Skip to comments.A 'selected' president? (From the mouth of one as dishonest as Shrillary)
Posted on 10/29/2002 2:34:37 PM PST by TLBSHOW
A 'selected' president?
We've heard from Hillary Clinton again.
There she was, just last week the fundamentally dishonest junior senator from New York, telling a bunch of her Hollywood pals that President Bush merely had been "selected" president, not elected. This, by the way, from the so-called "wife" of a man who never managed to get the majority of the popular vote in a presidential election.
This nonsense is really getting so tiring. How easy it is for some political hack, especially one as dishonest as Shrillary, to mouth this absurd Democratic line about Bush having "stolen" the election from Gore. When is some major player in the D.C. press corps going to challenge them to put up some proof or even some weak rationale for their stance?
It looks like it's time for a little review. So, let's go over just a few fundamentals about the 2000 election. Maybe some of you can e-mail this column to Hillary's office.
First, let's deal with this "Gore won the popular vote" argument. The argument that Gore won the popular vote is about as germane to the issue of who won the presidential election as would be the argument that Gore won the election because he is taller than Bush, or his hair is darker. We are, whether Democrats like it or not, a government of law. The law says that presidents are elected by electors chosen by the various states, not by the popular vote. Under the law (not that Democrats like to operate under the law) the popular vote means absolutely nothing.
Here's a little shocker for you: The law does not specifically state how the states must choose these electors. The Idaho legislature could pass a statute decreeing that a panel of the state's top-producing potato farmers would chose Idaho's electors, and so it would be. Now that I think about it, I would probably be more willing to put this decision into the hands of potato farmers than teacher's unions (who seem to wield immense control over the Democratic Party).
Now it just so happens that all of the states allow their registered voters to vote on just who these electors will be. This means, my Democratic Socialist friends, that only the state totals count the nationwide popular-vote totals have no more relevance and meaning under the law than does the total number of yards gained in Division 1-A NCAA football games the weekend before the election.
Moving on, now, to the U.S. Supreme Court. This is where Hitlary gets her "Bush was selected" nonsense. Most of you know that the Supreme Court issued some ruling that resulted in Florida certifying (for the second time) the election for George Bush. How many of you and I'm speaking to you whining Democrats out there how many of you can tell me just what that ruling was? Come on! You like to say that the Supreme Court "selected" the president, so stand up right now, face your computer screen and tell us all just what the court ruled!
Sit down. You aren't up to the task. I'll put the whole ruling in terms even Democrats can understand.
Electors chosen by the states will participate in the only federal election we have. This means that the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to decide legal or constitutional issues over how those electors are chosen. The Supremes took the Florida case and promptly reminded state election officials, and the Florida Supreme Court, that there was a pesky little Constitutional guarantee out there concerning equal treatment under the law. The U.S. Supreme Court did not tell Florida it could not recount the votes. If Florida wanted to recount the votes fine. Just one condition: The U.S. Supreme Court told Florida to apply the same standard to every ballot in every county in the state.
The good Democrats of Florida would not be permitted to apply a liberal standard (counting dimpled chads) to ballots cast in heavily Democratic counties, and a hard-line conservative standard (counting completely punched ballots) to votes cast in big Republican counties. When the Florida election officials received the Court's ruling, they decided that there just was not enough time to recount all of the votes using the same standard. Florida certified the election for Bush who, by the way, had won repeated recounts up to that point.
Florida Democrats were upset that Bush kept winning all the recounts. They were desperately searching for a magic formula that would give the win to Gore. The only formula was to apply different standards to votes cast in different areas of the state. Our Constitution says no. All Florida voters stand equal under the law.
Only the liberal mind could categorize this as an outrage.
WILL IT STILL BE HER SENATE?
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.