No, Doug, you're merely exhibiting the obverse of your accusation that the only reason liberals are complaining is because the other guys won. You're perfectly happy because your guy got in, and you have no incentive to question the manner in which that happened.

Once again, I remind you of the 57,000 people in Florida in 2000 who were denied their vote, and the insufficient number of poling places in Ohio in 2004, making people stand in line for up to eight hours. And most of the districts lacking poling places were in areas that customarily go Democratic. Now whether or not this actually changed the outcome of the election is open for question. I don't know the answer, but neither do you. But, interestingly enough, Florida in 2000 and Ohio in 2004 were swing states as far as the electoral college votes were concerned. In 2000, Bush lost the majority vote by a narrow margin, but won on the Florida electoral votes. Had those 57,000 people been allowed to vote, the election would most likely have swung the other way, because that would have given Florida's electoral votes to Gore. In 2004, many working people in Ohio complained because they had to go to work, and couldn't spend the day standing in line for hours to vote, so, in essence, were disenfranchised because sufficient facilities hadn't been provided. Add to all of this the possibility that votes were altered electronically (not because of hanging chads or failure to mark a paper ballot properly), and you have a big question mark hovering over the legitimacy of the two recent presidential elections.

Now, this should deeply concern every American, not just the Democrats. I remind you once again that cobbling elections is a two-edged sword. It cuts both ways. And some time in the future, you might not feel so smug about an election's outcome.

Tattoo this on your forehead backwards, so when you shave in the morning, you can read it in the mirror:

It isn't a matter of partisan politics. It is a matter of honest elections.

Don Firth