Words That Will Live In Infamy Forever!

[RetiredGySgt]

Words that will live in infamy forever... "The counting of votes that are of questionable legality does, in my view, threaten irreparable harm to petitioner (Bush), and to the country, by casting a cloud upon what he (Bush) claims to be the legitimacy of his election." - Antonin Scalia, Supreme Court Justice

Scalia's statement can be found at: Supreme Court of the United States, No. 00-949 (00A504) George W. Bush et al. V Albert Gore, Jr. et al. Scalia J. concurring opinion. 531 US_(2000).

Well darn I guess the other members of the court that agreed with him were just mindless robots and lest you forget the decision that ruled the affair unacceptable was 7-2, that means 2 of the LIBERALS agreed.

 

[Silence]

The 2000 election was stolen.... by Bush and by the GOP...

there are no two ways around it.

Bush won FL by a mere 537 votes.... which would've demanded a manual recount in any other circumstance.

In some counties Gore came back with a NEGATIVE 16K votes....how does that happen exactly?

Now the Cons and whoever can deny the facts but those are the facts.

Bush's brother was Gov of FL.....and said I will deliver FL to my brother

Katharine Harris was Secretary of State and also ran Bush's FL campaign

it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what happened.

a President hadn't lost the popular vote and won the election since 1888 when Benjamin Harris won the election with 233 electoral votes but lost the popular vote by 90,000 votes

Bush won the electoral vote 271 to 266 but lost the popular vote by 540,000 votes.

FactCheck.org: How many times was a president elected who did not win the popular vote?

that said, it's time to stop bitching about what can't be changed.

 

[del]

Even if true, how do you reconcile what he said with the fact that all of the precedents required that the high court NOT intervene in election law matters... that they were the sole purview of the highest court of the State.

And also, how do you reconcile what he said with the fact that the decision was specifically made inapplicable to any other case and has no precedential value.

That isn't one of those things that make you go hmmmmmmmmmmm?

it made me go hmmm, eight freaking years ago, but somehow i've moved on.
if Gore had carried his home state, the one where the Senate seat was a family heirloom and the family owns the largest newspaper, it would have been moot.
personally, i don't think the election was stolen in Fl, but even if i did, after 8 years i'd find something else to fixate on.

just sayin...

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Even if true, how do you reconcile what he said with the fact that all of the precedents required that the high court NOT intervene in election law matters... that they were the sole purview of the highest court of the State.

And also, how do you reconcile what he said with the fact that the decision was specifically made inapplicable to any other case and has no precedential value.

That isn't one of those things that make you go hmmmmmmmmmmm?

AND YET 7 of the 9 AGREED with the basis of the Courts finding, I guess they bribed those 2 liberals right?

And the High Court had no choice but to intervene when a partisan Florida Supreme Court tried to illegally give an election to their own guy. Or is it not the same when 4 of 7 vote one way but horrible when 7 of 9 do? Or on the last issue 5 of 9?

I suggest you review reality. On this , as most issues, you are a partisan hack. The only thing that makes me go HMMMMMM is why you do not care that 4 democrats tried to steal an election for a democrat. Ohh wait never mind, partisan hack.

 

[jillian]

it made me go hmmm, eight freaking years ago, but somehow i've moved on.
if Gore had carried his home state, the one where the Senate seat was a family heirloom and the family owns the largest newspaper, it would have been moot.
personally, i don't think the election was stolen in Fl, but even if i did, after 8 years i'd find something else to fixate on.

just sayin...

Ah...but the damage cases do lives after them while the good is oft...

oops...sorry, wrong script.

Well, Roe v Wade was decided 38 years ago, in 1973. Does that mean we can stop talking about that case too?



Seriously, the entire point of a Supreme Court ruling is for precedential value. The Court's not even SUPPOSED to take a case if it doesn't have general applicablity. So yeah, I guess since that type of thing is my bread and butter I found it pretty offensive... and yes, people still talk about it because none of us had ever seen anything like it.

 

[jillian]

AND YET 7 of the 9 AGREED with the basis of the Courts finding, I guess they bribed those 2 liberals right?

And the High Court had no choice but to intervene when a partisan Florida Supreme Court tried to illegally give an election to their own guy. Or is it not the same when 4 of 7 vote one way but horrible when 7 of 9 do? Or on the last issue 5 of 9?

I suggest you review reality. On this , as most issues, you are a partisan hack. The only thing that makes me go HMMMMMM is why you do not care that 4 democrats tried to steal an election for a democrat. Ohh wait never mind, partisan hack.

you keep talking about the 7 out of 9... that was only on one of the issues.

go back and look again, because a little knowledge is such a dangerous thing.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The 2000 election was stolen.... by Bush and by the GOP...

there are no two ways around it.

Bush won FL by a mere 537 votes.... which would've demanded a manual recount in any other circumstance.

In some counties Gore came back with a NEGATIVE 16K votes....how does that happen exactly?

Now the Cons and whoever can deny the facts but those are the facts.

Bush's brother was Gov of FL.....and said I will deliver FL to my brother

Katharine Harris was Secretary of State and also ran Bush's FL campaign

it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what happened.

a President hadn't lost the popular vote and won the election since 1888 when Benjamin Harris won the election with 233 electoral votes but lost the popular vote by 90,000 votes

Bush won the electoral vote 271 to 266 but lost the popular vote by 540,000 votes.

FactCheck.org: How many times was a president elected who did not win the popular vote?

that said, it's time to stop bitching about what can't be changed.

You of course are aware that almost every county in Florida had DEMOCRATS running the election? That said democrats COUNTED the votes and controlled the machines and the vote process? You were aware of this? ANd of course you were aware that Gore only challenged 3 counties, again where democrats designed and printed and provided the voter cards and ballots?

You are further aware the the Secretary of State had NOTHING to do with any of the recounts, right? Those were handled BY the local election boards all run by DEMOCRATS? That Gore received his mandatory recount? That STATE LAW required the election be certified and that the lower court agreed every time that the State law was correct and enforced correctly? That a Democrat filled Supreme Court ignored precedent and voted to aid and abet a Democrat in an attempt to thwart the will of the voters of Florida and when that failed attempted to prevent the entire State from counting in the Electoral College by mandating no certification by the time it was due?

The reality is Gore not Bush attempted to steal the election. Every recount has proven it by the way. But hey you dumb shits keep whining, I am sure if McCain wins in November we will be subject to 4 more years of your ignorant lies.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

you keep talking about the 7 out of 9... that was only on one of the issues.

go back and look again, because a little knowledge is such a dangerous thing.

IT was on the issue of whether the Court had standing to hear the case you partisan hack. You keep claiming they did not. BZZZT try again partisan hack.

 

[del]

Ah...but the damage cases do lives after them while the good is oft...

oops...sorry, wrong script.

Well, Roe v Wade was decided 38 years ago, in 1973. Does that mean we can stop talking about that case too?



Seriously, the entire point of a Supreme Court ruling is for precedential value. The Court's not even SUPPOSED to take a case if it doesn't have general applicablity. So yeah, I guess since that type of thing is my bread and butter I found it pretty offensive... and yes, people still talk about it because none of us had ever seen anything like it.

nothing would make me happier that to stop talking about roe v. wade. it's only purpose ("discussing" it) is to divide people over what should be a nonissue.

in 2000, i didn't vote for either of the major party candidates, but to me, it looks like Gore lost fair and square.
to his credit, if he'd campaigned half as well as he delivered his concession speech, he probably would have carried 40+ states.

he's gone downhill since, though.

 

[jillian]

nothing would make me happier that to stop talking about roe v. wade. it's only purpose ("discussing" it) is to divide people over what should be a nonissue.

in 2000, i didn't vote for either of the major party candidates, but to me, it looks like Gore lost fair and square.
to his credit, if he'd campaigned half as well as he delivered his concession speech, he probably would have carried 40+ states.

he's gone downhill since, though.

fair enough re roe v wade. I have no disagreement with you. (But you might want to take a look at some of the threads here ... it's nuts out there!)

We can certainly agree or disagree on Al Gore. I think the appearance of impropriety in the Bush v Gore decision was so great that it wiped out (at least for me) any legitimacy to the decision.

Personally, I wish Al Gore's convention speech had been as good as his concession speech, too. His campaign was idiocy. Instead of taking the position that he had a "moral" disagreement with Bill Clinton, he should have pasted Clinton to his hip and said... "if you like this guy, you'll like me"...

ah well.. at least he was "moral"...

 

[WillowTree]

What??? we don't care that there are large rooms filled with people filling out voter registraions??? dead people, false names, false addresses?? ACORN ACORN ACORN

 

[jillian]

What??? we don't care that there are large rooms filled with people filling out voter registraions??? dead people, false names, false addresses?? ACORN ACORN ACORN

what amazing insight...

 

[del]

what amazing insight...

maybe it's kirk/chris' evil twin.

 

[jillian]

maybe it's kirk/chris' evil twin.

heh... I've often wondered if there were such a thing as a doppleganger.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

heh... I've often wondered if there were such a thing as a doppleganger.

I notice no response to the fact the 7 of 9 decision was on the validity of the Court taking the case, remind us Jillian , are there 7 Conservatives on the Supreme Court?

 

[greenpartyaz]

See you tomorrow then. I'll get my popcorn and tin foil hat ready.

Katherine Harris, who was both George W. Bush's presidential campaign chairwoman, and the Florida secretary of state in charge of elections, paid $4 million to Database Technologies to go through Florida's voter rolls and remove anyone “suspected” of being a former felon. She did it with the blessing of the governor of Florida, George W.'s brother Jeb Bush, (who's own wife was caught by immigration officials trying to sneak $19,000 worth of jewelery into the country without declaring and paying tax on it...a felony in it's own right.)
The law states that ex-felons cannot vote in Florida. That means 31 percent of all black men in Florida are prohibited from voting because they have a felony on their record. Harris and Bush knew that removing the names of ex-felons from the voter rolls would keep thousands of black citizens out of the voting booth.
Black Floridians, overwhelmingly are Democrats, and sure enough Al Gore received more than 90 percent of them on November 7, 2000.
In what happens to be a mass fraud committed by the state of Florida, Bush, Harris, and company not only removed thousands of black felons from the rolls, they also removed thousands of black citizens who had never committed a crime in their lives, along with thousands of eligible voters who had committed only misdemeanors.
Katherine Harris's office told Database technologies, a firm with strong Republican ties, to cast as wide a net as possible to get rid of these voters. Her minions instructed the company to include even people with “similar” names to those of the actual felons. They insisted Database check people with the same birth dates as known felons, or similar Social security numbers; an 80 percent match of relevant information, the election office instructed, was sufficient for Database to add a voter to the ineligible list.
This means that thousands of legitimate voters might be barred from voting on Election day just because they had name that sounded like someone else's, or shared a birthday with some unknown bank robber.
Marlene Thorogood, the Database project manager, sent an E-mail to Emmett “Bucky” Mitchell, a lawyer for Katherine Harris's election division, warning him that “Unfortunately, programming in this fashion may supply you with false positives,” or misidentification s.
Never mind that, said Bucky. His response. “Obviously we want to capture more names that possibly aren't matches and let (county election) supervisors make a final determination rather than exclude certain matches altogether.”
Database did as they were told. And before long 173,000 registered voters in Florida were permanently wiped off the voter rolls. In Miami-Dade, Florida's largest county, 66 percent of the voters who were removed were black. In Tampa's county, 54 percent of those who would be denied the right to vote on November 7, 2000 were black.
But culling names from Florida's records alone was not enough for Harris and her department. Eight thousand additional Floridians were thrown off the voting rolls because Database used a false list supplied by another state, a state which claimed that all the names on the list were former convicted felons who had since moved to Florida.
It turns out that the felons on the list had served their time and had all their voting privileges reinstated. And there were others on the list who had committed only misdemeanors, such as parking violations or littering. What state was it that offered Jeb and George W. Bush a helping hand by sending this bogus list to Florida? Texas.

The investigation into the purged voter lists was reported in

The Nation, Florida's Disappeared Voters': Disfranchised by the GOP,” Gregory Palast, February 5, 2001;

The Nation, How the GOP Gamed the System in Florida,” John Lantigua April 30, 2001;

Los Angeles Times “Florida Net Too Wide in Purge of Voter Rolls,” Lisa Getter, May 21, 2001

Salon.com, “Eliminating Fraud-Or Democrats?,” Anthony York, December 8, 2000

 

[CrimsonWhite]

Katherine Harris, who was both George W. Bush's presidential campaign chairwoman, and the Florida secretary of state in charge of elections, paid $4 million to Database Technologies to go through Florida's voter rolls and remove anyone “suspected” of being a former felon. She did it with the blessing of the governor of Florida, George W.'s brother Jeb Bush, (who's own wife was caught by immigration officials trying to sneak $19,000 worth of jewelery into the country without declaring and paying tax on it...a felony in it's own right.)
The law states that ex-felons cannot vote in Florida. That means 31 percent of all black men in Florida are prohibited from voting because they have a felony on their record. Harris and Bush knew that removing the names of ex-felons from the voter rolls would keep thousands of black citizens out of the voting booth. Black Floridians, overwhelmingly are Democrats, and sure enough Al Gore received more than 90 percent of them on November 7, 2000.
In what happens to be a mass fraud committed by the state of Florida, Bush, Harris, and company not only removed thousands of black felons from the rolls, they also removed thousands of black citizens who had never committed a crime in their lives, along with thousands of eligible voters who had committed only misdemeanors.
Katherine Harris's office told Database technologies, a firm with strong Republican ties, to cast as wide a net as possible to get rid of these voters. Her minions instructed the company to include even people with “similar” names to those of the actual felons. They insisted Database check people with the same birth dates as known felons, or similar Social security numbers; an 80 percent match of relevant information, the election office instructed, was sufficient for Database to add a voter to the ineligible list.
This means that thousands of legitimate voters might be barred from voting on Election day just because they had name that sounded like someone else's, or shared a birthday with some unknown bank robber.
Marlene Thorogood, the Database project manager, sent an E-mail to Emmett “Bucky” Mitchell, a lawyer for Katherine Harris's election division, warning him that “Unfortunately, programming in this fashion may supply you with false positives,” or misidentification s.
Never mind that, said Bucky. His response. “Obviously we want to capture more names that possibly aren't matches and let (county election) supervisors make a final determination rather than exclude certain matches altogether.”
Database did as they were told. And before long 173,000 registered voters in Florida were permanently wiped off the voter rolls. In Miami-Dade, Florida's largest county, 66 percent of the voters who were removed were black. In Tampa's county, 54 percent of those who would be denied the right to vote on November 7, 2000 were black.
But culling names from Florida's records alone was not enough for Harris and her department. Eight thousand additional Floridians were thrown off the voting rolls because Database used a false list supplied by another state, a state which claimed that all the names on the list were former convicted felons who had since moved to Florida.
It turns out that the felons on the list had served their time and had all their voting privileges reinstated. And there were others on the list who had committed only misdemeanors, such as parking violations or littering. What state was it that offered Jeb and George W. Bush a helping hand by sending this bogus list to Florida? Texas.

The investigation into the purged voter lists was reported in

The Nation, Florida's Disappeared Voters': Disfranchised by the GOP,” Gregory Palast, February 5, 2001;

The Nation, How the GOP Gamed the System in Florida,” John Lantigua April 30, 2001;

Los Angeles Times “Florida Net Too Wide in Purge of Voter Rolls,” Lisa Getter, May 21, 2001

Salon.com, “Eliminating Fraud-Or Democrats?,” Anthony York, December 8, 2000

Read the bold part again and get back to me.

As for the rest, you missed the part where the Court ruled 7-2 that the recount was unconstituional to begin with. According to the Supreme court per curiam decisionof 7-2, the count stands. All the rest doesn't matter, becuase in the end, George W. Bush is still the 43rd President of the United States.

 

[CrimsonWhite]

Even if true, how do you reconcile what he said with the fact that all of the precedents required that the high court NOT intervene in election law matters... that they were the sole purview of the highest court of the State.

And also, how do you reconcile what he said with the fact that the decision was specifically made inapplicable to any other case and has no precedential value.

That isn't one of those things that make you go hmmmmmmmmmmm?

Shh, he didn't know any of this until you told him. Damn lawyers. lol

Seriously though, can the High Court not set new precedents? They did vote 7-2 to hear the case. The provision on no future precedntial value does confuse the hell out of me though. Because, If I'm not mistaken, then any future court can refer to the case anyway.

 

[Yurt]

you guys must be sore after the 2004 election

get over it, why don't you bring up the declaration of independence....maybe we should be an english colony

 

[greenpartyaz]

Shh, he didn't know any of this until you told him. Damn lawyers. lol

In what happens to be a mass fraud committed by the state of Florida, Bush, Harris, and company not only removed thousands of black felons from the rolls, they also removed thousands of black citizens who had never committed a crime in their lives, along with thousands of eligible voters who had committed only misdemeanors.