How to get an invitation to a White House dinner.....

Kaplan's story on the website proves his bias. He is, also, an idiot. He makes statements about how the Court's opinion made no sense and was very confusing. I don't know where he got his law degree, but saying it doesn't make sense does not make it true. In fact, it is quite well-reasoned, explaining how the Florida Legislature's role must be respected, and how the Fla Sup Ct cannot simply decide to throw out the U.S. Constitution's equal protection clause.

This isn't rocket science, unless you are a Democrat "journalist" who refuses to understand.

these poor fools

My subscription to Newsweak runs out in November (for good). Until then, it lines my birdcage.

It's amazing how the facts are easily twisted by the Liberal Gastapo.
The court ruling was 7 to 2 to stop the recount and 5 to 4 to send it back to the Florida Supreme Clowns!

As long as Newsweak has the time to discern what the conversations were at the SC level, how about doing the same "investigative reporting" to learn how the arguments and "logic" developed at the FL SC level. Now, that would be worth reading.

What part of 7-2 don't these people understand?

Oh sure! Don't let Newsweak try to portray Kaplan as some objective, non-biased, journalist. First, he has written for about every liberal, elitist newspaper you can think of, like the New York Slimes and the Washington ComPost. What I find most objectionable is that he worked for The Nation, arguably the biggest leftist propaganda rag in the nation. Kaplan also worked for the Carter administration.

What part of 7-2 don't these people understand?

The part that says the PEOPLE, not the Supreme Court, decides who gets to be president. The Constitution is very clear about what should have happened vis-a-vis the Florida vote. The U.S. Supreme Court had no business sticking its nose in. The founders expressly provided NO ROLE FOR THE COURTS in determining the outcome of presidential elections.

Is there ANYONE alive who thinks that Scalia, Rhenquist, Thomas, O'Connor and Kennedy would have jumped into this case and stopped the counting if Gore had been ahead and it was Bush who wanted the recount?

Anyone who is honest, that is.

The very fact that he entitiles his new book "The Accidental President" is all the proof anyone needs of Kaplan's blind bias.

Never before in American history has the road to the oval office been less accidental. George W. Bush began his preparation for political office right out of college and continued honing his skills by managing campaigns, running for Congress, partcicpating in his father's White House (and Reagans), and assembling the most professional campaign staff in history. Not even JFK was less accidental.

Never was a presidential campaign more professionally organized, planned, and executed than GWB's.

The campaign took Lee Atwarter's basic rules and refined them to new levels.

The most innovating part (IMO) was that Rove and Bush began by calling in the leading conservative authorities in every issue area, and FIRST developed issue positions based upon what is best for the country, not what the polls showed was popular or what interest groups wanted. Bush won the debates with Gore a year before the first one took place because he had staked out the most factually defensible positions.

That's also why hasn't had to change his positions after taking office.

You sir, are delusional. The SC didn't "jump in". Once Gore -yes Gore- involved the courts by protesting the election, naturally the appeals process all the way to the SC, by either party, was inevitable. And the recount (re-re-recount actually) wasn't "stopped". It was ruled unconstitutional. Otherwise known as "illegal". By a SEVEN to TWO vote, not 5-4 as you folks pretend. And as for the Constituton being very clear, yes it is. It says the STATES, not the people, decide who gets to be President. It says the states shall determine electors as they see fit. Any state could award electors based on what team wins the Superbowl if theat's what that state decides. Besides, Gore's friends at the New York Times and the other left-wing propaganda publications counted the votes AGAIN (except the military votes of course). Any way they sliced it, Bush comes out ahead. get over it. Gore lost.

Number 1, Hidy, Bush would never have done what Gore did; i.e., demand recount after recount, insist that ambiguously marked ballots count as votes, attempt to deny the vote to overseas servicemen and women, etc. And, number 2, if he had, I have no doubt that the court would have voted 9-0 to stop him.

And perhaps you should read up on the decisions of the Florida Supreme Court. You know, the one where they ignored the law and the other one where they made up a new law.

Nevertheless, the decision was made for political reasons and blurred the line of legality.
The demos were just mad because they didn't figure it out first.

Hidy, most of these people are in denial. They deny the corruption and then wonder why the people of the United States have a problem with the legitimacy of the president.

His win-at-any-cost technique of grabbing the office will haunt him (and us) for the rest of history. It follows him wherever he goes. There is literally no place he can go on this earth where it won't follow, nipping at his heels.

I am not sure how many times the Florida ballots have been counted. The law allows for a counting of the ballots, and then a recount. We recounted these things umpteen times and every single time that they have been counted G.W. Bush has won. Even when the Democrats counted only the heavily Democratic areas, G.W. Bush won. G.W. won the elction, period. I am a registered Democrat, who ran in the last election cycle as a Democrat. Okay, I am a very conservative Democrat.

You are right. The law allows for a recount. It also stipulates what day the recount has to be completed by. If you do not complete the recount prior to that day, the original count goes in the record. The Florida fiasco was a joke, the outcome was CORRECT.