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 : The Left Wing Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: YlangYlangBreeze who wrote (887)	12/12/2000 11:55:04 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Respond to of 6089

Stopping the count, then saying there is no time is in the spirit of Sauls' original lower court ruling that said that Gore hadn't proved that counting the disputed ballots would change the results. That's life. The quick article from the NYT: Bush Prevails in Supreme Court nytimes.com On interesting bit: Justices O'Connor and Kennedy were the only justices whose names did not appear separately on any opinion, indicating that one or both of them wrote the court's unsigned majority opinion, labeled only ``per curiam,'' or ``by the court.'' Its focus was narrow, limited to the ballot counting process itself. The opinion objected not only to the varying standards used by different counties for determining voter intent, but to aspects of the Florida Supreme Court's order determining which ballots should be counted. Needless to say, that didn't go far enough for Scalia, Thomas, and Rehnquist, who had to go the extra mile to enhance W's "legitimacy". Three members of the majority - the Chief Justice, and Justices Scalia and Thomas - raised further, more basic objections to the recount and said the Florida Supreme Court had violated state law in ordering it. Cheers, Dan.