Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 37

Thread: Judges are for Sale

  1. #1
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787

    Judges are for Sale

    No, not just my opinion. This is making headline news in publications such as TIME: Judges Are for Sale -- and Special Interests Are Buying

    This sounds exactly like the aftershocks of the epicenter involving SCOTUS decision that allowed corporate access to our government, which was never designed for corporate access, but was designed to be a government Of the People, By the People, and For the People.

    The root of the issue is integrity. That's doing the right thing no matter what the incentive might be to do otherwise. The problem is, most people can be at least somewhat swayed. That's why allowing corporate access to government was a VERY BAD IDEA. At the very least, it's lent credence to the concept of judges repaying election contributions with decisions in favor in their supporters.

    There's legal action known as "recusing" wherein a judge with any conflict of interest in a case can, and most certainly recuse themselves so as to ensure whoever does preside over an issue has no conflict of interest. As the article states: "Why does all this matter? Because as money floods into judicial elections, we are getting courts that are filled with judges whose first loyalty is not to justice — or to the general public — but to insurance companies, big business and other special interests."

    Hmm... The article offers some interesting ideas for solutions to this growing problem. What ideas might you have?

    Regardless, something must be done: "The American ideal of justice requires neutral judges, whose only commitment is to the law. Judicial elections that are dominated by special interest money make a mockery of that ideal."

    That's something NONE of us can afford.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  2. #2
    Regular Member SFCRetired's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Montgomery, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    1,770
    All of my life, I have heard that we, as a nation, have the best judges and politicians that money can buy. No, I did not intend that as a joke.
    At least here in the South, we mostly have honest politicians and judges. "Honest" is defined as one that, once bought, stays bought.

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by SFCRetired View Post
    All of my life, I have heard that we, as a nation, have the best judges and politicians that money can buy. No, I did not intend that as a joke.
    At least here in the South, we mostly have honest politicians and judges. "Honest" is defined as one that, once bought, stays bought.
    If I had to judge a cupcake contest on this basis, I'd cry foul.

    Perhaps this is the time when we return to a government where our best judges and politicians are NOT bought, but that they're holding to the principles upon which our nation was founded!

    I would re-define "honest" as "he who hold's true." To whatever. Whenever. Forever.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  4. #4
    Regular Member jbone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    2,241
    All part of the disease, judicial activism that is.
    Last edited by jbone; 11-30-2011 at 05:15 PM.

  5. #5
    Regular Member SFCRetired's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Montgomery, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    1,770
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    If I had to judge a cupcake contest on this basis, I'd cry foul.

    Perhaps this is the time when we return to a government where our best judges and politicians are NOT bought, but that they're holding to the principles upon which our nation was founded!

    I would re-define "honest" as "he who hold's true." To whatever. Whenever. Forever.
    First of all, you would have to find men and women to fill the role of judge who are totally incorruptible. Have you never heard the saying, "Everyone has a price"? For some, it is money; for others, it is some sort of physical gratification; and for still others, it is political ideology.

    Considering that very few people in this day and age have a sufficient grasp of history (present company excluded) to even begin to understand the principles on which our nation was founded, good luck in finding enough people to fill the role of judge. Maybe when we return to teaching real, versus revisionist, history in our public schools and universities, we will start finding more of these people.

    Yes, I have become somewhat cynical as I get older. Right now, I fear the same fate for our nation as that which befell the Roman Empire. Not attack from without, but decay from within.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Redbaron007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    1,637
    Just out of curiosity.....when were judges and politicians not bought?

  7. #7
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Redbaron007 View Post
    Just out of curiosity.....when were judges and politicians not bought?
    Whenever they've had integrity. :enlightenment:
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Redbaron007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    1,637
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    Whenever they've had integrity. :enlightenment:
    Even before the Roman Empire, politicians and judges were influenced and/or bought. Nothing new, other then the technology to make the masses aware; then the opportunity for the politician/judge to spin it their way.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    [snip]

    Hmm... The article offers some interesting ideas for solutions to this growing problem. What ideas might you have?

    Firstly, this is part of the reason that there are judges that have lifetime positions - not stating that it curbs special interests.
    Second, a ban on all members of Congress, Executive, and Judicial branch from accepting money, gifts, future gigs, not permitted to work for any organization until ten years past leaving office, etc. (you get my point). Republicans want to amend the Constitution with something, start there.

    This second part is a huge one. I think that members of Congress have been pushed from their states, and that the whole political process has been undermined by special interests. I double dog dare them to pass, at minimum, a Law that bans the above I have outlined. I know, there are always loopholes. So, as part of filling that loophole, the Law has at its beginning a thoroughly laid out 'spirit' of that Law, so that there are no misunderstandings. And the person who breaks the Law is subject to ten years or more in prison.


    [snip] "The American ideal of justice requires neutral judges, whose only commitment is to the law. Judicial elections that are dominated by special interest money make a mockery of that ideal."

    That's something NONE of us can afford.
    The crux is highlighted. Can you please, for all who are reading, lay out to us what that entails - the meaning, please. Let's figure out why there seems to be an issue here.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  10. #10
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Firstly, this is part of the reason that there are judges that have lifetime positions - not stating that it curbs special interests.
    Lifetime positions may close one door to special interests, but it opens another. The only relief is integrity. The problem is, Congress did not appoint the last two Supreme Court Justices based on their integrity.

    Second, a ban on all members of Congress, Executive, and Judicial branch from accepting money, gifts, future gigs, not permitted to work for any organization until ten years past leaving office, etc. (you get my point).
    Since they get a life-time pension equal to their pay while serving as a member of Congress, let's make this a lifetime restriction. If they don't like it, they can waive their retirement the moment they start drawing either salary, benefits, or future promise thereof from any entity.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  11. #11
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    Lifetime positions may close one door to special interests, but it opens another. The only relief is integrity. The problem is, Congress did not appoint the last two Supreme Court Justices based on their integrity.
    I am shocked that you would leave this to such an arbitrary thing as "integrity."

    Since they get a life-time pension equal to their pay while serving as a member of Congress, let's make this a lifetime restriction. If they don't like it, they can waive their retirement the moment they start drawing either salary, benefits, or future promise thereof from any entity.
    Members of Congress should not receive lifetime pensions. Will it curb all of this...no. Regardless of pension, the Congress-person should be barred for a period of time - five years? - from working for any special interest groups. Now, since the Congress-person, prior to being elected will be well aware of this, they have no cause for complaint when they run for the job.

    Let's face it...that ain't going to happen. It's a nice thought though.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  12. #12
    Regular Member okboomer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma, USA
    Posts
    1,164
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    I am shocked that you would leave this to such an arbitrary thing as "integrity."
    Actually, integrity is something that we, as the "public" should demand from our elected officials. IMHO, most of the ills of this country today can be traced directly back to a complete and total lack of integrity (along with a few other character flaws) in elected officials and heads of corporations.
    cheers - okboomer
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Lead, follow, or get out of the way

    Exercising my 2A Rights does NOT make me a CRIMINAL! Infringing on the exercise of those rights makes YOU one!

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    I am shocked that you would leave this to such an arbitrary thing as "integrity."
    Integrity is hardly arbitrary. It's the glue that binds the trust among members of the military. Without it, unit cohesion disintegrates. Without integrity, governments slowly die.

    Members of Congress should not receive lifetime pensions.
    Agreed. They, as well as the President and the justices of the Supreme Court (as should most government employees) should all be on the same pension plan as those who fight their battles on the front lines i.e. members of the services.

    Let's face it...that ain't going to happen. It's a nice thought though.
    If enough of us get fed up, it'll happen.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  14. #14
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    Quote Originally Posted by jbone View Post
    All part of the disease, judicial activism that is.
    Unless it rules in favor of something you like...

    Like Heller, McDonald, Glik v. Cunniffe, Terry v. Ohio, etc. etc. etc...
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  15. #15
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by Redbaron007 View Post
    Just out of curiosity.....when were judges and politicians not bought?
    A few come to mind. Just to get their names out there:

    Cato, judge
    Thomas More, judge
    Ron Paul, politi...well, not really

  16. #16
    Regular Member Redbaron007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    1,637
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    A few come to mind. Just to get their names out there:

    Cato, judge
    Thomas More, judge
    Ron Paul, politi...well, not really
    I don't doubt there are some that were not bought/purchased; but throughout history, politicans, judges etc have been influenced by businesses/individuals....thats politics.

  17. #17
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by okboomer View Post
    Actually, integrity is something that we, as the "public" should demand from our elected officials. IMHO, most of the ills of this country today can be traced directly back to a complete and total lack of integrity (along with a few other character flaws) in elected officials and heads of corporations.
    Integrity is a character flaw? Well, then, it appears we need to hire individuals who have less character flaws. Now the next problem at hand...identifying who does, and who does not have character flaws.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  18. #18
    Regular Member okboomer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma, USA
    Posts
    1,164
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Integrity is a character flaw? Well, then, it appears we need to hire individuals who have less character flaws. Now the next problem at hand...identifying who does, and who does not have character flaws.
    No, lack of is a character flaw. They chose to behave without integrity.

    As for identifying, that is why what they say and what they do are so important ... for example, Justice Kagan ... now that is a study in lack of integrity ... she asserted in her confirmation hearing that 2A/Heller was settled law, then we see her dissent in the second go-round on Heller/DC. Brilliant lack of integrity! (/sarcasm)
    cheers - okboomer
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Lead, follow, or get out of the way

    Exercising my 2A Rights does NOT make me a CRIMINAL! Infringing on the exercise of those rights makes YOU one!

  19. #19
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by okboomer View Post
    Brilliant lack of integrity! (/sarcasm)
    And Kagan is much loved by the Obamas. I think there's a pattern, here: Lack of integrity begets lack of integrity.

    If you want good leaders, look for a pattern of integrity. Since they're all sworn to uphold the Constitution, the quickest way to weed out those who lack integrity is to how closely their actions support and defend the constitution.

    Mitt's and Newt's patter of gun control legislation clearly indicate they do not support our Constitution. Since both have sworn to uphold it, their integrity is in question. Obama? Hillary? Fughettabout it.

    Who does that leave?

    Judges who're well-trained and have a high degree of integrity rarely disagree. Given the Supreme Court's recent splits on most decisions, something's rotten in those halls.
    Last edited by since9; 12-08-2011 at 02:54 AM.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  20. #20
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by Redbaron007 View Post
    I don't doubt there are some that were not bought/purchased; but throughout history, politicans, judges etc have been influenced by businesses/individuals....thats politics.
    Oh, I agree. I'm just pointing out a few to get their names out there.

  21. #21
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by okboomer View Post
    No, lack of is a character flaw. They chose to behave without integrity.

    As for identifying, that is why what they say and what they do are so important ... for example, Justice Kagan ... now that is a study in lack of integrity ... she asserted in her confirmation hearing that 2A/Heller was settled law, then we see her dissent in the second go-round on Heller/DC. Brilliant lack of integrity! (/sarcasm)
    So, Integrity is innate in us? We are not socialized with Integrity? One chooses to behave without Integrity? Please, help me out here, from what I understood Integrity or the lack thereof had something to do with character.

    With regard to her stating that Heller was settled Law - Law is settled ONLY as it is settled. I know, it isn't fair, welcome! Who knows, what she might have been stating when she did state that Heller was settled is that what is fundamentally settled about Law is that the settlement is only settled until there is some other settled (established) Finding of the Law; this may be a bit much for some people to handle.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,011
    Members of the Senate and Congress should have to provide for their own health insurance too! I bet we would have single payer real quick. Supreme Court justices that have clear conflict of intrests on cases they are trying should have the integrity to recuse themselves (Thomas).

  23. #23
    Regular Member okboomer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma, USA
    Posts
    1,164
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    So, Integrity is innate in us?
    I did NOT say that. Integrity, like honesty, truthfulness, kindness, etc. are learned from either the home or others.

    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    We are not socialized with Integrity? One chooses to behave without Integrity? Please, help me out here, from what I understood Integrity or the lack thereof had something to do with character.
    Are you really that much of an anarchist? If you don't have integrity, then you cannot behave in a consistent manner ... no one will be able to depend upon you. Of course that is a generic "you" ... when I see your posts I can just about bet that I will not agree with what you say, but you have an integrity that you are true to ... albeit one that I consider to be an anarchist point of view, but consistent.

    Those without integrity will say/do one thing one time, then in a similar situation will do something so different that folks wonder just what happened ... did podpeople take over or what?

    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    With regard to her stating that Heller was settled Law - Law is settled ONLY as it is settled. I know, it isn't fair, welcome! Who knows, what she might have been stating when she did state that Heller was settled is that what is fundamentally settled about Law is that the settlement is only settled until there is some other settled (established) Finding of the Law; this may be a bit much for some people to handle.
    I cannot debate you when you constantly and intentionally twist the meaning of things. If you really want to know, look these things up for yourself as they were hotly debated on OCDO at the time. But, here is the reader's digest version:

    When Kagan said that Heller was settled law, that was in response to a line of questioning during her confirmation hearings about her views on the 2A and whether she would support it or not. So, in her confirmation hearing, against her previously published paper indicating that she was opposed to an individual RKBA, she said that the Heller decision reaffirming an individual RKBA was "settled 2A law" indicating that she would then support the individual 2A RKBA ... but when the second case came up, there she was, arguing against Heller and the individual 2A RKBA. Lack of integrity both at her confirmation hearing and the subsequent case where she reverted to her previous published stance of the 2A being a "collective" right and not an individual right.

    IMHO, she lied. And she did it to get a position on our nation's highest court - again, an example of her lack of integrity! And this is someone who will help to determine how our laws are applied.
    cheers - okboomer
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Lead, follow, or get out of the way

    Exercising my 2A Rights does NOT make me a CRIMINAL! Infringing on the exercise of those rights makes YOU one!

  24. #24
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by okboomer View Post
    I did NOT say that. Integrity, like honesty, truthfulness, kindness, etc. are learned from either the home or others.



    Are you really that much of an anarchist? If you don't have integrity, then you cannot behave in a consistent manner ... no one will be able to depend upon you. Of course that is a generic "you" ... when I see your posts I can just about bet that I will not agree with what you say, but you have an integrity that you are true to ... albeit one that I consider to be an anarchist point of view, but consistent.

    Those without integrity will say/do one thing one time, then in a similar situation will do something so different that folks wonder just what happened ... did podpeople take over or what?



    I cannot debate you when you constantly and intentionally twist the meaning of things. If you really want to know, look these things up for yourself as they were hotly debated on OCDO at the time. But, here is the reader's digest version:

    When Kagan said that Heller was settled law, that was in response to a line of questioning during her confirmation hearings about her views on the 2A and whether she would support it or not. So, in her confirmation hearing, against her previously published paper indicating that she was opposed to an individual RKBA, she said that the Heller decision reaffirming an individual RKBA was "settled 2A law" indicating that she would then support the individual 2A RKBA ... but when the second case came up, there she was, arguing against Heller and the individual 2A RKBA. Lack of integrity both at her confirmation hearing and the subsequent case where she reverted to her previous published stance of the 2A being a "collective" right and not an individual right.

    IMHO, she lied. And she did it to get a position on our nation's highest court - again, an example of her lack of integrity! And this is someone who will help to determine how our laws are applied.
    I would like to read the text of her response during the hearing to post her to the Bench. Also, I would prefer to look over both cases, and identify if both cases were similar enough that they would warrant the same type of application (this line is going to get me in trouble, I can already read the responses LOL).

    Yes, in your opinion she lied...and she may very well have lied. I do not know whether or not she lied, I have not researched the cases, not have I gone through the transcripts of the hearing. I will look it up, if I have time, and get back to you on my opinion. I may well end with the previous response that I had given. Who knows though, these things are always up in the air with me.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  25. #25
    Regular Member okboomer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma, USA
    Posts
    1,164
    Hmmm, maybe you might not have seen the evidence that I did as it was through Glen Beck's show on FoxNews ... IIRC, you don't watch FoxNews?

    Just to get you started: google search

    I would also suggest that you will find more specific cites to her statements in the NRA and NRA-ILA archives.
    cheers - okboomer
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Lead, follow, or get out of the way

    Exercising my 2A Rights does NOT make me a CRIMINAL! Infringing on the exercise of those rights makes YOU one!

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •