OT: Stop the Litigation
is the title of an op/ed by Griffin Bell in today's WSJ. For those whose memories may not go back as far as mine, he was a federal judge and server as Jimmie Carter's AG. He also represented President Bush during Iran Contra. Well I rather despair of receiving a considered response from you on this subject, here's an exerpt from Bell's editorial:
<< Both George W. Bush and Al Gore should forswear lawsuits over the election vote, and they should call upon their supporters to do the same. Each candidate should wait for the election officials in the close states to announce the final vote totals and then accept those results with grace and dignity.
Instead, we have seen lawsuits in state court brought by Democratic voters, followed by a federal court suit filed as a defensive measure by Mr. Bush. Yesterday a federal judge refused the Bush campaign's request to stop manual recounting in four counties. Now, Mr. Gore is seeking an injunction to postpone today's deadline for certifying Florida's votes -- a deadline issued by Florida's secretary of state, and clearly established by the state legislature in a statute that would appear to allow no discretion.
....
I was the Georgia campaign manager for John Kennedy in 1960, and so I recall that election well. While Kennedy carried Georgia with 62% of the vote, the election was close in other states, especially Illinois and Texas. A difference of less than 9,000 votes in Illinois, and less than 50,000 votes in Texas, would have given Vice President Nixon a narrow majority of the electoral college, and he would have become president.
Many of Nixon's advisors urged him to contest the results in Illinois and Texas. His finest hour was when he decided, against their advice, to accept the results as reported. In this instance, Nixon set an example that both Mr. Bush and Mr. Gore should follow.
...
If these lawsuits go forward, especially if accompanied by an O.J. Simpson-like media circus, we will sink in a quagmire of litigation. There will be delays, inconsistent decisions by different courts, and appeals.
The results may not be clear either by mid-December, when the electors are to meet in their states and vote; or by early January, when Vice President Gore, as president of the Senate, opens the sealed lists of the electors' votes; or even by Jan. 20, when the new president must take office. As the lawsuits move ahead, the parties will become less attentive to the core concern, which is the good of the country. Mr. Bush and Mr. Gore have an obligation to put a stop to the litigation.
The vice president's advisors have stressed repeatedly that he appears to have won the popular vote, albeit by a margin only of about 200,000 votes out of more than 100 million votes cast. They seem to imply that if the vice president indeed has a majority of the popular vote then that majority somehow justifies involving the courts. Yet, just as Theodore White said of Kennedy's victory in 1960, the "margin of popular vote is so thin as to be, in all reality, nonexistent.">>
Gee, Pat, Mr. Bell made to reference to your novel interpretation of why Nixon declined to contest the Illinois results. Where'd you hear that one, Pat- at the Dick Tuck Memorial Society Convention? Oh well, a smear against Nixon is always good clean fun.
Larry
P.S. In matter of character or ethics, Al "I Didn't Know There Was FUNDRAISING Going On" Gore, or his boss the Perjurer in Chief are well below Nixon's level. Ditto when it comes to concern for the interests of the USA. |
