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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Zeev's Turnips -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bosco who wrote (123)	11/22/2000 1:13:39 AM
From: Carl R.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 644

As expected, the Florida court ruled unanimously in favor of Gore. In the course of the ruling they start out by admitting that they feel no compelling urge to follow the law. They state "the will of the people, not a hyper-technical reliance upon statutory provisions should be our guiding principle". The proceed to substitute their own dates for those of the legislature, and proceed to substitute their own discretion for the discretion of the executive branch, thus neatly violating all constitutional precepts where only the the legislative branch can create laws and only the executive branch can apply them; in Florida the Supreme Court can create laws from nothing, and can exercise its own discretion in applying them. As I have said previously, nothing good can come from the US Supreme Court overruling the Florida Court, so they should just let this bad decision stand. I'm glad I don't live in Florida where the Supreme court has absolute power and isn't bound by normal separation of powers or by precedent. Carl

To: Bosco who wrote (123)	11/22/2000 1:15:12 AM
From: Zeev Hed	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 644

I have not been able to watch all the news, but my wife did. She said she heard that "Republican Operatives" got from the Secretary of state in the two days post the election lists of registered Republicans voters outside the sate and got "some" to vote post the election. At least one of the ballots was signed November 9th, or post stamped that date. Did any one hear anything on this or did my wife imagine (disclosure, she has never voted for a Republican President, thus we have a little contention about politics in the house and "who really plays the old Daily Games" nowadays). She also said that some of the "Military ballots" rejected were because the voters did not have an address in the county to which they sent their vote. I wonder if some absentee (both Reps and Dems) vote more than once by having phony addresses in a plurality of counties, do they have a central registrar making sure that each voter vote only once? Zeev irrevolute.iuma.com