Of course I don't want violent demonstrations. I didn't want them when Republicans were threatening on talk radio from morning to night to march in the street and get out their shotguns, either.
I want to say when I suspect something is improper, though.
When I posted here early on that I thought the Seminole and Martin county cases were so outrageous the Demo lawyers should be ashamed to present them, nobody thought that was improper comment.
I still think that it's all about power and that everything the dems did the repubs would have done if they'd seen it to be in their best interest, and vice versa.
Some Neanderthal repubs on SI were calling the demo candidate such names as thief, Hitler and the Antichrist, and I heard no Republican demurs.
So I figure I have a right to ask a legitimate, and historically important, question about what the standards are for conflict of interest and whether my impression that, at least in the Scalia case, which seems the most startling, one judge should have, according to the guidelines, whatever they may be (I'm here asking for them! Guidelines and precedent), recused himself, or offered to, as did Judge Ito in the OJ trial.
I will be happy to hear that it is not a scandal that will discredit the Supreme Court. I think the SC is very important.
I have very little talent, btw, at instigating violent demonstrations! I stamp my foot and pout and shout rowdy encouragement to the masses out the window, but do the masses rally to my cry? No, hardly ever, how discouraging. |
