(Article changed on April 30, 2013 at 11:48)
.Blind. Justice by Internet
.Blind. Justice by Internet
Well, dear ex-Justice, it took you only thirteen years to
"summon up" regrets about the Supreme Court's decision to take on Bush v Gore that put Mr. Bush in office on
12/12/2000. Do recall that it was you who said you could not retire unless
a Republican won the
Are you sure you
suffered no such regrets sooner?
Are you really
that glad that three woman progressives now use the ladies' room in that august
neoclassical building in front of which we have demonstrated so often?
Admit it, you'd
prefer copartisan females in those spots.
How else has your
political perspective changed?
There's even more
to regret than that. You guys chose the correct Constitutional amendment to address but mangled the wrong
part
But let's take a
look-see at what follows in that amendment right after
But when the right to vote at any election .
. . is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, . . . or in any way
abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of
representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of
such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one
years of age in such State. . . .
Even if we count
only male citizens who were deprived of the vote in Florida--most of those [all?]
on the fake felon lists were men who actually did not commit any crime-- 94,000
U.S. citizens in this scenario alone, per the latest figures I find were deprived of
the vote, and punishment at this level was more than justifiable. So that more
than felony was involved. And the "the basis of representation" clause--might it
apply to the number of electors, so that Florida's total number of electors
would have been reduced?
Then what might
have happened?
Gosh darn, Bush
won by only five electoral votes, where Florida had twenty-five electoral votes
to contribute. How many might have been subtracted?
Here is yet
another among the countless ways that the Constitution was violated relevant to the G.W. Bush administration, even before
Governor Bush took office.
Violation of the Constitution (just a "piece of paper"?) is punishable by
(fill in the
Given that the
revelation of the fake felons lists was published more than a week before your
infamous 12/12 decision, so that the Sunshine state, in allowing a subtraction
of so many votes from its poll lists, has violated the
Fourteenth Amendment substantively (I mean, other states have used arbitrary lists and it
became law that an SoS can arbitrarily reject voter registrations) . . . , well
something else is rotten in the state of Florida. Not only so many votes
uncounted, but a far more valid application of the Fourteenth Amendment did not
even invade the discourse, did it?
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).