David Souter CRIED Following Supreme Court Election 2000 Decision

(Get ready for the BIG comedy Webcast starting September 10. No, this doesn't involve ol' PJ talking into a mike. This is a project involving MANY. Get your political humor in digestible chunks twice weekly on the Web.)

Perhaps the biggest MISTAKE of the first George Bush was nominating David Souter to the Supreme Court. At the time, everyone said that Souter's views were a complete mystery. Well, he hid them well at the time for a reason. As has been revealed in subsequent years on the Supreme Court, he is an out and out liberal. However, we can at least get some comfort by a report that Souter was absolutely DEVASTED by the Supreme Court election 2000 decision that halted the many recounts in certain Florida counties and allowed the electoral votes of that state go to the one who had earned the most votes---George W. Bush. So depressed was Souter for many months afterwards that he went into weeping fits at the thought that an EVIL Republican was allowed to become President due to having the most electoral votes. The source for this story is Jeffrey Toobin which does tend to cast aspersions upon the veracity of this story but this one I believe since I have no doubt that Souter, like many liberals, suffers from severe Bush Derangement Syndrome (BDS). Here is a BLURB about the Toobin book:

According to Jeffrey Toobin’s new book on the Supreme Court, Justice David Souter nearly resigned in the wake of Bush v. Gore, so distraught was he over the decision that effectively ended the Florida recount and installed George W. Bush as president.

In “The Nine,” which goes on sale Sept. 18, Toobin writes that while the other justices tried to put the case behind them, “David Souter alone was shattered,” at times weeping when he thought of the case. “For many months, it was not at all clear whether he would remain as a justice,” Toobin continues. “That the Court met in a city he loathed made the decision even harder. At the urging of a handful of close friends, he decided to stay on, but his attitude toward the Court was never the same.”

The only thing about this story that I find distressful is that Souter did not resign. However, I do get a sense of schadenfreude about the incredible despair that Souter endured as a result of the Supreme Court decision. So let us now watch the reaction of the Blurbies (?) to this story on the Examiner.Com site to this Souter crybaby story in Bolshevik Red while the commentary of your humble correspondent, handing Justice Souter a hankie, is in the [brackets]:

Book says Souter mulled resignation after Bush v. Gore

[Instead he cried like a BDS baby in despair. I would have preferred the resignation. Now to read the reaction of the Blurbies... BTW, if you actually go to the THREAD you will see that a deranged Leftwinger by the name of Sam attempts to spam the thread with long irrelevant posts because he can't win the debate.]

What a female male. He should have quit.

[Instead he stayed and wettened his judicial robe with his BDS tears.]

1 thing i think all 9 of these fascist enablers should remember is just what happened to the justices of hitlers reich at nuremberg, viva the noose for these traitors of american justice, actually i favor capitol punishment, imo everyone at the washington capitol should be punished, its a disgrace what these yeahoos have done in our names,they are trying to be the very thing they say we are fighting. this whole misadministration their enabling congresses the war profiteer board members the wall street bookies;all of them should be thrown into rubber rooms for the rest of their unnatural lives and reminded each day of what they did

[Speaking of rubber rooms... The nurse will soon be arriving at your rubber room with the daily lithium treatment.]

By the way Gary. The votes in Florida were counted by many news organizations including NY Times. ALL had Bush winning. Sorry Gary. The truth is always a pesky thing for you liberals. Maybe if you counted the votes Gore would have won.

[Shhh! Don't confuse the issue with the facts.]

". . . at times weeping when he thought of the case." Are you kidding me? And this emotionally unstable, pitiful little man is a Supreme Court Justice? Sheesh! His time has passed.

[Souter's reaction was no different that that of a typical sufferer of BDS.]

Too bad the sniveling little creep didn't resign. Souter is a psychotic little dirtbag loser and George Bush deserved to get beat by Perot/Clinton for being so stupid as to nominate this horrible weasel.

[Hmmm... Perhaps the nomination of Souter marked the Jump the Shark moment for the first George Bush.]

That just goes to show that even in the heady world of The Supreme Court, it is still possible for a respected jurist to take a hissy fit because he didn't get his way. This was not a conservative court. They just didn't agree with him, so he wanted to take his ball and go home. I makes me nervous that we are putting our trust in people whose skin is as thin as this.


[Unfortunately Souter did NOT take his ball and go home.]

When the Kennedy tax cuts were passed in the 1960s...

[This is but one of MANY examples of Sam Spam on this thread that he attempts to hijack because he can't get his way. What follows, as in his other Spam, is an overlong copy & paste treatise that has absolutely NOTHING to do with the topic of David Souter. Leftwingers can't win in open debate so they filibuster threads like this with meaningless Spam.]

Perhaps justic Souter will consider another book after he reads the full set of comments here. I can tolerate his wimpy weeping, but not his subpar intellectualism. He is an embarassment to a free republic. For the record, Bush won Florida, and he won the next two re-counts - trying to boost Gore, heaven forbid, into the lead by increasing his (hanging-chad) vote total in a heavily democratic region, is the scam that should be remembered.

[I would love to just see this thread in book form so folks can learn how intolerant liberals like Sam, when they can't win an argument, attempt to spam threads. I don't reprint his entire spam here because I don't want to bore my DUFU readers but they can check out his dementia for themselves.]

Sam, you're clearly a nutcase. Most of your little factoids are probably true, but none are really relevant to this topic.

[It's called filibustering via Sam Spam.]

Why Have Media Ignored 1992 Gore Speech That Blasted Iraq As Terror Sponsor?

[Apparently Sam is paying no attention to you since the above was but the first sentence in a treatise of overlong spam that has absolutely NOTHING to do with the topic at hand.]

HEY SAM! Why don't you just post the link you're getting all this stuff from? I can't think of anything that kills a conversation faster than someone posting a novel.

[This is Sam's whole purpose. He is using the leftwing technique of spamming threads with long irrelevancies when he is losing a debate.]

Most of the evidence concerning U.S. temperature trends is collected by NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center, which gathers information from about 1,200 weather observation stations across the nation...

[Irrelevant Sam Spam follows. This thread is more revelatory about the leftwing mindset than it is about David Souter's attitude. Come to think of it, they are one and the same.]

What's there to cry about? Is the decision constitutional or unconstitutional? There have been many many analysis of the Florida election - and Bush won. The NY Times even concluded the same thing. No irregularities. And he did this regardless of the fact that Gore successfully lobbied to keep a large number of military votes from being counted, and in the face of CBS news calling the election for Florida before the agreed upon time - which effectively supressed votes the Repubican panhandle counties.

[Uh-oh. You are about to encourage yet more Sam Spam. See, he can't counter your factual statements so instead he is just going to spam this thread.]

Michael Moore's "Bowling for Columbine" won the Oscar for best documentary...

[There he goes again. Yet more incredibly overlong and completely IRRELEVANT Sam Spam. He can't argue the FACTS so this leftwinger attempts to hijack this discussion.]

Weeping over the decision? This proves the guy is mentally ill -- which makes him a perfect liberal justice!

[The discussion continues. The Sam Spam filibuster seems to have failed.]

Schadenfreude!

[The flip side of that is Freudenschade!]

This jackass should have resigned when he ruled that the government could take private property for issues other than Eminent Domain.

[Didn't he throw a hissy fit when some group tried to take over his home for the same reasons that he justified in his SC decision?]

We all should have cried. The decision was a terrible usurpation of democracy. Gore won, which no one doubts, including the unregenrates who say otherwise.

[No one doubts it? Even liberal newspapers which ran their own recounts confirm that Bush was the WINNER.]

Reading the usual wingnut drivel posted on this thread should bring a sense of dispair to any thinking, rational person concerned about this country. They cough up fur balls of half-digested crap they’ve swallowed whole from the disinformation machines of right-wing rant radio and Faux News, and repeat it like the drooling retards that they are.

[And of course, you offer absolutely NO evidence that Al Gore won in Florida in 2000.]

Souter: Weeping that Bush won. To think this guy was a Republican appointee. SO TYPICAL. That's why conservatives always lose. They have no survival instinct or maybe even they're masochists.

[Bush I must have been in an hypnotic stupor when he nominated Souter.]

If all of the counties had been counted, Gore would have won under all four standards. If only the counties the Democrats asked to be recounted, then Bush would have won under all four standards. The Dems essentially lost when they did not ask for a statewide recount.

[And whose fault was that?]

War, Lies, and Videotape: A Viewer's Guide to Fahrenheit 9/11...

[Sam the Spam returns. When you can't argue the facts, they try to kill the thread with overlong spam that is completely irrelevant to the topic.]

The amazing about this story is that Souter was disappointed that Gore didn't win. The votes had been counted and certified within the law, there was no evidence of wrong doing or illegal activity. Yet the good ole Liberal State supreme court (unasked) made up of liberals agreed with Gore to do a second recount thus rewriting law because they didn't get what they wanted. However, it was not an unanamious decision. One of the liberals on the Florida court said it was a violation of Bush's equal protection under the US Constitution. Shows you what the Dem Party will be when the take over total power. Perhaps Souter should retire, we don't need someone like him on the Court.

[Uh-oh! Your rational comment is sure to trigger yet more Sam Spam.]

When the Founding Fathers established our government, they gave us...

[And Sam does not disappoint as he continues his hijack of this thread with meaningless overlong spam.]

What a shame he lacked the resolve to do it. Maybe he should consult European and International courts to for some relief from his melancholy state.

[That International court thing is actually Justice Breyer's shtick but I am sure Souter could easily buy into it. Breyer is under the delusion that foreign law should play a part in decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court. Nice attempt to subvert our sovereignty.]

The Supreme Court got it right in Bush v. Gore. They stopped a Florida Supreme Court that was WAYYYYY off the reservation - blatantly disregarding the election statutes enacted by the Florida General Assembly and substituting their own policies as if they were the legislative branch of government. It was political and judicial corruption at its peak. Thank God the US Supreme Court stepped in and restored order to the chaos created by the corrupt Florida Supreme Court

[David wept.]

The Persistant Myth of the Stolen Election...

[More Sam Spam. This time only very slightly on topic but still an overlong filibuster and mostly irrelevant to the topic at hand.]

Is there a cybernetwork of American Fascists who generate alerts when an article somewhere merits the benefit of their malevolent attentions? That seems to be the case here on this comment thread. The proportion of bush dead-ender creeps spewing their sophomoric vitriol is distinctly out of line with their representation in the general population.

[So you post while completely ignoring the Sam Spam staring you in the face.]

Al Gore tried to pull a fast one with a partial recount in Florida. When he didn't get it HE started the lawsuits to overturn existing law. When the suit that became Bush v. Gore was decided in the circuit court practically every legal pundit and scholar in the country said that the opinion was iron clad and that even the liberals on the FL Supreme Court would have to accept it. Their own liberal Chief Justice wrote a dissent saying that their overturning that decision could not withstand the Federal scrutiny that was sure to follow immediately. When the inevitable happened, liberals who have spent their whole lives living by a philosophy of the end justifying the means suddenly decided that they were States rights advocates and that "we wuz robbed". It is a good thing that Souter's whining reminds us that the outrageous charges and outright lies about Bush didn't start after things went bad in Iraq. They started while Al Gore was trying to figure out a way to win the election at ANY cost.

[Careful. Sam the Spam could be waiting in the wings.]

The Florida State Constitution had specifice guidelines as to when and how recounts were conducted. They also had a cut off time, otherwise you could recount endlessly. Despite liberal attempts to have felons and dead people voting, Al Snore STILL didn't win. Souter's no different than any other liberal who thinks that the rules only apply to conservatives. What Souter wanted was "jury nullification" if you will, where they look at the CLEAR VIOLATION of statutes and say "THIS DOESN'T MATTER", just as the Florida Supremes did. Under LAW the recount HAD to be CUT OFF because it was ILLEGAL to CONTINUE. Duh~!

[David Souter would have been qualified to be a New Jersey Justice since their Supreme Court didn't think the election rules really applied when they had to find a replacement for Torricelli when it was already too late to do so according to state law.]

Due to the Bush junta election steal, there are millions of Americans that weep right along with Justice Souter.

[Thank you for your utter failure to state your liberal case with FACTS.]

The Supreme Court decision will forever be remembered by thinking Americans who think outside of the false left/right paradigm that has engulfed our republic, as the day many of us realized that our Votes do not count and that the puppetry of a handful of corrupt people resulted in the placement of the Bush/Cheney PNAC regime in power. There will be a second American Revolution, hopefully in my lifetime.

[Translation: This Lefty is hoping for a BOLSHEVIK Revolution in his lifetime.]

Lest anyone forget, the SCOTUS vote was 7-2 on the question whether the Florida Supreme Court was acting unconstitutionally in re-writing Florida election law by sanctioning targeted recounts only in heavily Democratic counties (and beyond the legal deadline for recounts in any case). The 5-4 vote was on the narrower question whether the Gore campaign still had time to concoct another remedy before Florida certified its electoral vote for Bush. That Souter "came close to resigning" over the outcome reveals him not only to be a legal wussy--of which there was never any doubt--but also a partisan hack.

[Please don't assault me with the FACTS! Gotta stick my head in the ground!]

Did Rush tell all you right wingnuts what to write on these boards? All recounts show that Bush won? Wrong, even after Jeb had those 50,000 black voters dumped from the checklists, there are recounts that show that Gore won. And it was the Bush campaign that staged the riot in Miami that stopped the recount there.

[Which recounts show that Gore won? Certainly not those conducted by even the liberal newspapers.]

I'm a little confused. In this very short article, the Justice Souter is described as being "shattered". About what? That the case was decided in favor of Bush? That the case came to SCOTUS in the first place? That SCOTUS effectively installed a president, further blurring the line separating the branches of government? The laws were enforced and upheld in FL, and the will of the FL SC to usurp them was thwarted. Isn't that what a superior court is for?

[The FL SC had the same mindset as the NJ SC. Damn the laws! Full speed ahead for the Democrats!]

David Souter is a true piece of work. He literally has no insight and is one of the very worst Supreme Court appointments ever in the United States. Has Souter ever spent ten seconds reflecting that a liberal Democrat would have never appointed him to be on the Supreme Court? Warren Rudman wanted to stick it to Pat Robertson and other social conservatives, so he fooled George Bush 41 into thinking Souter was a conservative. Rudman and Souter will not be laughing on Judgment Day.

[Thanx Rudman for suckering the first George Bush with Souter.]

Weeping in a city he hates? Where did he think the SC meets when he took the job? He sounds like he wants to have his cake and eat it too.

[At least he has a wide stance.]

Oh Jeez. Bush won the Florida recount how many times? Eight? Nine? Ninety? Yet we're still talking about this $#*&? The US SC didn't "give" Bush the presidency, nor did they "install" him. They only stated that Florida had to stop re-counting. Why? BECAUSE THE US CONSTITUTION STATED THAT THE US PRESIDENT HAD TO BE SWORN IN ON A DATE THAT WAS WITHIN 48 HOURS OF THAT DECISION!

[Time limits don't count when it is necessary to install a Democrat in office. Just ask the NJ SC.]