Tuesday, May 24, 2005

Compromising Positions 

"COMPROMISE, n. Such an adjustment of conflicting interests as gives each adversary the satisfaction of thinking he has got what he ought not to have, and is deprived of nothing except what was justly his due." ---Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary

handchains Sorry to be away, but my real life has been interfering with blogging here and elsewhere, and will continue to do so for another week. But I wanted to get in here while I could and note that I saw the compromise deal brokered by McCain that Lambert wrote about yesterday, and I'm not so sure it's a good thing. If the nominees being given a pass by the compromise include Pryor, Brown and Owens, who are probably the most objectionable of the lot, I don't know why the Dems should bother even putting up a fuss on the rest. Here's just someof what The American Progress Report had to say about Owens last week:
"Owen has a long record of radical judicial activism and overreach. She has unfailingly voted to throw out jury verdicts against corporations and denied workers recompense for job-related injuries and unfair employment practices. Texas newspapers have flatly stated that "Owen...seems all too willing to bend the law to fit her views," is "less interested in impartially interpreting the law than in pushing an agenda" and "demonstrates a results-oriented streak that belies supporters' claims that she strictly follows the law." The San Antonio Express-News summed it up: "The senate should not block a judicial nominee simply because he or she is more conservative or more liberal than the Senate's majority party.… But concerns about Owen go to the heart of what makes a good judge."
The Report goes on to outline numerous past ethical and legal outrages committed by Owen, such as ruling for Enron against a school district right after receiving an $8600 contribution, making an unconscionable favorable ruling for Halliburton against a worker who had been framed by the company's management, dragging out a case brought against Ford by the family of a severely injured and disabled boy until the child died from lack of care, and since here election to the Texas Supremem Court in 1994, she has decided in favor of corporate interests over consumers in 197 out of 243 cases, or 81% of the time.

This is the broad even Alberto Gonzales had qualms about, until it became his job to help his boss make her sound good.

Just shoo them all in and be done with it. I don't need representation anymore than the poor schmucks in Iraq.

Difference is, I pay taxes for the privilege of this kind of anal rape.

corrente SBL - New Location
~ Since April 2010 ~

~ Since 2003 ~

The Washington Chestnut
~ current ~

Subscribe to
Posts [Atom]


copyright 2003-2010

    This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?