Fox News says Supreme Court Allows Lautenberg!

[Howlin]

It's done!

[mwl1]

Disgusted as I am at this horrendous decision, there are several unintended consequences now in play, some of them good for us. One is that it fires up our activists nationwide. Second, Cleland (GA) and Harkin (IA) are now under heavier assault. And I am certain that there are many others.

[RabidBartender]

I wonder if, in '04, the Dims determine that Gore-Kerry is losing substantially to Bush-Cheney in the polls, would they be now more cavalier about substituting H. Clinton-whoever in the middle of October.

[Miss Marple]

In my opinion, we need to quit griping. Am I disappointed? Sure.

However, we accepted the decision of the Supreme Court for the Presidential election, so we should accept this one, and get on with winning the election.

A benefit of this is that the Rats are stifled about the Supreme Court and how it shouldn't be listened to.

Now, I think Forester needs to be gracious and say "that's the way it goes" and start hitting Lautenberg on his very poor stance on terrorism, national defense, and assorted other issues.

[Howlin]

Illegal? Do tell. Won't John McCain be surprised.

[rwfromkansas]

It has to be everyone's call I think.

[ELS]

There is even a precedent on this law anyway where a candidate died, and was replaced within the 51 day window.

The candidate who died, died ONE day after the deadline, not 17 days later. Torricelli is not (physically) dead. The deadline was changed to 51 days in 1985 - long after the court case to which you referred took place.

[concerned about politics]

they have gotten away with disenfranchising military personnel.

Maybe not. The election isn't over yet, the results not in. Imagine the national backlash if our military votes are screwed up because demo(sewer)rats cheated. The Demo(sewer) rats didn't want to disinfranchize NJ voters, but thought nothing of taking votes away from those who are protecting our national security.
Keep a CLOSE eye on those military ballots. Each must be back in time, and counted. May be quite a feet, seeing that they're already late.

[free me]

Under Jersey law, the construction of the Jersey Supreme...
This is a tradition, not a law.

[PeoplesRepublicOfWashington]

SCOTUS has said, loudly and clearly, that state courts can rewrite laws and usurp Constitutional authorities on a whim.

How is that a loss? At this point in time, I believe most states have Republican governments.

I'm no more in favor of Republicans modifying the law on a whim than I am for Democrats doing it.

[RobRoy]

Y'know those "left turn lane" signals, where traffic going straight has a green light but traffic turning left has a red arrow?

Fuggetaboutit. No cops around? No problem...

[mwl1]

"Bait and switch" is still one of the most effective strategies that Forrester has in his arsenal.

[hchutch]

Perhaps, but this has to be answered, too. It's going to be a mess in Hawaii, and quite frankly, we will have to fight dirty with the Dems now. No two ways about it.

[concerned about politics]

Keep a CLOSE eye on those military ballots. Each must be back in time, and counted. May be quite a feet, seeing that they're already late.

PS.....America has already heard how unpatriotic Demo(sewer)rats are, right?

[PeoplesRepublicOfWashington]

I'll give you credit for trying to make lemonade out of a lemon, but I seriously believe we are no longer truly a nation of laws. Rather, we are a nation ruled by unscrupulous lawyers and incompetent, biased, and prejudiced judges.

[Alberta's Child]

I understand, but as someone once said, "Hell is the place where liberals get the type of government they want, but with someone else in charge."

[Alberta's Child]

The only problem there is that the cost of getting caught is quite high. Not only do you get a fine, but the additional insurance costs will hurt you for a long time.

[RobRoy]

>>Kind of puts one in mind of the thesis in "The Decline of the Roman Empire" <<

Precicely. I make the mental comparison almost daily. Ten years ago it was only weekly.

We're done, we just don't know it yet.

But then, I don't have television so my perspective is a little more "outside the box."

Before you think I'm sounding negative, I'm not. Countries come and go, as does life itself. After all, where would the early church have been if they had put their faith in Rome?

[capitan_refugio]

There is another way!

If the Republicans can obtain 51 Seante seats through the election, they can refuse to seat Lautenberg on the basis he is an illegal candidate. The Senate has a Constitutional prerogative to determine its own membership. NO court can intervene.

Some may argue that that they only need 50 seats (because the Vice President would break a 50-50 tie), but I recall an arcane Senate rule that requires a majority to organize. Anyway, some RINO could always do something like Jumpin Jim Jeffords did, so the bigger the majority, the better.

[hchutch]

I think it's a great foil, especially if Lautenberg tried to use the ocrporate corruption line.

"Mr. Lautenberg, how can you talk about corporate corruption when the Democratic party pulled a bait-and-switch? If my company were to do that, it would be fined, shut down, and I might end up in jail for it."

[husky ed]

I am a NJ voter and I will crawl to the polls if I have to on election day!!!!!

Too late, the Dems already voted for you.