Why Would He Do This?

[Snag]

Why would President Obama give his very first TV interview to Al-Arabiya Arabic TV? He even was bragging about his Muslim relatives and his Muslim background. As I remember, he wouldn't take any questions in his own Washington press room but was more than willing to run off at the mouth about everything Muslim.

I'm counting the days to his first press conference to answer questions from and to the people that elected him (I'm one of the 45% by the way).

[witchdoctor]

My initial impression was that he was crazy. I now think he was trying to find common ground that will allow him to negotiate with the Arabs. The questions is whether you can trust the Arabs.

[Tom]

The question is can we trust Obama.
He is a disgrace to this country - that speech was unacceptable.

[GaryG]

The questions is whether you can trust the Arabs.No, I don't think that is a question at this point. We know the answer. If the new emperor doesn't know that then he is a bigger fool than he appeared in that speech.

[Tom]

Jimmy Carter thinks he is doing a good job. Uh oh....when the world's biggest fool and failure is on your side.........:eek:

[ArlJim78]

why wouldn't he? doesn't surprise me in the least. i read the transcript.

I honestly think he sees himself as president of the world, that he can by his mere prescense make things better everywhere.

he's a dangerous guy imo.

[BUD]

I wish I had time to answer----But that is wrong.....


On every level wrong.........


I have no ax to grind----But its wrong----Anyone who has any authority knows its wrong.....So that means our Military in the past WAS WRONG---THAT justifies their killing.......Does it still justify their killing?

He was wrong---And May regret it----He forgets MR Prez is Commander in Chief...

That changes everything---He has a lot of lives in his hands---And when dealing with extremist at home or abroad every word has the potential to take or save a life....

Mr President....In all due respect...Smarten up Sir..

[Tom]

He is being all he can be........not much.

[Dahoss9698]

Let's all be afraid....very afraid. I know I am. :rolleyes:

[Tom]

Did he send a signal in his inauguration speech?
He said something about not being judged by what you destroy but what you build?

Was he telling Israel not to attack Iranian nukes, or was he telling Iran it was clear to go ahead and build their bomb?

A previous "ama" sent signals like this.......hmmmmmmmmm??????

[Bubba X]

Did he send a signal in his inauguration speech?
He said something about not being judged by what you destroy but what you build?

Was he telling Israel not to attack Iranian nukes, or was he telling Iran it was clear to go ahead and build their bomb?

A previous "ama" sent signals like this.......hmmmmmmmmm??????Not even close. Perhaps it wasn't well reported in the Simian News. The quote was:

"To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society's ills on the West – know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy."

Adjust your tin foil as needed.

[Dahoss9698]

Tom, you've lost your mind. It's official. You've scared yourself past stupidity and into paranoid schizophrenia.

[GaryG]

Israel does not need the approval of this muslim apologist to TCB. They will do what needs to be done. Then the emperor can apolozize to the terrorists for those hateful Israeli that just won't listen to him.

[Tom]

Not even close. Perhaps it wasn't well reported in the Simian News. The quote was:

"To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society's ills on the West – know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy."

Adjust your tin foil as needed.

Yes, that is what I said. You see, you got confused because I put it in a different order. Try holding it up to a mirror....oh, wait, you don't have any mirrors, do you? :lol:

[ddog]

Israel does not need the approval of this muslim apologist to TCB. They will do what needs to be done. Then the emperor can apolozize to the terrorists for those hateful Israeli that just won't listen to him.


You do know that they wanted to strike and Bush put the kabosch on it?

Just a few months ago.

They will not go for at least a year if then.

And even then they will have our tacit.

They would be savaged, you have to give events in many countries a chance to play out.

Take a larger view.

[Bubba X]

Try holding it up to a mirror....oh, wait, you don't have any mirrors, do you? :lol:

lol. No, I do not need mirrors. I know my hair is luxurious.

[toetoe]

I have it on good authority --- the GREAT Colin Powell ( :lol: ) --- that B. Hussein Oh Brother was NEVER A MUSLIM.

[wes]

There is one thing for sure! Dust off Obama balls will not cure the world of cancer as many think that voted him into office.

wes

[socantra]

There is one thing for sure! Dust off Obama balls will not cure the world of cancer as many think that voted him into office.

wes
I wasn't aware that anyone thought that was the case, but its nice to know that someone is doing the up close, hands on research.

[dutchboy]

His middle name is what?

[PaceAdvantage]

I would just like to point out that anyone who makes fun of Obama, disagrees with his politics, or criticizes his performance while in office is simply doing his or her PATRIOTIC DUTY as a citizen of the UNITED STATES.

How do I know? Hcap, Suff, Secretariat, 46zilzal and ljb told me so, that's how!

So to all those who constantly wish that Obama's critics would "SHUT UP" and "GIVE HIM A BREAK," you run the risk of being called an UNAMERICAN slob.

[hcap]

I responded to your so-called "dissent is patriotic" argument on another thread.
The repetitive right here is much worse than the left ever was. Obama is president 100 hours and according to the right, is far worse than bush ever was after 8 long years. The anti-bush sentiments, much of which were anti-war and ant-Katrina, drew from real events and real failures that could be criticized by their real world results.

[rastajenk]

Oh, bullshit. The anti-Bush stuff started during the Florida Fiasco, when Democratic attempts to steal the election failed. It began from Day One, which was on or about the day after the 2000 election.

[Tom]

I hope I bought enough peanuts for 4 years.....this party is going to be huge! :lol:

Just love how the libs handle the pressure, when their is NO ONE but their own jerk to blame.........HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

[hcap]

Sure, there was a huge argument going on during end of the election and recounts. It continued into bushs' presidency, and although I felt Gore the winner, my beef was the way bush handled Afghanistan and then Iraq. And Katrina.

Did Bush vs Gore influence me? Somewhat, but invading Iraq and leaving the job undone in Afghanistan was MY turning point. His "War President" era turned annoyance to total dissatisfaction and dislike.

I was not around back in bushs' first term on off topic. That's why I asked PA how to access those posts from that period

[hcap]

I hope I bought enough peanuts for 4 years.....this party is going to be huge! :lol:

Just love how the libs handle the pressure, when their is NO ONE but their own jerk to blame.........HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!What did you say about nuts attending the party here? :lol:

[rastajenk]

That may be your own personal experience, but in general Bushatred began immediately. Moveon.com, created to protect the legacy of Pax Clintona, had to have something to justify its existence. The glee with which the loony lefty libs displayed over things like fumbled public speaking, choking on a pretzel, depicting assassinations in book and film, and the whole Bush = Hitler crap did not wait for Iraq and Katrina. The knives were out early and often.

[hcap]

The loony right had it's own fair share of attacking Clinton way before bush was sworn in. If I remember correctly the rise of talk radio and guys like Limbaugh was born unjustly going after the Clintons.

But we are not speaking of the loony left or loony right. PA and the rest of you are comparing what happened here on this board back during bushs' first few days-first term, and Obamas'. Since I wasn't around then, I tried to access off topic from that period and could not. Maybe PA can, and you gentlemen can prove your point-which I doubt big time.

[Dave Schwartz]

He even was bragging about his Muslim relatives and his Muslim background.

Snag,

I read the transcript and could not find this. Could you point me to it please?


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[cj's dad]

http://us.mg2.mail.yahoo.com/ya/download?mid=1%5f48750%5fANU6vs4AAJljSYHmaAcJUE4wc y8&pid=4&fid=Inbox&inline=1

[Lefty]

hcap, Rush was around before Clinton was Pres. I started listening to him during the confirmation hearings of Clarence Thomas. His critics predicted his demise when Clinton beat Geo H Bush. Rush so called attacks on Clinton was mostly about Clintons Tax raise that was a retroactive tax raise. Of course, Clinton's sleazy ways gave everyboddy more 'fodder" including comics who voted for him.
On the other hand Bush was personally attacked, right off. The "dumb" jokes started immediately. And when he put in policies after 9-11to keep us safe, he was attacked even more. But the bottom line is, he kept us safe. And after 9-11 he even kept the economy going, but the vicious left wouldn't even give him credit for that. Through it all he never complained about the "raw" deal the press gave him. Clinton, on the other hand, whined when he even got a bit of criticism. He whined about Rush once, he told a St Louis radio station that he didn't have a 3 hour radio prgm like Rush did, to defendf himself.
Clinton a whiner and skirt chaser; and a whiner. Bush, protector and much man.

[rastajenk]

And The Big O is a whiner, too. One week in and he's whining about Limbaugh. And he and his staff are already cherry-picking questions from the White House Cheering Section, err, the press corps, so as not to have to answer tough questions.

[Snag]

Snag,

I read the transcript and could not find this. Could you point me to it please?


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

Dave, "bragging" about his Muslim connections was my interpretation. During the lead up to the election, any reference to BO's middle name, his Indonesia connections, pictures of him in a turban headdress, etc, was all met with distain from the left. With HIS first interview, he makes reference to it as if it defines who he is.

I don't feel it works both ways. Do you?

[toetoe]

Now, before Neighborhood Watch Commissar hcap gets me booted for my post's title, let me remind my mates that nowadays, all things Moslem are kinda cool and very hip --- even de rigueur in world affairs discussions.

P.S. If I ever use a word that is just TOO friggin' strange, DO NOT --- repeat, DO NOT look it up, whatever you do.

Yours,
The Subliterate Subaltern. :blush:

[Dave Schwartz]

I didn't get that. Perhaps I did not read the full transcript. Could you point me to a link?

(Understand, I am not disagreeing with you. I'd just like to verify it for myself.)

Dave

[Snag]

I didn't get that. Perhaps I did not read the full transcript. Could you point me to a link?

(Understand, I am not disagreeing with you. I'd just like to verify it for myself.)

Dave

Dave, give me a little bit to find a link. I should have posted one the first time. As Paul Harvey use to say..."Stand By for News"...

[hcap]

Musselmania??

Ok, no lookee uppee Good word play toe. But what are you saying here? All things Muslim are in vogue? Where exactly? Not here on this board. Comparing Obamas' stimulus plan to reparations, and putting down people of color are.

But hey, Musselmania does rhyme with Wrestlemania.
Maybe both terms are more than just rhymes. Maybe they are both fakes?

PS: I can not think of another decent rhyme.
Other than Beatlemania. Not that close tho'
You are the expert. Can you?

[Snag]

I didn't get that. Perhaps I did not read the full transcript. Could you point me to a link?

(Understand, I am not disagreeing with you. I'd just like to verify it for myself.)

Dave

This is the first of two part on YouTube. The audio is really low so be sure to turn up the volumn.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6eLfOpUtgQ

[JustRalph]

Rush's show started way before anybody even heard of Clinton............Clinton was still chasing skirts in Arkansas when Rush started his deal.

[chickenhead]

here is the full transcript:

http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2009/01/27/65087.html#004

I would guess the original poster saw "bragging" here:

THE PRESIDENT: -- what that tells me is that their ideas are bankrupt. There's no actions that they've taken that say a child in the Muslim world is getting a better education because of them, or has better health care because of them.

In my inauguration speech, I spoke about: You will be judged on what you've built, not what you've destroyed. And what they've been doing is destroying things. And over time, I think the Muslim world has recognized that that path is leading no place, except more death and destruction.

Now, my job is to communicate the fact that the United States has a stake in the well-being of the Muslim world that the language we use has to be a language of respect. I have Muslim members of my family. I have lived in Muslim countries.

[PaceAdvantage]

Off topic starts in March 2001. That should be early enough, should it not? Bush was not even into day 100 at that point.

[hcap]

Off topic starts in March 2001. That should be early enough, should it not? Bush was not even into day 100 at that point.
Ok, how do I use the advanced search option to go back further than one year as a general query? I only see going back 1 year as the furthest back option.
I understand I could type "Bush" using "Any Date", but that seems like hit and miss. How do I narrow the date down, if possible?

[Tom]

hcap,
Go to the bottom left of the main OT page - select from the begining and you will have all of OT listed - just page through.
Notice the fourth thread.....got moved, and I almost got bounced outta here before I ever got started....I think I really made a great first impression on PA? :lol:

[ArlJim78]

Rush's show started way before anybody even heard of Clinton............Clinton was still chasing skirts in Arkansas when Rush started his deal.
remember all the geniuses that were saying back then that with Bush out and Clinton in it spelled the end of Rush's popularity?
Actually I think he becomes more popular under Democrats than republicans.

[Dahoss9698]

here is the full transcript:

http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2009/01/27/65087.html#004

I would guess the original poster saw "bragging" here:

Thanks for posting that. Bragging isn't exactly how I saw it, but then again, I wasn't wearing my tin foil hat.

[PaceAdvantage]

Ok, how do I use the advanced search option to go back further than one year as a general query? I only see going back 1 year as the furthest back option.
I understand I could type "Bush" using "Any Date", but that seems like hit and miss. How do I narrow the date down, if possible?The search function only returns the first 250 results I believe, so if it's a really popular topic (like Bush) it won't get that far back before it hits 250...you might have to use Tom's method if you want to go back really, really far...

[Rookies]

I would just like to point out that anyone who makes fun of Obama, disagrees with his politics, or criticizes his performance while in office is simply doing his or her PATRIOTIC DUTY as a citizen of the UNITED STATES. How do I know? Hcap, Suff, Secretariat, 46zilzal and ljb told me so, that's how! So to all those who constantly wish that Obama's critics would "SHUT UP" and "GIVE HIM A BREAK," you run the risk of being called an UNAMERICAN slob.

The most brain dead catch phrase adopted by (largely conservative)Americans in the 70s WAS: " My country, right or wrong. " This is the shallow refuge of the "ditto head ", of the person who can't think through various complex events, who can't make decisions as to when they should proudly support their country and when to criticize, indeed- of those prone to totalitarianism. In a democracy, everyone DOES have the right to criticize the performance, actions and decison making of those in charge. NOBODY should EVER blindly follow along, concurring with all decisions, especially when it is " in the interests of the country " and the corollary, that their patriotism is in question, if they do.

So, I do agree here with Pace, that conservatives have every right to criticize the decisions of Obama, as those of us did with the former incumbent, whose name I don't wish to remember. Who would disagree ?

The most important lesson from recent world history, can be found here:

"In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist; And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist; And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew; And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up." Pastor Martin Niemöller (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Niem%C3%B6ller) (1892–1984) about the inactivity of German intellectuals (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual) following the Nazi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism) rise to power and the purging of their chosen targets, group after group.

[Snag]

Thanks for posting that. Bragging isn't exactly how I saw it, but then again, I wasn't wearing my tin foil hat.

Ok, if "bragging" doesn't fit your agenda, what word or phrase would you use? Why would BO bring it up and point it out? My thought was he was trying to relate to the Arbaric audience and felt the need to brag about his background.

[ArlJim78]

Ok, if "bragging" doesn't fit your agenda, what word or phrase would you use? Why would BO bring it up and point it out? My thought was he was trying to relate to the Arbaric audience and felt the need to brag about his background.
right, who cares if it was bragging or not, it certainly was pandering, and if I might say so evoked a double standard.

during the campaign any mention of the forbidden word Muslim, was met with howls from Obama and the dems about how it was the same old politics of fear mongering and divisiveness. one week into his presidency he shows up on arab TV talking about among other things the Muslim heritage in his family.

[Dahoss9698]

Ok, if "bragging" doesn't fit your agenda, what word or phrase would you use? Why would BO bring it up and point it out? My thought was he was trying to relate to the Arbaric audience and felt the need to brag about his background.

Doesn't fit MY agenda?? :lol: Right...I'm the one with the agenda.

[LottaKash]

I would just like to point out that anyone who makes fun of Obama, disagrees with his politics, or criticizes his performance while in office is simply doing his or her PATRIOTIC DUTY as a citizen of the UNITED STATES. How do I know? Hcap, Suff, Secretariat, 46zilzal and ljb told me so, that's how! So to all those who constantly wish that Obama's critics would "SHUT UP" and "GIVE HIM A BREAK," you run the risk of being called an UNAMERICAN slob.

The most brain dead catch phrase adopted by (largely conservative)Americans in the 70s WAS: " My country, right or wrong. " This is the shallow refuge of the "ditto head ", of the person who can't think through various complex events, who can't make decisions as to when they should proudly support their country and when to criticize, indeed- of those prone to totalitarianism. In a democracy, everyone DOES have the right to criticize the performance, actions and decison making of those in charge. NOBODY should EVER blindly follow along, concurring with all decisions, especially when it is " in the interests of the country " and the corollary, that their patriotism is in question, if they do.

So, I do agree here with Pace, that conservatives have every right to criticize the decisions of Obama, as those of us did with the former incumbent, whose name I don't wish to remember. Who would disagree ?

The most important lesson from recent world history, can be found here:

"In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist; And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist; And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew; And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up." Pastor Martin Niemöller (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Niem%C3%B6ller) (1892–1984) about the inactivity of German intellectuals (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual) following the Nazi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism) rise to power and the purging of their chosen targets, group after group.

Rookies, I like your style..........:jump:

best

[hcap]

The search function only returns the first 250 results I believe, so if it's a really popular topic (like Bush) it won't get that far back before it hits 250...you might have to use Tom's method if you want to go back really, really far...

hcap,
Go to the bottom left of the main OT page - select from the begining and you will have all of OT listed - just page through.
Notice the fourth thread.....got moved, and I almost got bounced outta here before I ever got started....I think I really made a great first impression on PA? :lol:Thanks. I did use Tom's method. Off topic does not go back far enough to investigate your assertion PA, that the Lefties here pounced on bush shortly after the 2000 election. First post I saw was from March 2001.

So I guess your assertion was not correct. The other interesting thing was there was very little said about bush at all until 911. And hardly any "Lefties" posting.

[Snag]

Doesn't fit MY agenda?? :lol: Right...I'm the one with the agenda.

:lol: You are very correct in your observation. Words have meaning and when used in connection with the messangers intent, they speak loads. My thought was that BO had an agenda that day and I disagree with his intent.

[PaceAdvantage]

Thanks. I did use Tom's method. Off topic does not go back far enough to investigate your assertion PA, that the Lefties here pounced on bush shortly after the 2000 election. First post I saw was from March 2001.

So I guess your assertion was not correct. The other interesting thing was there was very little said about bush at all until 911. And hardly any "Lefties" posting.First off, I wasn't only talking about off-topic when I said they pounced on Bush after the 2000 election. The 2000 election took place in Nov 2000 and the Inauguration was in January of 2001, so with off-topic starting in March 2001, that isn't much difference in time.

Again, back to my comment. I was talking about "in general" and I will offer this article as a prime example of what happened:

http://archive.salon.com/politics/feature/2001/01/20/protests/index.html

[Tom]

hcap, they were all over Bush long before the election was called final.
There were countless threads about Gore trying to steal the election throughout the whole process.

I think that is what crashed the old board! :eek:;)

[ddog]

First off, I wasn't only talking about off-topic when I said they pounced on Bush after the 2000 election. The 2000 election took place in Nov 2000 and the Inauguration was in January of 2001, so with off-topic starting in March 2001, that isn't much difference in time.

Again, back to my comment. I was talking about "in general" and I will offer this article as a prime example of what happened:

http://archive.salon.com/politics/feature/2001/01/20/protests/index.html


Pa,

really now, if the 2000 court appointment had turned out the other way, you are saying the other side would have fallen in lockstep with gore?

You can argue that but you had better have tongue firmly in cheek when doing so.


That was not a normal "outcome" to base all your Bush-victim-posts on.

no way.

it's always amazed me that the winner and "most powerfull man in the world" is then portrayed as a helpless victim because of some lamestream sound bites that 70% of the country probably never sees and certainly doesn't trust.

[PaceAdvantage]

Pa,

really now, if the 2000 court appointment had turned out the other way, you are saying the other side would have fallen in lockstep with gore?Absolutely not. But I betcha there wouldn't have been articles written about all the protesters lining the parade route, and this reality would have nothing to do with media bias.

[hcap]

hcap, they were all over Bush long before the election was called final.
There were countless threads about Gore trying to steal the election throughout the whole process.

I think that is what crashed the old board! :eek:;)I remember the heated debate out in the real world. I was challenging PA and the rest of you to back up your contention that here on off topic shortly after the 2000 election, the lefties here attacked bush within his first 100 hours as crazily as you guys have been railing all over Obama.
Doesn't look like we can find out objectively

What old board?
And where are all the lefties that dominated off topic back in 2001?

[Tom]

hcap, the original PA board crashed and was lost in 2000 or 2001. this is not the original....

ddog.....it was NOT a court appointment. Spin it how you want, but facts are,
it was a a legitimate legal challenge that forced the recount to follow existing laws.

[Marshall Bennett]

I remember the heated debate out in the real world. I was challenging PA and the rest of you to back up your contention that here on off topic shortly after the 2000 election, the lefties here attacked bush within his first 100 hours as crazily as you guys have been railing all over Obama.

Hcap , I haven't gone back and checked , but I don't recall the attacks on Obama being that vicious immediately following the election . I'm sure there were a few , but I for one , asked for everyone to give the man a chance . :confused:

[ddog]

hcap, the original PA board crashed and was lost in 2000 or 2001. this is not the original....

ddog.....it was NOT a court appointment. Spin it how you want, but facts are,
it was a a legitimate legal challenge that forced the recount to follow existing laws.

the "existing laws" - there were about 3 sets of those, thus the court ruling.
if a clear set of existing laws were controlling then no appeal to the supremes would have been needed and thus no court appointed prez would have resulted.
check the vote on the case, obviously no clear law existed.

[ddog]

Absolutely not. But I betcha there wouldn't have been articles written about all the protesters lining the parade route, and this reality would have nothing to do with media bias.

i am not so sure about the protestors, you will recall the protests at several of the polling/counting offices and that was way before the tensions really escalated.

also, while there were many msm types who were happy to rag on bush, i think the way the outcome was decided tended to give them and some others on the fence, not to mention more of the public an easy out.

of course this all forgets that orginally he had decent nbrs and would have no doubt , outside 9/11 been a nothing , a zero like clinton.

[Tom]

ddog, did you read the court's decision?
It is clearly outlined there. There was NO APPOINTMENT.
But if it makes you feel better, then feel free to believe that.

[ddog]

ddog, did you read the court's decision?
It is clearly outlined there. There was NO APPOINTMENT.
But if it makes you feel better, then feel free to believe that.

yes, now did you see the vote?

maybe you will quote the parts of the decision that refute the appointment angle.

[Tom]

May YOU could point out in exact words where an appointment was made? They do not exist.

[Tom]

Here ya go.....show me.

A legalese version:


http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-949.ZPC.html


Summarized here:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_v._Gore



"Equal Protection Clause

The Supreme Court ruled 7–2 that the Florida Supreme Court's decision, calling for a statewide recount, violated the Equal Protection Clause (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Protection_Clause) of the Fourteenth Amendment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitu tion). The Court stated that the Equal Protection clause guarantees individuals that their ballots cannot be devalued by "later arbitrary and disparate treatment". Even if the recount was fair in theory, it was unfair in practice. The record suggested that different standards were seemingly applied to the recount from ballot to ballot, precinct to precinct, and county to county."

"The per curiam opinion in Bush v. Gore did not technically dismiss the case, and instead "remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion." Gore's attorneys therefore understood that they could fight on, and could petition the Florida Supreme Court to repudiate the notion that December 12 was final under Florida law.[31] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_v._Gore#cite_note-Post-30) Gore was not optimistic about how the Florida justices would react to further arguments, and in any event "the best Gore could hope for was a slate of disputed electors", as one of his advisers put it.[31] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_v._Gore#cite_note-Post-30) So, Gore dropped the case."