny.

[TheGoodShepherd]

Gosh, you should have explained early on in this thread that you were talking about statements made in, say, 2002-2004.

And as for the threads being deleted, that's very convenient for you, isn't it?

Still, you don't have any proof about what anybody said other than your memory.


I did explain it early on. Its your reading skills that are killing you. Not me.

[rob on the job]

He used to annoy me now it's just funny.

Jro, do you mean funny as in fart-joke funny, or funny as in someone who isn't right in the head?

[Jro]

I'm still waiting for him to link to one of my posts.

[JoeMama]

So it boils down to plausible deniability.

"There's no proof that anyone on BBI opposed the FL recount, therefore everyone gets a free pass for supporting a VA &/or MT recount!"

Cute stuff.

[TheGoodShepherd]

Gosh, you should have explained early on in this thread that you were talking about statements made in, say, 2002-2004.

And as for the threads being deleted, that's very convenient for you, isn't it?

Still, you don't have any proof about what anybody said other than your memory.


Are you going to answer the questions robby? Are you for a recount in VA. Were you against a recount in 2000?


And dont forget the memory of about a dozen other posters.

[rob on the job]

I did explain it early on. Its your reading skills that are killing you. Not me.

So where is your proof about what FreedomFry and Jro said?

[TheGoodShepherd]

So it boils down to plausible deniability.

"There's no proof that anyone on BBI opposed the FL recount, therefore everyone gets a free pass for supporting a VA &/or MT recount!"

Cute stuff.


Joe. Rob has the most stupid idiotic arguments ever. His freakin face is covered in egg right now. Why do you think he is acting the way he is right now?


LOL its so pathetic.....I love how he is saying because I dont have proof no one was against recount.....how utterly stupid...LOL

[Jro]

Jro, do you mean funny as in fart-joke funny, or funny as in someone who isn't right in the head?
You already know the answer to this. :)

[Jro]

It's not a matter of finding a post were i was against it. I KNOW what i felt back then and i WASN'T against it.

I'm done with this thread.

PS: Again, bush won all recounts.

[JoeMama]

It's funny, just the other day I was lamenting the loss of those archives.

I wrote this huge thread about the Iraq War prior to the invasion where I laid out a number of reasons why it would be a huge mistake.

I really wish I could reference it because at least three or four of those points turned out to be eerily accurate.

[rob on the job]

Joe. Rob has the most stupid idiotic arguments ever. His freakin face is covered in egg right now. Why do you think he is acting the way he is right now?


LOL its so pathetic.....I love how he is saying because I dont have proof no one was against recount.....how utterly stupid...LOL

I guess Jro just demolished your argument, Chimp.

So sorry.

[TheGoodShepherd]

It's not a matter of finding a post were i was against it. I KNOW what i felt back then and i WASN'T against it.

I'm done with this thread.

PS: Again, bush won all recounts.

You were against the Florida supreme court's order of a recount. You were for the Supreme Court's order halting the recount.

Plain and simple.

[rob on the job]

It's funny, just the other day I was lamenting the loss of those archives.

I wrote this huge thread about the Iraq War prior to the invasion where I laid out a number of reasons why it would be a huge mistake.

I really wish I could reference it because a few of them turned out to be eerily accurate.

It really is too bad that we have lost all the archives.

I'm sure some nitwit out there will think it was done to hide something.

[pmoon6]

Joe. Rob has the most stupid idiotic arguments ever. His freakin face is covered in egg right now. Why do you think he is acting the way he is right now?Why do you have to enlist the help of others. Can't stand on your own, Sonny Jim?

And that's a vieled attack, Mr. Defender of the TOS, but I guess you only invoke it when it suits you.

Hypocrite.

[rob on the job]

You were against the Florida supreme court's order of a recount. You were for the Supreme Court's order halting the recount.

Plain and simple.

Prove it.

Until you prove it, I'll take Jro's word over your memory.

[TheGoodShepherd]

I guess Jro just demolished your argument, Chimp.

So sorry.

And he still doesn't answer the question!!!

Jro demolished nothing. He's lying.

[TheGoodShepherd]

Why do you have to enlist the help of others. Can't stand on your own, Sonny Jim?

And that's a vieled attack, Mr. Defender of the TOS, but I guess you only invoke it when it suits you.

Hypocrite.

LOL...saying his argument is stupid and idiotic is not a veild attack. And therefore not a TOS violation. Sorry try again.

[TheGoodShepherd]

Prove it.

Until you prove it, I'll take Jro's word over your memory.

Why are you refusing to answer the question rob?

Were you for a recount in 2000? Are you in favour of a recount now? Why wont you address the question?

[rob on the job]

... Are you for a recount in VA. Were you against a recount in 2000?

And dont forget the memory of about a dozen other posters.

OK, here goes:

1) I was in favor of a recount in 2000. If you don't believe me, look it up.

2) I really don't care about Virginia. If they want to foot the bill for a recount, or if they feel one is necessary, then have at it.

[JoeMama]

It really is too bad that we have lost all the archives.

I'm sure some nitwit out there will think it was done to hide something.

Somwhere between 4,500 - 5,000 of my posts were deleted when the archives went under.

Which is actually a good thing because it lowers my post count & makes it appear I have a life outside of an internet forum.

[Jro]

We both are for the recount. and always have been.

Why is this hard to understand?

[TheGoodShepherd]

OK, here goes:

1) I was in favor of a recount in 2000. If you don't believe me, look it up.

2) I really don't care about Virginia. If they want to foot the bill for a recount, or if they feel one is necessary, then have at it.

That wasn't so hard was it?


And if I dont find it....I'll assume it never occurred....I mean if I use your logic that is....LOL

[pmoon6]

It's funny, just the other day I was lamenting the loss of those archives.

I wrote this huge thread about the Iraq War prior to the invasion where I laid out a number of reasons why it would be a huge mistake.

I really wish I could reference it because at least three or four of those points turned out to be eerily accurate.That post would be nice to have so the newer members could read it.

Some of us remember it and you were dead on.

Not that you care, but you may out distance Chimpy as resident sage.:D

[TheGoodShepherd]

We both are for the recount. and always have been.

Why is this hard to understand?

You were against the Florida supreme court's order of a recount. You were for the Supreme Court's order halting the recount.

Plain and simple.

[TheGoodShepherd]

That post would be nice to have so the newer members could read it.

Some of us remember it and you were dead on.

Not that you care, but you may out distance Chimpy as resident sage.:D

He doesn't outrank me. And I made an amazing post before the invasion which was deleted. It outlined how Iraq would descend into a quagmire.

[JLB]

Yes I was. Yes I am.


Will you and rob now be men and answer the question now?

Yes I was and Yes I am.

[rob on the job]

That wasn't so hard was it?

And if I dont find it....I'll assume it never occurred....I mean if I use your logic that is....LOL

Hey, I was just waiting for you to cave and name names.

And you did. And the person you named -- Jro -- turned around and flat-out called you a liar.

It was a great moment on La Range.

[JoeMama]

That post would be nice to have so the newer members could read it.

Some of us remember it and you were dead on.

Not that you care, but you may out distance Chimpy as resident sage.:D

LOL

Eh, I got lucky.

That's really the only issue where I've ever predicted political fallout with any degree of success.

[pmoon6]

He doesn't outrank me. And I made an amazing post before the invasion which was deleted. It outlined how Iraq would descend into a quagmire.I don't remember it, therefore it never existed.

You may have posted it using one of your many characters.

[JLB]

Hey, I was just waiting for you to cave and name names.

And you did. And the person you named -- Jro -- turned around and flat-out called you a liar.

It was a great moment on La Range.

Rob you used trickery lol.

Mr. Smooth!!

[TheGoodShepherd]

Hey, I was just waiting for you to cave and name names.

And you did. And the person you named -- Jro -- turned around and flat-out called you a liar.

It was a great moment on La Range.

LOL...at the fact you believe JRO....LOL

[rob on the job]

... And I made an amazing post before the invasion which was deleted. It outlined how Iraq would descend into a quagmire.

I REMEMBER THIS!!!

IT WAS FREAKING AMAZING!!!

IT WAS LIKE CHIMP WAS SOME KIND OF FORTUNE-TELLER OR SOMETHING!!!

http://www.oldmilltoronto.com/Pics/Fortune%20teller.gif

[TheGoodShepherd]

I REMEMBER THIS!!!

IT WAS FREAKING AMAZING!!!

IT WAS LIKE CHIMP WAS SOME KIND OF FORTUNE-TELLER OR SOMETHING!!!

http://www.oldmilltoronto.com/Pics/Fortune%20teller.gif

Obviously you did not see my Packers/Bills predictions

[rob on the job]

Obviously you did not see my Packers/Bills predictions

One of an astonishing six predictions in eight tries in which you were not totally wrong!

[sukie]

I love it when JRO does a fly by and bitch slaps a canadian.

[JoeMama]

I love it when JRO does a fly by and bitch slaps a canadian.

Actually, Jro & Chimp would make for a good fistfight.

They're both roughly the same age & probably measure up pretty equally physically.

As a boxing fan, I think they'd match up well.

But Chimp probably has the reach advantage, so I'll take him on points. No way Jro beats that long jab.