| Submit your comments on this article |
| Fifth Column |
| Pledge beauzeaux delay recall |
| 2003-09-15 |
| Those assholes again. EFL. LOS ANGELES - A federal appeals court postponed the Oct. 7 recall election Monday in a decision that threw an already chaotic campaign into utter turmoil. *crunch* "What was that?" "A wrench falling into the machinery." The 9th U.S. Either of them politically incorrect emasures that these beauzeaux fear will pass? The court, the nation’s largest and most They’re crossing their fingers that the Supreme Court won’t hear it. It is the same court that ruled last summer that reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools is unconstitutional because of the words "under God" inserted by Congress in 1954. Same moonbats, same wrongness in ruling. Ted Costa, head of the Sacramento-based Peoples’ Advocate, one of the groups that put the recall on the ballot, said an appeal of Monday’s ruling was certain. "Give us 24 hours," he said. Both Gov. Gray Davis and Arnold Schwarzenegger, the leading Republican among the 135 replacement candidates, said they would continue their campaigns despite the decision, which could force the U.S. Supreme Court to rule on another highly partisan political issue — one Democrats have said echoes the 2000 election in which the high court declared Republican George Bush the winner. And this ought to have the same sort of end: the Supreme Court having a moment of sanity and overturneing the lower court. Schwarzenegger issued a statement calling on the secretary of state to file an appeal on behalf of Californians. "Historically, the courts have upheld the rights of voters, and I expect that the court will do so again in this case," Schwarzenegger said. "The people have spoken, and their word should, and will, prevail." "I’ll be back." Davis spokesman Peter Ragone said the governor will continue fighting the recall effort and supports the appeals court’s ruling. "Anything that leads to greater enfranchisement in California is something we support," he said. Then his lips fell off. The ruling is likely to benefit Davis if the election is delayed to the next regularly scheduled primary, March 2. I can’t believe the 9th. Circus Court! |
| Posted by:Katz |
| #17 You could have made a hell of buttlerfly ballot with that many candidates. It may serve California better to have a campaign prolonged to the point where the candidates have to give a realistic accounting of how they plan to turn the ship around. I was impressed by what McClintock had to say in Human Events, but his ws the only plan I have read. Maybe Arnold or Bustemante has a workable plan that is better. From a national standpoint, it will be worthwhile to see a decent plan put in action. Many other states are facing simular budget issues, but noe to the extent are as bad as California's. We can probably all learn something from this. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2003-9-15 9:43:40 PM |
| #16 SW, Mojo, SH, TU et al - I'll have more to say about this after I cool off. San Diego lifetime resident here - always voted via punchcard, and it was goodenuf to relect the piece of shit to governor (I obviously didn't vote for him). Wait til the anger is felt from this...Davis is dead meat. Wait til minorities figure out the ACLU Dem bootlicking Dog called them too stupid to work a punchcard? Frank |
| Posted by: Frank G 2003-9-15 9:17:06 PM |
| #15 Couldn't see this coming, could we??? They must've had a big weekend sampling that medicinal pot. |
| Posted by: tu3031 2003-9-15 9:08:24 PM |
| #14 I think the plan during the "pledge outcry" was to dissolve it into two courts. I doubt that there will be enough indignation to break it up over this issue. Too many people will think they are right. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2003-9-15 8:40:51 PM |
| #13 What's wrong with the absentee ballot? Is there some scenario where the ballot box is one's only access to vote? Well, if one lives in a tree I suppose - and we have plenty of those to be sure. Best, longterm solution is to petition congress to dissolve the 9th Circuit. Their record is appalling. |
| Posted by: Rex Mundi 2003-9-15 8:12:16 PM |
| #12 Although I am not a Californian(stakeholder), I would think that the California Supreme Court would be the final arbitrator in a non-national election being called under a state statute. Regardless of the outcome, I am glad for all Americans that Davis' budget scams have shined the brown spotlight on the fiscal sleight-o-hand possible to cover overspending. It will be interesting to see which states watch their legislature a little closer. Regardless of whether there is a recall or not most of the damage is permanent as so many unions were granted whapping increases that cannot be undone. It would be good to see some rollback on the Workman's Comp and Benefit's for Illegals front. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2003-9-15 8:10:45 PM |
| #11 Have to disagree with folks here. I was all in favor of Bush v Gore; that decision by the USSC stopped the Florida Supreme Court from changing the rules of election procedure in the middle of ballot counting. It's a hallmark of banana republics to change how ballots are counted after one sees how the election is going, but that is (unfortunately) what the Democrats attempted to do in Florida -- they lost the first machine count of the ballots, lost the machine re-count, and then attempted to change the rules to gain an advantage. Whatever one thinks of punch-cards, when one saw three election judges holding such a card up to the light to see whether a dimple reflected the will of the voter or simply a blemish in the paper, one knew that the ballot counting procedure had been changed improperly. The USSC was right to reverse the FSC, regardless of who won the election. Now then: the case in California might be seen in the same light, and the USSC might properly decide not to take the case on appeal since it involves a question of election procedure, even though it is one that is being asked and resolved prior to any ballots being cast. The mechanics of punch cards versus paper versus electronic voting aside, one basic duty of an election board is to provide a consistent (note: not error-free, as error-free is statistically impossible for any large election) means by which votes will be recorded and counted (that last one being the hang-up in Florida). The 9th Circuit could fairly conclude that, in a process in which some but not all of a particular type of voting recorder (punch cards) had been replaced on the grounds of being "outmoded", that no election should be held until said replacement process is complete. That argument is stronger when the California Sec. of State makes clear that the punch cards are due to be replaced prior to the next regularly scheduled election. That seems to be the heart of their ruling, and I would expect the USSC to agree with that. For any election, the principle is that ballots are fairly cast, counted and recorded. The USSC upheld that in Florida, and they should do the same in California. Does the 9th Circuit ruling fit with that? Looks like it does. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2003-9-15 7:45:50 PM |
| #10 The 9th |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2003-9-15 6:54:14 PM |
| #9 Alaska Paul, California absentee ballots are identical to the ballots you describe. That is why they would make an ideal fall-back, assuming this wasn't some kind of partisan ploy. I do not think the Supreme Court will touch this one. There is a chance the other members of the 9th will revive it, but I think the Supremes will try to stay away just as the Bush campaign kept their distance. I think the delay serves Davis in that the rightious anger is already disappearing, in 6 months, with enough misleading LA times polls to show people how they should be thinking,and enough Republicans stealing elections propoganda from the DNC, he'll have enough numbers to weather the problem. As far as natinional politics go it is better for the Republicans to have Davis stearing the sink ship through the 2004 elections since its unlikely the state can be pulled out of the mess its in in time, and it might pull the democrats down with it if enough fo them attach themselves to Grey Davis. |
| Posted by: Yank 2003-9-15 6:08:05 PM |
| #8 ...the 2000 election in which the high court declared Republican George Bush the winner. Incorrect. The USSC ruled that the Florida Supremes were wrong to allow targeted recounts. The Florida Sec. of State declared George the winnah... |
| Posted by: mojo 2003-9-15 6:04:01 PM |
| #7 Since the courts are actively defacto legislating and setting procedures, it will be interesting to see if the Supremes take this one on in their great wisdom. Re: voting machines. In Alaska, we had the accuvote machines. You marked your 8.5 x 11 in ballot in with a black pen inside oval circles with lots of clearance between the ovals. The machine optically scanned the double sided results. If the voting machine failed, you still had a clear paper copy to hand tabulate as a backup. Now what is so hard about that? WTF has California been doing with their Chad machines? Waiting for an election like this. I agree with Katz: I vote Asshats, too. |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2003-9-15 4:41:07 PM |
| #6 One of the LGFers has an enlightening point: The donkeys have convinced themselves that all women and minorities, if given a true choice, will sign on to the donkey agenda. Asshats. |
| Posted by: Katz 2003-9-15 4:30:30 PM |
| #5 I knew the 'election' was a sham! What about the last election? Punch-cards were/are used all over the state. In fact, the absentee ballots are ALL punchcards! If they are not good then the entire legislature should resign since they were elcted by those same punchcards. I knew the Demoncrots would find a way to twart the recall. Hats off to them for ONCE AGAIN USING the minority vote against Democracy. So if I ALREADY sent in my ballot, does it count? Or will I get a new one next election? Or will it count then? What if I used a #2 pencil instead of a punch stylius? Is this Florida? Where is Al Gore? Jesse? Jesse, save us.....URGH! |
| Posted by: Cyber Sarge (VRWC CA Chapter) 2003-9-15 4:26:56 PM |
| #4 See it all depends on what the meaning of 'democratic' means, you think its means the people voting to determine their future, they think it means democrat party bosses doing what they damn well please, and the people be dammned. I'd like someone to explain to me how voting machines that were good enough to elect Gray Davis in November are not good enough to recall him the following October. Is it now the case that any election can be delayed as long as some fault is found in the election process? Can I sue to have the voting roles purged of illegal voters or delay the election until I have my "right to a fair election" secured? This is the worst possible outcome for Gray Davis, he stood a reasonable chance to win in October, but now this will sit and fester in peoples minds for another 5 months, with never ending ads on TV and radio sucking the oxygen out of the air for the democratic primary that will occur at the same time as the recall. It is now possible for Mclintock to win. |
| Posted by: Frank Martin 2003-9-15 4:20:53 PM |
| #3 Every time the majority in this state raise their voice in opposition to |
| Posted by: Rex Mundi 2003-9-15 4:15:54 PM |
| #2 The state should deliver absentee ballots to the counties in question and let people fill in the ballots and drop them at the polling place. |
| Posted by: Yank 2003-9-15 3:51:17 PM |
| #1 At what point will the left simply *CONCEDE* that they do NOT endorse the democratic process UNLESS the outcome favors their candidates??? |
| Posted by: Flaming Sword 2003-9-15 3:42:30 PM |