Karen, I doubt that Dubya has a need for popular election. He was elected according to the rules of the country. That's enough. He does have a need to be re-elected as do all politicians. As soon as they are elected, they think about re-election.
Also, he wasn't elected by the US Supreme Court. He was elected by the people of 50 states according to law. In Florida, he became the President 7 days after election day. The Florida Supreme Court stopped this and gave extra time for hand vote counting. This was completely illegal. The Supreme Courts may not make law - that's the job of the legislative body. They illegally made a new law extending the time. They then made another law extending the time for manual counting. At this second illegal decision, the Democratically selected Chief Justice of the Florida Supreme Court broke ranks at the bare-faced effrontery of the second illegal extension. Then, they through out an "evidence rich" court case about the voting procedures. Supremes never do this to a full court case with witnesses and the rest. They did. After the first illegal extension, the US Supreme Court smacked the wrists of the Florida Supremes, suggesting further reflection of their decision. However, politics were at work which meant that the only way to sneak Gore in was to ignore the US Supremes. Which they did. By now, the whole thing had become a classic Keystone Cops comedy. But, the US Supremes were not going to let the local Supremes to continue to break the law - so all but two of them said "Enough, already". And Bush won - including the Presidency. The mistake the Democrats made was to drag to the polls their less than enthusiastic supporters - but not to give them a pamphlet or something explaining exactly what they should do when they get there. In California, they are trying to get a law passed that will allow people to register to vote - as they vote. It's part of the campaign to get disinterested and politically ignorant people to mark the ballot "correctly" without need to understand what they are doing. It's a shame that the political process is thus contaminated. Harry ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Karen wrote: >Yes, that's true. But so is Ariel Sharon concerned with himself. He'd >prefer not to be prosecuted as a war criminal. But because Israel is >constantly under siege, the media doesn't usually focus on Sharon's personal >issues personal agenda, or whether he is superficial. Wartime is great >cover for that. > >It remains to be seen whether Dubya will overcome his need to be popularly >elected and think of the country as a whole, transcending personal politics. >We like to think that FDR and Churchill did those things, but they certainly >also were concerned with self, at least their legacies. Who wouldn't be in >those positions of power? > >BTW, did you see that they have located the Japanese sub on the ocean floor >that the US claimed it shot down before the kamikaze attack force reached >Pearl Harbor? Other subs have been located but this last one was missing, >thus leaving claims unconfirmed. There it sat, all this time. > >It always fascinates me how short-lived memory is about recent history. I >saw someone arguing in print recently that they doubted the outgoing Clinton >presidency sincerely didn't want to start a war on Osama bin Laden just as >the new Bush administration was coming in; however, that's exactly what >happened in the case of the elder Bush when he felt compelled to send US >troops to Somalia just before the new Clinton administration came into >office. I'm sure the hawks in the outgoing Elder >Bush administration didn't trust the younger Clinton especially with his >anti-Vietnam baggage, to do the job. > >Eight years later, with detailed plans for a war on terrorism in hand, the >incoming Bush administration didn't want to accept the outgoing Clinton >administration warnings about Osama bin Laden or their blueprints. Alas, >the vagaries of those transitions of power. > >In light of Ed's posting from the Globe Mail about the Elder and Younger >Bush president's disagreeing on the Middle East, it is important to know the >psyche and motives of the current POTUS when debating significant current >events. They are all-too human, after all. > >I hesitate to mention it lest there is an onslaught of rehashed Clinton >analysis, but with Clinton it was significant that he had an alcoholic and >possibly abusive stepfather and was raised by a flamboyant mother. >Protecting dark family secrets and promoting a public face were inherent in >his upbringing. I don't know Blair's family background. Who knows what >else we will learn about this Bush father and son relationship from here on? > >Karen >Arthur wrote: They also shared a certain superficiality. A concern with the >self. > >Keith, > >I suspect the reason why Blair and Clinton got on so well is because they >each had policies keyed to the latest opinion poll. > >Harry ****************************** Harry Pollard Henry George School of LA Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: (818) 352-4141 Fax: (818) 353-2242 *******************************
--- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.381 / Virus Database: 214 - Release Date: 8/2/2002
