A+++ Would ruin country again!

September 10, 2005 7:18 PM

Own a piece of national tragedy. Rehnquist's original signed decision on the 2000 election recount, throwing the country over to the loser of the popular vote (and, quite possibly, the loser of the electoral college) is up for auction.
posted by jonson (39 comments total)

How does something like this get into private hands?
posted by phrontist at 7:22 PM on September 10, 2005

Lol, still not letting it go, are we...?
posted by dsquid at 7:25 PM on September 10, 2005

No... I wish I could dsquid. Believe me, I wish I could. It was the theft of the presidency, and it has led to American deaths in the thousands.
posted by jonson at 7:28 PM on September 10, 2005

I believe it's an autographed copy rather than anything official phrontist.
posted by Eekacat at 7:29 PM on September 10, 2005

Whaaat? Doesn't the National Archives get custody of these documents?
posted by rolypolyman at 7:29 PM on September 10, 2005

phrontist >>> "How does something like this get into private hands?"

rolypolyman >>> "Whaaat? Doesn't the National Archives get custody of these documents?"

RTFA:

Because we have many great contacts in Washington DC, Chief Justice William Reinquist was kind enough to have hand signed the complete and historic George W. Bush v. Albert Gore decision of the Supreme Court and mail this to me personally.

posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 7:31 PM on September 10, 2005

Thanks, must have missed that.
posted by rolypolyman at 7:33 PM on September 10, 2005

2 bids? It doesn't look like anyone wants it.
posted by nonmerci at 7:41 PM on September 10, 2005

heh. How unfortunate for the seller that the death of the artist coincided with the lowest ever popularity of the subject.
posted by leapingsheep at 7:43 PM on September 10, 2005

Chief Justice Rehnquist's Drug Habit
posted by homunculus at 7:53 PM on September 10, 2005

Lincoln lost the popular vote too.
posted by Mach3avelli at 8:05 PM on September 10, 2005

Mach3avelli

Lincoln wasn't a inaniloquent abecedarian wanksplash.
posted by lalochezia at 8:19 PM on September 10, 2005

Lincoln lost the popular vote too.

Lincoln won a 40% plurality of the vote in 1860, beating out Stephen Douglas at 39% and a 55% majority against McClellan 1864.
posted by deanc at 8:19 PM on September 10, 2005

Uh, 29% for Stephen Douglas. typo on my part. Losing popular-vote presidents go to such luminaries as John Quincy Adams, Rutherford B. Hayes, and Benjamin Harrison.
posted by deanc at 8:21 PM on September 10, 2005

Lol, still not letting it go, are we...?

I'll stop making fun and questioning the motives and policies of the worst president I'll ever live through (GWB) when conservatives lay off Clinton, who, last I checked, hasn't been president for almost five years.
posted by wakko at 8:25 PM on September 10, 2005

dsquid fellates goats.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 8:37 PM on September 10, 2005

i bet it still smells of brimstone.
posted by amberglow at 8:39 PM on September 10, 2005

Five. Long. Years.
posted by pantload at 8:40 PM on September 10, 2005

kudos to amberglow, for the funniest line I've read on Metafilter in many days!
posted by jonson at 8:41 PM on September 10, 2005

Alan Dershowitz: Telling the Truth About Chief Justice Rehnquist My mother always told me that when a person dies, one should not say anything bad about him. My mother was wrong. History requires truth, not puffery or silence, especially about powerful governmental figures. And obituaries are a first draft of history. So here’s the truth about Chief Justice Rehnquist you won’t hear on Fox News or from politicians. Chief Justice
William Rehnquist set back liberty, equality, and human rights perhaps more than any American judge of this generation. His rise to power speaks volumes about the current state of American values. ...
posted by amberglow at 8:41 PM on September 10, 2005

Idle wondering: If the poster had been a supporter of the decision, and posted something along the lines of "own a piece of the greatest moment in American history", would that make him a troll?
posted by loquax at 8:53 PM on September 10, 2005

The question is moot, loquax. jonson is a troll, regardless of this particular post. ;-)
posted by SeizeTheDay at 8:55 PM on September 10, 2005

Alan dershowitz? Jesus. Just for a little balance and debate.

Idle wondering: If the poster had been a supporter of the decision, and posted something along the lines of "own a piece of the greatest moment in American history", would that make him a troll?

It's just a change that's happened over the years. Editorializing in the post (instead of the inside), as if the poster is speaking to a crowd of like-minded individuals. Ain't gonna change, sadly.
posted by justgary at 8:59 PM on September 10, 2005

justgary, that link whitewashes away Rehnquist's longtime racism and anti-semitism how exactly?
posted by amberglow at 9:08 PM on September 10, 2005

Yahoo synndicates the huffington post?

Weird.
posted by delmoi at 9:10 PM on September 10, 2005

Embarrassingly fake. First, Bush v. Gore was decided in a per curiam opinion, i.e., an opinion with no named author. The idea that the Chief Justice was autographing and mailing out copies of opinions, particularly per curiam opinions, is laughable. Second, the per curiam opinion was written not by Chief Justice Rehnquist, but by Justice Kennedy.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 9:27 PM on September 10, 2005

Also, for a more balanced view of Rehnquist's term as Chief Justice, read these articles by Larry Tribe and Jeffrey Rosen.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 9:29 PM on September 10, 2005

Embarrassingly fake.

Hmm. If that's the case, it would certainly explain the lack of bids. My apologies for wasting everyone's time.
posted by jonson at 9:30 PM on September 10, 2005

Jeffrey Rosen's article in the Atlantic was one that I found fascinating and interesting. FWIW.
posted by SeizeTheDay at 9:32 PM on September 10, 2005

Embarrassingly fake.

Chief Justice William Reinquist was kind enough to have hand signed the complete and historic George W. Bush v. Albert Gore decision of the Supreme Court

The only question is if the signature is real or not. It's essentially an auction for what is claimed to be Rehnquist's autograph on something more interesting than a blank piece of paper, that people will be likely to recognize as a Supreme Court Decision. It doesn't claim that the document signed is Rehnquist's per curiam opinion. If you zoom in on the image, it's clear that he (presumably), just signed the first page of Kennedy's opinion. The seller seems to be quite reputable. Bid away!
posted by loquax at 10:03 PM on September 10, 2005

I don't have anything useful to say, so I'll just note a personal opinion: so-so post, great title.
posted by blindcarboncopy at 12:42 AM on September 11, 2005

We have a winning bid at $899.00.
Would a Renquist signature on any other document have drawn that sort of money?

Cherish your Renquist signature, winning bidder. You're no where done paying for it yet.
posted by maryh at 12:56 AM on September 11, 2005

a per curiam opinion, i.e., an opinion with no named author.

How incredibly useful. Now I can stop blaming the dog.
posted by trondant at 1:02 AM on September 11, 2005

loquax is right, although the seller goes out of his way not to explain it in these terms. It appears a lot more attractive than it actually is.
posted by fire&wings at 2:04 AM on September 11, 2005

justgary -- did you actually read your own link? Dershowitz shreds Posner quite handily. If you meant it as a crushing rebuttal to Deshowitz, well ... let's just say we're all still waiting for an educated and articulate defense grounded in constitutional law to explain away the Court's bastardization of EP in their pursuit to enthrone Chimpy McFlightsuit.
posted by RavinDave at 5:58 AM on September 11, 2005

wankslpash

That's a new one for me. A little better than knickerstain, my current favorite.

Chimpy McFlightsuit

Obligatory Coke-through-nose spew.
posted by Enron Hubbard at 6:24 AM on September 11, 2005

You're doing it backwards, enron. The chimp could probably give you some pointers.
posted by ook at 8:06 AM on September 11, 2005

I'd say it's fake, but the title of this post was hysterical. Thanks, jonson.
posted by danb at 8:44 AM on September 11, 2005

From the Newsweek article:

But it is not clear what President Bush does read or watch, aside from the occasional biography and an hour or two of ESPN here and there. Bush can be petulant about dissent; he equates disagreement with disloyalty. After five years in office, he is surrounded largely by people who agree with him.

And this is exactly why in olden days Kings had Court Jesters, because they were surrounded by fawning sycophants who were afraid to tell the king anything negative for fear of the Royal Wrath.

So maybe there needs to be a new cabinet post: The Truth Tsar.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 12:04 PM on September 11, 2005