.A Trackback is one of three types of Linkbacks, methods for Web authors to request notification when somebody links to one of their

I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view

I Googled for something completely different, but found your page…and have to say thanks. nice read.

I enjoyed reading your blog. What a great thing it is to be able to share information like this on the Internet.

And we all know what it really means when the good(?) Dr. Frist diagnoses by video what he concludes are “normal brain functions.”

Uhm…there they go ignoring the Constitution again. He ain’t going to be around. What’s he going to do it from his ranch?

Or does his executive power reach into the next President’s term. If that’s the case, Clinton should have balanced the budget for Bush.

Thanks dude! No rush. I’ve perused over the table of contents of the bill and picked out a few sections that “might” reference the U.N. and will look at them more in-depth in the next few days, starting tonight.

Thanks for any input you can give. I’d like to respond to “my” rep, and possibly send in a Letter to the Editor.

Comment by WC — January 25, 2007 @ 11:57 am

email me at myspammailbox at hotmail dot com – I’ll get to this later…

“A no-brainer! A state court deciding a federal constitutional issue about the presidential election? Of course you take the case,” Kennedy told ABC News correspondent Jan Crawford Greenburg in her new book, “Supreme Conflict.”

“Deciding” appropriate actions to ballot problems/interpretations, whether chads or not, has never been a “federal constitutional issue”. Beyond that, initial SCOTUS entry into this foray was over GWB’s “rights”, not ballot issues.

Kennedy said the justices didn’t ask for the case to come their way. Then-Vice President Al Gore’s legal team involved the courts in the election by asking a state court to order a recount, Kennedy said.

(sheesh…) what an incredibly inaccurate statement. Florida recounts were mandatory under Florida law given less than .5% plurality. This was overriden by Katheryn Harris’ “in my judgement” call. Harris made this announcement, answered no questions and exited the building, under guard, through an inaccessable private exit.

Gore agreed to not contest Harris’ original election certification on the word of GWB campaign, which promised a resolution in the “contest faze” to follow. GWB then pulled all the stops to delay adjudaction in this faze, with a strategy to “run out the clock” w/out recounts. This strategy is detailed, proudly, in books authored by several GWB strategists in this endeavor.

And again, Kennedy’s statement (eg: “we didn’t ask for the case”) is ridiculous: SCOTUS got involved on issues unrelated to “chads”… rather GWB’s concern that his “rights” (equal protection)would be violated in a recount. There is a good discussion of this SCOTUS “flip flop” here.

I’d also point out, while this was going on GWB lawyers argued for a recount in New Mexico, saying :

“of course, no other way to determine the accuracy of this apparent discrepancy, or machine malfunction, other than the board reviewing the votes by hand.”

Scalia further intones:

“Counting somebody else’s dimpled chad and not counting my dimpled chad is not giving equal protection of the law,” Scalia said at Iona.

Which, of course, is not what did happen or what would’ve happened had recounts proceeded. Such language, implicitly assuming election boards are/were picking and choosing likeable chads… from a sitting SCOTUS member… deplorable.

O’Connor said the Florida court was “off on a trip of its own.”

The Florida court decided on very clear Florida law. I think (and thought at the time) O’Connor was getting her legal advice from FOX News.

She acknowledged, however, that the justices probably could have done a better job with the opinion if they hadn’t been rushed.

And here is the greatest insult of all. After ordering a recount +/- 2 weeks before final deadline, SCOTUS took the decision under review. Knowing full well the deadline was approaching, SCOTUS took 3 days to send it back to Florida Supremes, asking them to “clarify” and “reconsider” their decision’s applicability to Florida law.

Now, aware of this impending deadline, one might think that the highest court in our land might mobilize some resources to review Florida law for themselves and issue an intelligent, thoughtful response on the issues at hand. Instead, they asked Florida to, essentially, restate their prior descision endorsing recounts.

Among SCOTUS’ multiple convenient fabrications, this one sticks in my craw…

The petition presents the following questions: whether the Florida Supreme Court established new standards for resolving Presidential election contests, thereby violating Art. II, §1, cl. 2, of the United States Constitution and failing to comply with 3 U.S.C. § 5 and whether the use of standardless manual recounts violates the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses. With respect to the equal protection question, we find a violation of the Equal Protection Clause.

The Florida Supreme’s decision is still posted on their website. I would highly recomend anyone interested in historical accuracy go read those FS’s decisions: it cites applicable Florida law, and is clear as day… unassailable.

Essentially, SCOTUS conspired, through delay and legal maneuvers, to assist GWB in “running out the clock”. It was constitutional deadlines, not ballot issues, which ended that thing.

Still, O’Connor said the outcome of the election would have been the same even if the court had not intervened.

Nope. The media consortium determined that, under partial recount scenarios, GWB won. This was the essence of headlines across the country when, 1 year after the fact, they released their results. What was not headlined: GORE won every instance where all ballots were recounted, regardless of the various chad interpretations applied. And this, knowing GORE lost some +20k butterfly ballots.

Or in other words, GWB won except when all ballots were considered.

That the “GWB won” meme persists… I’ve seen it stated as fact in main WSJ OpEDs many times in recent years, is bad enough. That a US presidential election’s results can be obfuscated by crafty legal maneuvers delaying an honest count further exasperates. The lasting notion of that affair and the shenanigans which determined it’s result are worse: eg…
* specific andidate, in this case GORE, is at fault for requesting partial rather than full recounts, neither of which SCOTUS ultimately allowed
* legal shenanigans can and did delay Florida State voting statutes & procedures
* And lastly, that a candidate is responsable for the integrity of an election process, rather than the process itself.

SCOTUS assisted and cooperated in a fraud. The methods of this fraud, sadly, were an accurate portend to the massive malfeasance that has proven to be the GWB whitehouse.

That those sitting SCOTUS members continue to make stuff up, AFAIC, is chilling. Very, very chilling.

If you are here…

Have you read anything about bill H.R.1 entitled “Implementing the 9/11 Commission Recommendations Act of 2007″?

I’m going to be looking at it off and on today, when I have time. If you have, can you tell me if there is anything in the bill that gives any control of our security over to the U.N.? One of our reps, David Davis (R-TN), voted against the bill because of this very reason. He said that we should not have to ask the U.N. for permission to protect our own country.

Thanks for any input you can give. I’d like to respond to “my” rep, and possibly send in a Letter to the Editor.

Did you also notice the foreclosures were up a whopping 42% in 2006 with the 4th quarter being the worst quarter for the year.

These 2 numbers are the primary reason I think most economists are too optimistic on the economy for 2007. These are powerful headwinds.

The guy should stand his ass up and still complete the task at hand.

I say throw almost all of them out.

Florida Republican fumes at not having a chair in meeting, leads walk out

A Florida Republican, who is the ranking minority member of the Transportation Committee in the House of Representatives, stormed out of a meeting last week, leading other Republican members with him. An article today in Roll Call reports that he was angry because he was not seated properly during an orientation session.
[...]
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/Florida_Republican_fumes_at_not_having_0125.html
.

I have constantly challenged you, yet you never respond. Can you not debate? Can you not have a reasonable argument? Or are you here because your pathetic, lonely life needs a raison d’etre? And that any form of disruptiveness regarding a thread makes you feel alive, of worth?
Again, pathetic

…and to further your education to help you disrupt (not debate) in future threads, it’s hemorrhoids, not hemmorhoids. For easier spelling, just type the oft used nickname, piles. As in your constant namejacking and offensive postings are, as usual, a pile of $HIT!
You’re Welcome

If your goal is to invade the oil-rich countries of the Middle East no matter what, you really don’t need intelligence, because you have such an overwhelming arsenal at your disposal, any WMDs possessed and used by the Middle Eastern countries merely reinforces your propaganda about why they had to be invaded.

Casualties, American or otherwise, are irrelevant to that way of thinking. The only thing that matters is total control of the World’s Oil Supply.

For every man and woman and child in America? I promise never to make this face again when my hemmorhoids are on the flare.