tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post5825471187472573477..comments2023-10-28T08:02:44.565-05:00Comments on illusory tenant: Charlie's Club For Mirthillusory tenanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08524761974822871419noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-90719891281331075582008-02-21T23:25:00.000-06:002008-02-21T23:25:00.000-06:00Disruptive ... yes, I agree they are. From a polit...Disruptive ... yes, I agree they are. From a political perspective, I'm not sure it serves the Gableman campaign well to make such a fuss over them. He never signed the pledge anyway and frankly, I don't believe that that should be held against him.<BR/><BR/>Making a huge issue out of these messages distracts from getting out whatever positive message he has -- if he has one at all.<BR/><BR/>My own "hope" for the WJCIC, I suppose, is that it might serve as an effective vehicle to educate voters on the distinction between the judiciary and the other branches of government when it comes to elections.<BR/><BR/>In that respect the judiciary is indeed separate and distinct, and there must be different rules governing political campaigning for judicial positions.<BR/><BR/>Contrary to the often deliberately facetious tone of this blog, I do have a great respect for the system, the legal profession, and especially the American constitutional scheme, which I consider a work of genius.<BR/><BR/>My own limited and largely unknown purpose has been to criticize the critiques of Butler which, with a few exceptions, have been largely fatuous, simplistic, and uninformed.<BR/><BR/>Keep reading, and thanks for your well considered and legitimate observations.illusory tenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08524761974822871419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-14725083330875699982008-02-21T16:33:00.000-06:002008-02-21T16:33:00.000-06:00But you don't see the email contents as a bit disr...But you don't see the email contents as a bit disruptive to the mission and goals of the WJCIC? <BR/><BR/>Some of us do see the committee as a "big deal." When we have elected judges, we would like them to be able to give their views without having to check with an external keeper, public or private, first. If a particular view is out of accord with the Supreme Court Rules, or indeed, if it does not resonate with the public at large, will that not be reflected by either disciplinary action by the appropriate body or the votes of the public at large? Some of us become very afraid when suddenly a candidate's speech may become subject to "reprimands" that, while not violating any established rule and carrying no official sanction, nonetheless may deprive the public of crucial information in a judicial election for the state's highest court.<BR/><BR/>In my view, almost every charge (but not all) leveled against the committee by the conservative element in the legal sphere has been vindicated by the contents of these emails. And one of those charges was that the committee has never been a good idea because there is no way to impartially arbitrate the speech of judicial candidates constitutionally.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-9823423228710306832008-02-21T13:29:00.000-06:002008-02-21T13:29:00.000-06:00Like I said, my assessment so far is that they're ...Like I said, my assessment so far is that they're entertaining. And I expect some of the commentary to be even more so. <BR/><BR/>As for inferences, there's no question they're a treasure trove of potential inferences, depending on one's perspective.<BR/><BR/>"Blatant lying," however? No, not quite. That's just over-the-top irresponsible.<BR/><BR/>I don't exactly see them as the "bombshell" others will try to make them out to be, either. I've never really seen this committee as the big deal it seems to be to them.<BR/><BR/>And, for the moment at least, the e-mail messages have nothing to do with Butler's campaign directly. So I don't think he or it has anything to worry about.illusory tenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08524761974822871419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-790317933200300902008-02-21T11:17:00.000-06:002008-02-21T11:17:00.000-06:00Forgot how others would characterize the email exc...Forgot how others would characterize the email exchanges between members of the WJCIC. What is your assessment of the content of the e-mails and the resulting inferences that can be drawn from them?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com