From: INVALID_SEE_SIG@example.com.invalid   
      
   In the previous article, David Carson   wrote:   
   > Excuse me, Bush v. Gore did not hand the presidency to Bush. Bush v.   
   > Gore said that the Florida Supreme Court had to stop violating   
   > Florida law in an effort to hand the election to Gore. Bush won   
   > every count and every recount, but that wasn't good enough for the   
   > election deniers in Tallahassee. And if the Supreme Court had   
   > refused to take the case (which it should have), then the Florida   
   > legislature was going to exercise its legitimate power to end the   
   > shenanigans and recognize Bush as the winner.   
      
   This case was a perfect litmus test for whether you are capable of   
   reasoning beyond "their team / my team." Note that Souter and Breyer   
   agreed that the recount Gore was asking for -- selectively based on   
   counties to maximize the potential of a Gore win -- would violate the   
   Equal Protection clause in ways that any first-year law student should   
   have found obvious. *That* part of the decision was 7-2 with the "2"   
   being Ginsburg and Stevens, reliable political hacks rather than   
   jurists.   
      
   Breyer and Souter had an idea that the case should be remanded to the   
   Florida Supreme Court with instructions to recount every county   
   uniformly, but pretty well everyone agreed that couldn't practically   
   be done by the statutory deadlines. The idea was that the statutory   
   deadlines didn't really matter all that much and the recount should   
   take place even if those deadlines were blown. The "You don't get a   
   remedy that violates the law" decision was 5-4 because of those two.   
   Shameful.   
      
   The problem with this is that Gore had already had a right to demand a   
   recount procedurally. He *didn't do that* and he went to court   
   instead, recognizing that a uniform recount didn't give him much of a   
   chance. His only hope to be president rested on a selective recount.   
   Letting the deadline pass and then saying "Well, I didn't get my Plan   
   'A' can I still please do that other thing?" doesn't really fly,   
   legally speaking.   
      
   > There was no legal path for Gore to be the winner of that election.   
      
   That Florida Supreme Court opinion was the most brazen attempt to   
   steal an election within my lifetime, and I was alive when LBJ   
   finagled votes in Texas to steal its electoral votes from Richard   
   Nixon. They expressly announced that the law didn't matter and that   
   the votes should be "recounted" the way one candidate wanted because   
   that's what they thought best. Almost 25 years later, I remain   
   astonished at the sheer chutzpah on display. (We got a little replay   
   of it in Pennsylvania last November, as well ...)   
   --   
     _+_ From the catapult of |If anyone objects to any statement I make, I am   
   _|70|___:)=}- J.D. Baldwin |quite prepared not only to retract it, but also   
   \      /  baldwin@panix.com|to deny under oath that I ever made it.-T. Lehrer   
   ***~~~~----------------------------------------------------------------------   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)