Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

NBC's Andrea Mitchell claims Supreme Court "denied Gore the Presidency."
NBC Nightly News | 12/09/04 | Andrea Mitchell

Posted on 12/09/2003 5:30:34 PM PST by Timmy

On NBC Nightly News with Tom Brokaw earlier this evening, during the story about Gore's endorsement of Dean, Andrea Mitchell referred to the Supreme Court's decision "which denied Gore the Presidency."


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 50dollarhaircut; 5dollarbrain; algorelostgetoverit; andreamitchell; antibush; bush; cheeseandwhine; dairyproducts; dnctalkingpoints; gore; liars; liberalbias; liberallies; lies; lyingliar; mainstreammedia; mediabias; nbc; notthiscrapagain; thebiglie; theives; unamerican; waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-114 next last
No liberal bias here. Just move along.
1 posted on 12/09/2003 5:30:35 PM PST by Timmy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Timmy
Andrea Mitchell is a liberal puke.
2 posted on 12/09/2003 5:31:39 PM PST by jackbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timmy
I wonder how much Alan Greenspan has to drink to cope with all her nagging of him to intentionally tank the economy so Bush loses in 2004.

3 posted on 12/09/2003 5:32:05 PM PST by Erik Latranyi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timmy
These LIARS! Do the American people really remember what happened in Florida? I hope so, they will be as digusted at this as I am.

GORE DIDN'T WIN ANDREA MITCHELL!!!!
4 posted on 12/09/2003 5:34:15 PM PST by ladyinred (The Left have blood on their hands!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timmy
Occasionally SCOTUS does it right.
5 posted on 12/09/2003 5:36:40 PM PST by Kay Soze (As society must bear huge medical costs of ones "recreational activities", it must exert influence)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timmy
On NBC Nightly News with Tom Brokaw earlier this evening, during the story about Gore's endorsement of Dean, Andrea Mitchell referred to the Supreme Court's decision "which denied Gore the Presidency."

The alternative would be the decision 'which provided or allowed Bush the Presidency'. I think the former sounds better than the later. Bush earned the Presidency. I would prefer no other words be used to describe it. How they describe Gores loss, I can care less.

6 posted on 12/09/2003 5:38:05 PM PST by ClintonBeGone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timmy
.

GORE started the fight to settle the 2000 Presidential Election in the Courts.

BUSH finished it...

...in the Courts.

All so very, very Simple.

.

7 posted on 12/09/2003 5:42:00 PM PST by ALOHA RONNIE (Vet-Battle of IA DRANG-1965 www.LZXRAY.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timmy
Add in the courts, making Florida go by their own laws that were in place during the 2000 election;

End result: Gore lost.

Take the courts out of the 2000 election;

End result: Gore still would lose.

What part of that don't the Democrats understand?
8 posted on 12/09/2003 5:43:29 PM PST by Hillarys Gate Cult (Proud member of the right wing extremist Neanderthals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timmy
Gore LOST the election, count after count. If they had their way we would still be counting.
9 posted on 12/09/2003 5:44:02 PM PST by HoundsTooth_BP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timmy
I know what you're saying, and I'm sure Mitchell's bias influenced her phrasing, but in a way, what she said is accurate.

The Supreme Court's decision let stand the electoral count as it had been ratified. This denied Gore the Presidency, because, according to the legally-certified electoral count, candidate Bush received more electoral votes, which, in our system, is how the President is chosen. Another way to say this is that the electors denied Gore the Presidency (by a tally of 271-266 as I recall). Or, that the voters (when their votes were counted and weighted appropriately, according to the rules set up by the Constitution) denied Gore the Presidency.

In a very similar way, Bob Dole was denied the Presidency in 1996 by the electors, George H.W. Bush was denied the Presidency in 1992 by the electors, Dukakis was denied the Presidency in 1988 by the electors, etc. Similarly, I was denied the Presidency in 2000 (by not even being a candidate), and so were you, and so was Tom Cruise, etc.

All quite plainly true.

The only thing which made 2000/Gore different from all these other cases is that at Gore's behest, the Florida Supreme Court ignored Florida's election laws for some reason, and tried to extend a legal vote-counting deadline to reverse Florida's legally-certified result. The U.S. Supreme Court put a stop to it, and thus, denied Gore an (illegitimate) Presidency.

10 posted on 12/09/2003 5:46:31 PM PST by Dr. Frank fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timmy
Tell the lie; tell it often enough and, sooner or later, people will think it's the truth.

Page 1 of the Clinton play book.
11 posted on 12/09/2003 5:46:57 PM PST by DustyMoment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DustyMoment
When will this stinky hippie liberals figure out that Algore did not win!
12 posted on 12/09/2003 5:48:08 PM PST by MizzouTigerRepublican (82nd ABN Gulf war vet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Timmy
Ralph Nader denied Gore the Presidency. Period. Case Closed. End of Discussion.
13 posted on 12/09/2003 5:48:21 PM PST by America's Resolve ("We have prepared for the unbelievers, whips and chains and blazing fires!" Koran 76:4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hillarys Gate Cult
Add in the courts, making Florida go by their own laws that were in place during the 2000 election; End result: Gore lost. Take the courts out of the 2000 election; End result: Gore still would lose. What part of that don't the Democrats understand?

I think they understand that the recounts, if allowed to continue happening, would not have had the same result as any of the media-conducted recounts. They know that Gore's goons would have eventually been able to manipulate enough ballots to swing it his way.

14 posted on 12/09/2003 5:48:31 PM PST by alnick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Kay Soze
Occasionally SCOTUS does it right.

But not in Bush v. Gore.

15 posted on 12/09/2003 5:48:51 PM PST by Jim Noble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: jackbill
With bruised knees.....
And, a messy bib...

Semper Fi
16 posted on 12/09/2003 5:49:14 PM PST by river rat (War works......It brings Peace... Give war a chance to destroy Jihadists...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Frank
The U.S. Supreme Court put a stop to it....

As did a number of Freeper poll watchers, as I remember, who wouldn't let those Florida chad counters take a bunch of ballots into a private room for doctoring.

17 posted on 12/09/2003 5:49:20 PM PST by Ciexyz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Timmy
Send off a quick objection to the show: You can email them at Nightly@NBC.com

I wrote in part: "The voters of the United States denied Gore the presidency. Every Florida recount, including those by Bush haters long after Bush was inaugurated, came to the same conclusion. Florida went for Bush.

"Your bias is unbecoming. Please try to get over it."

18 posted on 12/09/2003 5:49:45 PM PST by PoisedWoman (Rat candidates: "What a sorry lot!" says Barbara Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ciexyz
that is the whole missed point even by our best freepers.
The U.S. Supreme Court did NOT ,repeat DID NOT
lay the law down,they stood on a Florida Federal Judge
named SAULS. The dems and Boise lost all seven issues
and those ballots never left the basement
19 posted on 12/09/2003 5:52:05 PM PST by cars for sale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Hillarys Gate Cult
What's so disgusting...and that these people ignore, is that Gore lost just about every case in Forida's lower courts. It was the Florida SC that overuled its own Democratic judges...and continued to allow recounts to be done beyond even their proscribed time line. Hell, N. Sander Sauls found that Gore wasn't even entitled to a "hand" recount based on Florida's Contest Laws. There was no fraud, deciet or willful neglect that could be proven. There was only one court that was out of step with all other courts, and that was the FSC who changed the rules after the game was played. If any one should be pissed, it should still be Republicans who watched the Democrats "almost" succeed in overturing an election.
20 posted on 12/09/2003 5:56:45 PM PST by cwb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Frank
This denied Gore the Presidency,....

Although what you say is correct, the chosen phrase just sounds wrong.

The implication is that the Presidency would have been Gore's had the Republicans not taken the actions that they did (preventing the dems from stealing the election).

Thus the term represents the Dem POV that the election was theirs, inspite of the fact that at no time was Gore ever in the lead in Florida. It smacks of sour grapes and incessant whinning.

21 posted on 12/09/2003 5:57:20 PM PST by Michael.SF. (THECLINTONSARESCUMTHECLINTOSARESCUMTHECLINTONSARESCUM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: MizzouTigerRepublican
Blasphemy, sir, BLASPHEMY!!!

If they give up THIS lie, well . . . well, they may as well accept the fact that the 60s ended over 30 years ago.

OMG, did I just SAY that!!?? The 60s are over!!?? What am I supposed to do with the 5,000 Flower Power bumper stickers I just ordered?
22 posted on 12/09/2003 5:57:25 PM PST by DustyMoment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Timmy
This is hilarious: W is fighting a war on terrorism, in the present, while the Dims are still whining incessantly about 2000. We need to form moveonalready.org, in a response to these people.
23 posted on 12/09/2003 5:57:34 PM PST by Paul Atreides (Is it really so difficult to post the entire article?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timmy
Two problems with that statement which proves bias:

It assumes an outcome which can not be substantiated by fact.

It misrepresents the Supreme Court decision in which they did not deny an application for the Presidency, but determined that the Florida Supreme Court exceeded its constitutional authority in rewriting Florida law.
Bush won the popular vote in Florida. IIRC, the Florida legislature, which would have decided the electors in a contested election past the certification date was majority Republican. The Republican executive, Secretary of State, had certified the vote count on the date codified.

Despite all this, "Bush stole the election" and he was "Selected not Elected."

/preaching to the chior
24 posted on 12/09/2003 5:58:06 PM PST by optimistically_conservative (Clinton's Penis Endorses Dean: Beware the Dean Mujahideen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timmy
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/florida.ballots/stories/main.html

http://www.florida2000election.com/sections/1.htm

Enough of the Election 2000 controversy. Bush won. End of story. Gore was the one who tried to steal the election.
25 posted on 12/09/2003 5:58:08 PM PST by zencat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: optimistically_conservative
(Clinton's Penis Endorses Dean

I woulda thought it'd endorses bush.

26 posted on 12/09/2003 6:00:38 PM PST by Paul Atreides (Is it really so difficult to post the entire article?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Timmy
The only thing the SCOTUS did was prevent Gore and his minion lawyers from stealing the election...Funny how these lawyer hacks were on the ground in Florida before you could say Hanging Chads!
27 posted on 12/09/2003 6:00:48 PM PST by hope
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
I'm sure you have a point. Let's hear it.
28 posted on 12/09/2003 6:01:21 PM PST by calljack (Sometimes your worst nightmare is just a start.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Frank
Her comment would have sounded a lot more accurate if Gore had been leading in any of the recounts in Florida up to that point.

The accurate statement would have been "denied Gore the opportunity to keep recounting in various fashions until he finally came up with one which give him the Presidency."

29 posted on 12/09/2003 6:01:50 PM PST by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Timmy
What a shame that Al Gore did NOT concede the race for THE GOOD of his party and his country. BOTH would be so much better off today if he had done so. Instead THREE years later we have GROWN men and women from all walks of life that live in the past and dream of what could have been instead of living in the present and facing reality. Leftists are truly sad specimens of humanity.
30 posted on 12/09/2003 6:02:11 PM PST by PISANO (God Bless our Troops........They will not TIRE - They will not FALTER - They will not FAIL!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Frank
SYLLABICATION: de·ny
PRONUNCIATION:   d-n
TRANSITIVE VERB: Inflected forms: de·nied, de·ny·ing, de·nies
1. To declare untrue; contradict. 2. To refuse to believe; reject. 3. To refuse to recognize or acknowledge; disavow. 4a. To decline to grant or allow; refuse: deny the student's request; denied the prisoner food or water. b. To give a refusal to; turn down or away: The protesters were determined not to be denied. c. To restrain (oneself) especially from indulgence in pleasures.
ETYMOLOGY: Middle English denien, from Old French denier, from Latin dnegre : d-, de- + negre, to say no; see ne in Appendix I.
SYNONYMS: deny, contradict, contravene, disaffirm, gainsay, negate, traverse These verbs mean to refuse to admit the existence, truth, or value of: denied the rumor; contradicted the statement; contravene a conclusion; disaffirm a suggestion; trying to gainsay the evidence; negated the allegations; traverse an indictment.
ANTONYM: affirm
 

31 posted on 12/09/2003 6:03:49 PM PST by optimistically_conservative (Clinton's Penis Endorses Dean: Beware the Dean Mujahideen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Timmy
Well, in a sense they did. SCOTUS stopped Algore and the corrupt Florida judges from stealing the election.
32 posted on 12/09/2003 6:06:00 PM PST by BenLurkin (Socialism is Slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Frank
The problem is with the newspaper and media outlets that commissioned the independent recount that also found Bush to win. It is (or is it?) also these media that are still denying their own findings and repeating the lie that Gore won.

-PJ

33 posted on 12/09/2003 6:07:37 PM PST by Political Junkie Too (It's not safe yet to vote Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
But not in Bush v. Gore.

Had SCOTUS not ruled the way they did, then the Democrats would have succesfully stolen the election from Bush.

Although good points have been made by some authors (Bugliosi), there are several pertinent facts conveniently overlooked:

1. Dems sought to throw out ballots under questionable circumstances.

2. The Democrats sought to change the rules of play during the counting.

3. Increased handling of ballots results in manipulated ballots.

4. Dem operatives have published papers or articles explaining how they can manipulate elections to their side (Count, recount and keep counting, until your ahead, then stop and declare you won).

5. Democrats have a history of illegal or questionable methods used to sway elections (Nixon 1960, Missouri 2000).

6. Democrats have voted to seat their own man in spite of no proof that he actually won the election (Indiana 1988 Cong. race).

Maybe Scotus was wrong, but the outcome was not. The Dems got what they deserved and America got the right man.

34 posted on 12/09/2003 6:09:46 PM PST by Michael.SF. (THECLINTONSARESCUMTHECLINTOSARESCUMTHECLINTONSARESCUM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Paul Atreides
I woulda thought it'd endorses bush.

It depends what the meaning of endorse endorses.

35 posted on 12/09/2003 6:10:19 PM PST by optimistically_conservative (Clinton's Penis Endorses Dean: Beware the Dean Mujahideen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Timmy
This is becoming a recurrent lying theme and even Matthews said something similar last night as did some pundit last week. Am I dreaming or didn't the media do their own independent count in Florida and determined that GWB GOT THE MOST VOTES? I wish I could put my finger on the article and pass it along whenever I hear this lie being perpetuated.
36 posted on 12/09/2003 6:13:20 PM PST by StarFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul Atreides
We need to form moveonalready.org, in a response to these people.

But, if they move on they just might discover some real issues. Let them focus on 2000, while we focus on a future free of terrorism, and an America with a veto proof Republican majority in the Senate.

37 posted on 12/09/2003 6:15:20 PM PST by Michael.SF. (THECLINTONSARESCUMTHECLINTOSARESCUMTHECLINTONSARESCUM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Paul Atreides
Greenspan/Mitchell is hands-down 10X weirder than Matalin/Carville.

You know anything weirder?

38 posted on 12/09/2003 6:20:25 PM PST by txhurl (When the going gets weird, the weird turn Pro -- Hunter S. Thompson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: StarFan
MEDIA RECOUNT: BUSH
WON THE 2000 ELECTION
April 3, 2001
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/media/media_watch/jan-june01/recount_4-3.html


In the first full study of Florida's ballots since the election ended, The Miami Herald and USA Today reported George W. Bush would have widened his 537-vote victory to a 1,665-vote margin if the recount ordered by the Florida Supreme Court would have been allowed to continue, using standards that would have allowed even faintly dimpled "undervotes" -- ballots the voter has noticeably indented but had not punched all the way through -- to be counted.

39 posted on 12/09/2003 6:22:13 PM PST by optimistically_conservative (Clinton's Penis Endorses Dean: Beware the Dean Mujahideen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Paul Atreides
Other than Zeta-Jones/Douglas?
40 posted on 12/09/2003 6:22:27 PM PST by txhurl (When the going gets weird, the weird turn Pro -- Hunter S. Thompson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ladyinred
GORE DIDN'T WIN ANDREA MITCHELL!!!! Of course not but tell that to Howard Dean, John Kerry, Terry McAwful, Bill Xlintoon and Chris Matthews who continue with this lie. I just wrote to Andrea reminding her that an independent audit was conducted in Florida by the media and they determined GWB received more votes. I also added that the story was probably buried on page 24 of newspaper and her network did not see fit to report it so that might explain her ignorance.
41 posted on 12/09/2003 6:26:32 PM PST by StarFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Timmy
You gotta be @#&*ing kidding.
42 posted on 12/09/2003 6:28:12 PM PST by bdeaner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Michael.SF.
The implication is that the Presidency would have been Gore's had the Republicans not taken the actions that they did (preventing the dems from stealing the election).

I believe that's true. I believe the Presidency would have been Gore's had the Florida Supreme Court's unconstitutional decision been allowed to stand.

It smacks of sour grapes and incessant whinning.

True. :)

43 posted on 12/09/2003 6:28:45 PM PST by Dr. Frank fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
The accurate statement would have been "denied Gore the opportunity to keep recounting in various fashions until he finally came up with one which give him the Presidency."

Agreed.

44 posted on 12/09/2003 6:29:34 PM PST by Dr. Frank fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: optimistically_conservative
To decline to grant or allow; refuse

This seems to be the operative definition; the U.S. Supreme Court refused to let the Florida Supreme Court's unconsitutional ruling, and attempt to steal the election for Gore, stand. Thanks.

45 posted on 12/09/2003 6:30:58 PM PST by Dr. Frank fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Kay Soze
Occasionally SCOTUS does it right.

I love it when the U.S. Supremes smack lower liberal courts.

Twice in the Florida debacle and I recently read that the 9th circuit is overturned a full 75% of the time.

46 posted on 12/09/2003 6:31:18 PM PST by Holly_P
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Michael.SF.
Oh, I know. Let them stew in their own cesspool of hatred. I still like telling the losers to move on, though.
47 posted on 12/09/2003 6:36:48 PM PST by Paul Atreides (Is it really so difficult to post the entire article?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Timmy
At no time did gore ever receive more votes in florida than GW Bush. Gore conceeded and got together with that Daly character from Chicago, and decided to try to steal the election. The military vote was never counted, and Gore still lost. Gore lost both legal counts and then lost a couple of illegal counts even with all the criminal SCHANIGANS. The democrats are a bunch of pathetic losers.
48 posted on 12/09/2003 6:37:22 PM PST by chainsaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Holly_P
Yet we never see a meglith overturned.
49 posted on 12/09/2003 6:37:55 PM PST by txhurl (Pity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Timmy
The rejoinder that almost always shuts these dunderhead liberals up, when it comes to the Supreme Court gave Bush the presidency argument ... if Al Gore had won his home state of Tennessee, Florida would not have been an issue. Those who knew him best, the population of Tennessee, didn't vote for the stiff ... Gore's a loser.
50 posted on 12/09/2003 6:40:04 PM PST by BluH2o
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-114 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson