Art and Comments by Tica

Head Of A Pin

Leon County Circuit Court Judge N. Sanders Sauls rejected Gore's contest of Florida's election results.   He said that there has to be a reasonable possibility that, if yet another recount happens, the election results in South Florida would change.  The lawyers litigated. 

In this case there is not believable evidence based on statistics that the results would change if there is yet another recount.  No other kind of evidence exists that would change the results of the election if there is yet another recount.  The lawyers litigated. 

The judge also said that there was no evidence of any illegality that would demand a recount in South Florida.  There is no evidence of fraud.  There is no evidence of gross negligence.  No improper influence was applied to the voters of the counting board that might have changed the outcome of the vote count.  No one was threatened in any way.

.

Home
Allegedly
Art's Link Letters
Below The Fold
Crazy Talk
Dept. Of Huh?
Eye2Eye
Fool4Love
Full Disclosure
Homoerrectus
I'll Explain This Once
Scene & Herd
Technophobia
The Satyr Speaks
What The F#?K
Xona Files

The judge’s decision is clear and unambiguous.  Yet, the lawyers continue to argue.  Bush won the election on November 7, 2000 by such a narrow margin that a recount was triggered.  Bush won again, and the lawyers litigated.   The Florida Supreme Court granted the Democrats an extention beyond the deadline stated in Florida State Law.  Bush won again.  The lawyers litigated.   The Secretary of State of the State of Florida certified the election.  The lawyers litigated.   The United States Supreme Court over ruled the Florida Supreme Court.   The lawyers continue to litigate. Leon Count Circuit Judge refused to grant the Democrats a recount in South Florida.  The lawyers continue to litigate.  It is amazing that, no matter how many times legal opinions are handed down from the Bench, the lawyers can find some reason to continue arguing. 

Doesn’t this just inspire you to respect and admire our legal system?  Wow.  No matter what the facts are, no matter how many times these facts are examined, the lawyers argue on.  There no longer seems to be a mandate to find TRUTH in a legal argument.  No, what matters seems to be to win.  It doesn’t matter who gets hurt.  There doesn’t even seem to be a moral theory of justice in legal disputes anymore.  No, as long as there is someone else to hear the lawyers argue, then no case is ever over.

I can see it now.  In some distant future, some lawyer, some where, will still be arguing that  dent, dimples, and dings in aging ballots prove collusively that…………….   But some other lawyer will have a different legal theory.  And the count will begin again as lawyers continue to argue minutia.  They argue as sadly and uselessly as ancient sages once argued about how many angels could dance on the head of a pin.