Fox News just announced that Kerry has called Bush to concede the election. Whoo-Hoo!
Wow, you’re just popping up in every conceivable thread to crow, aren’t you?
Yep, Bush probably won; however, they are still counting. I only hope he can undo some of the damage he’s done and consider this a second chance to unify the American people. 'Cause he sure did a crappy job the last four years.
I concur with the second statement, but I don’t understand the first.
Kerry conceded. It’s over.
I was just commenting that duffer has popped up in a couple threads in the Pit extolling Bush’s virtues, how he voted for him, etc. But I suppose that’s true of several other posters on both sides. For some reason, I just noticed duffer the most.
Yeah, I’d like to crow, but what’s the point? Just trying to be the first. Sorry, overly, didn’t mean to seem like a braggart.
(We’ll have plenty of threads for that today) 
Oh, one more thing. We’re probably just reading two different news sources, but Kerry just called for Bush to concede: link. So far several sites still say that it’s up in the air. But, yeah, I’m sure Bush will win, whether for good or ill. I’m kind of depressed about it, but everyone’s entitled to their opinions, and I hope I’ll be proven wrong that he’ll continue to do a bad job.
I think you would benefit from a rereading of that headline.
He called Bush TO concede.
He did not call FOR Bush to concede.
Huge difference.
No problem. I’d probably be pretty thrilled and relieved if Kerry won. I don’t really understand voting for Bush, but, hey - here’s hoping he’s got some redeeming qualities I don’t see.
Oh, well. This is my last post for a while. Sorry mods - not trying to pad my post count, I swear! 
Oh, crap! You’re right. Sorry - illiterate this morning. Damn.
Okay, I’m going to wallow in my coffee. 'Bye.
As much as I wanted Kerry to win, I’m glad he did this. Ohio wasn’t going to turn blue anyway, and this saved the nation waiting, animosity, anger and bitterness.
Now I’ll go on to really, really, really hoping I’m wrong about Bush. Hope, hope, hope…
Sigh Maybe next time…
Yeah. Maybe next time. Maybe next time, after another 1000 american soldiers are dead and we’ve concluded conducting genocide in Iraq. Maybe next time, after we’ve decided whose rights to remove next by legislation of hate, maybe next time, after having evangelical Christianity shoved down our throats for another four years. Maybe next time, after more terrorist attacks that benefit the administration that claims to be fighting it (but doesn’t appear to be.) Maybe next time, after they’ve put more “three strikes” offenders in jail for shoplifting cigarettes.
Yeah. Maybe. Or maybe not. Maybe this country is being overrun by bible thumpers who want to legislate their religion right into our lives and housses and schools and hospitals, which is about as unconstitutional as you can get, but who cares because people voted for it. Yeah, the majority voted for Hitler too.
Thank You.
Is it really that bad, Ghanima?
This ain’t Great Debates or The Pit, but I’m just wondering if Ghanima’s post really is justified (I’m not American…)
I don’t like Bush either, but I always cringe when people compare him to a certain insane German warlord…
I suppose one out of four ain’t bad.
Been to the Pit lately?
One of my (university) students today took pains to point out that the total number of deaths in Iraq hasn’t come anywhere close to the number of deaths during the first three days of WWII…
Since this was a computer science class, rather than a government or politics class, I could only point out that more than 1,000 pointless deaths was already 1,000 too many. I did however make the point before the start of class that WWII was a justifiable war, which is hard to claim for Iraq without pushing A LOT of definitions of “justifiable.”
If by “justified” you mean “technically correct but stripped of any balancing context”, you’d be right.
If you don’t believe that ousting Saddam was good 'n proper, the outstanding result of HIS misbehaviors alone, then obviously you’re not going to see any good in the sacrifices necessary to achieve that goal.
Note that this would be the core of the debate, hence the “stripped of any balancing context” bit.
Bollocks.
It wasn’t the result of HIS misbehaviors at all- it was the result of inaccurate intelligence.
Granted, he wasn’t exactly co-operative, but the basis on which Americans supported this war was “he’s developing WMDs in defiance of the ceasefire”. He wasn’t.
Defend the results of the war, by all means- by any rational standard, it has gone rather well- but don’t expect anyone to buy what you’re selling when you try to defend the intent.