George F. Will: Rule-bending trend

The Sacramento Bee ^ | Published 2:15 a.m. PDT Thursday, October 3, 2002 | George F. Will

[greydog]

WASHINGTON -- About two hours after Sen. Robert Torricelli's weepy press conference, in which he -- a liberal, hence nimble at victim-mongering -- proclaimed himself a victim of America's defect ("When did we become such an unforgiving people?"), the presses of the Democratic Party's newsletter, The New York Times, were printing an editorial exercise in situational ethics.

[Havoc]

I've been all over the NJ Election websites the last few hours. I was thinking of trying to join the race myself,

Don't think about it, do it. If you are a resident of the state you have a legitimate greivance. Demand that the people be given a choice.

[Havoc]

Get all your family and friends to call too LOL

[witnesstothefall]

My mind keeps going back to the overseas ballots that have already been cast. Those are legal ballots. Whoever tries to uncount those votes is involved in a direct act of disenfranchisement. This I consider a both political and legal strongpoint.

Those ballots have Torch's name on them. The Dem's want to mail revised ballots. Don't ballots have to be uniform?

[stevem]

The smart Democrats know this, and it scares them. That is the reason for these desparate measures. If the Republicans do not win the Senate this election, then it will be the next. Soon we will have a majority in the House, the Senate and have the Presidency.

It's a nice thought. In my life I have had but a handful of spectacularly fun election nights, some based on horrible misconceptions, and a few cliff hangers.

In 1968 (one of the great nights and a cliffhanger) I became quite euphoric at about 5AM when Nixon was projected to win. Of course he turned out to be one of the corrupt ones. Interestingly, he also turned out to be far more liberal than Humphrey was in his wildest-eyed days. Let's see...Nixon...liberal...corrupt. Sort of has a ring to it.

Naturally, 1980 was a grand night. I've heard we were lucky that election wasn't held about 3 days earlier.

Ah, 1994. That may have been the best election night I ever can recall...maybe ever will see. That wasn't a win. It was a rout of epic proportions. The misconception that night was in the need to discover what a weak leader Gingrich turned out to be.

This year has the potential to be interesting. Still, I have no illusions. It doesn't happen until it happens. Are New Jersey voters sufficiently disgusted? Something tells me no. How about California voters? If the answer is no, we can only hope that the Bush administration continues to tell them they dug their own economic hole, and they can fill it themselves.

How about Iowa voters? Or Minnesota? In all fairness, the Democrat and liberal ticket(s) are split this year in Minnesota. Pawlenty(R) should win the Governor race.

Coleman(R) in Minnesota should win the Senate although I believe the conservatives in MN and around the country will eventually start asking what there is about Coleman they found attractive. I think he will turn out to be of Eastern liberal characteristics.

The fact is, if Democrats were able to think, they would be too embarrassed to vote for Democrats. It's that inability of Democrats to think that makes Democrat politicians so invincible.

[Revolting cat!]

Torricelli's career of political sociopathy, of rule-bending and rule-breaking, concludes, fittingly, with a crescendo of cynical rule-inventing.

And as we are seeing, it is not only one clown's political sociopathy. It is sociopathy of the entire system, with the NJSC leading the way, stamping its approval and providing intellectual and ideological cover. The O.J. jury as a state supreme court. Lovely!

[savedbygrace]

It was a Torricellian twist on an old joke: A child kills his parents and demands mercy because he is an orphan.
I like this one too.

Yeah, but I said it first. Here:

"NJ race shakes up battle for Senate - Democrats jittery as Lautenberg aims to replace Torricelli"
Posted by savedbygrace to MeeknMing
On News/Activism Oct 2 8:21 AM #29 of 53
This reminds me the story of the kid who murdered both his parents and then begged for leniency in court because he was an orphan.
The Dim created this mess; they oughta havta sleep in it.

LOL

[CyberAnt]

"law is silent"

I don't get that part - the law is specific - 51 days - not 36 days. What part of that L A W don't they understand??

[mathurine]

If the torch wanted to face the voters, he could have and should have. Who is unforgiving? We don't know. Most Americans probably would not elect a scummy s.o.b. like him, but he's not running in America at large, he's running in New Jersey. Or he was. Now he's quit, which is not quite as good as some things he could do, but he's gone of his own accord. Not bad. Poses a problem for the demofarts, of course, because they already had a lot of ballots distributed to various funeral homes which have been signed by the deceased and returned. Fortunately, the local party workers have not filled in the names yet, since the State Law says candidates can be changed up until 51 days before the election, which anyone who has been to law school would know means a combination of the numbers one and five in any creative way which suits the people who bankroll things, Might be 51, might be 15, or if necessary, 1.5 or 0.15, or even -51 if the election did not suit the black dress boys and their handlers.

[CyberAnt]

Wow! Have the dems really counted the cost of disenfranchising MILITARY VOTES while we are at war??

I think this is a very, very bad move on their part.

People still remember about all the military votes the dems had thrown out in the 2000 election. And ... if they don't we need to start reminding them.

[fone]

>>>No one holds them accountable<<<

As in "No controlling legal authority?"

And whoever said character doesn't count...

[fone]

>>>They have choosen to take sides rather than act as a watchdog, and they are paying a price<<<

Well, almost...

.... They have choosen to take sides rather than act as a watchdog, and we are paying a price....

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

I have a question:

If citizens in Missouri have the right to vote for a dead man, why don't citizens in New Jersey have the right to vote for a dead duck?

Robert Toricelli, meet Mel Carnahan. Charmed, I'm sure.

[fone]

>>>> I was thinking of trying to join the race myself, just to show the hypocricy of the court's ruling (yes, I'm a NJ resident)<<<

LOL! Focault's Pendulum also wants to run...

[CIB-173RDABN]

The price they (the media) are paying is in loss of readership for newspapers, and loss of viewers for the network news.

I did not say it was a big price, but they are paying.

[fone]

>>>What part of that L A W don't they understand??<<<

Easy! The part that's [*waaaah*] "unfair" to their "agenda" boo-freaking-hoo!

[harpo11]

[fone]

I was thinking of that earlier. If the Torch "won" (ballots remain as is) then Lautenburg could just be appointed? Maybe? Wonder what the NJ law is regarding that scenario...

[DB]

The NJ Supreme Court should have been asked that if the law doesn't apply in this case, what case does it apply to???

[fone]

Granted.

We (the people) will pay the ultimate price?

[ladyinred]

I am stunned that such an editorial comment appeared in the Bee! This is a very liberal rag, so to read this is quite the surprise! However, I could not agree more. This DNC machine has got to be stopped!