The case today started while I was having lunch w/ my wife, so I didn't get to hear very much of the counties' arguments. Nor did I hear much of Gore's teams' arguments. I did hear arguments by Bush's team. The guy that took up most of the time was inept and basically argued about twenty different angles. Manual recounts are invalid and those invalid manual recounts should have been done by Tuesday. It seems as if he should have stuck to arguing FLA. law and why Tuesday was iron clad. I assume that you can win arguments like this with your friends, but the courts seemed to actually be obsessed with objective facts and law... not a broad napalm attack against every forseeable angle. "Oh yeah, and if you go that way, I've got something over here too" (these are things that we do all of the time but it seemed as if the justices thought his logic erroneous... lawyers: are you taught to mix your arguments this way?) Bruce Edwards(?) on the other hand was solid. He was concise, coherent and driving in every point. I have no idea if his arguments were correct (the Gore team argued that there is precedent for a state court to do as FLA is doing now), but either way I'd like him on my team. In a word: a badarse. ------------------ It just goes to show how skewed our priorities are when Mo Taylor makes millions of dollars while some high school teacher, that can actually rebound, scrapes to make a living. If Mo were half the power forward that Charles Barkley was, he'd be 3'2" and still board more than he does now.
I only heard the Gore portion before I had to leave, and it was mixed, I thought. 4 Lawyers spoke for that side -- not sure who the first one was, 2 represented particular counties (Broward and Palm Beach) and then the big Gore lawyer from NY. The first lawyer was OK, I thought. The 2 county lawyers really had little to nothing to say because all the issues the judges were asking were irrelevent. The main Gore lawyer, I think, did an absolutely great job. He seemed to develop some rapport with the court and they almost were asking questions as though they wanted to allow a full recount, but needed some legal justification to do so. ------------------ Is it any coincidence that the Cato is the only Rocket with a temperature scale named after him? I didnt think so!!!!
Well, from what I understand, the court is only supposed to decide whether or not Katherine Harris acted within her discretion by enforcing the 5pm deadline for votes to be certified. If they say she didn't (unlikely, or else it would be very suspicious), it would seem the worst that could happen would be that the recounts for the 3 counties would have to be included. That was the case that got appealed, wasn't it? Am I wrong here? ------------------ "It's a great idea. A girl's name for a guy and lots of theatrics. I wish I'd thought of that." --Alice Cooper discussing Marilyn Manson
No, the case is apparently far broader than that. The court can do any number of things, from demanding a full recount of the state to setting its own deadlines and guidelines for a recount, to saying it's over and done with. I believe two cases were appealed: The one that stated that she used fair discretion and the one that gave the discretion in the first place. I think the second one is what opens up this thing. Basically, the courts in Florida are given broad power to deal with these types of issues. There are conflicting laws in Florida statute that make it impossible to follow all of them -- thus the courts have to resolve the problem. ------------------ Is it any coincidence that the Cato is the only Rocket with a temperature scale named after him? I didnt think so!!!!
