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: donjuan_demarco who wrote (112507)	12/12/2000 3:40:56 PM
From: Harvey Allen	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769670

15:36 Fla. State House approves measure to approve its own slate of electors 14:48 Sen. Lott: Hopes Congress won't have to decide presidency

To: donjuan_demarco who wrote (112507)	12/12/2000 3:45:55 PM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Long ago I precited a six to three U.S. Supreme Court vote tilting to Gore's favor, with Renquist, Scalia and Thomas writing minority opinions. But it might be possible that Renquist, given it'll be history which will view this decision the greater scrutiny, might not want the name of his court associated with a Dread Scott-like decision. This could possibly make it seven to two. It's pretty bad that two of Scalia's sons are now hired by Bush's attorney's: one a member of Olson's firm; the other having just joined Barry Richard's firm. And, of course, under Bush, Scalia could become chief justice. Conflict anyone? Someone please tell Clarence Thomas that if he backs Scalia in this one, he's barking up the wrong tree.