Remembering Florida

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • homebrew South Jordan, UT
    July 26, 2012 4:45 p.m.

    The sad thing is what happened, after the supreme court decision. Bush policies that ruined our economy. Tax cuts that bankrupted us. What a disaster. If gore had been handed the election, we would of continued the Clinton era tax rates, and as projected would of had a surpluss, instead of mounting debt. Like i said What a disaster.As far as today is concerned,, we need to let the disasterous Bush tax cuts expire, like they should have a year ago. They didnt work. They were a dissaster. Let them expire, not only on the rich , but on all of us. We need to start paying up. Go back to the Clinton rates. Remember, when we were in unprecidented peace and prosperity.

  • Eric Samuelsen Provo, UT
    July 23, 2012 2:41 p.m.

    >Mike Richards
    You seem to have a strange malfunction on your computer. For some reason, writing the word tax seems to activate your caps lock key. You might want to get that looked at.
    Flaws in the Florida voter purge were first noticed by Hillsborough County's election supervisor, Earl Lennard, a Republican. He said the names being purged were mostly eligible voters. Source: Miami Herald. Florida was purging eligible voters--them's the facts.
    As far as the tax vs. penalty thing, for the solicitor general to make an argument that the proposed penalty was a penalty not a tax is just a normal part of a legal brief--you make a lot of arguments, and hope the court likes one. Nobody called anybody a liar, and the mechanism for collecting it is the same. So, fine, it's a tax. Big deal. I would have preferred to call it a tax all along--we need to combat taxophobia whenever possible. We're citizens--we pay taxes.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    July 23, 2012 12:31 p.m.

    To "Ronald J. Hrebenar" put down the liberal coolaid. Gore lost the election no matter how you look at it.

    From the NY Times we read "Study of Disputed Florida Ballots Finds Justices Did Not Cast the Deciding Vote" in that article they found that "A close examination of the ballots found that Mr. Bush would have retained a slender margin over Mr. Gore".

    This was repeated in the Washington Post article "Florida Recounts Would Have Favored Bush"

    The study that multiple news organizations paid for found that if Florida went through the recount according to Florida Law that Bush would have won. Gore only would have won if you changed the rules.

    Yes, Michael Moore lied to you.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    July 23, 2012 11:34 a.m.

    @Mike Richards
    "NO ONE is being purged from voter rolls who is eligible to vote"

    Uh, one of the county elections chairmen (a Republican) did not implement it in his area because over 95% of the names to be purged are eligible US citizens. Then again, that would require you to google it, and Republicans never factcheck anything, they'd rather just look it up in their gut.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    July 22, 2012 6:41 p.m.


    NO ONE is being purged from voter rolls who is eligible to vote. You made the assertion. If you believe differently, prove your point. Obama can't prove his. A federal judge has overruled him. If your proof is better than Obama's, then let that judge know.

    Contrary to your opinion, Justice Roberts just made Obama eat his own dog-food. That term is often used in the computer world, where I spend most of my time. It means that when you have an idea or a theory, you prove it and then you use it from that point onward. Obama told us that Obamacare was not a TAX. Justice Roberts and the majority on the Court told us that Obama was lying; that Obamacare WAS a tax. You might not like the fact that Obama was told that he was a liar, but that doesn't change history. John Roberts not only told us that Obama was a liar, but he also told us that elections have consequences, and he implied that if we disagreed with Obamacare that we could easily correct it in the next election.

  • Eric Samuelsen Provo, UT
    July 22, 2012 1:21 p.m.

    Wikipedia's article on the recount is comprehensive and clear. Check Wikipedia "Florida Election Recount."
    As for Chicago, I'm not sure I see the relevance. I'm from Indiana, and growing up, we all knew about the corruption of Chicago politics. But that was over 50 years ago. Has nothing to do with elections today.
    >Mike Richards
    No one is trying to keep people who are here illegally on voter roles. In Florida, attempts are being made to purge voter roles, and a lot of the people purged have every right to vote. The Obama administration is trying to ensure than everyone eligible to vote can. I get that conservatives are trying to make something reasonable sound sinister, but the facts aren't on your side. As for the Constitution hanging by a thread, I think Justice Roberts just reversed that tendency.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    July 22, 2012 12:01 p.m.

    When it is so easy to google things about history, why do the democrats insist on rewriting history? Which party was trying to tell us that they could look at a "pregnant chad" and determine that the voter really meant to vote for Gore?

    The Democrats were trying to repeat in 2000 what they got away with in 1960. This time, the country had had enough of their shenanigans and they weren't able to steal an election.

    Already they're showing that they will do anything that it takes to "take" the next election. Obama is trying to keep tens of thousands of non-documented "citizens" on the voter roles. What kind of President, who has taken an oath to uphold the law and to execute the law, would try to keep illegal voters on the voting rolls?

    The Constitution is hanging by a thread and about half of the citizens seem to think that abandoning law is the way to do the right thing.

  • joe5 South Jordan, UT
    July 22, 2012 11:40 a.m.

    Please provide the evidence that shows Gore winning even one recount. It just ain't there. There was never a count in which Gore had the majority of Florida votes.

    The Supreme Court ruled that Florida had to follow its own constitution with regard to election rules, recounts, and their respective time frames. What controversy is there in that decision?

    History actually shows that voter fraud by Democrats is far more prevalent than voter fraud by Republicans. Chicago is the running joke about dead people voting, often more than once. The Daley machine of eelction fraud, honed in Chicago to a fine art, became a mainline Democratic strategy that has since been used nationally. Why do the Democrats not want voters to show IDs? Why do they oppose verification of absentee ballots against death records? Why do they support voting by non-citizens? Is visibility and transparency a problem for the Democrats? Even under the administration of the President who promised complete transparency and has delivery only secrecy (see Eric Holder)?

    Be careful where you go with this argument. I could argue, probably even more convincingly than this letter-writer, that Kennedy was fraudulently elected.

  • Eric Samuelsen Provo, UT
    July 22, 2012 11:10 a.m.

    Excellent article. One small correction: if you read Gore's actual remarks, he didn't overstate his role in the creation of the internet. What he said was factually accurate.

  • higv Dietrich, ID
    July 22, 2012 9:16 a.m.

    Tilden had the same controversy. The author of this letter can he back his claims up. Nader running didn't help. Buchanan almost gave the presidency to Gore that Isolasionist. voters were legit there Bush won fair and square. Why weren't all of the counties recounted multiple times? Not fair there.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    July 22, 2012 9:13 a.m.

    Excellent letter. But Americans have very short attention spans and memories. If it's not entertaining . . . . well forget it.

  • ugottabkidn Sandy, UT
    July 22, 2012 6:01 a.m.

    It is election fraud we need to worry about, not voter fraud.

  • Emajor Ogden, UT
    July 22, 2012 12:28 a.m.

    At some point we'll forget that controversy ever happened. It's already nearly gone from our collective attention.

    But I do wonder what the country would be like now if the intelligent but dull guy on the right of that photo were given the presidency instead of the interesting but clearly below par guy on the left. I don't at all like what the interesting guy did. Seems to me overstating one's role in the creation of the internet and being hypocritical about carbon emissions is far better than fabricating a war that cost thousands upon thousands of lives.