Number 4 from the top is Soviet Marshal Aleksandr Vasilevsky.
Stanley
-
George Bush goes to a primary school to talk to the kids to get a little
public relations exposure. After his talk he offers question time.One little boy puts up his hand and George asks him his name.
“Stanley,” responds the little boy.
“And what is your question, Stanley?”
“I have 3 questions. First, why did the USA invade Iraq without the
support of the UN? Second, why are you President when Al Gore got more
votes? And third, whatever happened to Osama Bin Laden?”Just then, the bell rings for recess.
George Bush informs the kiddies that they will continue after recess.
When they resume George says, “OK, where were we? Oh, that’s right,
question time. Who has a question?”A little girl puts up her hand. George points her out and asks her name.
“Stephanie,” she responds.
“And what is your question, Stephanie?”
“Actually, I have 5 questions. First, why did the USA invade Iraq
without the support of the UN? Second, why are you President when Al
Gore got more votes? Third, whatever happened to Osama Bin Laden?
Fourth, why did the recess bells go off 20 minutes early? And fifth,
what the hell happened to Stanley?” -
True Story?
-
I seriously doubt it :-D
-
Funny, in a look over your shoulder sort of way. :wink:
-
@ncscswitch:
Second, why are you President when Al Gore got more
votes?"why does the un and other nations consider him the president and not some rougue leader. what would be say if iraq’s prime minister was elected like that or any other country(except china and us). this nation was founded on democracy and is as if not more important today than it was in 1776.
-
@ncscswitch:
Second, why are you President when Al Gore got more
  votes?"why does the un and other nations consider him the president and not some rougue leader. what would be say if iraq’s prime minister was elected like that or any other country(except china and us). this nation was founded on democracy and is as if not more important today than it was in 1776.
good point - especially the bit about use of US troops in Grenada.
Still, your constitution dictates the use of the electoral college as that which defines the “people’s choice” of your president. I guess you kind of have more of an oligarchy than a democracy . . . . If you had not followed your constitution and just went with whoever was more popular, well, you wouldn’t be in Iraq now - that’s a good thing, right?
-
Um I’m pretty sure Al Gore conceded.
-
Um I’m pretty sure Al Gore conceded.
so throw his ass in jail for treson if he refuses. i don’t he should have been president. what we need is a simple majoity democracy(represenitive of course) i don’t personally like gore but is better than bush.
-
Yeah I don’t understand the whole electoral college thing. Seems kinda dumb. I think direct democracy would be best. just like the swiss
-
Yeah I don’t understand the whole electoral college thing. Seems kinda dumb. I think direct democracy would be best. just like the swiss
its impossible to have everyone vote all the time. you are right about the electral college.
-
I’m not sure if it’s mandatory to vote about everything but it better represents what the people and if they realy feel strongly about something I’m sure they would vote.
-
I’m not sure if it’s mandatory to vote about everything but it better represents what the people and if they realy feel strongly about something I’m sure they would vote.
Canadians are looking into this kind of thing, and afair this occurs in Australia.
With the electoral college - what would be the point in mandatory voting anyway? -
@ncscswitch:
Second, why are you President when Al Gore got more
  votes?"why does the un and other nations consider him the president and not some rougue leader. what would be say if iraq’s prime minister was elected like that or any other country(except china and us). this nation was founded on democracy and is as if not more important today than it was in 1776.
You’ve got to be kidding… If you don’t like the way our government operates write your ccongressmen You may not understand the electoral college, but that doesn’tean it doesn’t have a purpose. Democracy doesn’t mean that everyone gets what they want.
BTW, I thought the concept of the joke was funny, but the questions where a bit ignorant. ;)
-
Majority should win, not the college. That was created when people (wealthy white men) from every state could not see the candidates for themselves, therefore could not vote accordingly.
-
Um I’m pretty sure Al Gore conceded.
Yes he did, just before he unconceeded. Only person in history to surrender then unsurrender all within 24 hours!
-
Majority should win, not the college. That was created when people (wealthy white men) from every state could not see the candidates for themselves, therefore could not vote accordingly.
That’s not realy the point. The US is a confederation of states and each state in proportion to it’s population votes for president. If we went with popular vote, people in Wyoming could just stay home on election day, because There is absolutely no way they could make a difference in the election. You may think it’s a good idea, but I don’t want California and New York making the poitical decisions for Arizona. If you look a little deaper and a little more objectively you can see that our political system has purpose.
-
Majority should win, not the college. That was created when people (wealthy white men) from every state could not see the candidates for themselves, therefore could not vote accordingly.
That’s not realy the point. The US is a confederation of states and each state in proportion to it’s population votes for president. If we went with popular vote, people in Wyoming could just stay home on election day, because There is absolutely no way they could make a difference in the election. You may think it’s a good idea, but I don’t want California and New York making the poitical decisions for Arizona. If you look a little deaper and a little more objectively you can see that our political system has purpose.
I disagree. Popular vote can and should be done. As it is now, it doesn’t matter if I vote or not, and if do, whom I vote for. If we had elections by popular vote, people voting in Wyoming WOULD matter more. You’d also not have a winner takes all scenario for each state, which is why someone can achieve the popular vote but not ultimately win the presidency. More importantly, there are ranking voting systems that would work much better than a single vote for a single candidate. Honestly, you have more impact on local elections - presidential elections are somewhat a scam.
-
Jermo, that is part of the shift that has occured in the US AWAY from semi-soverign states and more to a single National government.
That was NOT the intent of the founders, but has been creeping in.
The Civil War was a big hit on teh Federation. Direct taxation of hte populace was HUGE. Loss of state selection of Senators sealed our fate.
-
@ncscswitch:
Jermo, that is part of the shift that has occured in the US AWAY from semi-soverign states and more to a single National government.
That was NOT the intent of the founders, but has been creeping in.
The Civil War was a big hit on teh Federation. Direct taxation of hte populace was HUGE. Loss of state selection of Senators sealed our fate.
I’m just commenting on the presidential election. Honestly, it’s a joke. We have the ability to make it democratic, and I think we should do so. I’m not saying to strip states’ rights.
-
im ffine with the electoral college i don’t think it should be winnner take all. How would they round that then?
Suggested Topics
