Rioters Stab L.A. Times Reporter

By Paul Watson, Times Staff Writer

MOSUL, Iraq -- In the middle of a riot Tuesday, a group helping a man with a long, deep gash on his forehead asked whether I would photograph them. When I did, about 300 people rushed me, shouting, "American! American!"

As the mob approached, I saw that I had no escape. The only thing that kept them at bay

Your point?

Not every single one loves us.

Every country has it's idiots. We have liberals, Iraq has these guys.

And these guys.



This could turn out like the Hotel California.

Don't blame me though. I voted for the guy who got the most votes.





<!--EDIT|RochesterFalcon|Apr 16 2003, 07:47 PM-->

Rochester,,, you see, way back in Civics class they talked about this thing called the Electoral College. Read up on it. It is how it works. As far as everyone loving us,,,,,,,, show me where anyone said that. And I would not brag about voting for a loser. It makes you look bad.

nate jonesacc Wrote:Not every single one loves us.

Every country has it's idiots. We have liberals, Iraq has these guys.

Haha :laugh:

Gee, who is red again? I love looking at Florida on that map. :D

Even better........


I love it when the popular vote comes up. It just shows you how poorly the dems campaign was run. You play by the rules, and George out smarted the bearded one!!!!! See, look, down on the bottom right,,,,,,its Florida!!!!
271-270. Read them and weep little fella.

Rochester... every now and again you make a logical point... but when you bring up the election process... you lose all credibility you almost had.

Who won our county nate? And how did Bush lose California? According to rick's map, Bush won most of the counties.

What credibility am I losing? More people voted for Gore. It's a fact.

The electoral college is the system. Yes.

And... I don't like it. I admit it. The electoral college is outdated. It distorts the will of the people. And it ought to be replaced. In fact, if the electoral college wasn't in the constitution, it would have been declared unconstitutional by now.

Why? The electoral college defies the principle of one person, one vote. Small states are overrepresented in the college. Large states are underrepresented. In fact, Wyoming only has as many people as metropolitan Dayton. Yet it still gets three electoral college votes, which is close to triple the clout metropolitan Dayton has in presidental elections.

In order for the college to reflect the balance of population among the states, two electors would have to be subtracted from each state and the District of Columbia. Had that been the case, Gore would have won.

Essentially our Constitution forces this country unnaturally rightward. It does so with the electoral college. And it does so in the Senate, where a state about as siginficant as metropolitan Dayton gets as many senators as the entire state of New York.

The constitution favors small states. And these small states tend to be rural, conservative and -- as we can see on the maps above -- red.

I understand the constitutional compromise that produced our bicameral system. But I also recognize what many fail to see -- that the framers were not infalliable. We need look no further than the fact that our framers made a royal mess the first time they tried to draw up a constitution. Remember the Articles of Confederation? It was a disaster.

Essentially, our constitution is a second effort -- a second effort drawn up in an era of slavery, an era when people from Virginia called themselves Virginians and few people any where in these united states called themselves Americans.

It's a hell of a document. But it isn't perfect. (If it were, our Founding Fathers might have made a bit more clear what they had in mind with Amendment No. 2, for instance).

We live in a different age. In this day and age, an urban and suburban age, giving Wyoming as large a senate delegation as California makes only marginally more sense than giving Sault Sainte Marie the same clout as Detroit in the Michigan legislature. (And that, my friends, would be unconstitutional).

This is the reality: 50,996,582 voted for Al Gore and 50,456,062 voted for George Bush. It was close -- but Al Gore represented the will of the people, not George Bush.

Our constitution prevented the will of the people from being heard.

I have a problem with that, yes.



<!--EDIT|RochesterFalcon|Apr 16 2003, 11:00 PM-->

Cry me a river, liberal.

Ya know, if California were to have a really bad earthquake and indeed float away into the Pacific, we'd probably not have a liberal president for .... well.. damn . . . . A longgggggggggg time.

If, if, if....if my Aunt had nuts, she would be my uncle........Gore knew how the game was played,,,,,,and he lost. 271-270. Sucks, doesn't it?????? :laugh:

Quote:Cry me a river, liberal.

Who is crying here?

My proposition is simply this: The guy who gets the most votes ought to win the presidential election. This is hardly a radical idea.

Quote:Ya know, if California were to have a really bad earthquake and indeed float away into the Pacific, we'd probably not have a liberal president for .... well.. damn . . . . A longgggggggggg time.

We wouldn't have had Richard Nixon or Ronald Reagan either.

Gore was the will of the people.



<!--EDIT|RochesterFalcon|Apr 17 2003, 06:34 AM-->

Wrong...........gotta play by the rules. If he was not smart enough to figure that out, do you want him as President???

T_Monay...

Our county most def. voted for Gore.

Obviously Bush is president. Those were the rules.

But the fact that Bush is president shows the rules deserve scrutiny. The rules thwarted the will of the people. More than a half million more Americans voted for Gore. Gore was the will of the people. Not Bush.

I'd suggest what I proposed earlier: Subtract two electoral votes from each state and from Washington, D.C. Make the electoral college reflect the population. Right now it doesn't.

And, by the way...

Quote:Wrong...........gotta play by the rules. If he was not smart enough to figure that out, do you want him as President???

Anyone suggesting Bush could lick Gore in a smart contest might want to evaluate their own education.






<!--EDIT|RochesterFalcon|Apr 17 2003, 07:14 AM-->

Like I asked,,,,,,,,,,if he is not smart enough to figure out how to win with the way the system is set up,,,,,,,,is he smart enough to be the pres?

Still crying about that election are we?Would you be flaping your feathers about the electoral college if Gorleon had won?Seems to me when the libs are on the loosing end its because of that d*** constitution. :bang: