what really happend in Florida
On December 12th, 2000, in a 5-4 decision, the U. S. Supreme Court put an end to the recounting of presidential votes in Florida, thus assuring that George W. Bush would win the election. This action allowed the five judges to steal the election from U.S. citizens and simply hand the presidency over to Bush, a conservative Rethuglican like the five judges. It was also treasonous. The five injustices are criminals in the very truest sense of the word, and have exhibited the morals of an alley cat. The Florida recount, claimed the Court, was invalid because it violated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment; as different counties used different methods for determining voter intent, voters were being treated unequally. This justification does not stand up to scrutiny - it is an incorrect and unprecedented use of the equal protection clause, feebly applied and argued, and was simply the best excuse the Court majority could come up with. It is now well known that by bringing the Supreme Court into the election, the President was not chosen by the good citizens of America - the President was chosen by those five corrupt justices. Bush stole the Florida election with the help of his brother Jeb, who prevented minorities from voting, allowed defective machines in Democratic neighborhoods, and allowed the counting of illegal absentee ballots. In addition to this, George Bush got his Republican cronies on the U.S. Supreme Court to stop a manual count of 180,000 uncounted ballots. Bush only occupies the White House only because his brother Jeb, the Governor of Florida, stopped thousands of Democrats from voting - and because a narrow Republican majority of the U.S. Supreme Court prevented the counting of 180,000 uncounted votes. After an unofficial recount of all votes, conducted by several media organizations, it was found that if every county in Florida - not just the wealthy Rethuglican ones - had up-to-date voting machines that allowed voters to correct their mistakes, Al Gore would have won by 46,466. Bush lost Florida by at least several hundred verifiable, legal votes. This means that he was not entitled to Florida's twenty-five electors when the Electoral College met on December 18, 2000. What's more, George Bush had rethuglican officials bribed to shut down the Miami-Dade recount. Click here for proof. Plus, before the election, Bush was arrested on various occasions and has a number of convictions and offences, and has even appeared in court concerning these. Click here for proof. What a difference a year makes. When President Bush took office, we had the strongest economy in the nation's history and the largest budget surpluses in a generation. Today, the economy is slowly recovering from recession and unemployment keeps getting higher. Millions of US citizens are currently unemployed, there is a massive $4 trillion+ deficit in the economy, and this is all thanks to the criminal who is acting as president. Should Bush be president? The answer is no, definitely not. Bush is an irresponsible, ignorant, arrogant, misguided half-deranged fool with minimal intelligence and a maximum dependence on others, whose philosophy is "the only thing that matters is what me and my daddy wants" - this person is not fit to serve the American People! Look at the damage Bush has already done to the American Economy. Under Bill Clinton, the economy was absolutely thriving and was in massive surplus. BUSH IS NOT FIT, AND WAS NEVER FIT, TO SERVE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE! If Bush were not selected for President, the 9-11 terrorist attacks may have even been avoided. Al Gore, when he was Vice-President, proposed that airport security should be tightened. Also, the U.S. Government was alerted several months before 9-11, by several Intelligence Organizations across the world, that there was a possibility of terrorist attacks on America. However, Bush failed to act upon these warnings, and now thanks to his ignorance thousands of innocent people are dead. George W. Bush ran for President on a promise to restore "honor and integrity" to the White House. If Bush has any "honor and integrity," he should recognize that his Presidency is a complete fraud - and resign. If Bush does not resign, he should be impeached for stealing the Presidency, which is certainly a very high crime against America's Constitution.
We as Americans enjoy the many, many freedoms we have - including the freedom of speech, the right to protest, the right to a free press, and so many others. We enjoy them to the point of where we brag about them often in comparison to other nations. the men and women of our armed forces, past and present. Let us remember and honor those who have given so freely of themselves to allow others to enjoy these many freedoms. Some of these brave fighting men and women came home alive, some came home dead, but there are still countless others that have yet to return home. All of them are heroes! But all that fighting for are freedom is use less when the American government takes that away from U.S. citizens. Do the Department of Homeland Security and other outgrowths of 9/11 add up to a threat to our freedom?Our government betrayed American values in its treatment of many non-citizens in this country, almost all of them innocent of anything but routine immigration violations. These violations, suggest a greater love of freedom than most American citizens have ever had to demonstrate. Perhaps you have thoroughly studied the Homeland Security situation and have reached an informed opinion one way or another: that our freedom is imperiled, or that the impositions are minimal and the complaints are hooey. If so, in either case, you are a better citizen than I have been until the past few days, I suspect that most Americans have not done their homework on this issue. In Athens Greece if you did not participant in your government your were a degenerate. Most people don't know what is going on there government if it was gone they would not no it even if it was right in fount of there face.. On the other hand, you might say that if you cannot even detect your loss of freedom without making a homework assignment out of it, the deprivation cannot be too severe. . My own conclusion after a bit of homework is that the threat to the civil liberties of most Americans is still mainly a matter of incipience. Will the wall between abusing foreigners and abusing American citizens hold? Did the absurdly named Patriot Act authorize terrible invasions of privacy that the government hasn't gotten around to yet? Does the ease of passing the Patriot Act just whet the appetite of Attorney General John Ashcroft for more and worse? The administration has been given, or sometimes simply asserted, new authority to act in secret and without normal congressional approval or court supervision. Will this be abused? Most of these red flags concern government "data mining": gathering financial information, intercepting e-mail, and so on. Also, centralizing and cross-referencing data that the government already had access to. The Camp of Complacency argues that pushing previous information- gathering powers to their limit, and analyzing that information more intelligently, should not be considered a new infringement of anyone's freedom. But I know, as someone who goggles for a living, how much you can learn by bringing together information that is already public but scattered. The diffusion of information about you probably protects your privacy as much as your right to keep some of it secret. America I ask when does the government stop taking away are freedom? Every time they take something away from you it is taking a piece of the constitution away from The US citizens. I may like something government tries to take away like somking in public places but it not right to take that freedom away if the government starts taking away Americans freedoms it will turn the American government into crumbling into defeat.. It is becoming more evident every day that there is a deliberate plan to destroy our constitution, our freedom and the cultural heritage that made America great. The entertainment industry is portraying immorality, infidelity, homosexuality, and extreme violence as acceptable behavior. Our schools pass out condoms, The liberal press denigrates patriotic Americans and labels patriotic groups that do not trust the government as "terrorists" and part of a vast right wing conspiracy. Unfortunately, there is no vast right wing conspiracy; not even a small one. There are some patriotic groups and some religious groups that are disunited and do not work together, but there is no conspiracy, and there is little or no cooperation. There are also several small political parties that refuse to work together, and can find no common ground. However, there is a vast left wing conspiracy that the controlled media will never mention. They meet secretly annually and those attending are among the political and financial leaders in the United States and Europe. It is called The Trilateral Commission. George Bush inadvertently let the cat out of the bag when used the words "The New World Order" The vast right wing conspiracy is a myth to cover up what is really happening. Oh, we still have a democracy. We can vote, but our elected officials do not represent us. Most of us divide our votes between two political parties that are accountable only to special interest groups that are interested in what is best for them and not for what is best for America. These special interest groups that have vast amounts of money, and other groups that claim to control blocks of voters in hundreds of associations and organizations that are interested only in what is best for their group have priority over the rest of us and what is best for America. Politicians who want to remain in office must carry out the demands of these groups. The time has come for a new special interest group that will support only those politicians who will do what is best for America We still have democracy, but we no longer have freedom. Our Bill of Rights is being systematically eroded by "gradualism" and most Americans don't realize it. (i.e. gun control instead of criminal control), ("speech", a verbal expression of thought and has now been turned into action by the supreme court) ("Church", an organization, is now inaccurately used to describe religion, a philosophical belief) They're stealing our constitution. The time is long past due for all Americans who are concerned about what is happening to America begin to work together and reestablish real representative government in this country. Americans must begin to realize that only a new grassroots movement united by the knowledge of what is happening to America and by their common goals based on what is best for America and not what is best for the special interests can be the hope for a better America, and real representative government. "From the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire, let freedom ring. From the mighty mountains of New York, let freedom ring. From the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania, let freedom ring. But not only that: Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Mississippi"that great quote was buy Matin Luther King jr . But sadly freedom is not ringing no more
Copyright 2003, Volume 2 by Field Research Corporation. This report may not be photocopied or reproduced without written permission. (ISSN 0271-1095) A Digest on How California Voters View Issues Relating to Same-Sex Marriage August 2003 California Opinion Index Findings in Brief • Opinions about allowing same-sex marriages increasingly di-vides the California public. At present, 50% of voters disap-prove of extending marriage laws to gay and lesbian couple, while 42% approve. Nevertheless, the proportion who approve of allowing such unions is up from the levels found in three previous Field Poll measures. For example, in 1977 just 28% supported same-sex marriage. This increased to 30% in 1985, 39% in 1997 and now stands at 42%. • There are large subgroup differences of opinion about same-sex marriage. For example, while Democrats approve 57% to 33%, Republicans disapprove 74% to 21%. While liberals approve 67% to 28%, conservatives disapprove 80% to 16%. Opinions of younger and middle age voters are about evenly divided. Voters age 65 or older disapprove 75% to 19%. A large majority of Protestants and a somewhat smaller majority of Catholics disapprove. Majorities of voters affiliated with other religions or who have no religious preference approve of allowing such unions. • Voters are also divided when asked about the idea of amending the U.S. Constitution to define marriage as exclusively between a man and a woman. Currently, 50% of voters oppose making such a change to the Constitution, while 42% are supportive. • A two to one majority of Californians (60% to 30%) believe that homosexual relations between consenting adults should be legal. Majorities across most of the state’s major demographic subgroups hold to this point of view – with the exception of Republicans, conservative voters age 65 or older and those with a high school education or less, who are divided on this matter. • On the issue of whether sexual relations between adults of the same sex are wrong or not, a plurality (45%) describes them as “not at all wrong,” and 36% take the opposite view and feel they are “always wrong.” • There is widespread support for domestic partnership laws applicable to unmarried people living together in a loving relationship. For example, 72% support granting legal recogni-tion to such couples in the areas of family rights, such as hospital visitation rights, medical powers of attorney and conservator-ship. Another 61% favor granting financial dependence status to such couples, whereby partners receive benefits such as pen-sions, health and dental care coverage, family leave and death benefits. A 54% majority also favors government registries where domestic partners could legally declare their partnership. • Californians are about evenly divided when asked about the pace of the gay rights agenda, with 44% saying gay rights leaders are moving at about the right pace and 40% holding that they are pushing this agenda too fast. California Opinion Index Support for same-sex marriages growing in California, but plurality still opposed The issue of allowing same sex marriages in California, where homosexuals would be allowed to marry and have regular marriage laws apply to them, divides the public. Currently, 50% of voters disapprove of extending marriage laws to gay and lesbian couples, but 42% approve. In 1977 when The Field Poll first measured attitudes of Californians on this issue, just 28% approved, while 59% disapproved. The proportion favoring same-sex marriage has increased in subsequent polls, to 30% in 1985, 39% in 1997 and 42% in the current survey. Wide differences in voter opinions by subgroup The issue of allowing same-sex marriages appeals to some segments of the state’s voters but is rejected by others. For example... • Democrats approve of allowing same-sex marriages by a 57% to 33% margin, and non-partisans also are supportive five to four (50% to 39%). However, this contrasts with the views of California Republicans who disapprove of allow-ing same-sex marriage 74% to 21%. • Liberals approve of same-sex views by a greater than two to one margin (67% to 28%). Those who consider themselves middle-of-the-road in politics also are supportive five to four (49% to 38%). However, conservatives overwhelm-ingly disapprove of this idea (80% to 16%). • Opinions of younger and middle-age Californians are about evenly divided on this issue. However, voters age 65 or older disapprove of same-sex marriage four to one (75% to 19%). • There are also large differences of opinion by religious affiliation. Protestants and members of other non-Catholic Christian denominations disapprove of allowing regular marriage laws apply to same sex couples three to one (71% to 23%). Catholics also disapprove, but by a narrower 53% Table 1a Trend of California opinion about allowing same-sex marriages where regular marriage laws apply (among California voters) Disapprove Approve Undecided 2003 50% 42 8 1997 55% 39 6 1985* 62% 30 8 1977* 59% 28 13 * Survey conducted among all California adults, not just registered voters