Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SecularBull who wrote (71560)	11/12/2000 4:15:33 PM
From: Proud_Infidel	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 769667

Why the Manual Recount is Unconstitutional: Due Process, Equal Protection and Carol Roberts The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment of the U.S. Constitution prohibits states from denying any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. In other words, the laws of a state must treat an individual in the same manner as others in similar conditions and circumstances. The equal protection clause is not intended to provide "equality" among individuals or classes but only "equal application" of the laws. The result, therefore, of a law is not relevant so long as there is no discrimination in its application. Generally, the question of whether the equal protection clause has been violated arises when a state grants a particular class of individuals the right to engage in activity yet denies other individuals the same right. There is no clear rule for deciding when a classification is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court has dictated the application of different tests depending on the type of classification and it's effect on fundamental rights. Traditionally, the Court finds a state classification constitutional if it has "a rational basis" to a "legitimate state purpose." The Supreme Court, however, has applied more stringent analysis in certain cases. It will "strictly scrutinize" a distinction when it embodies a "suspect classification." In order for a classification to be subject to strict scrutiny, it must be shown that the state law or its administration is meant to discriminate. [The reason for the Gore camp's selection of only DEMOCRATIC COUNTIES was precisely to discriminate against Bush and for Gore.] In order for a classification to be found permissible under this test it must be proven, by the state, that there is a compelling interest to the law and that the classification is necessary to further that interest. The Court will also apply a strict scrutiny test if the classification interferes with fundamental rights such as first amendment rights, the right to privacy, or the right to travel [or the right to vote]. The 14th amendment is not by its terms applicable to the federal government. ("No State shall . . . deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.") Actions by the federal government, however, that classify individuals in a discriminatory manner will, under similar circumstances, violate the due process of the fifth amendment. ("No person shall be . . . deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.") But if fundamental fairness, the essential arbitrariness of the process, fraud laws, rational thought and the due process and equal protection provisions of the U.S. Constitution aren't enough to challenge Gore's selective manual recount, then Palm Beach County Commissioner Carol Roberts is. Last night we were witness to Ms. Roberts' ruthlessness, bitter partisanship and bias in real time. After the 1% sample count of four Palm Beach precincts was completed, Roberts and the two other members of the board overseeing this process (its chairman is a judge) announced the results and continued their meeting in front of the cameras. What we saw was nothing short of astonishing. Although the judge urged the board to seek expert advice, and although a state lawyer who would be one of those experts demonstrated that Roberts was misinterpreting Florida law, Roberts maintained despotic control, quashing all dissent and insisting on a countywide manual recount. Most astonishing: the essence of her argument was that such a recount would favor Gore. Moreover, Roberts alluded to her control of past Palm Beach elections. I would refer you here to PALM COUNTY REGISTERED VOTER DEMOGRAPHICS. Palm Beach appears to be the epicenter and Carol Roberts the prime mover of Democrat election fraud.