What absurd things to say...! ;-)
You mean it is OK for the Supreme Court to step into a
Presidential election, and with a decision that mystifies
everyone with its total lack of justification, appoints
Bush President without bothering to *properly* count *all*
the votes (and they even interrupted that process!)? You
mean that it is OK for a vote count to be called finished
since an incomplete vote count had been done repeatedly?
You mean that it is OK that Bush was appointed rather
than elected, so long as after the fact a complete count
comes out with the same results? Methinks if you and
enough others understand our system of elections this
poorly, and think it is OK the way this election was
handled, we will soon have no system of elections at all...
BTW, an interesting precedent has now been set by the
Supreme Court: it appears that any candidate who is
ahead in a partial count of the votes in an election
(but who may not win with a complete count) can now
(if he times things deftly enough) petition the courts
to stop the vote count lest a full count "irreparably
damage his candidacy"...! This is what the Supreme Court
essentially did with Bush - and we, as citizens, should
not allow the conservative Supreme Court members to rest
easy over this one! If we do, and let them think they
got away with it (because we didn't notice, care, or
remember what they did), our democracy is near its end...

On 13 Mar 2001 13:57:03 GMT, gotvideo@aol.com (Got Video) wrote:
>Spoken like a true bleeding heart, crybaby liberal! The vote have been counted
>and recounted and like it or not the true winner was elected. Even the
>independent press recount had Bush STILL the winner of the FL vote. If you
>don't like the system move to a Latin American country where they elect by .45
>caliber. Grow up!

>>Well at least she took only the silver - Bush stole
>>the whole works: the White House itself, and the
>>Presidency! ;-)