New year, same old BS

What? An insider appointing another insider that's on their side?
No way.
/sarcasm

It does raise an interesting question, though. How do you actually find somebody/some group in the JD that you know won't be biased or influenced, when you're not technically allowed to consider a person's personal ongoings (contributions etc) when dolling out assignments?
 
RatLabGuy said:
What? An insider appointing another insider that's on their side?
No way.
/sarcasm

It does raise an interesting question, though. How do you actually find somebody/some group in the JD that you know won't be biased or influenced, when you're not technically allowed to consider a person's personal ongoings (contributions etc) when dolling out assignments?
Click to expand...

.......how convienent is that? If they really wanted to get to the bottom of this blatant abuse of power and gubmnt. ( exactly what they absolutly want NOT to happen because it would expose criminal acts by many and possibly the pres. himself ) a panel of peeps from both parties would be on this "investigation" and it would be a top priority.
 
mommucked said:
.......how convienent is that? If they really wanted to get to the bottom of this blatant abuse of power and gubmnt. ( exactly what they absolutly want NOT to happen because it would expose criminal acts by many and possibly the pres. himself ) a panel of peeps from both parties would be on this "investigation" and it would be a top priority.
Click to expand...

Agreed - but see that is where the problem lays.
It's technically against JD rules, and actually unconstitutional, to appoint a JD lawyer to a case based on their political affiliation. So how do you get a panel of "peeps from both parties"?

So that means either you have to (1) do it "blind" (yeah, right) or have folks outside the JD who "volunteer". But then how do you know THOSE folks aren't biased too? Would you trust an investigation by a private firm? Who do they get their $$ from? etc etc.
The idea is *supposed* to be that the JD is the unbiased check against the other branches. Ahem, theory, at least.
 
I wish just once, we could vote all the current incumbents out of office so that there would be all fresh faces in all layers of government. I know it's never going to happen, but wouldn't it be great if we could just start "fresh" for better or worse (I don't think it could get much worse!), with whatever parties fall where they may. I think the biggest part of the problem in government is the , "we've always done it this way" mentality of things. Breaking that cycle with a whole bunch of newbies would definitely take some doing. Just once.

I actually thought about starting a Facebook/ internet campaign something to the tune of www.ThrowAllOfThemOut.com. I don't know if it's available or not, and it probably wouldn't work, but even if it could get the attention of current officials that we are on the whole not happy with the state of government and the levels of corruption, etc. that is so rampant.
 
Back
Top