12/12 Supreme Court rules for Bush, 5-4.
/- I've re-worded it, ya crazy sodan:
| Of the seven justices that felt there were constitutional
| problems, two did not feel these problems warranted a halt
| to the recount. Hence, the 5-4 vote.
\_ This isn't true no matter how you word it. Try again
and this time use something other than jesse jackson's
website as an info source.
\_ Dewd. You are sick.
\_ 7-2 agreed that there were problems with the Equal protection
clause.
\_ 7-2 agreed that there were constitutional problems with what has
been going down in Florida.
\_ They agreed that there was not a consistant way to hand count
votes (ie. the different chads) because of that, there would
be a question of equal protection under the law. There is no
law of what a vaild vote is in Florida, except that it is
determined they the Secretary of State. The problem lies in
that there is disagreement of whether or not the Supreme Court
should have interferred at this point in the process. Bush
wins by litigation.
\_ Bush wins by having more votes. Thank you for playing.
\_ Gore had more votes...don't be silly. Not even the
Republican lawyers are suggesting the Bush actually
received more votes. Congrats on preventing the
recount in Florida while getting one in New Mexico.
\_ New Mex. recount was automatic, not requested
AFAIK. And AL could have cheated his way to
more votes, not quite the same has getting more
votes on election day. Spare me your whimpering
about under votes, etc. If you really care
about your vote, you would make *SURE* that
you punched the ballot all the way through.
If you can't even bother to do that, your vote
deserves to be discarded.
\_ Stop using the "F" word! _F_acts offend the
mindless ultra left. Yes, NM was an automatic
recount just like the machine recount in FL,
and the automatic recount triggered in Oregon
in the Senate race. Bush had more votes.
\_ url?
\_ If you didn't notice the other recount, you aren't
really interested (If you have to ask, you don't
already know)
\_ uh, Florida did get a recount. The count was
certified, Gore went to the lawyers, yadda yadda yadda.
\- bush wins by delay of game. penalty 150 votes. --psb
\_ stupid republican comment deleted
\_ COMMIE CENSORS CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!
\_ Poor babies. For the poor ultra leftist
clowns who can't deal with the truth I
essentially said that Bush won every vote,
and count and recount using the most stupid
rules invented by Gore's Demo buddies with
ballots manually counted by Gore's Demo
buddies and at no point despite this
travesty of justice was Gore ever ahead in
Florida. Good bye Mr. Gore. Nice speech.
Hopefully your last public speech ever.
\_ and Gore WASN'T trying to? the votes were recounted, the
count was certified, Gore went to the lawyers, yadda yadda
yadda.
\_ The Republicans hand recounted their districts then
denied the Dems the same right. And got away with it,
it turns out. Face it, your man stole the election.
\_ url?
\_ It does not exists, because it did not happen.
The GOP did not recount any district by hand.
\_ Hello? Volusia? Broward? Only the most heavily 20%
Democratic areas in Miami-Dade? Al Gore did his best
to steal it and got beaten down like the mad dog he is.
If I wanted spin and lies I could turn on CNN or MSNBC.
They do it better than you do and shower more often.
\_ I agree that the Republicans "stole the election".
The Republican strategy was to not count all legal
votes, especially legal votes that could go to Gore.
I often had the impression that they were rushing
the election to a close. Not to say that the Democrats
were entirely fair, but the Republicans didn't want
to play ball and go ahead with a statewide recount
(probably those slippery, pro-Gore liberal counters),
so the Democrats were forced to pursue recounts in
only liberal-heavy counties.
I do not agree with the Republican propaganda that
valid recounts had been repeated thrice. I believe
Gore's assertion that not all legal votes were
counted.
\_ Grow up, child. Gore could've requested a statewide
recount but instead chose 3 or 4 cherry picked Demo
areas where he thought he could scum up a few more
improperly cast votes by "diving the will" through
his political surrogates.
\_ Yeah, I bet you believe that AL created the
internet too. All the votes that were correctly
voted were counted by the machine. Hand recounts
amounted to guessing which ballots when to Al by
people who want him to win. If some stupid fool
in FL can't be bothered to check his/her ballot
then they don't deserve to have a say.
I disagree, too, with the assertion that "the
Democrats would have resorted to the same stalling
tactics if they had the lead." In this case, if
the Republicans asked for a statewide recount,
the Democrats would have accepted. This coincides
with the general principle that Democrats are good
(know what's going on) and Republicans are evil
(are misinformed).
\_ And you base this on what? Your leftist mindwashing
on campus from your drooling babbling communist
profs? WAKE UP! COFFEE IS READY!
\_ Republicans didn't steal anything. The won fair
and square under the laws as they existed on
election day (ever hear of ex posto facto?).
\_ Hey dumbshit. No laws were made by Al Gore.
In case you're too stupid to figure it out
he doesn't have the power. Figure out what
the hell "ex post facto" means before you
blab it out on the motd. It is within the
FL supreme court to interpret existing laws.
\_ 'after the fact', extending the recounts
past the original legislative deadline
was illegal. The courts can interpret
the law, they don't make it and they
shouldn't break it as the FL Supereme
Court did. Fortunately the US Supreme
Court has the wisdom to stop their
activisim.
GWB was ahead in the initial count, the machine
recount and every other count (despite challenges
to military ballots).
AL's plan for a statewide recount by his vote
counters would have amounted to a coup d'etat,
subverting the laws in order to win.
Furthermore, the GOP did not ask for a recount
in states where GWB lost by similar margins. If
FL had gone to ALGOR by 500 votes, GWB would have
conceeded and AL would be Pres. Elect. Only a
Democrat would have the gaul to act as AL has.
His behavior only serves to reinforce the general
principle that Democrats/Liberals == EVIL COMMIES
and the GOP == the good guys. Only Jefferson and
\_ I take it
you never
took US
history?
Let me rephrase, Jeffersonian _/
principles are good, Jefferson
the man made many scary mistakes.
Very few democrats even have principles,
so Jefferson is a decent one in
my book.
Truman have ever been able to transend this
principle.
[ Possibly unfair characterization of a liberal
removed by author. ]
\_ You make a good argument, but I'll have to
look at Rehnquist/Scalia/Thomas' opinion
in the Supreme Court case. I think their
reasons for voting "no-recounts" are
substantively different than yours.
\_ Yes. As I understand it they said no
recounts because of two reasons. First,
the choice of electors belongs to the leg.
branch not the jud. branch according to the
constitution. Second, partial recounts w/o
standards violates equal protection under
the 14th amendment (as I recall).
I'm basically saying that what AL did was
not the right or proper thing to do for
a gentleman and a president.
\_ they gave up b/c it was going to
be "too big a mess." what a cop-out.
\_ You went to the Jesse Jackson School
Of Logic. I can tell.
\_ I'm not sure you're right about the
first part and will have to check.
The second part would suggest that
if the state court a) extended the
deadline to the 17th and b) more precisely
explained how re-counts would be conducted,
and explain how it would not be a violation
of equal protection -- if the state court
did both of these things, the U.S.
Supreme Court would have let the recount
go on.
\_ They extended to the 26th. Not 17th.
\_ Yes, that is correct. Despite the
democratic cries of a partisan Supreme
Court, a timely recount with a statewide
standard would have been allowed. This
seems so obvious that I find it puzzling
that the Democrats didn't push for it.
The only explanation I see is that they
really were fishing for votes.
\_ I don't know what it's like to be
a liberal Florida Supreme Court
justice, but it looks like what
happened is that four justices
produced a hasty, poorly thought-out
decision, in order to meet a Dec 12
safe harbor date. |
http://csua.com/feed/