in article 40e764fa$0$19836$44c9b20d@news2.asahi-net.or.jp, Shannon Jacobs
at shanen@my-deja.com wrote on 7/4/04 11:01 AM:

> I will make one substantive comment on the thread as it stood at this time
> (I was trying to rejoin as close to the original question as possible). It
> is patently obvious that if such things as Dubya's business and personal
> relationships with the Bin Laden's and his military records were evidence of
> what a fine fellow he is, then BushCo would have released that evidence long
> ago. It might not stand up in court, but BushCo's chronic secrecy stinks
> like the proverbial dead skunk in the middle of the road. And after the 5-4
> SCOTUS decision in Bush v. Gore, I can't regard the American judicial system
> as intrinsically superior to the court of public opinion. I strongly
> recommend Dean's _Worse_Than_Watergate_ on this part of the situation. (But
> for now I'm returning to alt.fan.michael-moore...)

The above statement says a lot about the poster.

As an American lawyer, I had looked at both the US Supreme Court decisions
and the Florida Supreme Court decisions, and found the Florida Supreme Court
to be the one that was very partisan (the split tracked exactly along party
lines) and very poorly reasoned, with the desired outcome determining the
law rather than the law determining outcome.

But then I am lawyer, who cares about the law. Apparently Mr. Jacobs is
guilty of the thing I dislike about the present administration, he is more
concerned with getting the political outcome he wants rather than protecting
our legal process.