i always thought he was appointed, maybe those sources are wrong or maybe it is all "word play"....either way, he did not "win" the position the way he should of and out current voting system stinks, which i think Americans may finally see.
:) ps, could u provide me with links to info about what you posted, or email them to me...if i am going to post something, or say something in person, i want to make sure i cover all my bases.... thanks corey [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- In [email protected], "rickgaber" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Oh -- and BTW, NObody "appointed" W. The U.S. Supreme Court, acting > on an appeal of a bizarre ruling by the FL Supremes (second only to > the 9th Circus in outrageous judicial activism IMO), sent the case > BACK to those FL Supremes (who had ruled at first that it was okay > for different counties and jurisdictions to adopt their own rules for > recounts, different from one another). > > Rightly or wrongly, the SCOTUS said that ruling violated the equal > protection clause, and remanded the case back WITHOUT a final edict -- > indicating ONLY that a SINGLE METHOD of recounts had to be chosen - - > but the SCOTUS did NOT choose it. > > You may disagree with what the SCOTUS did, but declaring they did > something they did NOT do is beyond ridiculous. >
