This question is for anyone who wants to “take it on”…..
If the recounts show any difference: like Kerry instead of Bush and even findings of fraud; yet these findings occur AFTER the Electoral College Vote:

Will any of these recounts really matter?

It’s the Electoral College who elects the Prez and Vice ---
Not the people of America (by popular vote)….

So does anyone really want to find out that there was Fraud or simply miscounts?

It will not change anything!
Bush still gets to sit in the White House – Because the Electoral College Vote
Is the only one that really counts!

Comments anyone???

It's like watching a replay of a bad call in a baseball game.

You know it isn't going to be changed even though it's obvious that the official blew the call but you get two things out of it;

1. You can expect that there will be a bit more scrutiny on the officials in future games.

2. You get the satisfaction of knowing that the call really should have gone the other way.

The attorney for Dr. David Graham, who revealed at his testimony several weeks ago that his employer the FDA was incapable of protecting consumers from drugs with questionable safety records, says that the only thing keeping his client from being retaliated against by the Administration is the involvement of Iowa GOP Senator Charles Grassley in telling the FDA in essence “don’t think about retaliating against this man.”

On Chuck Grassley - if there were more GOPers like him (and less like Bush, Rove & DeLay)... there would be FAR less hostility in this country.

Grassley is very conservative - make no mistake - but doesn't see 'us' as the enemy. A distinction Rove fails to make.

In the 80s when Reagan was at his peak - Grassley did more to question Reagan's military build up than the whole Democratic 'majority' combined... Grassley was opposed to the blatant waste and graft associated with the rapid build up... he took Ike's warning about the military industrial complex at face value.

I do not share many of Grassleys positions (on things like 'choice' and religion & 'morality')... but I don't fear him like I do DeLay & Demint and the others.

There's no such thing as a close election anymore. Elections aren't won; they're stolen. From now on, no matter who wins, every election result is a fraud.

So, why not spend the next 4 years recounting them all over and over again? Heck, the next 40 years. Heck, the next 400 years. Knock yourselves out. Have fun!

On what dry fly says about Chuck Grassley;

Agree, agree, and agree. However, I still have great reservations about the $230,000 he receieved from Big Pharma in the last election cycle and how it will affect the outcome of the overall discussion of the FDA's broken regulatory system.

It's great that Grassley protects whistleblowers, but what if he allows reformation of the FDA into a agency that helps Pharma at the expense of consumers?

Grassley isn't perferct. And he is VERY conservative... but old school conservative not a neo-con.

And as an old school pol he will take money - lotsa money. I do think he is different from the Bushies in that he does have a line he won't cross... he will only go so far for his 'constituents'...

I don't know if there is a line for people like DeLay and Rove... if there is its out there somewhere way beyond my imagination.

So does anyone really want to find out that there was Fraud or simply miscounts?

Yes. Even if there wasn't enough fraud to change the outcome (which I feel is likely), it will further challenge Bush's "mandate" (which is bogus as it is), and raise pressure to repair our electoral non-system.

And if we find that a state sent the wrong electors to the College, I'd like to see a Senator with the courage to challenge that state's electors this time. Sure, it'd be a symbolic gesture. A challenge won't succeed in the new, fortified GOP Senate, and even if it did, at best it'd throw the election into the House, where Bush would win anyway. But it would tell us a lot about said Senator's integrity.

It will not change anything!

It won't change who sits in the White House for the next four years, but it may very well change the people's belief in his legitimacy.