I'm going to retract my promise to not comment on this any more; I just
can't keep silent anymore.
I agree. The Supreme Court has gone way beyond what I believe it was meant
to do, and the election is just the most recent, egregious example. The
Supreme Court's involvement is part of my larger point and my fundamental
problem with the way the election concluded.
My basic take on the whole thing is that the election system was flawed to
begin with. Heck, I'm sure that it's *still* flawed, despite any changes
we made. But the system was there as a matter of law and was in place
prior to the election. The procedures were known in advance of their being
tested by the actual events, and that is what the Rule of Law is all about.
The Rule of Law means that regardless of who you are or how much clout you
have, you can look at the law and look at the circumstances and determine
ahead of time what the approximate result will be. The Rule of Law doesn't
mean that the courts step in and sort it all out according to who has the
best (i.e., most expensive) lawyer. There was an excellent commentary in
the Tampa Tribune a week or so ago that examined this more fully - it was a
wire service editorial, so it may have been in your newspaper, too - and
the columnist even went as far as to examine the original Latin words that
arose from this philosophical debate. The Rule of Law, or "leges", was
contrasted with the Rule of Influence, or "privileges". I highly recommend
reading it if you can find it. If I locate the columnist's name, I'll post
it.
There were rules for conducting hand recounts. There was a time limit in
place for the conducting of hand recounts. There was a hierarchy of who
does what and when. All of these things were fatally flawed, mainly
because they had never been needed before. But the time to change them is
*not* in the middle of things. Send it to Congress if you have to, but as
soon as you let the courts step in, you abandon the Rule of Law that is
supposed to govern our country.
P.S. What got me going on this, Howie, was when you took my good-natured
comment of Florida's bid for the 2012 games and turned it around into
something nasty. You basically called every resident of Florida crooked
and a cheat, just because the political parties wanted to play power games
last November. As is typical of generalizations, yours was an unfair
statement and I found it highly insulting.
|----------------------+--------------------------------------------------|
|Eric A. Laney |You have only a very small head and must live |
|Systems Engineer |within it. |
|LAN Optimization Team | |
|Voice: 813.978.4404 | |
|Pager: 888.985.8519 | - Today's Fortune|
|----------------------+--------------------------------------------------|
"Howie
Hamlin" To: CF-Community
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<howie@coolfu cc:
sion.com> Subject: Re: oh Heck...we lost the
Olympics bid
07/17/2001
09:37 AM
Please
respond to
cf-community
True, but there is a remedy for what happend in the last election that is
part of the US Constitution. Elections were never meant
to be decided by the Supreme Court.
Howie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marcus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 9:22 AM
Subject: RE: oh Heck...we lost the Olympics bid
> You really can't see, that those justices recusing themselves, would make
> the court rather one sided?
>
> Marcus
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
