In light of this post regarding the Foulkes v. Hayes case, it has been requested that I link to this post over at Flag of the World, in regards to yet another post I made on the subject four months ago on the same subject. Got that? At any rate, if you're jonesing for some Rossi v. Gregoire stuff with Stefan's radio silence, this might give you the fix you need.
Posted by Timothy Goddard at June 03, 2005 08:54 PM | Email ThisI completely agree with you on the relevance of Foulke's in the Rossi case!
Judge Bridges seems like a no-nonsense guy when it comes to his rulings. I can see him applying Foulke's to his decision!
It just fits.
Posted by: Deborah on June 3, 2005 09:20 PMChill.
The Republicans specifically asked for this court because of this Judge.
Posted by: Deborah on June 3, 2005 09:52 PMI really appreciate it that the judge took this seriously.
Posted by: California Dreamer on June 3, 2005 10:23 PMI am confident that he should and will rule for Gregoire. But if he rules for Rossi, while I may criticize the ruling, I will not call him corrupt, fraudulent, incompetent, a tool of the Republicans, etc.
I am curious how many Rossi supporters are willing to make such a pledge.
Posted by: Bruce on June 3, 2005 10:24 PMWhat you are forgetting is that Liberals camouflage themselves better than anyone else in the world. They are cowards and liars and have infested the legal systems of this country like no other institution (true?). We ALL know that the only acceptable ruling here is one for the Republicans in this state who have been robbed... or this site may as well not even exist.
Having said that, I will refer you to Senator Clinton's sudden shift to the center (for her 2008 run) and the resulting mayhem it has caused the National DNC as a party. She has managed to fool even them into thinking she is a centrist and moveon.org/dean PACs are going bonkers!
I don't think that this judge can be evaluated or given any kind of vote of confidence until we see how he rules. The fact that WE picked him and can't "read" him is very troubling to me for one very important reason...conservatives can be pegged for who they are very easily. In other words...someone who was a conservative judge would make it apparent by his very behavior (I have not seen that). Now, all I have heard is that no-one can read this guy and it just doesn't sound right to me because he is supposed to be conservative. The reason why conservatives are notoriously easy to read is that we are honest and forthright at our cores. We say what we mean and we get things done. We are not "nuanced" (which is code for vague with a side of arrogance).
I am not basing this thing on just an earring. The earring is an indicator...nothing more.
Even Stefan said he couldn't read this guy. I don't know about you folks but I go by intuition a lot and I think it all spells trouble.
Bruce...
A liberal asking for a pledge from Conservatives is like a Bum asking for 2 bits to buy some food. You know what the bum is going to purchase. (hint)It ain't gonna be a ham sandwich.
Yes!
Either way - my reaction will be.....OK - on to the appeal to the Supreme Court.....
But Judge Bridges ruling will carry a lot of weight in the appeal process - so we will see!
I'm sorry for the Dems - but under all of the circumstances - they just could not produce a compelling case against setting aside last Novembers election. They just couldn't effectively spin this one.
Posted by: Deborah on June 4, 2005 12:13 AMThe mouth-breather tries to irk y'all with this pathetic jab, but it is as limp as, well his tongue ;'}
As for me, I tend to judge by action more than word. I saw nothing during the course of the trial that has changed my opinion of Bridges - he's an honorable man in a difficult position.
So Bruce, likewise I will not call him corrupt, fraudulent, incompetent, a tool of the dems, etc.
I have said it before (and nothing has changed) a win for the Republicans is a win for all of us (except for the extreme activist left, and morons like JDB). A win for the dems signals that this state has no interest in fair and equitable elections and will represent a death knell for the "elections business".
As for me - I think I'll buy JDB a dictionary...
Posted by: alphabet soup on June 4, 2005 08:30 AMJDB, yep, your right. We will support our pledge to accept the judge's ruling. We will also support either parties attempt with moving the contest to the SCOW. You might ask why, because it is allowed as an appeal. If we didn't support those rights we would be hypocritical. Unlike the count every votes group we do want to give all the parties every legal chance for appeal.
JDB
Are you claiming your a felon?
Or is she hiding her agenda, appearances, and utterances out of "security" concerns?
Posted by: Victor on June 4, 2005 09:42 AMMany of the posters on this board seem to have some legal training, and understand that the law does have limits to its legal remedies, and do not expect the judge to uphold every one of our wishes in order for the trail to have been fair. Also, I don't think that overturning the election is the only ruling that will satisfy us, although we want it, think it is justice, and hope it wiil happen. I think many of us will be ok with a ruling that forces King county (and others) to reform (although it would need to be very strong and have very sharp teeth.)
My husband was a judge's clerk when we were first married, and so maybe I have a soft spot in my heart. But I did not see this judge displaying the same sort of "whatever" attitude towards "errors" that King county and SOS officials have had. He made it clear in his comments to Dean Logan he did not find the "errors" to be meaningless. I don't think that exchange was some sort of act.
I'm also heartened by his statement that he would rule with an eye to the future and what voters should be able to expect when they vote.
My position remains the same. I like this judge and appreciate his efforts, time, and attention to this case; I think he has high expectations of elections officials and will not accept incompetence lightly; I think we've had a fair hearing. I won't complain about the judge.
I might, however, complain about the legislature if it turns out stupid laws hog-tied us.
Posted by: California Dreamer on June 4, 2005 09:46 AM