Posted on 05/01/2013 5:03:49 AM PDT by IBD editorial writer
Media Bias: When Sandra Day O'Connor said she regretted her decision in Bush v. Gore, the press threw another fit about the "stolen" election. They seem to forget their own studies proved the court's ruling didn't matter. [snip]
After that election, USA Today, the New York Times and every other major news organization spent months manually recounting Florida ballots in hopes of proving that the court did, in fact, hand victory to Bush.
And what did these recounts find?
(Excerpt) Read more at news.investors.com ...
Sandra Day O’Connor, Another woman in way over her head.
Like the three female idiots on the court now.
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it..”
Joseph Goebbles would be proud
If it weren’t for the media desperately trying to influence the election, Bush would have probably carried the national popular vote and definitely would have had a bigger margin in Florida.
I think that Gore’s graceless whoring greenie performance since losing has told us a lot about what sort of president he’d have made. His immediate weight gain indicates mental problems. He was so invested in his position, that when he lost it he became depressed.
When Democrats leave office they continue to act as though they are in office. They make pronouncements and rush to judgment. Carter, Gore, and the host of former Democrats want to stay in the news and push their relevance.
Republicans, on the other hand, stay out of the news and let their successors attempt to lead. Both Bushes have class.
There would have been no 5-4 decision if there had not been a 7-2 decision.And a 9-0 smackdown of the Florida Supreme Courts first ruling.
I remember. I was out collecting carbon credits for the poor.;)
I find it a frequent problem with women and this type of decision making...
They twist at every turn and in the end...they just do "something"...right or wrong, logical or not.
The recounts didnt matter no matter what they turned up.
The FLA SC ordered the counts to continue, but gov Bush was in charge of certifying the electors (the FLA AG technically and give them to governor) and giving them to the GOP congress. So those recounts could manufacture as many votes as they wanted but the court didnt tell Bush he couldnt certify the prior counts or would have to certify the new ones.
And the GOP congress was under NO obligation to the FLA SC.
The SCOTUS stopped a possible conflict between the two.
The latest example is Immigration...
OMG - I've thought for 12 years I was the only one to have figured this out!!!
In other words, Gore had to win both decisions to win the election and he lost both. If you look at the margins, even if Justice Sandy had nonsensically voted the other way on both cases, Gore still loses. Does she have dementia, is she taking her ancient prerogative of changing her mind, or was she just a moral and intellectual mediocrity to begin with? Could be all three, of course.
Sandra should have kept her opinion to herself
I believe, in short, the SCOTUS ruled Florida either hand-count ALL ballots or stop the selective counting, right? Every scenario uncovered by the “media” afterward showed Bush winning be increasingly larger margins, so the lefturds can push this noise until the cows come home, but their guy would’ve lost anyway.
Better wording would be "They seem to forget their own studies proved the court's ruling didn't affect the election outcome." The rulings mattered a lot. The Supreme Court ruling said that the rule of law is still the law of the land in the United States and that elections must be decided based on the written law in effect at the time of the election. It's a shame we have drifted away from that concept; I miss the rule of law.
Whenever a liberal talks about the stolen election, I ask him ‘Where was the headline.’
You know, after the manual recount showed Gore the winner, wasn’t there a full page headline in the New York Times?. Wasn’t it on every news station for a solid week?
Oh, the recounts never showed Gore the winner? Huh, then why was the election ‘stolen’?
I hope your post gets repeated attention. If only the Repubs at the top would get this — their repeated pandering gets them slapped around again and again. Perhaps if they had a clear conviction to conservative principles it would help. They are the Baldwin-Chamberlain wing of 1930s British politics.
As for Sandra D-O’C, being a Supreme Court justice is about law and the Constitution, it is not about your personal wishes or the team you want to win. Regrettably, Dems still appoint judges expressly because those judges will not live up to their oath.
It was not clear if she regretted the decision as a matter of law and interpretation thereof, of as a matter of political preference.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.