2000 Election Protesters / Schiavo Protesters, what's the difference?

[valvano]

Can somebody explain the difference? Both groups were wack jobs who refused to accept the decisions rendered down by our judicial systems, both controled by bigger powers looking to exploit the situation for political gain.

[QueenAdrock]

Sure, the 2000 elections were rigged. The Republicans had people flown to Florida to go and protest, and the person in charge of the re-count was a Bush crony. It was a difference of 500 damn votes, and there was evidence of fraud, and evidence of not allowing African-Americans to vote, who typically vote democrat. And plus, Gore DID win the popular vote, he "didn't" win Florida by 500 votes, and that was very suspicious. The people protesting the judicial decision were not "wack-jobs" they had good reason to protest, solid facts that they brought forth of fraud and cheating from the right-wing.

The Schiavo protestors simply protested because it's what God wants them to do.

The end.

[bb_bboy]

Most protesters are nuttier than a Snickers. I would rather sit back and watch my convictions be trampled upon.

[valvano]

Hey little Gary Williams,

Your but this and but that arguement sounds just like somethign the Schiavo folks would say, just fill in the blanks:


Even though ________________ it should have been _____________. They ignored __________________ and the courts screwed up by ________________. The ______ wing media then reports it as the truth. The true count was ______________.

:rolleyes:

[QueenAdrock]

Hmm..what did they ignore in the Terry Schiavo case? Evidence? Well, yeah that's true - the evidence in the Schiavo case is that she was blind, and she has been proven to be a vegetable. Oh wait, that's not evidence in their favor. I guess they have none.

And I never said the courts screwed up. I may not agree with the court's decision for the 2000 election, but I accept it.

The differences between the two is that one is motivated by fact and evidence of fraud, the other is motivated by "god's will".

And, there was political motivation on both sides of the 2000 elections, and political motivation for the right-wing for Schiavo.

And Maryland basketball can blow me. So can the other sports teams. My avatar is because I'm proud to be getting my education from there. But I doubt you'd understand.

[valvano]

2 of my best friend here at my office are Terps.... I love all my fellow ACC alums, except for Tarholes...


back to point, if you could step back and look at yourself you sound just like a bible thumper save schaivo freak.

[QueenAdrock]

Actually, no I don't. I am not a protestor. But I am telling you why the 2000 election protestors are different from Schiavo protestors. The 2000 protestors had ample evidence to support their argument, other than just "faith". They were also trying to keep Satan out of office, whereas the Schiavo protestors were trying to keep a brain-dead woman out of eternal peace. Makes sense.

[valvano]

The Schiavo folks have ample people to support their evidence, other doctors, neurologist, etc. They aren't all arguing on religious principles...

And you see, when you refer to Bush as Satan, that right there shows you have taken a personal stake in it, just as the Schiavo fools. Its not like you are argueing over which day Mantle hit the homerun out of old Griffith Stadium in DC.

[STANKY808]

One group was protesting something that affected the whole country and every citizen.

The other group was protesting something that was none of their business. It was a family matter period.

[QueenAdrock]

The Schiavo folks have ample people to support their evidence, other doctors, neurologist, etc. They aren't all arguing on religious principles...

And you see, when you refer to Bush as Satan, that right there shows you have taken a personal stake in it, just as the Schiavo fools. Its not like you are argueing over which day Mantle hit the homerun out of old Griffith Stadium in DC.

How do I have personal "stake" in the 2000 election results, if I've said in a previous post of mine, that I may not agree with the court's decision, but I accept it? I do believe Bush is Satan, but that has nothing to do with what we're arguing. You're arguing that the 2000 protestors are as bad as the Schiavo protestors, and I disagree. And then for some reason, by me saying that I do not believe they are the same, you chalk me up to being one of the protestors. Nice try, but you can't call me the same as a bible thumper if I do not bible thump. Sorry.

The people for the Schiavo case that had "evidence" were incredibly biased. It was shit like "she looked at a Mickey Mouse balloon and smiled," which is not evidence of conscious brain activity as much as it is human emotion and wanting to believe it meant something. They WISHED they had evidence, but in retrospect, all the "evidence" that they had hoped for turned out to be BS - it's been proven that she was blind and brain-dead.

The evidence of voter fraud to this day goes unchallenged.