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: ecommerceman who wrote (107556)	12/9/2000 12:05:40 PM
From: gao seng	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Legislatures pass new laws that supersede old laws every day they meet. This statement you made in support of the judicial action taken by the FSCC seems to indicate that you think that since the legislative branch can pass new laws, why can't the judicial branch? Water under the bridge, anyway. Courts do determine the intent of existing laws, and provide remedies where they feel warranted. But remedies are legislated. Not invented by the courts. Yesterday's decision to provide a remedy was anti-democratic. I will let Harding state my case: As such, I would find that the selective recounting requested by Appellant is not available under the election contest provisions of section 102.168. Such an application does not provide for a more accurate reflection of the will of the voters but, rather, allows for an unfair distortion of the statewide vote. It is patently unlawful to permit the recount of “no-votes” in a single county to determine the outcome of the November 7, 2000, election for the next President of the United States. We are a nation of laws, and we have survived and prospered as a free nation because we have adhered to the rule of law. Fairness is achieved by following the rules.