>And we'll see just how much class you have by how you respond... <g>

If class, or intelligence, were a requirement of this thread, it would be a whole lot shorter <g>

>Not at all. I think she's very partisan but I don't really care. If one's partisanship overcomes their judgement to where they do not do their duties as required by whatever governing laws thewy serve under then it's an issue in my mind.
>
>I don't see where she's done that at all. The Florida Supreme Court said 5:00pm Sunday and that's what she did. If that's partisan then you need to place the 'blame' at the feet of their Supreme Court I'd suppose.

>Now.. A slightly larger issue. What's wrong with being partisan?
>
>I expect the different sides to take their positions stongly. That's partisan and I think it's a good thing. It's healthy actually, given human nature's tendency to allow power to corrupt over time. The current 50/50 deadlock in the Senate is IMO a good thing and will require all sides to work together.
>
>Doesn't seem to bother Democrats when they start talking about starving kids and grandmothers and some of the other nonsense they spew out.
>
>The way I see it is that the framers, while not really contemplating political parties, certainly expected their to be 'groups' on many sides of any given issue. That's the basis in logic for the notion of checks & balances, the notion that men were 'devils' rather than 'angels' and so forth.
>
>Gridlock and partisan fights are what should happen IMO.
>
>
>>
>>>Remember, regardless of personal opinion the only thing that counts is this certification. She was Florida when she exercised the powers given to her under Florida's constitution.
>>
>>Why is it that one Republican, Ms. Harris, is above partisan politics, but 7 Florida Supreme court justices, 1 of whom was appointed by a Rep. Governor, 1 appointed jointly by a Dem. and Rep., in a unanimous decision, are partisan?
>
>No one said she was above partisan politics but I can guarantee you that if she makes one eeensy teensy tiny extra-legal 'slip' the local and national Democrats and press will be on her like the proverbial duck on a June bug.
>
>That's not bad since the design of the process is that oppossing parties keep each other honest. They all have an interst in the outcome so a good fight isn't necessarily bad.
>
>As always what bothers me is the shifting and changing of the rules mid-stream
>
>>
>>>The votes have been counted and recounted. Mr. Bush has prevailed every time.
>>>
>>>Those are the facts.
>>>
>>>And.. I understand that some folks confuse their desires and opinions for facts.
>>
>>No, some folks just can't see their own bias.
>
>Right. The Democrats and Liberals teach us this every day. <g>
>
>But that still doesn't change the facts that in all counts Mr. Bush prevailed and that he has now been officially certified by the State of Florida.
>
>All the gripes, complaints, accusations, insinuations and other disagreements simply do not change those facts.
>
>Yes, a court might reverse but I'd wager that that's a statistically small probability. But, who knows...