In our article "Cornyn on Bad Blog" we pointed out that the neoCon right likes the Brad Blog idea that "elections should take as long as it takes". In fact, if you think about it, that is the very essence of Bush v Gore which Cornyn and Coleman now cite with ritualistic fervour.
It is as if Cornyn wants Coleman v Franken to be Bush v Gore II, the sequel.
The Brad Blog movie about the Minnesota election almost brought the popcorn industry out of the recession all by itself; and it is not done yet, king popcorn will live again!
It is the Brad Blog form of planned obsolescence. Once an election is "over" (perish the thought), an EI bard blog must talk about stuff that is boring, which is non-election stuff, all over again.
Yech! says the Brad Blog. Who can eat popcorn and not talk about elections that should have been over last year at the same time?
So the bardology is to perpetuate an election for "as long as it takes" so that everybody will be excited and happy all the time!
UPDATE: Evidently the Brad Blog idea did not work out so well. Is it because some people just give up too easily when it comes to perpetuating old elections that should have been over last year?
Do they not have the hardened heart of a soldier when it comes to new and exciting words and ways to describe an old election that should have been over last year?
Who knows, but it is for sure that the bard is now revising his history and revising his policy. Enough is Enough! is the new bardolator's mantra.
We never meant what we said exclaims the bard! We meant that Coleman should not take it to the Minnesota Supreme Court! Should not take it to the US Supreme Court! It should not take as long as it takes!
Well, we do remember what you actually said and advocated Brad Blog. We said you were wrong then, said you should apologize, said you should change your teachings on that, and we saw this coming.
Now you have to play pretend like Corny Cornyn and those whose ideology you have either spawned or followed.
Shame on you for misleading the EI community just to save Big Popcornyn.
UPDATE II: If this movie goes to the Brad Blog endorsed ultimate, "good", "take as long as it takes" Minnesota Supreme Court on appeal, one of the justices there (of the remaining 5 who have not already recused themselves) will be mini-me-Scalia, a.k.a Justice Dietzen.
Evidently that justice was a lawyer for, and contributor to, republican causes and, oh goodie, including Norm Coleman.
Get out the popcorn because now Justice Dietzen has a chance to show he can be unbiased by saying so (like Scalia did), but not by recusing himself. Oh, the bardolatry of it all.
If you like popcorn and election movies about elections that should have been over last year, get on the bardolator's set right now.
UPDATE III: Brad Blog contacted me to say that it still fully supports the Minnesota law, it is just that Coleman is "abusing" that law. Weak argument Brad Blog, very weak.
A clue for Brad Blog: those laws are not "abused". They are either obeyed or broken. Current Minnesota law allows everything Coleman is doing.
Coleman is not "abusing" Minnesota law by obeying what it allows; appeal, appeal, and appeal. The law is what is broken and needs to be fixed. If we did it your way and fixed Coleman, the law would still be flawed.
As I said, Minnesota needs to change its law.
In close elections after one normal recount, the law needs to be changed to say, among other things: a) that all costs of a challenge shall be borne by a challenger unless there is clear and convincing evidence that the challenge was brought in good faith; b) good faith means a clear chance of overturning the recount; c) the burden of proof is upon the challenger; and d) a 90 day limit must be imposed within which the challenger has to make the case after the one recount; e) after that 90 day period the candidate with the most votes shall be certified.
Brad Blog also challenges my use of the Bush v Gore case as an example of delay. They should read some of the statements of Cornyn and Coleman lawyers who are citing that case because they want it repeated in the US Supreme Court where they think deja vu could happen. They are not using that appeal to speed things up by the way.
If Bush v Gore had not been filed in the US Supreme Court the Florida count in 2000 would have been over sooner than Bush v Gore was decided by his majesty Scalia and the Supremes. With different results too I should add. Bush v Gore perpetuated uncertainty which is still with us to this very day.
We would not have had the Bush II regime, wars that are still with us, economic catastrophe, hurricane shame, the utter loss of our world reputation, the loss of civil rights, torture, and the pathetic, ad nauseum, and psychotic ramblings of the bushies telling us that history will eventually glorify him.
One more Bush v Gore thing Brad Blog is perpetuating ... we still have those who cannot admit when they are wrong ... like Brad Blog.
The Minnesota state government has been reading this blog, so I urge them not to drink the Brad Blog kool aid nor eat the Brad Blog popcornyn.
Fix what is wrong with your election law instead, so that you may avoid a next time, like Florida did.
And Brad Blog, while you are at it, stop carping about Oregon's election law that works just fine thank you.