 |
|
|
|
|
George W's Worst Nightmare
By Mark W. Mayfield
Election 2000 is finally history, and...Wait a minute! It's not history! According to a special bulletin, a sharply divided U.S. Supreme Court has overturned Al Gore's concession speech, citing the Constitution's obscure safe harbor clause, which prohibits any presidential candidate from conceding the contest on the second Wednesday of December. This unprecedented action means that the Vice President will be able to resume his valiant fight to "count every vote"--except the ones for George W. Bush.
In related developments, the U.S. Supreme Court also vacated the Florida Supreme Court's earlier 5-4 ruling on a case that had something to do with partially punched ballots and confused elderly voters who mistakenly voted for Pat Buchanan when they thought they were filling out a contest entry form to win a sporty new Chrysler PT Cruiser. That case was immediately remanded back to the Leon County court, where a very angry Judge Sanders Sauls retaliated by making an offensive noise with his lips and overturning an earlier 50-50 ruling by the 11th U.S. Circuit Court in Atlanta.
Sauls justified his unusual actions by citing the Constitution's obscure safe harbor clause that allows angry judges in Florida to make offensive noises with their lips. When reporters asked George W. Bush to respond to this latest series of unprecedented events, he replied, "Well, I don't know what 'vacate' and 'remand' mean, but they sound pretty darn serious. I'm still cautiously optimistic."
The case is now apparently heading to a liberal traffic court in Wisconsin, where it will undoubtedly be recounted, disenfranchised, tossed, sautéed and simmered until it prompts the Republican-controlled Florida Legislature to choose its own slate of electors. Such an unprecedented action would be devastating to the Gore campaign, which is still reeling from the Supreme Court's scathing majority opinion that called the Vice President "a big, stiff, phony crybaby."
Of course, such an unprecedented event would be great news for the Bush campaign, which is still reeling from the Florida Supreme Court's scathing majority opinion that made fun of the way George repeatedly uses the phrase "cautiously optimistic." (Bush defends his actions by citing the Constitution's obscure safe harbor clause that allows presidential candidates to say "cautiously optimistic" as many times as they want to.)
In another strange twist to these unprecedented events, a judge in Orlando has agreed to throw out thousands of disputed ballots because three local Gore supporters claimed that Republican voters looked "really, really smug" on election day. During oral arguments, the plaintiffs cited the Constitution's obscure safe harbor clause that prohibits Republican voters from looking really, really smug on election day.
Attorneys from both campaigns have resumed their heated arguments about the confusing subject of hanging, dimpled and pregnant chads. According to Gore's lead lawyer, David "I-Don't-Need-No-Stinkin'-Notes" Boies, his client's hanging chad would not adversely affect his ability to lead the country. He claims that previous testimony from medical experts solidly established the fact that a hanging chad, which is often caused by an enlarged prostate, is not usually problematic. However, Boies believes that a man with a dimpled chad is unfit for the White House.
Bush's lawyer, Barry "Does-My-Hair-Look-Okay?" Richard, countered by asking the judge why Mr. Bush's dimpled chad should be considered less desirable than Gore's hanging chad. (Bush's chad was severely dimpled last summer, after being hit by a foul ball during a Texas Rangers baseball game.) He then reminded the court that one of our country's greatest presidents, Abraham Lincoln, suffered a horribly dimpled chad during a freak horseback riding accident. Richard also cited the Constitution's obscure safe harbor clause that prohibits the disqualification of a presidential candidate based on the condition of his chad.
Stay tuned for more breaking news on these unprecedented events.
Mark W. Mayfield (himark@firstworld.net) defended this ridiculous column by citing the Constitution's obscure safe harbor clause that gives him the right to make fun of the 2000 presidential election.
|
|
|
|
Campbell, California
