« August 2003 | Main | April 2004 »
September 22, 2003
Elections? We don' need no steenkin' elections!
Lawrence Tribe (pictured above), tried arguing today to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that the key to preserving Democracy is to cancel an election if it's not perfectly executed.
I can't begin to tell ya how appalling this is. It represents the inexorable advance of a judicial oligarchy, wherein the will of the people is of no moment; the Executive is humbled and the Legislature neutered.
Three co-equal branches of government have apparently been replaced by two branches dominated by the robed solons of Da Law Iz Whut We Say It Iz. I've watched the arguments and am flabbergasted by Tribe and his cohort's dishonest presentation, one targetted from the very beginning by Judge Kosinzki.
Tribe said that thousands of voters would be "disenfranchised" -- Gawd, does no one use a dictionary anymore? -- by use of the impossibly-difficult-to-use punchcard system. The sharp-witted judge spotted the flaw, pointing out that the hack poli-sci prof feeding the numbers to Tribe failed to work the problem through to the end.
Whut?
It's like this: assuming arguendo (lawyer speak for, "for the sake of argument" and "check out the size of my brain!") that 40,000 Punch-O-Matic ballots are rejected by the automated counters. Under the hypothesis put forth by Tribe, that's it; game, set, match.
"Not so fast, my pretties," said the judge. Even if 40,000 ballots were rejected, constituting a rejection (or failure rate of two percent), the analysis doesn't stop there. Under California law, a manual tally is then conducted, and, unlike our retarded Floridian friends, Californians have an election law that provides a standardized basis for determining what that ballot says.
So, let's say that of those 40,000 ballots, more than half can be counted by hand. That reduces the error rate to less than one percent, well within the margin of error for even the latest, greatest, voting machines.
In essence, the Judge caught the shyster attorney trying to mislead the court.
D'oh! Stupid judges!
I want to think some more on this. But the bottom line is that the ACLU, et al, are essentially saying the election must be delayed because blacks and latinos are too stupid to figger out how to vote. How pathetic is that?
Posted by Mike Lief at 09:29 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack