You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #4: Sorry, but I disagree [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
SharonRB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-02-05 03:07 PM
Response to Original message
4. Sorry, but I disagree
Last time, Gore didn't ask anyone to stand up. The response of some senators when asked why they didn't stand was that no one asked them to. This time, Kerry has at least shown some support by joining the GLIB's lawsuit. He has not asked them not to stand up. And, the senators have been asked by many, many people, starting with John Conyers, to stand up and be heard this time. They know they are being watched by their constituents because of the many thousands of letters they have received. It may be a no-win situation for them, but I am confident that we will have at least one, if not more, senators in our court this time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -If a Senator didn't stand in 2000, I doubt one will in 2004 WI_DEM  Jan-02-05 02:51 PM   #0 
  - I agree- they are too scared/corrupt to ever stand up for truth.  Dr Fate   Jan-02-05 02:54 PM   #1 
  - also agree  imenja   Jan-02-05 03:03 PM   #2 
  - I'm thinking that way too.  Sparkle   Jan-02-05 03:05 PM   #3 
  - Sorry, but I disagree  SharonRB   Jan-02-05 03:07 PM   #4 
  - Kerry's "nuanced" attitude won't cause any Senator to stick his or her  bones_7672   Jan-03-05 07:05 AM   #20 
  - We have to MAKE them stand up - fax them  arnheim   Jan-02-05 03:19 PM   #5 
  - 2000 was TOTALLY different  Faye   Jan-02-05 03:23 PM   #6 
  - Where were you in 2000?  WI_DEM   Jan-02-05 03:28 PM   #7 
     - well for me  Faye   Jan-02-05 03:31 PM   #8 
  - One big difference: Gore asked them NOT to object.  pointsoflight   Jan-02-05 03:33 PM   #9 
  - Well, the Supreme Court  mountainvue   Jan-02-05 07:35 PM   #17 
     - The Supreme Court ruling did not prevent Congress from contesting  Garbo 2004   Jan-03-05 05:25 AM   #18 
  - WI Dem, I hope you are wrong on this but I fear you may be right ...  NVMojo   Jan-02-05 03:38 PM   #10 
  - Agree - never in a million trillion years would one stand up.  Southsideirish   Jan-02-05 03:41 PM   #11 
  - I disagree! -- we didn't have the info in 2000 we do today!  Imagevision   Jan-02-05 03:42 PM   #12 
  - I expect you're right.  bemis12   Jan-02-05 04:03 PM   #13 
  - conyers is predicting several will stand  burn the bush   Jan-02-05 07:09 PM   #14 
  - Fraud is more clear this year, 2000 was abuse of power by SCOTUS  McCamy Taylor   Jan-02-05 07:24 PM   #15 
  - You're forgetting the Supreme Court. n/t  mountainvue   Jan-02-05 07:32 PM   #16 
     - The SCOTUS ruling did not prevent Congress from asserting its perogatives  Garbo 2004   Jan-03-05 05:27 AM   #19 
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC