To: SAJ
Fair enough. My point is that there was a 7-2 decision in there that threw a wrench into what the Florida Supreme Court was doing, not just the 5-4 that makes it look like a wholly partisan decision. It makes it easy to argue that it was the dissents that were political.
To: Question_Assumptions
The curious bit is how all of the alleged jurists of the Florida Supreme Court decided to take it upon themselves to intervene in the usually quite simple process of counting ballots.
I'd be VERY interested to know how many of the ''supreme seven'' in Nov-Dec 2000 in FL are stll on the bench.
Florida FReepers, would you please advise?
TIA, and go, panhandle, go!
147 posted on
08/11/2004 11:00:03 PM PDT by
SAJ
(Buy 1 NGH05 7.50 call, Sell 3 NGH05 11.00 calls against, for $600-800 net credit OB. Stone lock.)
To: Question_Assumptions
The curious bit is how all of the alleged jurists of the Florida Supreme Court decided to take it upon themselves to intervene in the usually quite simple process of counting ballots.
I'd be VERY interested to know how many of the ''supreme seven'' in Nov-Dec 2000 in FL are stll on the bench.
Florida FReepers, would you please advise?
TIA, and go, panhandle, go!
148 posted on
08/11/2004 11:00:05 PM PDT by
SAJ
(Buy 1 NGH05 7.50 call, Sell 3 NGH05 11.00 calls against, for $600-800 net credit OB. Stone lock.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson