Excellent editorial from Chicago Trib on the maniacal behavior of AlGore the Sore Loserman:
from post# 14957000
THE COURTS SEND GORE A MESSAGE
December 5, 2000
There's a rugged hillside in Montana where visitors can look down on the Little Bighorn
River and imagine the hopelessness George Armstrong Custer must have felt when he
stood in the same spot 124 years ago. That same emotion must be coursing through Al
Gore today.
Gore is not quite finished (in terms of legal maneuvers) or done (as in fully cooked). He
has at least one more avenue of appeal. And a couple of stray cases to be heard
Wednesday could give him renewed life. But for now the court clerks are yawning and
looking at their watches, and the bell on the oven is about to ding.
Gore's refusal to admit that he lost the presidential election has begun to look less like a
profile in courage and more like a scene from Caine Mutiny, with Humphrey Bogart as
Captain Queeg, obsessively rolling those two steel balls in his hand. This newspaper has
called on Gore to acknowledge the obvious, to spare the country more uncertainty and to
curtail the legal and political shenanigans that have cheapened this quest for the
presidency.
Gore has pledged to fight to the bitter end. The question is whether that will turn out to
mean the end of the election process, as Gore suggests, or rather the end of his political
career.
Many Democratic leaders already see Gore as badly damaged goods. Though he sees
himself as protecting his legal rights to pursue the presidency, the first draft of history
may regard him as just one more pol who believed his own hype. There will be no
shortage of ambitious Democrats--why, hello Sen. Clinton--who'll be boning up on union
issues in Iowa and buying warmer winter boots for New Hampshire.
On Monday, Gore suffered the kind of hydra-headed humiliation that proud men and
women hope never to encounter.
In the morning, the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court sent a trenchant and unmistakable
message to the Florida Supreme Court. Television's talking heads immediately
characterized the federal court's order as a request for a clarification from the state
court: Help us understand whether you grounded your decision to rewrite the election
rules in Florida law (which is good) or in Florida's Constitution (which is bad).
But there is more to the U.S. court's seven-page order. The judges asked the question
because they already suspected the answer. In the paraphrasing of University of Chicago
law professor Dennis J. Hutchinson, editor of The Supreme Court Review, the U.S.
Supremes really said: "At least five of our justices are not going to put up with what you
did in your Florida court. To avoid a bloody dissent from a minority of justices here in our
court, we'll vacate your decision instead of reversing it. But don't think you can play fast
and loose with a presidential election."
This ruling may not have appeared to be as devastating as the one that shocked Gore
later in the day. But it was, in fact, a depth charge that reverberates through the whole,
watery application of justice that's been awash in Florida for four weeks. On Monday, the
U.S. Supreme Court made it clear that somebody is watching the Florida courts and their
evident disdain for the rule of law.
So much for "the will of the people," a phrase which, as manhandled by Gore, turned out
to mean whatever technicalities Gore's lawyers could seize on, or ignore, subject only to
approving pats on the head administered by sympathetic judges in Florida. Up here in
Washington, the federal court was saying, questions get decided on the cold, hard basis of
law.
The same ruling included a subtle but equally unmistakable message to the Florida
Legislature. Its members have been the butt of derision for adopting the supposedly
preposterous stance that if the election can't produce 25 electors to represent Florida, the
legislators should do the job themselves.
Democrats have argued that if this occurs, it would amount to "politicians" hijacking the
election from voters. Nonsense. As the highest court in the land took pains to quote from
this nation's Constitution, it is the job of state legislators to oversee the selection of
electors who cast votes in the Electoral College. The U.S. Supreme Court gave the
Florida Legislature a tacit nod: You have plenty of authority to do what you may need to
do. The high court's reference to the Constitution should remind Gore's partisans that
legislators aren't just politicians. They are elected representatives of the people and
should be trusted as such.
Gore's third thrashing was administered in a soft Southern drawl. N. Sanders Sauls is a
circuit court judge, far down the food chain from both supreme courts. He clearly had
been underwhelmed by Gore's contest of the Florida election. While demolishing the Gore
legal team's arguments in his dulcet monotone, Sauls stressed a point that has been lost in
much of the news coverage of Gore's contest: as the challenger to Bush's certified
election victory, Gore had to prove that recounts would reverse the outcome of the
election.
That is a high bar for a candidate to clear if he or she can't point to outright fraud, or
terminal stupidity, on the part of election officials. It was a burden Gore couldn't carry.
The practical effect is that, barring intervention from the same Florida Supreme Court
that got its nose whacked earlier on Monday, there will be no more recounting of ballots
in Florida. Sauls would not permit more of these recounts, conducted without standards in
locales favorable to one candidate.
So now Gore, like Custer, can only retreat to the highest ground he can find. Gore's
appeal of Judge Sauls' ruling will be adjudicated by the same Florida Supreme Court that,
by trying to rewrite election law for him, gave Gore a happy Thanksgiving. Unlike real
kamikaze pilots, the Florida judges now have a chance to perform the same
self-destructive act twice. But they're likelier to think twice before they risk another
reminder from Washington that, based on the evidence, they're only capable of playing
minor-league ball.
For four weeks Al Gore has tried to swath himself in "the rule of law," all the while
pushing it to, and at times beyond, its limits. But that phrase is not as empty as Gore
wishes it to be. The courts are speaking loudly now. The real rule of law still permits
Gore to press his last appeals. But not for long.
chicagotribune.com |
