OT: Nostradamus on Bush

truffler1635 at my-deja.com truffler1635 at my-deja.com
Sat Dec 23 21:09:54 EST 2000

In article <3A43D850.3F4575BA at livingston.net>,
  dstaples at livingston.net wrote:
> Gore is on the books about his opinion of the law, and Bush used the law to
> win the presidency.  Get over it.
I don't think so.

Sometimes the law needs to be changed. That's one reason why the Civil
War took place, as you may remember. <G> Even if the Jefferson's Anti-
Slavery amendment failed by one vote: his.

The time to eliminate the Electoral College may well be now. When 200,000
votes nationwide are ignored, the value of the vote is questioned.

Using the law to win? Is that the _only_ thing you think matters!?! As
Ron Regan, son of former president Ronald Regan, stated: "He's probably
the least qualified person ever to be nominated by a major party...What
is his accomplishment? That he's no longer an obnoxious drunk?"

How can any American condone a candidate who skipped an entire year of
his Air Force service: a year which _STILL_ has not been accounted for.
He didn't even appear for his yearly physical. Anyone else who served in
the armed services would have been considered AWOL.

The piece of political brilliance explains his stupifying remark to
Glamour magazine: "Oh, I thought you said some band. The Taliban in
Afghanistan! Absolutely. Repressive."

BTW, all quotes in this opinion are from Newsweek, Dec. 25-Jan. 1, 2001.

This tall heap of mushroom substrate president? Perhaps "first in law,
first in funding, last in the hearts of his countrymen" would be a more
concise assessment.

BTW, I didn't think highly of either Gore or Nader either. But there was
little choice in voting for the millionaire of your choice this past

Daniel B. Wheeler

Sent via Deja.com

More information about the Ag-forst mailing list