Where Do Judges Come From?

To me the most important protection of our democracy
should be the insulation of our judicial system from corrupt
influences. If justice comes down to who has the most money,
society as we know it would disintegrate. For a society to
survive the people within it must, after all, believe in their elite.
And they must have trust in the fairness of their judicial
systems. The only other way to hold society together is
with a large internal "security" force.

In a national bestseller, "Personal Injuries", Scott Turow
vividly describes what can go wrong when "The Judge" is on
the take. The story involves favorable rulings in personal
injury cases where insurance companies are on the hook
for huge settlements. Common wisdom holds that insurance
companies use the pretext of those monstrous settlements
to charge their customers outrageous fees for what are in
actuality rare cases. The lawyers get rich, the judges
(in these cases) get a nice bonus of some sort and the
insurance companies get to raise their rates. The plaintiffs
get hugely rewarded for their pain and suffering and as a final
tribute to a system gone horribly wrong, the evildoer is severely
punished. Everyone involved is the winner, the insurance company
pays off, and if there is a loser in there somewhere, no one cares.

WE, the majority of people in USA, have a firm belief in our
democracy (with a few detractors), and a strong backbone
of religious and moral convictions. And WE overwhelmingly
support our judicial system. I believe as a society WE feel shame
when the bad guy goes free (take OJ for example) or when the
good guy gets wrongly convicted (take the hundreds of inmates
recently freed from years of confinement by new DNA evidence).

So what in the world are WE thinking when WE allow the most
politically motivated, and by extension the most heavily influenced,
people in our society to --APPOINT-- the judges who sit on the
highest benches in the land. Every honest person needs to believe
that the person presiding over a court of law, and possibly
sitting in judgment of him, will be impartial, which is inherently
an oxymoronic concept under these circumstances. Shouldn't
WE the people be voting on these guys?

Teflon Ron

Incredible as it may seem, it appears the Illinois governor might be found innocent in a court of law for attempting to sell Obama's vacated senate seat and expect (extort) numerous other favors for family and friends.

I think in the court of public opinion, however, he is as guilty as they come. But if they brought the case too soon there is every possibility that, because he hadn't overtly (yet) committed any crime, he may not be found guilty of anything.

IMO whether or not he gets convicted he should not be permitted to appoint the next senator.

That PRIVILEDGE, the power to change political history for better or worse, for
both Illinois and the Nation, should go to an honest man.

One thing is clear; Blagojevich’s pick will be bought and paid for.

Feels good to be a cat.

We love them for their fur.... and their purr.

Think about it.

There is something incredibly tactile about a purr rumbling through thick fur. If you are lucky enough to be close enough, you can get a therapeutic benefit akin to a heat pad and a vibrator combined.

And then, there is their fur.

To run your fingers through the silky fur of a long-haired cat is like sliding velvet covered fingers on glass. The feeling is hard to describe, but so comforting it almost seems illegal.

And then, cats are so clean. Check out their tongues. The perfect scrubbing tool. The first company to replicate the scrubbing/cleansing action of a cat's tongue wins my housekeeping seal of approval.

Sure, they are imperious. You're darned right they have their own agenda. On occasion, they defer to their "master" and allow a few behind the ear or belly scratches. Consider yourself lucky are if you are deemed acceptable to a award
these perks.

Feels good to be a cat. They are so cool.

So be cool.

Purr.

Be like a kitten.

You'll get all the attention you want -- probably way more than you are looking for.

Banking Morals

mIn old world banking circles personal conduct was regulated by a moral code whereby honor and self-interest were joined at the hip. To put client capital at risk was a cardinal sin punishable by dishonor and disgrace and therefore unthinkable.

That was a century ago. Where Wall Street erred in judgment was when the giants hired physicists and mathematicians to construct financial instruments. These new guys were not steeped in the 100's year old "Bankers Codes of Conduct", nor was their family honor at stake. The financial instruments they designed were so complicated analysts were unable to evaluate them properly or assess their risk. Or, possibly, they didn‘t care

But when people are making money, and bankers are no exception, they don’t ask why. They just smile and bank the checks. Effectively the morals clause implicit in traditional banking constructs no longer applied to these side bets. Since the banks, their shareholders, traders and brokerage houses were all making “bank” everybody was winning and the future was blindingly bright. That was only 2 years ago.

So we have all learned a valuable lesson again (for the third time). The notion that anything to do with money, actually gigantic money, could be self-regulating and the people involved trusted to do the “right thing” is a concept which has outlived its usefulness. Money corrupts — big Money corrupts completely. And forgetting the lessons of the past is suicidal.