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: ColtonGang who wrote (86251)	11/24/2000 9:10:29 AM
From: U Up U Down	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

SISSY AL'S GOING DOWN KICKING & SCREAMING Friday,November 24,2000 By STEVE DUNLEAVY --------- He has single-handedly divided this country in the most dramatic way since the Vietnam War. And if you want to make a stretch, since the Civil War. This tobacco-rich child of a pampered life who excoriated tobacco farmers is really just a sissy . . . he demands to win and doesn't want to fight for it. What happened in the three explosive counties - Palm Beach, Broward, Miami-Dade - is something that even Al Capone could not control. What happened to Al the Sissy's party loyalty? He actually sued Democratic canvassing boards in Palm Beach County and Miami-Dade County - they weren't doing what he wanted. And the sissy stamped his foot. nypost.com

To: ColtonGang who wrote (86251)	11/24/2000 9:22:19 AM
From: U Up U Down	Respond to of 769670

A boomerang chad It turns out that an Illinois court case trumpeted by the Gore campaign as a mandate for counting "dimpled" or "pregnant" chads actually makes the opposite point. The trial judge in the Illinois Supreme Court case — cited in the Florida Supreme Court decision Tuesday to allow manual recounts in three heavily Democratic counties — did not count a single dimpled chad, the Chicago Tribune reports. Attorneys for the Gore campaign had implied that the Florida high court's quotation from the Illinois Supreme Court case was a subtle suggestion that county canvassing boards should go ahead and count ballots with slight indentations. "The judge [in the Illinois case] did not count ballots that were indented because he could not determine the voters' intent," said lawyer Burton Odelson, who represented challenger Rosemary Mulligan in the 1990 case. "From the beginning, I knew everybody [in Florida] was interpreting this case wrong and reading into it what they wanted to read into it." washtimes.com