posted on July 24, 2001 06:36:37 PMWhat we need to understand that it is dead wrong to grant authority over such auctions to the judiciary.
Auctions? A Freudian slip I'm sure, but that's the whole issue we are talking about, the election going the the highest bidder. I'll pay (say's Dumbya), say, 2 nice cushy Jobs for your kids.
If it didn't belong in the Florida Courts, it certainly didn't belong in the Federal Courts, after all, we (Those of us who Live in Florida) where where trying to elect electors to represent the state of Florida.
Who Need's a stink'n Sig. File?
UBB edit
[ edited by Microbes on Jul 24, 2001 06:37 PM ]
posted on July 24, 2001 06:45:58 PM
Oh, and if it's not for the Courts to decide if an election is on the up and up, then WHO decides. Any other choice I like even less.
Other than in a Presidental election, Then you send it to the House, where this one should have went.
Who Need's a stink'n Sig. File?
posted on July 24, 2001 06:55:36 PM
I thought it was supposed to go to the Florida state legislature.
I liked the one judge in the lower court, the one that looked like he may put a 'Gone Fishin' sign up at his courthouse. He was good. As soon as Gore lost in that one, is when the Gores attorneys ran to the Fl Supreme court.
I really liked that judge...
[i]Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the
Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector. [/i]
The Legislature of the State of Florida has chosen to do this by election. If the election didn't show a "winner" (and this election was all screwed up, on that point we most all agree), no electors should have been certified.
12th Admendment:
[i]if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those
voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state
having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of Representatives
shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President--The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number
of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to hat of Vice-President of the United States.[/i]
This is what (IMHO) should have been done with this election.
Who Need's a stink'n Sig. File?
[ edited by Microbes on Jul 24, 2001 07:15 PM ]
posted on July 24, 2001 08:09:56 PM
Uh, if I remember right, Al Gore himself, told everyone, whatever the Supreme Court (US) rules he will abide by, didn't he?
Not sayin what was done was right or wrong either.
posted on July 24, 2001 08:33:10 PM
Roofguy, apparently speaking in seriousness, says:
"What we need to understand that it is dead wrong to grant authority over such auctions to the judiciary".
"IF the courts can first order manual recounts, and then pass judgement on the inevitable list of issues which arise, the cours can move a huge number of votes, way more than what decided Florida"
Good grief! Is this some comedy or human interest giggle show? Maybe Art Linkletter is filming?
Out of the mouths of babes we hear that it is
"dead wrong" to grant authority over such as the Florida count from the same person who here defends the actions of the Supreme Court?
What kids will say!
As to leading you by the hand through the thicket of legalese, roofguy, I won't do it for you. Maybe someone else will, though I doubt it, but I've always felt that learning requires something of a student, and no learning occurs when information is spoonfed.
I have given you the road and the tools, now you will have to go to your house and build it. Whining along the way won't make it easier for you, I'm afraid.
posted on July 25, 2001 07:37:03 AM
Microbes: Oh, and if it's not for the Courts to decide if an election is on the up and up, then WHO decides.
The question in Florida was never whether the election (not auction, sorry) was on the up and up. There is no evidence that this election was fraudulent.
What we do have is an election where the noise level exceeds the precision of any possible count.
The state of Florida is entitled to select electors AS THE STATE CHOOSES. The State of Florida selected a method which yielded Bush the winner. The courts have no business interfering.
You seem to have posted the relevant article from the constitution yourself.
This is important, because it prevents the creation of a judicial aristocracy in America, with the courts deciding elections of people who will then appoint new members to the courts.
posted on July 25, 2001 07:40:05 AM"dead wrong" to grant authority over such as the Florida count from the same person who here defends the actions of the Supreme Court?
The action of the US Supreme Court was to tell the Florida Supreme Court "stay out of it".
The US Supreme court did not in any way select the winner. They allowed the State of Florida to carry out the constitutional duty to select an elector.
posted on July 25, 2001 08:13:18 AM
Amazing. The supreme court told the florida court to stay out of the florida election, you say on the tail of having said that elections are the business of the states according to the constitution? And you say that seriously?
Err, exception. The electoral procedure is set forth in each state in state law and is the business of the state only. The state court assures, when issues arise, that the in place law is adhered to by all parties. Is this basic civics too basic for you?
The US court should never have been petitioned, one, and once petitioned should never have accepted any case for ruling but should rather have remanded to the state court. And that's more or less what they did, to save their butts from complete impropriety. But, they had to impose that quirky little business about equal treatment in denying equal treatment to the democratic campaign, and also say that there wasn't time (which there was plenty of) to continue.
The inability of the state process to decide a winner through it's own devices is to be then taken by the US CONGRESS, not the US court, for final decision. But there was no time for that according to the arguments presented by the Bush lawyers and subscribed to by the majority of the biased US court.
No evidence of fraud, you repeat? What? Is your first name rumpelstiltskin? Like "Rumple Roofguy" or something like that? Been sleeping?
There has been an enormous amount of evidence of fraudulent practice in that state in that election. As I implied above and you seemed to have missed, they have RePug Dogs in Florida registered voters who voted. It seems almost as if every Cuban in Miami took glee in voting twice or more. There were mysterious absentee ballots forced into acceptance by Republicans that were submitted after the election was over, or were sent without evidence of the compliance required in the link(s) I've provided which need signatures, requests, postmarks, and all that sort of stuff before they can be allowed to tally according to the laws ignored. There were people prevented from voting because they had been termed felons when they were not. Prevented by the convenienttly located state police safety checks of vehicles in front of polling places in two counties at least. Prevented by having their registered polling place, which many of them had used for years suddenlt become the incorrect polling place, and their names appearing on the rolls in polling places clear across town. The list goes on and on and on, and you've somehow missed it?.
Even republicans are acknowledging that there was funny stuff going on down there.
But be all of that as it may be. Wasn't it you who noted that over 100 million votes were cast in this election? There were, and Gore carried the majority of them with more than a half million lead. If Bush were even as honorable as most petty but non violent criminals often are he'd have conceded because he would have known that regardless Florida the American people do not want him for their president.
But no. Not this egotistical little ignoramus. He has no honor for he will accept a win by cheating.
posted on July 25, 2001 09:24:51 AM
Julesy-he said before any ruling, that he would abide by it, he then conceded after the U.S. Supreme court ruled
The election dragged out until Dec 11. The FL supreme court wanted to extend the counting, which was not in their own state laws to do so, that is why the U.S. SC came in. (well one reason)
posted on July 25, 2001 10:06:56 AMThe state of Florida is entitled to select electors AS THE STATE CHOOSES. The State of Florida selected a method which yielded Bush the winner. The courts have no business interfering.
To interfer, no, to rule on if it was according to the rules, yes.
A Freudian slip I'm sure, but that's the whole issue we are talking about, the election going the the highest bidder. I'll pay (say's Dumbya), say, 2 nice cushy Jobs for your kids.
exactly.......
