Intel Corporation (INTC) Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC)

INTC 48.32

-0.8%

Jan 15 3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Elmer who wrote (122443)	12/13/2000 12:48:44 AM
From: Scumbria	Read Replies (2) of 186894

Elmer, You obviously missed the part about 7 out of 9 agreeing the recount violated the equal protection clause plus it was illegal in the first place because the first ruling of the FSC had already been vacated. What is truly amazing is how the FSC could possibly have missed the unfairness of the total absence of any standards whatsoever, not to mention the mystical divining of dimples. This was just a complete no-brainer and apparrently they had no brain. The "equal protection" argument is absurd. PBC voters were denied equal protection because they had to use butterfly ballots. Black voters were denied equal protection because they were given wrong instructions. Democrats in Seminole County were denied equal protection because they did not have equal access to the absentee ballot correction process. The USSC has opened up a can of worms, which will haunt them forever. They have laid the ground work for any two bit judge in Florida to overturn the election results, based on the precedent they set tonight. Scumbria

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next