27 September 2004

Another Gore Loser

In A Scrape

Jon Heinz-Kerry is in a scrape, he is scrambling to shore up his base, he is changing advisors almost as fast as he changes positions on Iraq, and the internal data in polls suggest he is in seriuos trouble in some very important areas. In areas such as trustworthiness, Bush is outpolling him by 30-40% points. This means that when Heinz-Kerry suggests a policy(however briefly) to win in Iraq nobody takes him seriously. So Jon Heinz-Kerry thinks that if he can get close in this falls election that he can do a better job of stealing the election than AlGores failed attempt in 2000. So to that end, Jon has hired thousands of lawyers to do this for him. Jon is in a scrape and he plans to litigate his way out of it. Watch Ohio, particulary the Over The Rhine area in Cincinnati, an area that has suffered from racial unrest, even riots in 2001.

Jon Heinz-Kerry wants to drag us into his problem. When you find yourself in a scrape, often a piece of paper, nothing more than pressed wood fibers make can make all the difference in the world. Say you are unfortunate enough to be involved in a fender-bender. You're not too worried, nobody is hurt, just a lot of bent sheet metal.

Until you call your insurance agent and he tells you your policy expired last month. You know this cannot be, and you can prove it. The piece of paper that saves you a lot of grief and money in this case would be the insurance policy. An enforceable contract of pressed wood fibers and some ink arranged in a certain fashion can save you thousands of dollars in a case like this.
But an insurance policy is more than simple paper with ink. It represents a negotiated agreement between two or more parties. This system of negotiated and recorded agreements between peoples on a larger scale is referred to as the rule of law.

Civics Lesson

This may be tedious for some but here goes. We have in this country the rule of law. It does not always work perfectly, but it is the most successful system of governing in the recorded history of mankind. An important component of this system of laws and governance is the concept of recording laws, and due process. That is to say, that when one event requiring legal intervention, or litigation occurs we have processes in place for dealing with it.

If you are arrested, you have a right to counsel, you have a right to a fair and speedy trial. You can expect certain things to happen to protect you if you are unfortunate enough to find yourself involved in a criminal matter as a defendant. If your insurance company tries to welch on paying to fix your car when you have a valid contractual policy in place you can have a reasonable expectation of successful recourse through the civil courts.

Without this system of rules and laws where we have reasonable expectations of how our civil affairs are to be conducted, the result would be the ugly specter of anarchy. Maybe we would devolve into the sad state of tyranny, where the weak are ruled by the strong, and the weak (or the minority) have absolutely no say.

All that said, we are now likely to face another severe test of our system of laws and governance. In 2000 AlGore and the Democrats hijacked our electoral system and held it hostage in the court system. Our electoral system emerged from this ordeal the weaker for the experience. Ever selfish, and apparently lacking any semblance of moral restraint, Jon Heinz-Kerry's campaign is hiring thousands of lawyers to try again to subvert our constitutionally established procedures of governance.

You see, in our system we have laws and statutes that are passed by various representative bodies at the state and Federal levels. But there is a higher governing authority, that provides for the nature and arrangement of our governance.

This higher authority is the constitution. All 50 of our states also have constitutions. Each of these constitutions provides for the framework of our governments state, and Federal. These constitutions are written records that specify the process of our governance. Separation of the legislative, judicial, and executive functions of our governments for instance. These constitutions even provide means of changing themselves. Some state constitutions have been changed with some regularity. These constitutions (state and Federal) are not subject to the whims of the Democratic party or whatever petulant loser they happen to be running for office at the time.

One of the most important things our various constitutions (state and Federal), provide for is the election (or appointment in the case of some judges) of our government officials. Particularly in the legislatures and in the case of the executive.

One of the things our wonderful constitutions provide for is the resolution of political disputes that may arise from time to time in the election of our governing officials.

The Process

In the case the congress or the Senate, if their is an electoral dispute in a given state regarding who will sit in a particular seat in congress, and it cannot be resolved through the recount process in the district, the congress decides the matter. Yes, you read that right; congress decides who sits in congress. Ask Bob Dornan next time you see him. Loretta Sanchez now holds the seat he used to in congress. Bob contends that she stole the seat by stuffing ballot boxes with the votes of illegal aliens, who voted based on her Hispanic last name. The specifics or validity of his charges are not important to the point of this discussion. When the matter could not be resolved in the state of California, the US Congress resolved the matter, and now Bob is doing something else, and Loretta Sanchez is the US representative from the 47th district of California.

In the case of the executive, our various state constitutions provide for the representative body to decide contested elections, in their respective states. In 1999 the Mississippi governors race was decided in this manner. Guess what the predominantly Democrat Mississippi house did? Yes that's right, they shamelessly voted along party lines to place Ronnie Musgrove in the governors mansion. There wasn't even the slightest pretense of feigned "bi-partisanship" fairness or other such tripe, they just dispatched the Republican candidate without even flinching.

In the matter of the Presidency of the United States, if the matter is not resolved at the state level; then it is incumbent on the US House of Representatives (Congress) to resolve this political dispute. The contested election of 1800, that placed Thomas Jefferson in the white house, was decided in this manner. On 17FEB01 the US House of Representatives elected Thomas Jefferson after the electoral college tied in his race with Aaron Burr.

In 2000 AlGore duped this country (and the Bush team for that matter) into ignoring the Constitutional process that is already in place for resolving political disputes. Political disputes are to be settled by politicians.

So Now What?

The time is now for the Bush-Cheney '04 to begin staking out the case for the rule of law. Now is the time for Bush lieutenants to begin insisting on the constitutional process to decide the certain to be disputed presidential election results. Bush-Cheney '04 needs to spread the word now, that we are a nation of laws and we are not going to allow petulant Democrat losers to continue to take our electoral process hostage and attempt to decapitate it like so many Islamo-Fascist thugs in Iraq. What kind of example does this set for fledgling democracies in Afghanistan and Iraq?

The piece of paper in this case that can make all the difference in the world is the United States Constitution. In fact, if we adhere to this piece of paper it may save the world from the tyrannical theocratic rule of Islamo-Fascist maniacs. It is imperative that we insist that the rule of law be followed in this instance and that any disputes regarding the election outcome be resolved in the US House of Represntatives.

I maintain that the uncertainty created by the debacle of AlGores temper-tantrum fit in 2000, deepened the Clinton-Gore recession, which demonstrably started in the Spring of 2000. Last time it was our economy that suffered. Now we are at war, and such uncertainty this time around will only embolden our enemies even further than Heinz-Kerry has done so far by talking down the accomplishments of our troops. Another such stunt may even endanger our security here at home.
All so an arrogant, blow-dried-stuffed-shirt-Flop-Flipper can complete his resume' . I think not. Now is the time for the GOP spin machine and Bush-Cheney '04 to begin insisting that these disputes be decided in the political realm, in the manner the Constitution requires.