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 : Electoral College 2000 - Ahead of the Curve -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Philosopher who wrote (4458)	12/3/2000 9:06:34 PM
From: Carolyn	Respond to of 6710

Here is the complete report. Amazing! XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX SUN DEC 03, 2000 20:29:31 ET XXXXX CONTROVERSY SWIRLS AROUND SUPREME JUSTICE BREYER; COMMENTS MADE BY GORE 'FRIEND' INDICATE PREJUDICE As the nation waits for the US Supreme Court to rule, Justice Stephen Breyer found himself in the middle of complete controversy after Friday's historic oral arguments where he indicated how he had prejudice against Florida's Secretary of State. Justice Breyer, appointed by the Clinton/Gore administration, slipped during questioning and revealed just how Election 2000 has become a bitter battle split down partisan lines -- even inside of the land's highest court! Breyer stunned watchers inside of the courtroom as he grilled Joseph Klock, a lawyer for Republican Secretary of State Katherine Harris. Justice Breyer framed the debate by stating: Whether we win, whether your side wins. "And now the secretary has certified a winner," Justice Breyer declared. "And therefore, I guess, whether we win -- whether your side, the side your supporting wins or loses, it doesn't change that." The Justice's view that he is on the opposing side of Secretary Harris, who awarded George Bush the state's electoral votes, may be rooted in the fact that Vice President Gore is a personal friend -- who argued vigorously for the selection and confirmation of Breyer to the Court. Gore was a driving force during formal meetings held by President Clinton's Supreme Court search team in the Spring of 1994. During the sessions, a list of a dozen prospects were considered to fill retiring Justice Harry Blackmun's seat. In the end, the nomination was given to Breyer, a personal friend of Gore's. On July 8, 1994, Gore said of Breyer: "Just speaking in personal terms, it is a great pleasure to be able to promote the virtue of this particular nomination. He is a friend and he is obviously an outstanding jurist... the more you know him, the more you come to appreciate what he is really like -- his wife and his family and he, himself, are really wonderful people... His whole approach to life, I think, is just a real model. I think he's a wonderful person." Breyer's "whether we win, whether your side wins" comment made in open court on Friday ignited nonstop conversations throughout Washington, even though the nation's main press has remained silent on the slip. Said one insider: "What if Justice Scalia had made such a revealing comment? Or Clarence Thomas? Another media lynching would have begun, at a minimum with calls for recusal from Jesse Jackson." One court staffer told the DRUDGE REPORT late Sunday, "I think you can now understand why the justices would rather debate without the glare of the camera, or even the broadcast microphone." A Gore campaign spokesman refused to comment for this report. ----------------------------------------------------------- Filed By Matt Drudge Reports are moved when circumstances warrant drudgereport.com for updates (c)DRUDGE REPORT 2000

To: The Philosopher who wrote (4458)	12/3/2000 9:41:43 PM
From: TraderGreg	Read Replies (6) \| Respond to of 6710

Of course, all that really shows that, unlike Breyer, Scalia and Thomas are far more expert in hiding their overt bias...in fact, I do believe that Thomas actually no longer thinks he is black. TG

To: The Philosopher who wrote (4458)	12/4/2000 1:01:09 AM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6710

Hi Christopher, Have you heard about Justice Breyer's alleged comment in the Supreme Court hearing? I'm afraid you are engaged in exactly the sort of sound-bite sophistry that Justice Souter so roundly derided when he said that cameras would be allowed in the Supreme Court chambers "over my dead body". This supposed offense to fairness is nothing unusual whatsoever. Drudge knows that, he just uses this nonsense to stir up folks who really don't understand how the system works. You've been taken for a ride by a propagandist. If you were to apply the same fine tooth comb to Justice Scalia's comments and questions you would swear, with selective editing, that he needs to recuse himself as well because of his bias. This is just not the case. The justices often can and do play devil's advocates roles with the attorneys before them. To read what Justice Breyer had to say as a sign of malignant partisanship simply shows that you need to spend more time reading serious studies of the court and far less time of sensationalism like the Drudge Report. He's pretty damn close to the National Enquirer, as far as how much credibility he has. Best, Ray

To: The Philosopher who wrote (4458)	12/4/2000 11:38:58 AM
From: Don Pueblo	Respond to of 6710

Yes, he really did say it. I heard him say it.

To: The Philosopher who wrote (4458)	12/4/2000 11:43:49 AM
From: Don Pueblo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6710

I'm tuned into MSNBC right now. A few minutes ago, the anchor described Bush's legal position as "crazy"! It's nothing but, 'this is Gore's position, and this is why Bush is scared, here's what happens if Gore wins, etc. etc.' It is simply astounding to me that the media has such a hard time not choosing sides. It seems like anyone that is not adamant about Al Gore being right has some sort of mental incapacity.