Frogtails

May I suggest all the people that fear that Team America World Police Force is a stupid puppet movie to go see it. Now I strongly urge anyone who does not like unmoral situations, cursing, or any one that is easily offended not to see it. The theme song to the movie drops the F-bomb about half a million times. This is certainly not a movie to take the kids to. It is funny in that it portrays America as it is known to the rest of the world, (destroying Cairo and Paris) in the hopes of catching a few terrorists. I found it hilarious but I know no one has the same sense of humor as a college student. You walk out of the theatre feeling like someone hit you in the face with a shovel but you will be singing the theme song in the shower I almost guarantee. Of course we are portrayed as the good guys and we just do whatever we want throughout the movie. There are parts you will simply not believe. Take an open mind, certainly not the kids, or a girl that prefers romance movies. (There is a quite vulgar scene involving two puppets and well the karma sutra I believe.) This is a funny funny movie and I cannot wait for it to come out on DVD. I will probably see it again this weekend just because it is ridiculous and there is no way your brain can process everything that is going on. I watched a clip on Conan one night about it and thought it was going to be a stupid movie. What I realized after watching the movie is that the clip they showed was about the only c lip they were able to play on T.V. If you like to laugh I encourage you to go see it. It is most certainly propaganda but I’m still deciding for which side it falls.

This year my costume is Bizzarro (some people say this fits me). I wanted to pay homage to Mr. Reeves but Superman seemed so childish. Pictures are forthcoming.

Some of my previous years’ costumes are listed at http://www.russellweisfield.blogspot.com

BTW, sorry if I seem snide in some remarks (that’s snide not cynical or sarcastic). I sometimes post here after programming late at night with the help of a little liquid hops.

On other recent topics in this forum:

To clarify what Colorado is doing with its vote we are considering an Amendment ot our Constitution wherein our electors would be split based upon a percentage of the popular vote. We have 9 electoral votes. If it passes and one candidate gets 55% and the other 44% then the one would get 5 votes and the other 4. Various fractions are worked into it. Of course, the penalties for faithless electors in Colorado are fairly minimal.

I’ll close with my haiku for Google (that’s how they hire some people. Well that and going to http://www.(first consecutive 10 digits of e that are prime).com).

I ponder something
One place to enrich my mind
And Google it is

Russell Weisfield

So I found it very funny reading the writings of the day. I have to give my undying respect again for people correcting me. Yes I know the U.S. is a republic, and I understand I didn’t state that.
Now with the Colorado electoral college. From my understanding they are trying to get rid of the electoral college. This is a bad idea from my opinion. The idea of electoral colleges protect the minority. So if in California (let’s say 50 for easy math) everyone votes for Kerry and in Ohio (25), Kentucky(15), Florida(17) go for Bush but only at 51% of the population of each state voting for Bush. Technically Kerry has more popular vote, but you cannot deny the fact that the overall majority of our system wants Bush. Now I’m just saying this is the general idea, I didn’t really put much time in the numbers, but it can be applied to the country as a whole. I don’t want California and New York deciding whom our presidents are. I think the electoral college at least gives us a chance at having a minority say in government. If you go with the popular vote I think it should at least be set up as having a particular majority of the country’s vote. Say 55% or more. That way no election can be determined by a few hundred or thousand miscounted votes. Otherwise leave it up to the congress; after all WE did elect them…

First, congrats to the BoSox! I cheered loudly for them. Is Boston burning yet? I think they need a new curse by the way (afterall all the business that arose out of the Bambino curse are now purposeless). How about, they won’t win another series until a full lunar eclipse occurs during the World Series (maybe in a month with a blue moon - not the beer).

Second, John finished his bike ride. He’s posted some of the photos. As I get more I’ll post them. Go to http://home.att.net/~j.dover/biketrip.htm to see them.

Third, I want to put forth something about audio files. I spent part of this weekend (when I should have been doing more useful things but what the heck) copying music from my cassettes to digital format. This is a painful process involving hooking upa boombox to the computer, playing the entire tape and making sure recording levels are set, using CD Wave to record it, splicing the long file into smaller chunks, bringing the chunks into iTunes and ripping them down to another format other than wav. Some of my cassettes cannot even be bought from the record companies as they are out of print or were bootlegs to begin with. Of course, I still cannot legally share my files but what if there was a library. After all, libraries are stealing from the publishing industry! When was the last time you read a book from a library and then paid for it? I can think of one time personally. I’ll just translate that over to music. Setup an online library where you borrow the music, listen to it for a little while, and then return it (erasing it from your computer). Please, don’t bother me with details like how someone might rip it to their iPod/ Dell DJ/ Rio Karma. BTW, those digital hard drive players are kind of fun.

Response to other comments

First Nick, I have to correct you on a few points. As has been noted we don’t live in a democracy, we live in a sound_bite_ocracy (ok cynicism is out of my system now). As has been noted though we live in a Republic and not a democracy. More noteworthy, though, there have been more than two parties at times other than war (although we’ve always had some kind of war - the Native American wars, the Spanish American War, the war against poverty, the war against booze, etc.) Teddy Roosevelt handed the Presidency to Wilson when he ran as a progressive. George Wallace took votes away when he ran as a racist (I’m not sugar coating that one). True the two parties have been dominant and there is actually something that can be learned about American parties by reading “The Rise and Fall of the American Whig Party". Its long but easy to read and interesting if you like that sort of thing. BTW, I feel like being cynical one more time and quoting Mort Sahl “Liberals feel guilty of their possessions and Conservatives think they deserve everything they’ve stolen".

Dave, your other method is probably more accurate though of course not comprehensive. I like the idea of Googling to figure out the winner but it has its flaws. Counting the signs around here its a dead heat for every darn race and amendment/referendum. BTW, you do still vote for electors. Heck in Colorado we’re voting on whether to change that or not. Of course I cannot begin to grasp the concept of electors. Partitioning off votes for each state based upon population, ok that I understand (one can argue the legitmacies both ways but that’s a whole other thread). What I don’t get is why its not OK to elect a President because he might be a smooth talker and therefore convince an underinformed populous into voting for him but then it is OK to vote for electors (who obviously won’t be smooth talkers). Now drafting politicians like a jury hmmmmm. . . . Besides having Monty Python and the Holy Grail flashbacks, I think it would bring a whole new meaning to the Draft Dodger Rag and 1001 Ways to Dodge the draft by Tuli Kupferberg (I remember some great quotes from that pamphlet but I’m trying to keep my vulgarity here to a minimum).

I’ve rambled too long.

Russell Weisfield
PS Can we get rid of those freaking ads (or at least get some dough from them)?

I’m disturbed with my father. What in the past 20-30 years tells you that the Democrats and Republicans are polar opposites? There is a political curve, the majority of Americans are in the center of the curve. You cannot tell me that the Republicans and Democrats don’t appeal to that curve. Face it pops democracy is the gray area between dictatorship and communism. We want a few people to do things for us but we want the choice who it is. That’s a combination of the two. An extreme liberal is practically communistic and a strong conservative is almost a dictator. (Bush; my way or the highway….) Any time in history that we’ve had more than a two party system it is around a war. The Civil War had four very strong candidates. So did the Spanish American and more recently I believe good old Ross was around Desert Storm. This is significant to realize. Either unrest lies with the people and they are begging for change, or the third party brings about unrest which disturbs the people into supporting a war. Obviously this is the case with historical elections, but I’m proven wrong with our most recent war.

This is getting interesting. I love looking at my own site to see what is going on and who has posted what.

Russell wasn’t certain about my method for predicting which candidate will be elected. How about this one. Drive through a residential district and count the signs. In these parts, Kerry seems to have a slight lead, though I will admit that it would probably be different if you took a different path than I. The paths that I follow are not all that random (going to work, going to the store to buy milk, etc.) but I do not drive in a contrived path to make one side look good over the other either. I think it is probably a fair assessment of the popular sentiment in these parts.

Nick, you ask some interesting questions. I’ve got a friend living in Scotland who was raised in the U.S. I’ll try to get his point of view about voting for parties vs. candidates. I am old enough to remember voting for electors rather than the president. My preference has always been to draft politicians rather than elect them. However, if we must elect them, then have a minimum of three viable parties. That way you would not have the extreme polar opposites that we see today.

As many of you might be aware a lot of European democracies have elections different from our own in the U.S. We vote for the individual whereas European democracies vote for the party and the party selects who is most likely to support that parties ideals. I think our way brings innovation from unlikely candidates. Personal policy overrides political views any day, and our parties can only support the person they think will support them best. The likelihood of a party being pleased with someone is just a matter of what the individuals do. However after someone is elected they can do whatever they please, and whatever pleases the people and continue to be a candidate in future elections. In Europe if a candidate is selected and does not adhere to direct political party policy they will not be selected again.
So my question is which is better? Would it be better for Americans to vote for a party like we did in the older days and know what values we are voting for, or vote in the dark for a candidate we just have to trust on what they say they will do? I prefer being able to vote for the individual candidate but that wasn’t how we were originally supposed to do it.
Another quick question for you. Which side of the Civil War would George Washington have fought for? He was a wealthy Virginian with slaves… I love possibilities.

With all the political ads right now I think I’m yearning for commercials advertising Cialis, Viagra, and Maxi-Pads. BTW, I’m wanting to know about really crazy political ads. Not ones with lies and untruths but ones that just make you laugh at their absurdity and might be fun to put on the internet just for laughs. My nominee is one against Marilyn Musgrave (of gay marriage amendment infamy) in which she’s picking the pocket of a soldier while he’s performing his duties.

Russell Weisfield

First off I don’t know a thing about Russell and I love it. It’s hard to find anyone with an opinion they are willing to share with you. I have little fear about what people are going say or do to me for expressing myself, but again I’m a young pup. Russell you are insightful and downright hilarious.
Obviously I know that taking a bribe for my vote is a very wrong thing to do. I take my voting right very seriously, but it’s hard not to make a pun every now and again with the pinheads we’re electing. Now I shouldn’t be critical I mean both these men fought for their country…scratch that. They’ve led very successful lives…wait Bush failed at everything in life until he was what 40ish? And Kerry must have a coosh position with Mrs. Heinz behind him. It’s not like we’re going to see these men on the street begging for quarters. It infuriates me to no end having to elect one of these two men. Where are the Teddy Roosevelts, Abraham Lincolns? These men came from nothing and did amazing things with their power. Now no doubt a lot of what both did was downright illegal but looking back on it could we say it wasn’t the right things to do? Anyone that opposed Lincoln was put in prison, the majority of his cabinet ran against him in the election of 1864, even one of his leading generals George McClellan. They all spoke very harshly of him and argued with nearly everything he did. But that is looked back on as a good thing.
I don’t believe an absolute ruler is what we need because throughout history that has been disastrous. But with conservatives going liberal and liberals being conservative it’s hard to know which way to turn. One ruler to rule them all has an appeal to it. For example: Personally I’ve never been against the war in Iraq, with the exception of it costing so much money. A lot of empires have been brought to their knees by the costs of war. Yes we are an empire, I don’t think having territory all over the globe and military bases in a butt load of countries make us an un-aggressive nation. But when you go to war with a nation you should have absolute resolve. Either we keep Iraq or not. I’d prefer we didn’t but it doesn’t really matter. Why we go into other countries bomb the crap out of them and then use our money to rebuild them is insanity. Yes I know we’re making a better future for them and we’re being civilized about it. Does anyone else not pay attention to global conflict? When you take a country they pay you. They are your new state to do with what you want. Now installing a government in Baghdad six-thousand and nine miles from New York City just seems silly to me. I’ve traveled over this country and that really doesn’t seem that far to me. Yes it’s twice the size of the U.S. but it’s less than a day away. Telecommunications make it almost instantaneous. With a plane going a little over five hundred miles an hour Bush could fly in, fire a couple of shots, fulfilling his national guard duty, and fly back in less than a day. Now why is that about the only tempting thing I’ve said so far…

Dave, first, no my window does not quite look like that. I use Opera which gives a vastly different layout. Firefox does as well. I did, however, after some searching find some of the fields and believe that posts should now be going to the Russell Section.

Second, thanks for cutting down on the spam. As intersting as the quotes were (when they made any sense - the one about the pagans, chastity, and Christianity was a little out there) I don’t need the advertising for online poker. I just played in a tournament up in Central City. It was quite fun but it was kind of distressing to get dealt A-K of hearts early, match somebody’s raise, see a King and heart come down on the flop, go all in, only to have the other guy match since he had a couple of bullets in the hole. Needless to say I got knocked off early though I still think it was the right call.

Nick, you ought to know that taking bribes to vote a certain way would be illegal - although taking Romen Meal or underwear to vote at all would be perfectly fine (well maybe - ask Michael Moore). You state that things could always be better. They could also go from bad to worse!

I do, however, have to agree with your assessment of the nanny state. My favorite example is when the Republican (see the Democrats aren’t the only ones in favor of more regulation) led Congress forced V-Chips to be put in Tvs to enforce their moral standards. Hey if I could save just one dollar by not having it in my TV I would go for it. The only thing that the V-Chip has ever done is make me enter a code when I’m watching something like Nadia strip in American Pie. Maybe I wouldn’t mind my child seeing a naked woman because at least I know she’s real (I said real not natural). On the other hand, the number of references made to Angels in “Its a Wonderful Life” might bother me if I thought angels were fictitious and didn’t want my child believing in them. Frankly neither one really bothers me.

I actually think Ed Quillen said it best when he said our problems with government arose from Air Conditioning! You see, Congress had longer recesses before Air Conditioning was installed in the Capitol. Why? They didn’t want to swelter in Washington’s summertime heat and therefore went home earlier and therefore, could not make more laws causing the rest of us lots of problems.

Russell Weisfield

A friend of mine regularly travels on a “bike tour”. These tours have ranged all over the world. They generally entail about a week of riding 60 miles (plus or minus) a day on dirt trails and then throwing back a few brews at night. This year, during his fall break, he decided to ride the new Front Range trail and Independence Pass onto his cabin near Woodland Park.

I joined him for the first leg of his trip, Larkspur to Colorado Springs. This trail is actually quite impressive. We thought maybe it would just run along I25 where we could inhale the exhaust of all the people trekking to the Air Force game. Turns out in winds through lots of open pace and woods. I didn’t know there was so much open land on the Front Range. Why haven’t the developers uprooted it already? How can Colorado keep up with California if we don’t develop every inch of land?

Actually it was a very pleasant and fun ride. Some good hills, few riders, and mostly good weather. Well, okay there was way too much wind and I unfortunately had not appeased Aeolus lately. It made it more grueling but was worth the workout for some of the pictures - some will be on the site soon.

The ride, takes you through the Air Force Academy although far from the tourist area. We were mildly worried about going through there though since John had driven to the campus recently to check out the trail and a nice young man with some automatic weapon sternly told him it was closed and to go away. It was not closed.

Ended up being a 43 mile ride but on the dirt and with the headwind felt like 60. The gallon of microbrew beer we drank while watching the Sox beat the Cards was well earned!

Nick/Russell,

When you make posts, do you have the option of checking a category. If so, check the “all writers” and “Nick” or “Russell". Here is where it appears on my screen.

I’m looking into how the comments are being generated. The sayings are not offensive so I’m not overly concerned. The interesting part to me is that they appear instantly after making a post.

Well it has literally taken me years to get this far. The majority of you know who I am, others can guess by looking at my name, but I’m Nick Weeks. I would say everyone who reads this is at least familiar with my dad Dave Weeks the founder of this site.
For years I’ve asked dad to break away little chunks of his site for me. All are met with an agreeing smile and a confirmation that he would do it. This has been my first advancement so far. Maybe my attempts are too vague even for his open-mindedness. More likely is the case that I was just a boy and would rant much like I’m doing now. I’m using this as more as an introduction to you my readers, but my future posts are intended to hold a political view from my post in Kentucky.
According to the freerepublic.com Bush is almost guaranteed Kentucky, which will drive my professors crazy. It’s really a shame I already voted because I know I could get at least twenty dollars off each of them for a vote in Ohio for Kerry. The big picture I’m picking up on is this, everyone hates Bush, (alright not everyone but a lot of people) and secondly everyone despises the liberals. (again apologizes to whoever doesn’t, especially the history and government professors that grade me) Is it really going to come to a liberal president and a republican congress? Is that really a bad thing? Maybe having their hands tied is the BEST thing they can do. I’m not big for change, sure things aren’t always perfect, but a lot of it needs for us to be the one’s fixing it not big brother. My biggest example is the commercial that won’t stop playing in my head. Blah blah blah… now with passenger-side airbags. This is about the minimum that can be done isn’t it. Airbags were invented in 1968, that’s over 30 years ago. If the government wouldn’t have stepped in and told everyone they needed airbags I certainly think all cars would have had them years ago and the economy would have forced automobile companies to make better automobiles, not the gas guzzling break-it-if-you-touch-it vehicles we have today. Consumers are the ones who actually make the products we don’t need liberal sanctions on industry, although a little Midas touch on education reform, and the deficit…

That’s going to be my new saying when I’m mad now. I voted today - and boy did I feel dirty afterwards. Not only that, but they didn’t have computerized ballots. How can I be sure my vote will be counted? What happens if there’s a fire? What if one of the poll workers destroys my ballot? Heck, they couldn’t find me in the database for a long time and almost forced me to cast a provisional ballot (apparently if you type in only my last name it could be found but when it was combined with my first name it could not be found).

Going on Dave’s flawed theory of using Google to determine the winner, btw, Kerry is only losing by a little over 100,000 votes. I say flawed because Google is using webpages that date back for years. Bush was in the news a whole lot more over the past four years (as he should have been) than Sen. Kerry. Additionally, to be completely accurate one should really enter all hte variations on the names (such as President Bush, Mr. Bush, etc.) An interesting test though.

Recently I saw a faux documentary entitled CSA:
Confederate STates of America. It is a faux
documentary and not a “Mockumentary” because the
director, Kevin Wilmott who is a heck of a speaker,
doesn’t think he’s mocking anything but rather telling
a story using a documentary format. The movie is
about the history of the Confederate States of America
- from the moment they won the Civil War to today.

One of the ways this differs from other scenarios of the South winning the Civil War is that the conquers the north rather than simply having
two countries. As he said in the Q&A after “I’ve
never heard of a country saying ‘hey we kicked your
ass now you go be by yourself’. Its more like ‘here’s
Bob and he’s going to rule you for a while.’” There
are actually rare examples to the contrary but his
point is well taken. It also helps to frame a funny
and powerful movie.

It is a funny because there are points that are so absurd its
just hilarious The whole sequence of Lincoln running
from the law with the help of Harriet Tubman for
example is brilliant. It is especially so when
Wilmott blends in D.W.Griffith’s films to show the
capture of Lincoln (in black face) as portrayed in a
D.W. Griffith film developed in that timeline (Griffith, btw, was a talented but
racist director who directed “Birth of a Nation” which
does show Lincoln’s assassination but also has the
audience cheering for the KKK at the end).

The movie is powerful because there are definitely
points where you are made to feel uncomfortable. For
example, Wilmott shows the movie as if it were being broadcast on a standard television station and therefore advertises various products. These products make you wonder if you should be laughing or outraged
or something else. These products include Niggerhair Cigarettes, Darky Toothpaste, and Coon Chicken Inn (all of which, btw, were real products well into the 20th century).

Wilmott also makes the issue of Slavery sink in without showing the full brutality thereof. As he explained afterwards, he wanted to do a movie that focused on slavery rather than a movie like “Cold Mountain” where the slavery issue is scuttled aside. When he said that, I couldn’t help but remember a quote from Greater Tuna “We think that Roots only showed one side of the slavery issue.”

Wilmott definitely succeeds in his mission too! He makes you think about slavery without making you feel disgusted from the brutality. The movie, amazingly, is put together so well that you find yourself laughing at points and cringing at others. It is a must see although unfortunately not yet in most theaters.

From my other blog:

When you read about the following events happening in relation to the Presidential election, just remember you heard it here first. Also, if this does not happen, something even crazier will.

On election eve it is reported that Florida has absolutely no election problems. Commentators point to that state as the epitome of how an election should run. Bush is declared the winner even without the votes from soldiers overseas. Some voters, upon exiting the polls, admit that they thought they were voting to re-elect the governor who lead them through four hurricanes. Comedians everywhere poke fun at the intelligence of the Florida electorate.

The election night drama unfolds as news stations everywhere mark West Virginia, Oregon, and New Mexico as blue. The drama culminates with a crescendo of music as Ohio slowly turns red. The night ends with Bush being declared the “winner” having won 273 electoral votes to Kerry’s 265.

But wait there’s more.

Bush is not declared the “official winner” because recounts ensue in multiple states. After numerous recounts in New Mexico, it is determined that the election is a tie and following New Mexican law about two candidates being forced to draw lots to determine the winner, Bush and Kerry agree to meet to play poker for the state’s five electoral votes. The world press laughs but ratings for Celebrity Poker are the highest on record. ESPN laughs louder. Some voters are confused, however, when announcers say that Bush has the nuts and actually think the announcers say “Bush is nuts". Teenagers everywhere, however, howl with delight at the phrase citing that now they can point to a bush that has a dick and the nuts.

But wait there’s more

Colorado seemingly goes to Bush but Amendment 36 (reforming the Electoral College), after numerous recounts, passes resulting in 4 of the electoral votes of Colorado going to Kerry. Republicans immediately challenge it on the grounds that the Constitution says that the legislature has to decide and the legislature did not decide in this case since the amendment was initiated by citizens instead. The Colorado Supreme court disagrees. The case goes to the US Supreme Court which rules 6-3 that the amendment is constitutional with O’Connor, Rehnquist, and Kennedy in the minority. Justice Scalia astounds critics everywhere by voting with the majority. He cites states rights in his decision.

But wait there’s more

Ohio votes are suspect after Diebold CEO Walden O’dell admits he did everything he could to give Ohio to Bush. Challenges immediately ensue and the Secretary of State of Ohio is forced to wait to declare the winner.

But wait there’s more

Lawsuits are brought across the nation alleging voter fraud. In one poignant case in Wisconsin Republicans charge that Democrats sent mail to a “safehouse” in Wisconsin with the names of thousands of Illinois Democrats. These people then allegedly drove to Wisconsin and voted on election day using Wisconsin’s laws that allow people to register the day of an election with a piece of mail ten days old. Allegedly CBS obtains such a letter but refuses to air it fearing its a forgery. Conservative critics blast the network for being biased unlike the “Fair and Balanced” network of Fox.

Other cases challenge the legality of the HAVA act passed after the 2000 debacle. Voter disenfranchisement becomes a major buzzword. Voters are confused as to what being a part of a franchise really means even wanting to know the stock symbol under which they’re traded.

After all legal challenges and recounts are sorted out Bush is declared the winner by two electoral votes.

But wait there’s more

One elector is unable to cast his vote at the convening of the electoral college because he is stopped from boarding a plane. Apparently someone with his same name has been listed as a potential terrorist and is put on a no fly list.

Additionally, one elector is faithless and votes for Libertarian Mike Badnarik marking the first time that a faithless elector has changed the outcome of an election. Allegations of George Soros influencing the vote are made.

All eyes immediately focus on Louisiana where a Senatorial runoff is underway since no candidate got a majority. Since the Senate will be choosing the Vice-President millions of dollars from 527 groups pour into Louisiana thereby proving how this awkward system really does help the state.

When the Congress convenes, the House is unable to determine a President as a few states with split delegations (including Illinois which has one Libertarian voting for Badnarik) are unable to come to a consensus for how they will vote. Nor is the Senate able to choose a Vice-President as they remain deadlocked. On January 20, 2005, with neither chamber having made a decision, Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert is declared the interim President.

But wait there’s more.

When Hastert leaves the House his fellow Illinois Congressman are able to come to a consensus of John Kerry. Fifteen minutes after Hastert is declared acting President, John Kerry is declared President.

But wait there’s more.

When Kerry leaves the Senate to assume the Presidency the Senate is able to come to a consensus on Vice-President. Dick Cheney is declared the Vice-President.

But wait there’s more.

Kerry gives the longest inaugural speech on record and takes ill dying less than a month later thereby serving the shortest of any President.

Dick Cheney, upon learning that he is to assume the Presidency suffers a Heart attack and becomes severely incapacitated but insists upon serving as President even naming an entirely different cabinet than Kerry. In three months, however, he dies giving rise to the Hastert Presidency.

For one year Hastert attempts to act as President but is severely hampered by Democrats and members of his own party who blame him for assuming the Presidency long enough to give Kerry the job. Hastert is ultimately killed by terrorists although it is unclear if they are domestic or not. Investigations never reveal anything giving rise to conspiracy theories. Interestingly, in the same attack on President Hastert the newest Speaker of the House is killed meaning President Pro Tempore Robert Byrd assumes the Presidency.

Byrd amazingly manages to complete the Presidency even after appointing the fourth Secretary of State in two years. He dies two days after the inauguration of Hillary Clinton who narrowly beats Jeb Bush in an election ultimately decided by the Supreme Court.

- Russell Weisfield