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.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Joe NYC who wrote (122590)	12/13/2000 2:14:21 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Joe, re: "But on the merits of the case, Bush side had an excellent case, both from the perspective of law, and from a basic principle of fairness, so once the USSC took the case, the outcome was not that tough to predict." You are right. The outcome shouldn't have been hard to predict, because the "Justices" ruled directly down party lines. It was a partisan selection of Bush, not a court ruling. From dissent of Justice Stevens, joined by Justices Breyer and Ginsburg "Time will one day heal the wound to that confidence that will be inflicted by today's decision. One thing however is certain. Although we may never know with complete certainty the identity of the loser is perfectly clear. It is the Nation's confidence in the judge as an impartial* guardian of the rule of law."* The US Supreme Court selected the President, not the voters. John