LETTERS: SO-CALLED WIN FOR GORE BASED ON FALSE PREMISES

To the editor:

This is in response to Alan Journet's recent letter. He claims Al Gore should have received 8,238 additional votes in Florida, thereby making Gore the legitimate president. The arguments he makes are based on false premises.

False Premise No. 1: At least 99 percent of those additional ballots that were cast for both Gore and another candidate should be votes for Gore.

It is impossible to know the intent of each voter. Ballots that have been invalidated by the voter should never be counted as votes.

False Premise No. 2: Ballots with dimpled chads should be counted as votes.

This is an attempt by liberals to rewrite the rules after the election.

The generally accepted rule that was laid out by Democrats prior to the election was that a vote only occurs if the hole is punched through. Since the election didn't favor Gore, Democrats have tried to change the rules.

False Premise No. 3: If the recount were allowed to continue, Gore would have gained enough votes to overtake Bush.

Fact is, Bush won the first count and the re-counts. When that didn't satisfy the liberals, they decided to only recount those counties which heavily voted for Gore. Thankfully, the Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that this violated equal protections.

I think it is time for the liberals to get over it and quit wasting our time with these fallacious arguments. Let's move on and work to heal our nation.

JIM KREWSON

Shawneetown, Mo.