Tennessean focuses on Judicial Selection

The Tennessean editorial page on Sunday was devoted to the issue of judicial selection. If you're interested, you can read all three op/eds. Suffice it to say, whatever the purported advantages of appointment/retention of judges, opponents of electing judges need to change the Constitution rather than skirting it.

Judge-selection system in state instills trust

Skirting constitution is an abuse of power

Electing judges will only create problems

Increased respect for Jon Stewart

I have criticized Jon Stewart in the past (just search "Jon Stewart" on the blog to see) and I have always respected him as being intelligent and clever, but I have an increased respect for him in challenging Rachel Maddow in this interview: Check out this great MSN video: Jon Stewart on George W. Bush

Limbaugh['s speech] in the crosshairs

For the record, I believe it is unkind to mimic a dialect in a derogatory manner, so I would not defend Rush Limbaugh's actions here (based on what I've heard that he did). On the other hand, I think these people are making idiots of themselves to criticize "making fun of any country's leader." But this attack on Limbaugh appears to reach a new level (My Way News - "Asian-American lawmakers demand Limbaugh apology"):

Yee has been joined by Asian-American state and federal lawmakers who say Limbaugh's comments are inciting hate and intolerance amid a polarized atmosphere. A number of civil rights groups, including Chinese for Affirmative Action, Japanese American Citizens League and the California National Organization for Women, have joined Yee in calling on sponsors to pull advertisements from Limbaugh's program.

Did sitting appellate judges get their supper for free?

Conservatives want judges to sing for their supper and submit to contested elections — but will that pimp out the bench? | Jeff Woods | Nashville Scene:

Calling it a threat to their independence and integrity, judges on the state's highest courts are descending into the muddy political trenches of the legislature to try to put down a conservative populist uprising.

The judges are apoplectic over the possibility of a change in state law that they say would put justice up for sale in Tennessee. It would end their comfy, hard-to-lose yes/no elections and force them to hit the hustings like common politicians to shake down fat cats, cut backroom deals, kiss babies, talk tough in TV ads and promise the moon to voters in competitive campaigns.

But having already been placed on the bench by a coalition of powerful special interests and powerful politicians, did sitting appellate judges get their supper for free?

Who says appointment with retention votes for judges is best?

Interesting analysis of the comment from Iowa Supreme Court Justice Mark Cady heralding the Iowa version of choosing judges by commission appointment and retention: ("Iowa’s Crazy Judges, Part II" - By Gary Marx - Bench Memos - National Review Online)

Hooray for "Citizens United"

T-ball nation v. Tea Party Nation

In an article about the central role of women in the Tea Party Movement (The American Spectator : "Women for Tea"):

The women interviewed in the film believe their children will be the losers as government pushes a “dependency” agenda and the country loses its competitive edge. “The current administration is promoting T-ball nation,” says Doreen Borelli. “With T-ball, you hit the ball, everyone gets on base, everyone supposedly wins and everyone goes for ice cream after the game. But life isn’t like that.

Steve Cohen bungles smear attempt

Interesting back history on the concept of "the Big Lie," which demonstrates that Jewish and Democratic Congressman Steve Cohen was rather careless (not to mention clueless) in pulling the Holocaust card. (The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : The "Big Lie"):

So no, Rep. Cohen didn't call Republicans Nazis, he just smeared them in terms that the Nazis pioneered. I'm sure his bubbe would be proud.

Aside: I don't know about you, but I love me some yiddish.

Look out: Philly abortionist has been "targeted" . . .

Very disturbing story (which plainly raises questions of how the abortion industry exploits (here) the poor and racial minorities), but Democrats will surely seize on this last sentence from the article ("Abortion Dr. Kermit Gosnell Arrested" -- myfoxphilly.com):

He has also been targeted in multiple lawsuits, at least one charging that a woman died from a botched abortion.

More on Obama's Tucson speech

Though many pundits applauded President Obama's Tucson speech for flatly stating that political rhetoric did not cause the shooting, Byron York observes that Obama was merely playing "good cop" to the four days of "bad cop" from the rest of his party ("Rethinking Obama's political performance in Tucson" | Byron York | Politics | Washington Examiner):

But how could he have said otherwise? By the time Obama spoke, there was irrefutable evidence that shooting suspect Jared Loughner was deeply mentally ill and acted out of no recognizable political agenda. Obama simply could not have made the case that Loughner's acts were in any way the product of political rhetoric from right or left.

He didn't need to. The point Obama wanted to make was not that political rhetoric caused the violence but that such rhetoric -- like, for example, criticism directed at Barack Obama -- should be toned down. So even as he conceded that rhetoric did not cause the violence, Obama argued that it should be muted anyway. And he cloaked his appeal in so much emotionalism, in so many tear-jerking references to the recently departed, that some in his audience might not have noticed he was making the political point he wanted to make all along.

As Ann Coulter wrote,

It's not that both sides did something wrong; neither side did anything wrong. The drama queens need to settle down.

Behind the NYT's Smug Grin

The New York Times as a very interesting and detailed report about the AZ shooting ("Behind Jared Loughner’s Mug-Shot Grin" - NYTimes.com), but having read a variety of other stories about the shooter's ideologies, it is difficult to miss the writer's attempts to tie the shooter to conservatism:

He became an echo chamber for stray ideas, amplifying, for example, certain grandiose tenets of a number of extremist right-wing groups — including the need for a new money system and the government’s mind-manipulation of the masses through language.

And this,

A few days later, during a meeting with a school administrator, Mr. Loughner said that he had paid for his courses illegally because, “I did not pay with gold and silver” — a standard position among right-wing extremist groups.

It is pretty noteworthy, as reflected in the link/headline chosen by The Drudge Report, that the shooter was a GWB hater--"a tenet of a number of left-wing groups," you could say.

And I think the liberal media's account of another event is being obfuscated to make the shooter out to be a Pro-lifer:

In February, an administrator reported to the campus police that [the shooter] had disrupted the class with his strange reaction to the reading of another student’s poem, taking a huge leap from its context to abortion, wars and killing people. The school official described him as “creepy.” They would keep an eye on him.

Sorry, but the girl's poem was about an abortion, and it is not a big leap from abortion to "killing people" . . . unless you are a hard-core liberal. What lousy "journalists" . . .

Take time to watch MLK's "I Have a Dream" Speech

Judges: Politics for me but not for thee

It's no shock that appellate and supreme court judges in Tennessee are political, but it is shocking to hear them claim that they oppose elections "because politics and money corrupt the judiciary" and yet give heavily to candidates who will protect them from facing contested elections. Tennessee judges donate to politicians who oppose judicial elections | tennessean.com | The Tennessean:

According to Wade, Tennessee's Supreme Court justices and appellate judges uniformly oppose a switch to an electoral selection process.

"Contributing to campaigns from time to time doesn't mean that I cannot and most jurists cannot compartmentalize those issues," Wade said. "All of us have a constitutional right to support any candidate of our choice, and yet when I put on the black robe, partisan politics and friendships play no role.

. . . .

Wade was the most frequent contributor to political campaigns over the past four election cycles among judges from Tennessee's highest courts.

BTW, despite saying repeatedly that these big spending judges gave to both Democrats (who characteristically like the undemocratic and unconstitutional TN Plan) and Republicans (who more often than not oppose the TN Plan), the reporter failed to ask the obvious question (that, or failed to like the answer to said question): were the Republicans who got money from judges supporters of not electing judges?

Well, Republican Doug Overbey--the Maryville lawyer who was just about the only Republican in the Senate who fought to preserve the TN Plan (here, and here), sure doesn't count. Neither would the Republican who faced TN Plan opponent Mike Bell in the primary (story here).  Judges gave money in a primary race?  Someone who makes a campaign contribution in a primary, particularly a primary of the other political party, hardly seems like someone who "contribut[es] to campaigns from time to time."

This is great reporting from Andy Sher of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, Judges' donations draw criticism | Chattanooga Times Free Press, but I have to say that it concerned me to read this statement from the article:

All five Supreme Court justices back the Tennessee Plan for selecting and retaining judges.

Look, because of my experience over on the years on this issue, I was aware that all the Supreme Court justices liked the Tennessee Plan--which ignores the constitution's requirement of contested elections. But it is stunning to think that this is common knowledge. Especially when you consider that they would be the ones deciding on whether a given system complies with the Tennessee Constitution.

And that's the problem with a system that insulates judges from "politics" (read: accountability). The reason that a lot of money is potentially spent on judicial elections is because the persons elected in such elections have a LOT of impact on voters' lives. I guess we voters just need to just leave all this politicking to judges and unaccountable commissions . . .

Of course Naifeh supports this move

Harwell calls for streamlined process, drops 12 subcommittees | Nashville City Paper:

State House Speaker Beth Harwell abolished 12 subcommittees Thursday in her first attempt to make good on her promise to streamline the labyrinth-like legislative process.

Harwell, the Nashville Republican who was elected as the new speaker at the start of the 107th General Assembly on Tuesday, did away with all but one subcommittee for each of the House’s 13 standing committees.
. . . .
Rep. Jimmy Naifeh, D-Covington, who often used the subcommittee system to kill legislation when he was House speaker, said he supports Harwell’s restructuring.

“She’s the new speaker, and if there are changes to be made now is the time to make them,” he said. “I’m going to be open to the idea. There’s always room to change things. You don’t do something just because it’s always been done that way.”

Even though this sort of thing limits the legislative tricks available to Harwell and Republicans, it is a great means of increasing transparency and efficiency.

Say what you mean, mean what you say, do what you say you'll do.

Not exactly false equivalence

Liberal Seek Ban on Metaphors In Wake of Arizona Shooting - HUMAN EVENTS:

It's not that both sides did something wrong; neither side did anything wrong. The drama queens need to settle down.

Hateful DAILY KOS posts 48 hours before AZ shootings

IS DAILY KOS INVOLVED IN ARIZONA MURDERS? “My CongressWOMAN voted against Nancy Pelosi! And is now DEAD to me!” — eerie Daily Kos hit piece on Gabrielle Giffords just two days before assassination attempt; repeated use of word “dead” in relation to Giffords just 48 hours before she and a dozen others were fired upon. UPDATE: Daily Kos scrubs “dead to me” thread but screengrabs document everything; UPDATE: school classmates and former friends describe shooter Jared Lee Loughner as committed Leftist « HillBuzz.org: "- Sent using Google Toolbar"

Collectivism and the AZ shooting

From the Sarah Palin response (view below) (BTW, it's amazing that such a thing is necessary in this context) it resonated that Collectivism, a touchstone of the liberal/progressive movement, is manifested in their response to this and other individual acts. This is one example of the building blocks of a worldview . . . and I'd say this premise is unwittingly accepted by many who vote for Democrats or liberals.

It was cool to see that Ronald Reagan had a salient quotation on the issue. Here's what appears to be the quote from Ronald Reagan:

We must reject the idea that every time a law's broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions.

Sarah Palin: "America's Enduring Strength" from Sarah Palin on Vimeo.

Why immortalize murderers?

At the end of an article about polling(?) related to the Arizona shooting, I appreciated this side comment: ("Why Are We Polling About the Gunman’s Motivations?"):

*You’ll notice I rarely write the gunman’s name. This is deliberate. I remember the Weekly Standard writing an editorial about the Columbine killers back in the 1990s, focusing on the abominable irony that we so often remember the names of the perpetrators of mass murder but rarely recall the names of the victims. At the end, I lamented that the editorial perpetuated the killers’ fame by naming them, only to reread it and find that the writer had artfully avoided mentioning either one. News coverage requires specific names, but afterward, when we digest and analyze, it is good to forget the names of evil men who killed in order to be remembered.

Tip o' the hat to Jim Geraghty - The Campaign Spot - National Review Online.

On a slightly different note, you can see the same principle in operation during broadcasts of live events (this happened recently during a college bowl game when a person "streaked" onto the field). If idiot attention seekers disrupt an event, by averting the camera we discourage future similar acts by denying idiots the stage they are usurping. Though I typically am curious to see what is happening at the scene, I can appreciate that broadcasting companies have an interest in discouraging such conduct.

A Horrid Crime, a Dishonest Debate - Andrew C. McCarthy - National Review Online

Here's another nice op/ed rebutting the Left's efforts to blame Conservatives for the AZ shooting ("A Horrid Crime, a Dishonest Debate" - Andrew C. McCarthy - National Review Online):

If wanton violence has a cause other than mental illness, it is a culture that lionizes the savages. That culture is not the culture of the Tea Partiers so despised by the Left. Many Tea Partiers are part of what until recently was called “the Christian Right,” an amorphous group of Americans, not all of whom are actually Christians, tied together by their shared acceptance of basic Judeo-Christian principles, such as equality and the sanctity of life (even the lives of their ideological opponents). They love liberty, because in their hands it is guided by virtue. It leads to the good life and the good society, not to dissipation and anarchy. Many of them pray for President Obama despite their revulsion at most of his policies. All of them consider him their president and would rally behind him if the good of the nation demanded it. Their dissent does not diminish their patriotism.

For our opinion elites, though, they are a punch line or, when disaster strikes, a punching bag. Those elites scoff at the very idea of real, knowable virtue — unless it is rhetorically useful in showing that America has failed to measure up. They would erase any traditional understanding of virtue from public life, replacing it with their vapid “values.” Under these, the young learn, a terrorist can still be a hero if he kills for noble reasons, if it becomes fashionable to deny the humanity of those he takes as his enemies.

ESPN v. FOXSports

I complained about this several years ago (though it seemed much more recent . . . yikes), but can I say for the record, how happy I am to have had ESPN doing the BCS Bowls this year? The NFL-hosting FoxSports Network was not a good fit for the BCS broadcasts these past years.

God bless this woman . . .

Learning that some brave persons on the scene of the AZ shooting tackled and restrained the shooter, I want to give a shout out to the Ohio woman in this story: Fists swinging, Ohio woman comes to cop's rescue - CNN.com

In the Left's crosshairs

Great op/ed re. the Arizona tragedy from Ken Marrero--the Blue Collar Muse ("Only Those Engaged in Violent Imagery and Rhetoric Can Stop Doing So" | Blue Collar Muse):

In the aftermath of the Tuscon carnage; before I learned the name of any victim beyond Representative Giffords and along with hearing the name of the shooter, I also learned I was to blame.

Beyond the ignorant premise that any Tea Partier anywhere had anything to do in any way with such senseless violence lies the sad reality that the obvious has yet again escaped the political Left. While a woman struggles for her life and her husband and children suffer in unimaginable limbo, 5 other families would trade anything for even long shot odds at getting their loved one back. In response, as a friend of mine tweeted, “My Conservative friends offer prayers, my Liberal friends offer blame."

Instapundit: The Arizona Tragedy and the Politics of Blood Libel

Glenn Reynolds: The Arizona Tragedy and the Politics of Blood Libel - WSJ.com:

. . . [T}hose who purport to care about the health of our political community demonstrate precious little actual concern for America's political well-being when they seize on any pretext, however flimsy, to call their political opponents accomplices to murder.

The Donald's ego

You may have heard the recent news report that Donald Trump is considering a run for president, and my first reaction was, “maybe he has a chance, as a famous and–by some calculations, successful businessman.” So it was rather poignant to stumble upon an ESPN "30:30" special this evening that featured The Donald: Who Killed the USFL?

I guess I haven't paid enough attention to Trump all these years, but having viewed this documentary, I sure hope that Trump's candidacy doesn't get any traction.

Irony of buying favor with judges

Nice op/ed from Gail Kerr Tennessean, "Fundraising to Keep Judges from Being Bought is Ironic"):

Lawyers and former judges are raising money from big law firms to try and preserve the current method of seating Tennessee's appellate court judges.

The irony is not lost: Those very legal eagles argue that allowing judges to be popularly elected would create a system in which special interests and big powerful law firms can buy the state's judiciary.

My only quibble is with Kerr's flat assertion that, "Overall, the current system has worked beautifully to place appeals court judges who have followed the rule of law." Who says?

Cross-posted at Tennessee Judicial Reform Blog.

"Nicely" stated on problems with electing judges . . .

Aside from the fact that contested elections for all judges is required by Tennessee's constitution, it is disingenuous for politicians to claim that elections beget "bought" judges.  State Rep. Frank Nicely has it right I think (New fight brews over judge selection process in Tennessee | tennessean.com | The Tennessean):

The Tennessee Plan will expire in 2012. Emboldened by new Republican majorities after November's elections, however, opponents may press the issue sooner. Opponents say that in addition to being unconstitutional, the Tennessee Plan makes judges unaccountable to voters.

'If elections are so crooked that you cannot elect a judge … then what does that say about our form of government?' said state Rep. Frank Niceley, R-Knoxville.

Cross-posted at judicialreformcoalition.blogspot.com