Wrong side of the lake -- I'd take a job emptying trash cans in Seattle before I'd commute across Lake WA to Kirkland again! Thanks for thinking about me though. I do have a couple other Unix friends I'll pass it on to. >From http://dummy.us.eu.org/robert Mon Dec 11 19:37:09 2000 Encrypt: on To: noelle Subject: Fw: Op Ed for Monday Bcc: noelle From: http://dummy.us.eu.org/robert (Robert) Date: Mon Dec 11 19:37:10 EST 2000 Message-ID: <uptPWf97zbX9v27//7P/Zw@robert> Status: O --- Forwarded mail from Margaret <http://www.juno.com/~margaretch> To: http://www.yahoo.com/~arbyraines Cc: http://dummy.us.eu.org/robert Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 15:12:51 -0500 Hello- I thought you might find this interest' ,Margaret Jim Walsh's sister. --------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jim Walsh <http://www.leadinspection.com/~jimwalsh> Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 10:18:24 -0500 Subject: Op Ed for Monday Message-ID: <v03010d01b6594d0a062a@[24.128.128.12]> <excerpt>Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 10:07:08 -0500 To: http://www.shore.net/~lynnitem From: Jim Walsh <<http://www.leadinspection.com/~jimwalsh> Subject: Op Ed for Monday Bcc: X-Attachments: On Irreparable Harm Jim Walsh is Vice Chairman of the Nahant Democratic Committee and a former Selectman The possibility of "irreparable harm" was the basis for the Bush campaign's appeal to the US Supreme Court and a bare majority of the Court said, in essence, it could happen. But as the weekend's events unfolded and swirled like a cyclone of briefs and ballots, I found myself, at the end, indeed worried about "irreparable harm" but not the way Justice Anthony Scalia meant it. As with many who turn to CNN or C-Span at times like these, I followed Judge Terry Lewis's hearing Friday night as he put in place procedures to accomplish the order of the Florida Supreme Court to systematically determine if, in every precinct, votes which did not register on machines truly were non-votes. There was a reasonable belief and demonstrated record that some machine systems simply did not record every vote. As has been the practice in Florida and in Ma, when an election is very close, a careful recount is appropriate and called for. On Saturday morning I watched as Florida officials began the process of counting the votes. Where local boards and judges began the actual counting, they sat in quiet rooms, looking at each card with two individuals looking at each ballot. Where they could not agree, setting aside that ballot for final review by a third. Outside, there was <italic>media</italic> chaos as hundreds of reporters seemed to fall over one another to get a sound bite. Raucous partisans noisily chanted and blew horns at the Vice President's home and outside buildings where ballots were being counted. Some local boards debated ferociously and others more calmly, the exact requirements of a decision which had been issued late the previous evening. I commented to my wife that between the internet, fax machines, and the broad Floridian human infrastructure, I had the feeling that most of the votes would be counted by the 2 PM Sunday target deadline set by Judge Lewis. For weeks, it seemed, the main topic in America was the election. People had positions, families debated over the dinner table, friends argued and laughed in restaurants and coffee shops. There were headlines in newspapers and lead stories on TV daily. The media wanted a "crisis" and looked for it anxiously--perhaps hopefully. It didn't come. There seemed to be a consensus among the people that the system would work it out. Partisans had their up days and their down days but most agreed that "it was still too close to call". Early Saturday afternoon I attended an art exhibit at the Ellingwood Chapel in Nahant. The artist, Stojan Maksimovic, had emigrated from the former Yugoslavia, an area of the world where political life was often deadly. But as we looked at the peaceful water colors of Nahant scenes we talked American politics and most of us felt that, at last, there was going to be a full count and there would be a legitimate winner. Forget the idea of a "certified" winner, what we all really longed for was a "legitimate" winner, one that we could accept, happily or unhappily. Enter "irreparable harm". When five Justices of the US Supreme Court stopped the final resolution of this campaign on the basis that, to make certain that every legitimate vote was counted would cause irreparable harm to George Bush, the real harm was done to all of us. And while it may not be completely irreparable, the harm is deep and the repercussions will be long lasting and frighteningly unpredictable. Late on Saturday, already distressed at the turn of events, I read on the op-ed pages of the <italic>Item</italic> Attorney Neil Howland's unfortunate and intemperate attack upon "the assorted villainies of the Clinton-Gore crime family". The only thing missing was a reference to "Democrat wars" . Not missing were suggestions that the Democratic Party runs systematic "vote scams to steal elections" and that our instruments are "Haitian non-citizens" and "disfranchised felons". These accusations, Attorney Howland assures us, are based on "verified reports". What a shocking and embarrassing piece of writing! Yet, it is possible that this is just the beginning. Until Saturday afternoon I thought that things would work out, that we would end up with a <italic>legitimate</italic> President, a President who might have been Mr. Bush. If Mr. Bush wins by not counting legitimate votes, it will be a hollow victory and the beginning of a particularly troubling time in America, one where people of Attorney Howland's clouded and distraught frame of mind will lead the dialogue. Now there's the "irreparable harm". </excerpt> ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. --- End of forwarded message from Margaret <http://www.juno.com/~margaretch>