Tommy,

>Is it not possible to have an opinion and still do what is right?

Not unless you're liberal then every decision you take is embued with morality and is automatically superior to everyone else's.

Why? Liberals more often than not see themselves as the final moral authority in matters such as this and take great offense when others simply do not accept this position.

I do not accept that they are morally superior; particularly based on some of their wrongheaded and dumb policies. They have been proven time and time again to not work but there's a point you reach where there's simply no reasoning with them and they start calling people names - like they have done with Ms. Harris.

If you don't believe that just watch the responses I get to this message. <g> They simply cannot help themselves. They are addicted to the need to feel morally superior.

They are not morally superior than anyone else and never will be. (Nor am I by the way - or anyone else for that matter) Morality does not come from positions - positions come from morality.


>As far as I see it she did what the courts said was to be done.

She did but since that wasn't what the Liberals wanted they feel justified in thinking they have been somehow disenfranchised. As such they feel like they are victims - confusing the simple fact that they lost a contest and have somehow been 'robbed'. Imagine this.. They have already started using the race card too. Typical bunch of baloney from the regular gang of demagogues. Nothing new here.. But they somehow translate their not getting their way into a sort of moral deficiency on the part of others - showing to all their utter arrogance. Hence the constant calls for more recounts and different rules. It's blatant and anyone who cannot see it doesn't want to see it.

>The courts gave until 5 pm on Sunday to complete the recount and that is what she stuck to. Isn't that the time frame that was given to have the recount completed?

Yep. But since she certified Mr. Bush she's evil, not obeying the law, which as a matter of fact she was doing.

>It would not have been right to take a partial count of what was completed by 5 that day. Wouldn't that have been more incomplete than the original count was supposed to be?
>
>Tommy

Those partial counts were that way only because they took Thansgiving off., They wanted her to extend - not for the purpose of extending - but for the purpose of causing her to invalidate herself by violating the Florida Supreme Court's deadline. Had she extended in the interests of 'fairness' (a common Liberal trap) they would have turned on her and asked the court to disqualify her since she had obviously violated the Supreme Court's ruling.

She didn't which shows her to be smarter than they in this case.