Neil Fisher <neil@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> **** he's good, isn't he? If you doubt his word, it's because you have
> a financial interest in the outcome. Of course, his own financial
> interest in the outcome is because he cares about the environment -
> that he stands to make a fortune from any carbon trading scheme is
> just a bonus, right? And he's happy to lie to you about how bad it is
> because he wants to protect the environment and it has absolutely
> nothing to do with any financial interests he may have, right? Sure...
Consider that the USA has never elected a president who isn't a while
male.
Now consider that the Democrats are having a competition between a
non-white male and non-male white to be their candidate for president
at the next presidential election.
There are people who believe that, even if the Republicans are totally
on the nose, if there is a choice between a white male republican and
a democrat who is not a white male, the white male will win. It is
about racial and gender discrimination that is ingrained into the US
psyche to the extent that even people who are not white males believe
that the president should be a white male...
So, after sabotaging the next presidential elections by standing a
candidate that will drop about 20 to 25% of the vote simply due to
underlying discrimination, the democrats will need a champion to stand
in the next presidential election. That champion will, of course,
have to be a white male...
Yes, there are really people in the USA and elsewhere that have
suggested that the Obama vs Clinton thing this time around has been
orchestrated to improve the chance of electing Gore next time around.
--
Athol
<http://cust.idl.com.au/athol>
Linux Registered User # 254000
I'm a Libran Engineer. I don't argue, I discuss.
|
