OLSON: That's correct.

REHNQUIST: And what your argument boils down to, I think, is that you would like us to attempt to appear fair, although this is neither necessary for your candidate's victory, nor likely to influence the manner in which the corporate media presents this story.

OLSON: We're saying that, if the court doesn't pretend to be fair, it might cause some agitation from voters in other states, for those state legislatures to, as Florida has, give their electors away to the guy they like the best.  And there are states that The Dummy has won which have Democratic legislatures.  So, you see, it isn't just the decision.  It's the appearance of fairness that might prevent the voters from seeking to have their will expressed in this manner. 

REHNQUIST: Yes, you are, but even if these other state legislatures chose to give their electors to Gore, you know that our friends, the corporate media, would portray them as evil, and their actions as illegal.

OLSON: Well, I believe that is true, but there might be some citizens out there that would ask, "If it is alright for the Florida Legislature to act in this matter, then what is wrong with other states doing the same?"

REHNQUIST: And we need to take that possibility into consideration when rendering our decision?

OLSON: We submit to you that unless you make this look good, that could happen, yes.  Furthermore, it is quite clear, we submit, that this would make The Dummy very unhappy.

REHNQUIST: Well, if your concern is with that possibility, how can we rule for your client and still prevent other states from awarding their electors to the guy we don't want to have win?

OLSON: Well, I don't know…

REHNQUIST: You'd better find out.

[LAUGHTER]

OLSON: Because we argued, and I believe, that an Al Gore Presidency, though this is what the people have chosen, would be bad for our contributors and large corporate interests.  These interests control the media, and although the stealing of electors by legislatures in states other than Florida would be no difference in substance than what is occurring now in Florida, these media interests could be relied upon to characterize them very differently.

SCALIA: I thought your point was we needed to pretend to be impartial in our ruling to lend legitimacy to The Dummy being inaugurated?

OLSON: But, in some ways, that doesn't matter at all because 1) the media will never report your bias and animus in any substantial way, and 2) the Gore campaign will have nowhere to go for relief, no matter how screwy your decision is.

SCALIA:  Good enough.  On to more important things.  If I throw this election to your guy, what kind of raise are we looking at for my two sons?  Ha ha!  Wasn't that a TV show?  Sorry… What kind of money, though, are we talking about exactly?

OLSON:  I think, Your Honor, that we can safely say it will be substantial and that you and your sons will be more than satisfied with our expression of gratitude.

SCALIA, questioning Gore campaign attorney David Boies: Well, what have we here? 

BOIES: If I could respond to that, Your Honor.

SCALIA: Not sure why you would want to, but give it a shot.  We don't have anywhere to be.

THOMAS:  I do!  I don't want to miss the noon showing of "How the Snatch Stole Dick-mas!"  (continued NEXT PAGE)