I have found the Drudge report to be an excellent source. There is usually a column by Matt Drudge and eight or ten headlines of breaking stories from AP, Reuters, etc. There are also links to 100 columnists who range from Rush Limbaugh to Hunter S. Thompson.
In addition, you can access AP and Reuters,-both national and international- and a wide variety of newspapers of national and international origin.
As I said, a most useful site.
Frank Hamilton, I suppose it was OK when FDR tried to pach the Court in the 30's and I really don't believe that the Warren Court reflected the "will of the people" with their decisions on prayer for example. Whether anyone likes it or not, we DO live in a Federal Republic and, since the states use the popular vote to choose the electors, yes, your vote does count.
McGrath, please tell me where to find the research that shows that hand counts are more accurate than machine counts. Yes, you are correct in saying that Bush did not want a statewide recount. He did not obstruct one. He couldn't have. Gore was LEGALLY entitled to one IF he wanted one.
He didn't want one.
When his lawyers were up before Judge Sauls (I think it was) the Judge asked them if they wanted to address the matter of a statewide recount.
They remained silent.
If thete had been agreed upon standards for what constituted a valid vote I feel certain that Bush would have had to give in on the recount question. But there were none, and in Broward Co. they actually changed standards in the middle of the counting. This was, I believe, admitted by David Boies in his testimony before the Supreme Court when he said that the standards were left up to the individual canvassers. This does NOT make for a just and fair count by any non-partisan standard.

troll