A Coup Against the Supreme Court

[spanone]

People don’t usually remember it this way, but on Dec. 13, 2000, Vice President Al Gore gave one of the most important speeches in American history. Mr. Gore had contested the initial results of the Florida vote count and prevailed in the Florida state courts, but the Supreme Court had voted, 5-to-4, the day before to end the recount and effectively hand the presidency to George W. Bush.

“Now the U.S. Supreme Court has spoken,” Mr. Gore said. “Let there be no doubt, while I strongly disagree with the court’s decision, I accept it.” The frenzied battle over a few hundred votes had spawned intense anger across the country — but it had been resolved “as it must be resolved, through the honored institutions of our democracy.”

Mr. Gore’s concession that night still stands as the most powerful reaffirmation in modern times of the Supreme Court’s unique and fragile role in the American system of government. Millions of people were furious at the justices’ decision in Bush v. Gore — many believed it was the result not of legal reasoning but of rank partisanship — and yet virtually everyone followed Mr. Gore’s selfless lead, accepted the court as the final arbiter of the dispute, and moved on. There were no riots in the streets, no attempted coups, no “Second Amendment solutions.” There was, instead, a peaceful transfer of power: the hallmark of a civil society operating under the rule of law.

Sixteen years later, the Supreme Court sits crippled, unable to resolve the most pressing legal questions facing the country. Two events — the sudden death of Justice Antonin Scalia in February and the unprecedented refusal of Senate Republicans to even consider President Obama’s pick to fill the vacant seat — have converged to throw the court’s future as a functioning institution into doubt.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/07/opinion/a-coup-against-the-supreme-court.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=span-abc-region®ion=span-abc-region&WT.nav=span-abc-region

[benld74]

1. W was selected NOT elected

[Orrex]

2. I wish that Candidate Gore had been as compelling as Concession Gore

I agree that his concession speech was fantastic, much more powerful than any speech he'd given on the campaign trail.

[Nitram]

3. That's right! We 'Muricans like our candidates fun and exciting, just like our favorite TV stars.

So we voted for George Bush.

[Orrex]

4. What the hell are you talking about?

[Nitram]

5. Sorry, I guess my sense of humor is sometimes hard to penetrate.

I like policy wonks and nerds like Gore and Clinton. I was responding to the notion that Gore's speeches were boring until his concession speech. I like boring speeches a great deal more than content-free appeals to emotion. People who didnd't vote for Gore becasue he is boring just don't really understand what kind of person makes a good president.

[Orrex]

7. Ok, now I understand

People who didn't vote for Gore because he is boring just don't really understand what kind of person makes a good president.

I'd say that's true overall. On the other hand, Gore (or his advisers) must have understood that he'd be playing against this perception, yet they didn't effectively challenge the "boring" image until the concession.

Much as we might wish otherwise, we live in an age of image, and candidates who don't recognize this will be left in the dust regardless of how qualified they really are. And misogynistic, racist simpletons who know how to work the camera will be considered credible right up until election day...

[Coyotl]

6. I wish Republicans had been busted for fixing Florida by caging black voters.

That would have put some real pressure on the Justice system.

[malaise]

8. Precisely n/t