Republican Justice: blindness to conflicts of interest

The United States Supreme Court was barely able to hold that it's wrong to spend $3,000,000 electing a judge and than be able to have your newly purchased judge decide a big case in your favor. Decided June 8, 2009, Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Company Inc. was a 5-4 decision, with dissents by John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. The defendant in the West Virginia case was a coal company that had been accused of fraud, and the jury had awarded $50 M in damages against defendant. It was A.T. Massey's Chairman and Chief Officer Don Blankenship who stepped in to buy the judgship for Brent Benjamin for $3 M after the verdict, knowing that this case would be considered by the West Virginia Supreme Court. Chief Justice John Roberts frets that he can't criticize this obviously wrong case of a $3,000,000 judge because there are less obvious cases that would be more difficult to decide. Think about it: Roberts is urging that the Court can't decide the easy cases because there are also some other cases that aren't so easy. Why not just hang up your robes and give it up? Tell me a situation where that isn't true. Roberts goes even further, suggesting that hammering the $3,000,000 judge will undermine our fair, independent, and impartial judiciary. Good grief. Scalia had previously shown that he is completely obtuse to the idea of a conflict of interest when he decided a case favoring his duck-hunting buddy, Dick Cheney.

Continue ReadingRepublican Justice: blindness to conflicts of interest

Add your voice: Keep the Internet open and free.

The context for this post is provided by Michael Lynton, CEO of Sony Pictures, who recently stated:

I'm a guy who sees nothing good having come from the Internet. Period."

Now, in light of that bizarre, politically motivated statement, what's going on at the FCC? FreePress advises:

At this very minute, the Federal Communications Commission is crafting America's first national broadband plan. Whether the plan will give more control over our Internet to the likes of Sony Pictures, Comcast, AT&T, Time Warner Cable and Verizon depends on what we do right now.

These companies' well-heeled lobbyists are flooding the FCC's public docket with comments in support of policies that let them:

  • Tilt the Web’s level playing field to favor the Web sites of corporate partners;
  • Deploy content-sniffing devices that would randomly open and sift through our private Web communications;
  • Impose usage penalties on people who use the Web for more than simple e-mail and Web surfing;
  • Block innovative Web services that compete against their phone, cable and entertainment products; and
  • Disconnect users for any reason or without justification
What can you do to keep things on track at the FCC? Write a comment to the FCC. It will only take a minute. Let your voice counter-balance the monied corporate interests that are trying to grab hold of the Internet for the sole purpose of squeezing out profits, just as they grabbed hold of all other electronic media during prior decades. Note that we now have a president who is committed to keeping the Internet open and free:

Continue ReadingAdd your voice: Keep the Internet open and free.

Frank Schaeffer lays, and takes, the blame for murder –

I found this an interesting response to George Tiller's murder. Frank Schaeffer, a reformed evangelical, argues that the hate speech continually spewed by the religious right regarding abortion set the stage for George Tiller's murder, and other abortionists before him. He still expresses disgust at late-term abortion, and while I am more likely to agree with that, I do believe there are situations in which that choice is the only one that makes sense. Painful, horribly so, but sometimes the only choice is.

Continue ReadingFrank Schaeffer lays, and takes, the blame for murder –