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: lawdog who wrote (109353)	12/10/2000 11:26:35 AM
From: Don Pueblo	Respond to of 769667

the S.Ct. sanctioned subversion of the Constitution and Bill of Rights I hope this is your employer's next argument. Please let him know that I heartily concur with your premise, and I would think that David Boies would be the perfect choice to argue that premise to all the Justices of the United States Supreme Court. Get Alan Dershowitz to explain it on television. He would be perfect. Jesse Jackson will go along with it, too. It really works for him, I'm sure. Call him up and ask him. He can have a demonstration on the front steps of the Supreme Court! Have Daley send some labor union administrative assistants over to cover the back exits. Geraldo Rivera can cover it live. THE BATTLE AT THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT Here's the plan: Have Jerry Nadler grind up half a dozen Burrito Supremes, and then he can go in and cut one real close the bench, Dick Gephardt can light it, and POOOOOF! No more United States Supreme Court! Just out of curiousity, how much money has the Democratic Party spent on this venture so far? How much of this do you think that average American will believe? LOL!

To: lawdog who wrote (109353)	12/10/2000 11:55:50 AM
From: Gordon A. Langston	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

fact: the system does intend for hand recounts to occur. Florida stautes provide that a candidate may request recounts in up to four counties This 4 counties "limit" has been stated as fact here before but I cannot find it. I have asked others that have stated this and they come up with the statutes on precinct sampling or something. If you could post it I would appreciate it.

To: lawdog who wrote (109353)	12/10/2000 8:20:28 PM
From: Dan B.	Respond to of 769667

Re: "What you posted wasn't reality. It was alternate universe spin from the GOP." In fact, what I posted was simply what I figured out using common sense within the first few days. Re: "fact: the system does intend for hand recounts to occur" Hey, you think I didn't know that? Are you implying I said it didn't? Where'd you get that? Not from MY words. In any event, I knew that. Re: "...a candidate may request recounts in up to four counties. Gore did this. Bush could have." Noone seems to know about the four counties thing, but no matter. What you say doesn't show that the legislature intended either candidate to fight for, or attain, territorial counting advantages. Hand-counting for punch-card territory, whether you like it or not, simply wasn't written into law with the intent that candidates would battle for skewed counting advantages. I defy you to show me a single other case where such a battle took place. It's downright un-American to count votes that way, and I'm certainly feeling Bush rises above for refusing to participate in this silly proposition Gore put forward. We count votes as fairly as possible in America. Noone, certainly not the Fla. State legislature, set up a system intending that counting advantages may accrue to a candidate who seeks them. Re: "It what the Florida law requires. Gore follows the rule of the law, to you it's just a platitude" Sorry. Simply not so. If it were, there could be no reading of the law from which Bush could even begin to make a case There would be no case settled with the directive "closeness is not reason enough to hand-count,(I paraphrose)" but there is. If there were such an intent, the Fla. Supreme wouldn't have had to reject the Boise argument insisting that only his challenged territory needed lawfully to be counted when they ruled the other day. Re: "Bush did get hand recounts in numerous Florida counties. Here is a small sample of the areas in which Bush benefoited from hand recounts (did Bush refuse to accept these votes? No)" Dude, can you ever tell the truth here? "Small sample?" You covered all the handcounts that took place without special requests being made, and Bush DID NOT benefit from them all. They were mainly if not all, optical counties who followed the law without a candidate's request involved. Bush, as you say, did not make special requests. You claim to offer a "partial" list of counties where Bush benefitted, yet GORE benefitted greatly in one, and noone knows who benefitted in another. Lame argument dude, just lame. Again, you claim to offer a "small sample" when in fact you've covered them all, but they didn't all even benefit Bush. Lame argument dude. Are you even aware when you write falsehoods like this? If not, you were just mistaken. I don't suppose you'd like to apologize for your gross error, would you? Re: "It is not unprecedented. Hand recounts are so common place that the statutory and case law is very clear. Hand recounts are to be preferred to machine recounts because the punch card system has inherent flaws." There is nothing in statutory case law indicating that territorial advantages should accrue to candidate as a result of counting by special request a few of the counties where the punch-card system is used. Quite the opposite, if anything. The Fla. Supreme Court dissenting decision recognized this when it indicated the current situation was never imagined, in so many words...and SO DID THE MAJORITY OPINION, when they insisted it'd only be fair to count in all the counties. To the extent that either candidate gained from a counting of only but a portion of favorable precincts within a county without counting and adding in the rest of the precincts, I decry that. The Fla. Supreme court included such an advantage for Gore from Dade county in it's recent decision. I decry that. Freedom Works, Dan B