gomezcat

It isn't strictly political, but I am being anti-American, so I guess it counts. This made me laugh my very fat arse off. Only in America:

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/s...006301,00.html

__________________
The blog of our recent trip to The States (September and October 2012):


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Real World

What's anti-american about saying this guys a boob. He should get his own show though (according to his wife).



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vK43sZh_rc

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him."
Leo Tolstoy, 1897

gomezcat

Damn! I was trying to be inflammatory, but then you know that. We just saw it on the news and it was unbelievable. How DID he get to be a Judge? The guy is a clown (allegedly). In all seriousness, I think someone needs to look at his conduct as it reflects really badly on the legal profession.

__________________
The blog of our recent trip to The States (September and October 2012):


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Real World

Judges in this country are appointed to life terms. Basically, once they get the job, they own the job. I think GAJ, PAtsfan and I (maybe Pujo too) once discussed how they should be elected. I'm of the mind that they should still be appointed, but only to a term, maybe 8 or 10 years, and elected thereafter. My reasoning is that their being elected would mean that the proper due diligence would tend to be done when initially putting them into power, as most voters would be clueless as to who a guy running would be, and probably wouldn't vote for them other than for name recognition. However, after that initial term, they would have a record, and could then be held accountable by the public. Having an 8-10 year term would help ensure that said judges wouldn't have to rule according to public perception, election. IF they had 4 years, then there would be less to scrutinize,and more to exploit.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him."
Leo Tolstoy, 1897

Pujo

NO to elections of judges, YES to appointments for a term (10 years would be good), with no reappointment allowed.

Not all judges are appointed for life as it is, though. Federal judges are, but this whack was NY state judge. I don't know how they do it in NY.

Real World

Why not an election of jugdes after their 10 year term? Also, why prohibit a judge from serving longer than 10 years if said person proves to be a worthy individual?

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him."
Leo Tolstoy, 1897

PressCoverage

yeah, there's been a lot of blubbering by councel in high-profile courtrooms lately... Scooter Libby's lead attorney wailed during his closing arguments this week... what an embarrassment...

concerning this judge, i was digusted to see this ridiculous trial on every channel yesterday when looking for real news on the Libby trial or the IAEA's latest refutiation of claims against Iranian nuke "plans"... but i must note that this guy was so pretentious and bombastic in the five minutes i was able to stomache, that it seemed like he was drunk... i had to turn it off long before he reportedly blubbered, which really doesn't surprise me...

Pujo

Because I don't think judges should answer to public opinion. The public is emotional and wants the results they want, without consideration of the law. Judges have to make rulings according to the law. Every time a judge makes a controvertial ruling, no matter how legally sound it is, they'd be putting their job on the line.

As for why a judge shouldn't be reappointed... it's much for the same reason. Once somebody's been in the position and made judicial decisions, I don't like the idea of them having to go through a process where their decisions are politically judged. I feel a lot less strongly about that than I do about the election of judges, though.

Seymour93

Everyone in America, barring Mrs. Seidlin, is making fun of this clown. Besides crying in court, he also called the attorneys by where they're from. Like, "Texas, you're on the stand," or "I need your papers California." Also he would go on about his personal life, such as his time as a cab driver and where he went to vacation with his family. Clearly he loved the spotlight.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

sdaniels7114

I don't know if judges should be elected, appointed, or picked by those clowns on American Idol. I just know that guy shouldn't be one.