Our Opinion: Ohio recount would waste time, money, achieve little

[sled]

Our Opinion: Ohio recount would waste time, money, achieve little

http://www.mariettatimes.com/edit/story/122202004_edt01edit2.asp

Thursday, December 02, 2004 — Time: 8:37:46 AM EST

As of today, all of Ohio's provisional ballots should now be counted
and it isn't likely that this latest total will change the outcome of
the election for the state.

It's not likely a full blown recount will change the outcome either.
That's why we agree with others, like U.S. Sen. Mike DeWine, R-Ohio,
who are asking that a recount not be done because it will be very
costly to many Ohio counties, and isn't expected to change the result
of the election anyway.

We think avoiding the cost involved with doing what amounts to a
fruitless exercise makes sense. It's well known the state doesn't have
money to spare and counties aren't much better off. Many counties
already are faced with excessive overtime bills and other expenses due
to the election.

One estimate cited by DeWine is that a recount would cost $1.5 million
or more. He made the point this week that that's money that could be
better used elsewhere. We agree.


CONTACT INFO: [e-mail]

[sniffa]

1. get over it

counties just don't have the money because of the bad ecomony under our Leader. get over it. move on. man date.

[MatrixEscape]

2. Hey, I know ....

Let's put the money into war! That's a better "elsewhere" to use it in. Gosh, I think you can get a missle and-a-half for 1.5 mil.

Wascal Weepuwicans.

[berner59]

4. or...use it for a draft board offices...

This seems to be the talking point..."a waste of money"... Oh please...let's get counting folks, then we'll move on...

[MatrixEscape]

5. Yeah,

what is Democracy worth these days? Gotta' be at least a couple million bucks.

What am I offered for this slightly used Democracy? Do I hear five million?

Wascal Weepuwicans don't seem ta' think so ... no bids :(

[Viva_La_Revolution]

3. That's right, too expensive......

to ensure that our rights aren't trampled on. Just shut up, bend over and take it like a good little loser. You didn't bitch when we stole it in 2000 and 2002, why start now? Won't change the outcome, right? AAAGGHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! f*ckers!

[Sparkman]

6. Re-count to show the disparity and corrupt pro-Bush precinct's!

Even if the Ohio re-count doesn't change the winner, it will show how corrupt the RepubliKnz, those pious hypocrits, lie and cheat.
They aren't content to control all three branches of the federal gov't. They aren't content to stifle thruth and dissent, they need to silence the glaring reality that in wartime, their billions spent to bribe,threaten and to scare the citizens could only garner a minimal margine of "victory"! And we know how they stole 2000.
Since a minority of the elegible adults voted, we know how the majority of our population would vote, had they the franchise, NOT for the conservative religious xenophobes?!

[The Blue Flower]

7. My response to the Editor

Editor: "One estimate cited by DeWine is that a recount would cost $1.5 million or more. He made the point this week that that's money that could be better used elsewhere. We agree."

And we're spending how many billions in Iraq to establish a democracy? Obviously, you don't support our president and his ideals.

[bemildred]

8. Yep, a full and accurate vote count is not worth spending money on ...