Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (6213)	12/6/2005 8:28:40 AM
From: Dale Baker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542214

My guess is that her candidacy will be so carefully calibrated to please anyone and everyone eligible to vote in the primaries, it will come across as not having much real substance at all. She lacks her husband's charisma and sheer presence on the hustings, and she is now wandering all over the political road trying to scoop everyone up before she ever really defines herself. I'm not sure there will be much "there" there once the national press really put her actions and words under the spotlight.

To: Lane3 who wrote (6213)	12/6/2005 9:19:17 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 542214

Justice Kennedy was the keynote speaker at the annual Fairfax Bar Association Jurisprudence Award dinner, which was very well attended, in part because Kennedy was speaking, and in part because the awardee was a very popular retiring judge, Rosemarie Annunziata. His theme was judicial independence, and he talked about how he meets judges, lawyers and jurists from all over the world, that envy our constitution, and our legal system. Some very heart warming anecdotes. The one I liked best was when he was attending an EU workshop for judges on jurisprudence being held at a lawschool in Poland, and the law school asked if he would speak to a class of incoming freshmen -- which, as you know, means kids fresh out of high school, since law school for them is a college curriculum. After the speech, there was a question and answer session. The first student asked him about separation of powers, that the judiciary was a check on the executive and the legislative functions, but what was the check on the judiciary? The second student asked him a question I can't recall, but just as tough. The third student asked him whether John Marshall's opinions were popular in his lifetime. Kennedy says, he asked them, what is this? These are just former high school students, they haven't even started law school yet, where are these questions coming from? But it turns out that in Poland they dreamed of having their own constitution for 30 years, so they studied ours. I have to wonder, now that I read of CIA kidnapping of the citizens of foreign nations on their own native soil, and secret gulags, whether anybody really believes in American exceptionalism anymore. I know my own faith is so shaken that I can't even call it faith anymore. I believe in the ideals but what good are ideals and principles if they are treated like trash paper to be discarded when inconvenient? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ But -- before you ask -- while I do not subscribe to Tom Delay's ideas about Congressional oversight over the judiciary, and I do not subscribe to the idea of putting judges through the meat grinder before appointing them -- I agree with the Polish student who asked, "what is the check on the judiciary?" There is none. And that loophole has been taken advantage of by people with no respect for democracy, who use it as a means of achieving their own personal agendas. I regret that Kennedy doesn't like us peasants talking about this -- and I believe that he probably realizes that judicial independence is not an unalloyed good. Power corrupts. No matter how pure you think you are. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Edit again -- the only check on the judiciary is the Constitution itself. And if you can make it into anything you want it to mean, it's no check at all.

To: Lane3 who wrote (6213)	12/6/2005 12:27:15 PM
From: Suma	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542214

I know that Hillary panders but it amazes me that she does as well as she does with all that has been hypothesized about her. EG.. She knew Bill was having an affair and did nothing. She is a lesbian...and only married Bill for power. The book that was written about her was filled with trashy innuendos and falsehoods..Trouble is no one can really prove anything and she has not sued nor done anything that I have read to contradict all the trash. Maybe it's just left undone and not draw anymore attention to the issues. I like Hillary and really don't want her to run. After what was done to Kerry by the Swiftmuds and all the nasty things that are done in politics today I would feel terrible for her. Maybe this is why we don't really get many honest politicians.. One has to have alligator skin, be ready for all kinds of dirty tricks.. Only those who don't really give a damn are willing to run. The idealists cannot be bothered.. So pandering is the least of her undesirable traits .. imo