Tim,
The liberals should be blaming the Democrat who got caught with the voting machine in his car. If that hadn't happened, they might have had a complete and fair count by November 26 with Algore the winner.
Every day a new excuse for avoiding a full accounting of votes.
"The counting isn't uniform"
"The deadline passed"
"The FSC didn't respond to the USSC"
"The guy in the car"
"If they can't vote right, their votes shouldn't count"
"It is the democrats own fault"
"It would be best for the country to let Bush win"
"It is unfair to only count in a few counties"
"There isn't enough time"
"The stock market will tank"
The Presidency and Supreme Court are at serious risk without a recount. We need it, more than you can possibly imagine right now.
Do you consider this behavior acceptable?:
At one point during a long colloquy with Justices Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Mr. Olson appeared willing to discuss the theoretical possibility of coming up with a statewide standard.
At that point, Justice Antonin Scalia jumped into the argument almost as if to make sure that Mr. Olson did not make any unnecessary concessions on the Bush side.
"It's part of your submission, I think," Justice Scalia said, "that there is no wrong when a machine does not count those ballots that it's not supposed to count?"
In other words, Justice Scalia was reminding Mr. Olson that the Bush position was that undercounts caused by voter error, as opposed to a mechanical malfunction, were not ballots that qualified for counting under any standard.
"That's absolutely correct, Justice Scalia," Mr. Olson said.
"The voters are instructed to detach the chads entirely," Justice Scalia went on, "and the machine, as predicted, does not count those chads where those instructions are not followed, there isn't any wrong."
"That's correct," Mr. Olson said.
Justice Scalia, whose son, Eugene, is a partner of Mr. Olson's at the Los Angeles law firm Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, has been the most outspoken advocate on the court for Mr. Bush's position.
nytimes.com
Are Supreme Court Justices allowed to act as advocates for one side? Are they allowed to try cases where they have a clear conflict of interest?
Scumbria |
