Submitted by Gordon Crump, Feb 23, 2007 05:52

This editorial is fair and focused but, I disagree on one point..... that the election would have gone to Al Gore, had Ralph Nader stayed out of it.

This assumption overlooks the widespread corruption by Democrats in California, where Gore and/or his people gave voter registration cards to a list of one and one-half million illegal Mexicans and others. The list was supplied by the US Immigration Service,on order of the Clinton Administraton.

That alone would have invalidated the California vote.

Corruption in Wisconsin and in Bill Richardson' New Mexico was as blatant and would have easily overturned the vote; had Mr. Bush chosen to contest them. There were other states where corruption influenced the vote.

Had these illegalities been laid to Republicans, the Democrat Party would have been demanding a federal grand jury investigation. Bush sought a peaceful,non-rancorous change of leadership. The Florida vote count righted the outcome and he did not have to resort to contesting the legalities.

He did not have to go through a contest of the votes and spared the country even more wrangling.

For his generosity and peace-making, Mr. Bush has endured a seven-year campaign of hate and meaness unleashed by the Democrats and media, who long ago forgot 'fair and balanced.'

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.