Cornyn Calls Dems Hypocrites, Invokes 2000 Election To Decry Disenfranchisement In Minnesota
NRSC Chairman John Cornyn released this statement, regarding Norm Coleman's continued legal fight after Al Franken's lead grew by 87 net votes today:
"Events today do not address the main issue that remains unresolved: over 4,000 Minnesotans were disenfranchised by this three-judge panel. That's why it's so critical for this process to move forward before the Minnesota Supreme Court and why Senate Republicans fully support Senator Coleman's efforts.
"The message from our side has remained consistent throughout this process: we want this election to resolve itself as quickly, but not at the expense of Minnesota's laws or voters.
"In contrast, the criticisms from the Democrat side as recently as today have expressed the opposite viewpoint. It's blatant hypocrisy that many of the same Democrats who so loudly complained about voter disenfranchisement during the 2000 Florida recount are now willing to compromise this fundamental principle of our democracy when it no longer fits their political agenda. Senate Democrats should stand down, set partisan politics aside, and respect Minnesota's laws and voters."
Advertisement




















If you ever have occasion to wonder why you aren't a Repub, intellectually dishonest asswipes like Cornyn invariably provide you with a quick answer.
April 7, 2009 6:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Keep it up Cornyn! I hope the Dems plaster your Texas puss from one end of Minnesota to the other. Keep it up!
April 7, 2009 6:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Senator Cornyn, if I can quote the immortal Albert in The Deer Hunter, "You're so full of shit you're going to float away!
Any voter who followed Minnesota state election law to the letter had a chance to have their vote counted. Coleman had his day in court (several, actually) and failed to prove otherwise; instead, he argued for more lax vote counting. Isn't Cornyn from the party that rallies against voter fraud?
April 7, 2009 6:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Isn't Cornyn from the party that rallies against voter fraud?
Yes. The party that is blind to irony.
April 7, 2009 6:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hussein,
or, Cornyns' so full of shit his eyes are brown.
me
April 8, 2009 9:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ah yes. Well I remember April of 2001, when Republicans chomped at the bit to have George W. Bush sworn in as President but Democrats demanded they first receive their full chance to exhaust all potential appeals to overturn the results of the Florida recount.
April 7, 2009 6:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is not "chomping at the bit, mcc." This has gone through a painfully careful procedure. Democrats who objected to the illegal voter disenfranchisement in Florida were not trying to "overturn the results of the Florida recount," they were trying to get all votes counted. In Florida, people were illegally purged from the voter roles -- nothing like that happened in Minnesota.
Bush was appointed; he was not elected. The most important Democrat in 2001 ceded, so what is your point?
This has nothing to do with Florida, and in fact it is the opposite, because the person who got the most votes is in fact, going to win.
Now that the newspapers are calling for Coleman to give up, Pawlenty may realize he is backing a loser and is not looking good if he won't go ahead and certify the winner of the most votes.
April 7, 2009 7:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Plus, even the MSM is beginning to report the real game here. It's not about electing Coleman, it's about blocking any Minnesotan from taking a seat in the Senate in order to advance the interests of Republicans external to Minnesota. Minnesotans have been disenfranchised all right, by Republicans in other states.
I heard Big Ed say he ran into Norm in NYC today. I expect Norm was meeting with his real constituents, the ones who bought him.
April 7, 2009 7:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please excuse me. My point was to use sarcasm to highlight the vast differences between the situation in 2001 with Bush/Gore and the situation with Franken/Coleman today. Notice for example that contrary to the claims in my previous post, in April of 2001 Bush had been president for three months. The Democrats did not challenge the recount, in fact the recount was halted in December so there was nothing to challenge, and claims of widespread voter disenfranchisement in Florida never went to court at all. Etc.
April 7, 2009 8:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
mcc. I misread your post I apologize. But I'm glad I had the opportunity to say what I said.
You don't need to excuse yourself; you were perfectly clear. I read it wrong, and so I will say, "Excuse ME!"
Thanks for your post, and hopefully we'll have a win for the right guy before the week is out!
Friends?
April 7, 2009 9:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hi CVille,
Here, I got you this JPEG of a cookie.
<3
April 7, 2009 9:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Judging from the comments, CVille Dem was not alone in taking you literally, but I wanted you to know that your sarcasm wasn't missed by everyone here -- I knew what you were saying, and it made me smile and say, "Indeed."
Amazing how Republicans proceed to try to re-write history as if Americans could not possibly remember anything that happened prior to last November 4th.
April 8, 2009 7:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Well I remember... "
Well, apparently, you have trouble remembering things.
"...April of 2001, when Republicans chomped at the bit to have George W. Bush sworn in as President..."
George W. Bush had already been President for 3 months, he was sworn in in January. Just like every President since FDR.
"...but Democrats demanded they first receive their full chance to exhaust all potential appeals to overturn the results of the Florida recount."
There was no recount to overturn. The Florida recount was not allowed to be completed. The GOP went to the Supreme Court to have the recount stopped. And they succeeded, in December of 2000, one month after the election. So, the Florida 2000 recount didn't even make it anywhere near the stage that the Minnesota recount has reached five months after the election. Not the same situation at all.
But, by all means, make whatever appeals you're legally entitled to, Norm.
April 7, 2009 8:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
By April of 2001, Bush had already been sworn in over two months and had already taken a month of vacation.
April 7, 2009 9:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you!
April 8, 2009 8:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
So two years is resolving itself quickly? Bush was forced in in mere weeks with Republicans calling for Gore to be a "Statesman" and concede, Franken has waited five months, a complete recount and a trial that only added to his lead. And Cornyn is talking about years before he could be sat.
April 7, 2009 7:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Of course Big John is citing 2000. Thats when the goopers fought the recount and demanded Gore step aside. That to do anything else was unpatriotic. Uh, John do you see the problem nitwit??
April 7, 2009 7:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
So Cornyn agrees that there should have been a full recount in Florida in 2000, and that the Supreme Court decision to stop the recount was wrong? And that Al Gore should have kept contesting the election results, instead of stepping aside as he did? I guess Al was a fool for saying:
Now the U.S. Supreme Court has spoken. Let there be no doubt, while I strongly disagree with the court's decision, I accept it. I accept the finality of this outcome which will be ratified next Monday in the Electoral College. And tonight, for the sake of our unity as a people and the strength of our democracy, I offer my concession. I also accept my responsibility, which I will discharge unconditionally, to honor the new President-elect and do everything possible to help him bring Americans together in fulfillment of the great vision that our Declaration of Independence defines and that our Constitution affirms and defends.
I guess Sen. Conryn also disagrees with what Dick Cheney said at the time:
Dick Cheney called today for Vice President Al Gore to concede the presidential election, saying history would regard Mr. Gore ''in a better light if he were to bring this to a close in the very near future.''
Speaking on the NBC News program ''Meet the Press,'' Mr. Cheney also said he believed that the nation was on the verge of a recession and needed the stimulus of a tax cut like the one proposed by the Republicans.
Both statements seemed designed in part to build public pressure in different ways for an end to Mr. Gore's legal challenge of the vote in Florida. In the same interview, Mr. Cheney talked about troubling economic indicators and the importance of a new administration getting to work on them.
The political conflict since the election has eaten up so much of the transition period, he said, that there could be damage to the effectiveness of the next administration.
''Let's get on with it,'' said Mr. Cheney, the Republican vice-presidential candidate.
Every day and in every way, Republicans prove themselves to be hypocritical sons of bitches.
April 7, 2009 7:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
dont buy into this fake argument.
geez.
the real issue is , will the dems finally grow a set and stand up to these creep republicans and seat Franken asap!
April 7, 2009 11:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cornyn is only being his fascist self.
It's so hilarious to see Repub's make accusations of things they are guilty of - The real hypocrites of course are the Repub's.
John you moron you as usual have it all wrong, first of all in 2000 they STOPPED the recount. To compare this with 2000 is at best idiotic & crazy, but that's your thing.
Minnesota is very efficient at running their elections and pretty much everything else, the state has high standards throughout. The election board is made up equally of both parties and they have unanimously certified the election results. Yet as usual someone like Cornyn can whip up something crazy & make it sound legitimate.
I hope though that the people of Minnesota who did not vote, will next time & in the future make more of an effort to do so. I cant really blame ol Norm, if there is any blame it's to those who didnt bother to vote.
Republicans rarely hold a majority in most states, they do however turn out to vote and they are the majority 'voters' so when they win it's usually because non-repub's decide to let them win.
This is what's really sad & this Senate election is a great example of it.
April 7, 2009 8:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, the message from the Republic party has been consistent: If Coleman's ahead, stop counting immediately and declare a winner. If Franken's ahead, keep counting, recounting, recounting, appealing, spinning, contradicting, stalling, hemming, hawing, and throwing a lot of chaff in the air to see if it helps move the numbers in Coleman's direction.
And this world has not seen anything as consistent, as unswerving, as the Republic party's commitment to brazen hypocrisy. They will declare their principles and then drop them like a hot biscuit if they present even the faintest obstacle to their pursuit of self-interests.
Oh and by the way, Cornyn, shut your festering gob.
April 7, 2009 8:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sen. Cornyn: if the Florida recount had been allowed to proceed, as the Minnesota recount is being allowed to proceed, to its finish, the Democrats would have had, and would to this day have, no reason to complain -- other than if Bush had still won and we'd had the same eight years of crappy leadership, but not about the election itself.
April 7, 2009 8:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's a shame that Big John loses a clue everyday about reality. He is the most worthless, self-absorbed jerk that has probably ever been in the Senate. He brings nothing to the party except what's in HIS best interest only..has hood-winked his supporters, neighbors, constituents and probably even his family to the point of delusion..
If you have ever watched him during ANY Senate leadership (teehee) press conference, you would notice that he is doing the same thing that a 16 year old jock used to do in high school by trying to horn in to the picture but never say anything because he has nothing to add - EVER. Too stupid..just follow orders.
This guy is one of the five biggest loser alive.
April 7, 2009 8:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
A large vocal group of Gore supporters did not accept the 2000 Florida election results, even after all state laws were followed and the result was certified. Bush's lawyers silenced them and halted their fight to recount more votes by taking the case to the Supreme Court of the US and winning.
Coryn is plainly saying Coleman supporters will act exactly like Gore supporters did, and they expect to get treated by the Supreme Court exactly like the Gore supporters wanted to be (not how they really were).
Okay so yes, Gore supporters who who now in the Fanken/Coleman case want to stop counting votes and want the Courts to stay out of it and let the recounted results stand are hypocrites.
So what? The bottomline is that if the "hypocrites" were wrong and lost in 2000, what makes their position the "right" position for the Republican party now?
Coryn's arguement is like if Rush Limbagh argued it's OK to shop his OxyContin perscription around to multiple doctors and pharmacies (seemingly against the ...um..LAW) because NORML attorney's once argued it's unconstitutional to stop people from growing there own weed.
Not only would Limbagh have totally disagreed with the NORML argument at the time it was made, but the argument was also totally unsucessful!
It's Coryn that's the more "actionable" hypocrite here.
April 7, 2009 10:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
No. No. No. In Florida in 2000, Democrats wanted a recount in line with state law, which is exactly the same thing they were asking for in Minnesota after the 2008 election. That happened in Minnesota, but not in Florida in 2000, when Republicans, with the collusion of the U.S. Supreme Court, were successful in shutting down the recount.
At the same time, once the final court ruling came down in 2000, Democrats went along with it, however much they felt it was wrongly decided. Republicans certainly agreed at the time that it was the patriotic duty of the Democratic Party to do just that. But now when the shoe is on the other foot, and the court ruling goes against them, they want to overturn it and hold a Mulligan election in hopes that the results will be different this time.
So don't pin that hypocrite label on the Democrats. They're supporting now what they supported in 2000: letting a lawful process run its course. Now it has, and it really is time for Coleman and his Republican buddies to take the advice they gave out to Franken in November, to concede for the good of the state, and the advice they gave so freely to Gore's supporters to get over it.
April 8, 2009 7:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Who'd like to take a bet on if Norm takes exactly 10 days to file his appeal? Someone at today's press conference asked Ginsberg when they'd file. He beat around the bush a bit and would only say they have 10 days. I'm betting on the 10th day, just in case you were wondering about the purpose of all this-you probably weren't.
April 7, 2009 11:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
True.
Towards the end of this, Coleman's team will be asking to read the contents of all Minnesota phone books aloud, so they can be on record. And they'll find a guy who stutters to do it.
April 7, 2009 11:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
And then he'd have 15 days to turn over the evidence he wants considered - so if he waits to the max limits on both he can hold things up another 25 days...
April 7, 2009 11:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Methinks "big John" has lost his mind. Again.
April 7, 2009 11:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
RE "disenfranchisement"
The polling places where people had to wait too long to vote were in pro-Franken areas.
The polling places where they ran out of registration forms were in pro-Franken areas.
April 7, 2009 11:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's hypocritical is that the party that claims to believe in federalism, state's rights, and the 10th Amendment, sought federal jurisdiction in 2000 when they didn't like the Florida election result, and are now threatening to do the same thing in Minnesota in order to thwart the will of the voters.
Holy shit, Cornyn is such a disingenuous moron.
April 7, 2009 11:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
What a hypocrite.
John Cornhole, crying about voters rights?
The GOP deserves extinction.
~
April 7, 2009 11:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ramsey County, which is one of the most Democratic areas in Minnesota and includes St. Paul, didn't bother to tell absentee voters when there was the lack-of-a-signature on the envelope. They just refused to open those envelopes.
Some suburban districts let absentee voters fix such mistakes.
If this is remedied by letting absentee voters who didn't sign, to sign now, then Al Franken will have an even bigger lead.
April 7, 2009 11:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
I used to think the Republicans should spend the next 10 to 20 years in the political wilderness.
Now... I think they need a permanent exile from politics. I hope the GOP begins a slow decline for the next 20 years until conservatives finally get around to think about taking it off life support and starting over.
April 8, 2009 12:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
This may lead to a power struggle between Cornyn and Harry Reid.
April 8, 2009 9:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
With Cornyn and Steele as a one, two punch, how can Republicans lose?
April 8, 2009 9:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
i am still raving mad, disappointed, disturbed, outraged, worried, and incredulous about the 2000 election.
the fact is the voters of florida intended to vote for gore. probably did in fact just barely manage to register more votes for gore. there was never a government sanctioned legal recount of the entire assembly of multi varied ballots from all of florida's many counties. the media analyzed the ballots carefully and determined that in most scenarios of ballot consideration, gore actually won by a narrow margin. this in an election where gore won the popular vote nationally. in an election where bush's brother was the governor of florida. where the official in charge of elections was bush's state campaign manager.
the nation suffered through eight years of a disastrous presidency that began with a stolen election. this is a disgusting chapter of american democracy. unacceptable.
is corny acknowledging this?
April 8, 2009 10:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
i just want the historical record to clearly state that the 2000 election was stolen by family members and appointees of family members of the winning candidate while the losing candidate, the losing party, and the media got out of the way, acquiesced, or remained silent.
then we as a nation may start to move on.
April 8, 2009 10:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
the more i think about this, the more i see it as a welcome development. basically there is an acknowledgment by a lockstep, bushie, texan, republican that the 2000 election was stolen.
April 8, 2009 11:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
If only Al Gore had fought like this, he had a much better case and we may have been spared the disaster of the last eight years.
I guess it doesn't matter now though, the republicans appear to be doomed to wander the wilderness for at least a generation if not forever thanks to Bush, so maybe Gore did us all a favor.
April 8, 2009 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
And Cornyn was on the Texas Supreme court, from what i remember. His race this past year was probably closer than he would have liked but he still held on despite his complete ignorance of our history (but I guess since we had GWB for 8 years and the saying states that winners are the ones who write history then in that case this is simply the same sort of non-sense that all of the GWB people have been trying do as of the last 8 months or so, re-writing their own actions and the history of those actions). It is pretty cowardly but with the MSM focused in on a 24 hour news cycle their is very little to lose, unless of course one of these guys becomes part of the 24-hour election cycle.
On the down-side the effort by Obama to simply move forward kind of inadvertently works in their favor. I have hope however that Obama is doing more than just giving speaches but would rather have most of his ducks in a row before pulling the down the hammer.
April 8, 2009 1:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
The hypocrisy of Cornyn and his ilk is blatant, and I, too, harbor lots of resentment about how Florida was handled in 2000. That said, I'm surprised the Repubs haven't countered with an argument I think is defensible: can you imagine the country without a President-elect from early November through the (non)inauguration day, and into April? The domestic dissension and international loss of credibility would be significantly damaging and long-lasting. Gore recognized this, and very eloquently declined to put the country through the trauma.
For all of the negatives about the current delay in seating Al Franken, in the big picture the country isn't suffering.
April 8, 2009 6:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Being a Texan I have seen "Judge" Cornyn as an embarassment for years. The guy approves of torture. 'nuf said.
April 9, 2009 4:41 PM | Reply | Permalink