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 : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (85812)	11/23/2000 9:45:42 AM
From: Mike M2	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 132070

Nadine. I understand that there is a federal law which supercedes all state laws concerning military votes. I seem to recall the FL law read dated OR postmarked. It is not unusual for military mail to be sent without a postmark. The democrats went too far on this one it is disgusting and disgraceful. The men and women of the armed forces are ready to risk their lives for all Americans so they should be given every consideration by all Americans. Think of all men who died in combat and the grief felt by their family and friends. A British soldier Wally Parsons made a very moving comment about those who died during WWII " they gave up all of their tomorrows for your today" . mike

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (85812)	11/23/2000 11:19:34 AM
From: Freedom Fighter	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 132070

Nadine, These are my feelings about court decisions. The party that appoints members of the court will tend to appoint judges whose interpretation of the law and other controversial items is similar to their own. (similar philosophies) So when a court is stacked one way, you get a very partisan decision without any partisan intent. I don't know enough about the Florida law. In fact, I am clueless, but the fact that a very controversial issue was decided unanimously in favor of Gore leads me to believe that that court is stacked with the kind of judges that believe courts should legislate. That doesn't make it unfair - just not consistent with my own personal philosophy. I hope we get a more balanced view from the Supreme Court whichever way it goes. Wayne

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (85812)	11/23/2000 6:45:08 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Respond to of 132070

>>The Republicans really feel that heaven owes them this one.<< nadine, you say that as though gore doesn't think the same thing. he does. i assure you. gore just said he won't concede fl even if he loses according to the fl supreme court ruling. >>As for the court, being appointed by Democrats is not the same as being co-chair of Bush's campaign, for goodness sake.<< nadine, the important factor is the bias in the thought process. i don't know why harris was unfair, i just know her actions appeared biased (and i called her decision b4 she made it!). same with the court. statistics will show that decisions favoring one's partisan side are due to random chance with a near nonexistent possibility. what is the cause if it isn't random variation? i have my guess. >>As for the military votes, blame the Florida legislature! The law requiring postmarks may be idiotic but it seems unambiguous.<< except when compared against federal law, nadine. a federal law that doesn't require postmarks from military in combat zones. there is ambiguity. the irony is that some argue to include improperly filled out ballots for their side but they don't want to include improperly filled out ballots for the other. the repubs argue it is the legislature's fault when it suits their purpose and the demos argue the same thing when it suits their purpose. when it doesn't suit their purpose, they attempt to get the law interpreted or changed (again, depending on one's viewpoint). you want to blame the legislature for the military votes (supporting the wrong guy) but you want to change the legislature's ruling when it doesn't agree with your guy. convenient. ;-) >>Notice that the Bush camp slammed the Democrats about military ballots on the courthouse steps but had nothing whatsoever to say about them inside the courthouse. << the bush campaign has integrity and intellectual honesty issues. serious issues. where we disagree is that i interpret the actions of gore and the demos to reflect the same issues in just about the same magnitude. i do not like either candidate. having viewed what i perceieve as ridiculous positions by folks with an emotional vested interest in the outcome, i can only hope that when i do have an interest that my view point doesn't become as situational and liquid as it needs to be to justify my interests (even when my interests act wrong). ps - i do have to give initial kudos to the counters in s fl. given the lackluster numbers for gore coming out of s fl, it would appear they are performing their job professionally. i am concerned about the canvassers, though. one rejected a hand count for a republican running for state office losing by about 11 votes. "not enough." if they count a number of ballots that have a dimple for president with no other dimples on the ballot then they are playing politics. i understand one county won't count this way. i understand gore is suing. thank goodness gore cares about us so much he'll sue his own party's canvassing board. what a guy! ;-)

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (85812)	11/24/2000 12:01:50 AM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 132070

>>The Republicans really feel that heaven owes them this one.<< here's the evidence. 1. gore lost the original election. 2. gore lost the recount of the original election. 3. gore is suing his democratic partisans in miami b/c they can't comply with the supreme court ruling. 4. gore is suing to mandate dimpled ballot counting 5. now gore is saying he will not concede, indeed he will contest, the florida election, if he loses - even though he cherry picked manual count counties and the count was completed under the fl supreme court guidleines. >>The Republicans really feel that heaven owes them this one.<< of course, gore is doing this for selfless reasons. maybe he really does "feel our pain." ;-) given these facts, i wonder why some democrats find it so easy to criticize republicans and so hard to criticize democrats (i also wonder the same visa versa, but that isn't applicable to your democratic leanings). re: >>What is the federal issue involved here?<< i believe it is fundamentally unfair to weight 3 county votes more than the rest of the state county votes. my guess is that bush somehow screws up this argument by stating manual counts are unfair (i believe they are more fair than 3-5% error rate machines). imho, manual counts are great. unfortunately, the fl supreme court screwed many more florida voters than they helped by approving the 3 county manual count. if the voter's interests were REALLY of importance, they would have manually counted the state. jmho. re: >>When both sides are scrapping for votes, do you really expect the Democrats to say "this absentee ballot has no postmark, or is dated after Nov. 7, so it's clearly illegal, but what the hey, it may be from one of our brave servicemen, so let it in anyway." Ain't gonna happen.<< not gonna happen. that is unless they felt the votes helped them. then they'd argue no rational person would every disqualify them ;-) the republicans would sing a chorus of "the rule of law" over and over. my point is the demos and pubs LIE when they say they have the voters' interest at heart. bore and gush are manipluative, lying hacks. and, equally so. jmho.