Australian news can only really be described as 'tabloid' at best. The most exciting thing about it is the occasional golden opportunity to ridicule our fellow neighbours, and this video is no exception.
Citizens! Get Wiki! Help Rewrite The Privacy Act of 1974
Interested in protecting your online privacy?
It's time to get wiki with The Center for Democracy and Technology and help effect federal privacy policy for the next 35 years.
CDT unveiled an in-depth proposal to update the federal Privacy Act and related federal privacy policy to address the challenges of the digital age. The announcement coincided with the release of the federal Information Security and Privacy Advisory Board’s own report recommending changes to government privacy rules.Consider contributing your edits to the E-Privacy Act Amendments Wiki.
CDT is also encouraging the public’s participation in helping craft privacy legislation via an interactive "wiki." The “wiki” allows anyone to read any part of the bill, change the language, provide feedback or simply open a discussion on any provision of the bill. CDT will edit and moderate this open process and, if appropriate, incorporate suggestions in the final bill it submits to Congress.
specifically Title II, Amendments to the Privacy Act of 1974.
Regarding commercial use of online private information:
Commercial information can and should play a key role in important government functions, including law enforcement and national security investigations. However, agencies relying on that data should have clear guidelines for its use ensure the information is reliable for the government purpose for which it is proposed to be used.
Considering the harms that can occur when the government makes decisions about individuals based on inaccurate or irrelevant data, it is imperative that the federal government develop better and more consistent rules for use of commercial data, regardless of whether the data is stored on government computers or stored on commercial systems.
Click open the embedded links to read the National Institute of Standards and Technology's Information Security and Privacy Advisory Board report entitled Toward A 21st Century Framework for Federal Government Privacy Policy and the June 2008 GAO report issued last year entitled Privacy: Congress Should Consider Alternatives for Strengthening Protection of Personally Identifiable Information.
The Privacy Act has not been rewritten since 1974.
Read more about that oversight has effected your personal privacy here.
In case you missed it, Ramsey no longer updates this blog.
Well, I think that just about says it all.Thanks Ransey, for the fantastic Blog with a MASSIVE archive of stuff that I KNOW no one could have read all of.
Oh, and BTW 'Anonymous', we never expected any slack. We just thought that this dead blog may be able to use an update once in a while to keep the archives browsers amused. If you don't appreciate it, fair enuff, but being a prick about it isn't necessary.
Thanks Ramsey, for everything. You are a blogging legend.
Sonia
For those of us impacted by those who impact our Constitution, we watch and wait for the confirmation of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the SCOTUS.
The nomination is a day late and a dollar short for those without power. The high court, in a 5-4 ruling, overturned the 1986 Michigan v. Jackson ruling, which said police may not initiate questioning of a defendant who has a lawyer or has asked for one unless the attorney is present.
The court's conservatives overturned that opinion Tuesday, with Justice Antonin Scalia saying "it was poorly reasoned, has created no significant reliance interests and (as we have described) is ultimately unworkable."
Scalia, who read the opinion from the bench, said their decision will have a "minimal" effects on criminal defendants. "Because of the protections created by this court in Miranda and related cases, there is little if any chance that a defendant will be badgered into waiving his right to have counsel present during interrogation," Scalia said.
The Michigan v. Jackson opinion was written by Justice John Paul Stevens, the only current justice who was on the court at the time. He dissented from the ruling, and in an unusual move read his dissent aloud from the bench. It was the first time this term a justice had read a dissent aloud.
"The police interrogation in this case clearly violated petitioner's Sixth Amendment right to counsel," Stevens said. Overruling the Jackson case, he said, "can only diminish the public's confidence in the reliability and fairness of our system of justice."
The damage to be undone is simply overwhelming.
***
Excerpt
‘A Latina Judge’s Voice’
‘A Latina Judge’s Voice’
"...to understand takes time and effort, something that not all people are willing to give. For others, their experiences limit their ability to understand the experiences of others. Other simply do not care. Hence, one must accept the proposition that a difference there will be by the presence of women and people of color on the bench. Personal experiences affect the facts that judges choose to see. My hope is that I will take the good from my experiences and extrapolate them further into areas with which I am unfamiliar. I simply do not know exactly what that difference will be in my judging. But I accept there will be some based on my gender and my Latina heritage..."
--Judge Sonia Sotomayor, 2001
Judge Mario G. Olmos Memorial Lecture, University of California, Berkeley, School of Law
Read the speech in its entirety here.
Judge Mario G. Olmos Memorial Lecture, University of California, Berkeley, School of Law
Read the speech in its entirety here.
Somebody's Darling
Into the ward of the clean white-washed halls,
Where the dead slept and the dying lay;
Wounded by bayonets, sabres and balls,
Somebody's darling was borne one day.
Somebody's darling, so young and so brave,
Wearing still on his sweet yet pale face,
Soon to be hid in the dust of the grave,
The lingering light of his boyhood's grace.
Somebody's darling, somebody's pride,
Who'll tell his mother where her boy died?
Matted and damp are his tresses of gold,
Kissing the snow of that fair young brow;
Pale are the lips of most delicate mould,
Somebody's darling is dying now.
Back from his beautiful purple-veined brow,
Brush off the wandering waves of gold;
Cross his white hands on his broad bosom now,
Somebody's darling is still and cold.
Give him a kiss, but for somebody's sake,
Murmur a prayer for him, soft and low,
One little curl from his golden mates take,
Somebody's they were once, you know;
Somebody's warm hand has oft rested there,
Was it a Mother's so soft and white?
Or have the lips of a sister, so fair,
Ever been bathed in their waves of light?
Somebody's darling, somebody's pride,
Who'll tell his mother where her boy died?
Somebody's watching and waiting for him,
Yearning to hold him again to her breast;
Yet there he lies with his blue eyes so dim,
And purple, child-like lips half apart.
Tenderly bury the fair, unknown dead,
Pausing to drop on his grave a tear;
Carve on the wooden slab over his head,
"Somebody's darling is slumbering here."
Somebody's darling, somebody's pride,
Who'll tell his mother where her boy died?
--Marie Ravenal de la Coste
Nancy Grace a Joke?
Ah, where would we be without “I'm not pretending to be anything but a crime victim who went to law school and tried a lot of cases” Nancy Grace?
Likely without a huge source of humor just a keystroke away.
Quoting Charlotte's Creative Loafing, NG recently found herself on the receiving end of a "satisfying smackdown"...
"...when guest McGraw Milhaven, a St. Louis radio journalist, told her, “This show is a joke, you are a joke … You’re missing the whole point. I’m embarrassed to be on this show.” To which Grace, in her usual graceless way, replied, “Well, sir, you’re off. Cut his mic!” and cut off Milhaven’s microphone."
Join the Nancy Grace conversation in progress here.
Hate Crime in New Hampshire
Is this a hate crime?
Eleven businesses in Portsmouth (N.H.) were hit with graffiti over the weekend that seems to be targeting a sex offender living in the area.
The graffiti was sprayed on businesses on Islington Street, a main route through town. In black spray paint was written, "Get out of Portsmouth, Charly Paul," along with other variations on the same message.
Charles Paul is a registered sex offender who lives in the neighborhood. He was convicted in 1985 of sexually assaulting a girl in North Hampton, N.H.Police wouldn't comment on Paul but said they are investigating who is behind the graffiti.
"It's quite a bit. It's quite a bit for this area," said Sgt. Chris Cummings. "It does happen on occasion, but for 11 businesses to be hit in such a short amount of time, it is quite a bit of damage to these establishments."Workers cleaning up the graffiti at Celebrity Sandwich noticed the message first thing on Saturday.
"(It's) kind of embarrassing to see something like that on your building. So, we tried to get it off there as quick as possible," said Rich Fairway, of Celebrity Sandwich. "It's a busy little street, and I'd hate to see people drive by and have people think about Charly Paul and not the businesses."
Police said they don't know if one or more people are responsible.
Here's the kicker.
WMUR News 9 tried to contact Paul at his address listed in the registry but was unable to reach him.
A Fresh Coat of Democrat
If ever the political stars were lining up for Florida Democrats, the time is now.
By announcing his candidacy for the U.S. Senate, Governor Charlie Crist may have sparked the possible implosion of the Republican-majority grip on the Sunshine State.
Chief Financial Officer Alex Sink--the lone Democrat serving as a Crist Cabinet member--announced her intent to run for Governor. Perennial Republican politician, Bill McCollum, who presently serves as Attorney General, threw his hat in the race just this past week, although Agricultural Commissioner Charlie Bronson is considering whether to compete with his GOPPER brethren. With all the negative publicity swirling about the Attorney General these past few months, the last thing Bill needs is a good old boy like Bronson (a fifth generation Floridian) facing him off in a Republican primary.
Speaking of which, let me remind you a bit of how Bill McCollum's backward thinking.
McCollum is an old school lock 'em up type, the sort responsible for Florida's number one resource: prisons.
Reference back to an April 2007 Smashed Frog post, No Longer Civilly Stripped:
...the Florida Cabinet--sitting as the Board of Executive Clemency--restored civil rights, including voting rights to non-violent felons who have served their sentences.
The only dissenting vote was cast by-and so aptly described by the Frog's buddy Blast Off-as"that notorious fascistFlorida's ultra-wingnut attorney general, Bill McCollum."
"I believe in appropriate punishment. I'm Chain Gang Charlie," said Crist, as McCollum shook his head. "I believe in justice. But punishment should never be confused with revenge. We should be able to find it in our hearts to forgive. Our Creator does."
(...)
Those soon-to-be-the-former civilly stripped will find themselves with a voice and the vote. With that power in hand, legislators will have to face a very important and very personally effected-new voting block in a State with a nasty little habit of criminalizing and 'felonizing' under the CYA policy known as zero tolerance.
And AG Bill McCollum knows it....involved voters vote. No one is more involved than someone whose rights have been directly impacted by the state or federal government.
The Powerless have become the Powerful....and they usually vote Democrat.
Howard Dean used to talk a lot about taking our country back.
It's time Floridians took our state back. We've started the restoration by painting Florida blue through the election of President Obama. It's now time to give the Governor's mansion (and the resulting open seats) a fresh coat of Democrat.
My hopes are that Bill McCollum--who represents everything gone wrong with Paradise since the Rethugs took over the state--is rejected and ejected by his own party through the primary process.
Let's get busy. It's our time.
Legally Speaking
I caught a broadcast of Legally Speaking over the weekend, a refreshing respite from the usual Right slam aka Talk Radio via WMMB 1240 AM.
Eighteenth Circuit Court Judge Robert Burger sat subject to interview, completing the blanks for those who phoned in questions regarding the legal system.
As most are engaged in activities other than sitting around listening to the radio old school style on a Sunday afternoon, needless to say, much filler was needed to fill the hour. On Air talk turned to the inner workings of the court system as well as to those who cannot afford legal representation upon arrest.
The attorney-radio host asked the judge to guesstimate how many cases came before him that required the services of a public defender.
Eighty per cent. 8-0.
With all those cases on the backs of the public defender's office, what type of quality effective legal representation can truly be provided a citizen client?
***
As stated by The Sentencing Project, 1 of every 131 Americans is incarcerated in prison or jail.
FDLE Email Snafu (Gesundheit).
Call it public notification in reverse.
As reported by the Miami Herald, the FDLE "...sent out 11,000 e-mails beginning Saturday afternoon notifying Floridians that individuals on the sex offender registry had been removed from the list. Some of the notifications went to victims of sexual assault who follow their assailants through the registry."
(If it were only that simple).
One such recipient just happened to be Lauren Book, daughter of Ron Book, guilt-ridden father, Florida bajillion dollar lobbyist and Sex Offender Residency Restriction Advocate Extraordinaire. The other half of the Book ends "...operates an educational foundation, Lauren's Kids, that offers seminars and workshops that encourage children to immediately report sexual abuse to their parents or authorities...", which I'm certain is all on the 501 (c) 3 up and up, especially with Daddy sitting on the board as President.
Anywho, Lauren--a survivor of childhood abuse--chose not to point fingers at the FDLE and the unfortunate computer mishap. ''I just wish they had put something out sooner, so that other people didn't worry, or weren't so afraid,'' Book said. ``The not knowing is scary, especially if you are not in counseling.''
Darn technology.
Interesting comment left by a Herald reader who doesn't seem to feel the residency restriction love to the intensity shared by the Book family:
Thanks to the residency restrictions in Miami Dade County advocated by Lauren Book and her father,those sex ofenders who have been released from parole or probation and are not required to live "UNDER THE BRIDGE" have now registered as "Transient" or provide the address of some homeless shelter. They have become nomads van or car dwellers,perhaps parked right down the street from from you. Thanks in part to Ms Book and her fathers interferrence (sic) with the States regulatory scheme sex offenders are still here in our neigborhoods all day everyday. Only differecne (sic) is now we do not know who they are or where they are. So thank you Mr Book. Thank You very much.
So Much for HIPA
We've all pretty much agreed that our lives are no longer private. Supreme Court Justice Scalia recently offered his personal opinion that privacy is not a right under the Constitution.
So, it must be true because our lives (some of us more than others) are impacted every single day.
Celebrities have known such well, since becoming celebrities, where one snapshot can add $10,000 plus dollars to the 10,000 words a compromising photograph can fetch.
Or information wished to be kept private.
Farrah Fawcett suspected the leaking of her medical information to the press. Along with her physician, she set up her own unique sting.
As reported by the LA Times:
As time went on and more stories appeared, Fawcett said she grew convinced that information about her medical condition was being leaked by someone at UCLA. Whenever she sought treatment there, word always got out. Even when the tabloid reports were false, she said, they were based on a morsel of truth.
When she went in for an eye exam, for instance, "they had to say I was going blind." When she had a pap smear, "they had to say that the cancer had spread; I was having a hysterectomy.
"I actually kept saying for months and months and months, 'This is coming from [UCLA]," Fawcett said. "I was never more sure of anything in my life."
Fawcett said she realized that she needed to prove her theory. So when she found out that her cancer had returned in May 2007, she deliberately withheld the news from nearly all of her relatives and friends.
"I set it up with the doctor," she said. "I said, 'OK, you know and I know.' . . . I knew that if it came out, it was coming from UCLA."
Within days of her diagnosis, the news was in the Enquirer. "I couldn't believe how fast it came out," Fawcett said. "Maybe four days."
UCLA began an investigation and quickly found that one employee had accessed her records more often than her own doctors. Fawcett said she asked for the employee's name, but the senior UCLA official in charge of patient privacy refused, saying, "We have a responsibility to protect our employees."
"And I said, 'More than your patients?' . . ." Fawcett recalled.
(...)
After months of requests, UCLA ultimately provided Fawcett's lawyers with the name of the administrative specialist who had gone through her records. In July 2007, as the hospital moved to fire the worker, Lawanda Jackson, she quit. Federal prosecutors tracked the leaks to Jackson as well.
Jackson pleaded guilty in December to a felony charge of violating federal medical privacy laws for commercial purposes but died in March of cancer before she could be sentenced. Prosecutors alleged that beginning in 2006, the Enquirer gave her checks totaling at least $4,600 in her husband's name.
Fawcett said she decided to speak up about the ordeal because she wants to see the Enquirer charged criminally for inducing UCLA workers to invade her records. "They obviously know it's like buying stolen goods," she said. "They've committed a crime. They've paid her money."
The U.S. Attorney's Office said its investigation was ongoing.
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger recently "...signed into law tougher penalties for institutions and individuals that violate patients' privacy."
Farrah's Story--a documentary detailing her fight against cancer and her fight for privacy--is scheduled to air this Friday, May 15 on NBC. Her health condition has deterioriated since the August interviews/
"I'm a private person," she said in the interview. "I'm shy about people knowing things. And I'm really shy about my medical [care]. It would be good if I could just go and heal and then when I decided to go out, it would be OK.
"It seems that there are areas that should be off-limits."
Is that so much to ask?
(Our thoughts are with Farrah and her family during this time. And thank you for your part in the fight for common decency....)
Candygram
Two words of advice to the Melbourne SWAT team.
Google. Maps.
Andre Moody was resting in his apartment when he heard the back door crash in, then a loud explosion.Within moments, the disabled 57-year-old Army veteran said he was pinned to the floor, a black boot pressed against his back as uniformed men with weapons shouted, "Get down, get down!"
"I was petrified, scared," Moody said Wednesday as he stood in the doorway of his small Kenwood Apartment residence in the 800 block of University Boulevard. "But the police came in here, and they had the wrong apartment."
News of the botched daytime raid by the Melbourne Police Department's SWAT team prompted Chief Don Carey to order an internal review of the April 29 operation that targeted the wrong apartment with a search warrant.
"We went into the wrong location. The target was right next door, and neither was marked," Carey said Wednesday.
Carey praised the department's tactical team. The team trains to capture or subdue potentially armed suspects.
"I looked at the briefing material, and everything was done well, but I want us to step back and interview witnesses, retrace our steps and fix any problems. We want to figure out what went wrong," Carey said.
"They're well-trained, professional and dedicated," he said of the SWAT team.
Moody said his elbow was broken during the raid. Police said Moody refused medical treatment on the night of the raid and that they were not informed of his subsequent injury claim.
"I'm still in pain, but I understand that the police were just doing their job," he said. "They had a lieutenant call and apologize."
The raid was one of dozens of paramilitary-style tactical operations typically carried out by Brevard County law enforcement agencies each year. But civil libertarians often cite reports of rough treatment, even as officers say they must protect themselves from dangerous suspects.
Last year, there were at least 10 cases nationwide in which police accidentally targeted the wrong location, according to a study by the Cato Institute, a think tank in Washington, D.C. Melbourne officials said the incident was their first case in which SWAT team members raided the wrong residence.
In Moody's case, SWAT team members quickly determined that they had the wrong apartment and went next door.
(...)
Moody, who has a plate in his head because of a 2005 brain injury, said he is seeing VA doctors for his broken elbow.
"I think something will be done about it," Moody said, his left arm in a sling.
"I would tell them that if you do something like this, plan it good. . . . Make sure you have the right apartment, the right number."
After reading this story, my hopes are Mr. Moody also has received the right number--a phone number of a take-no-prisoners attorney.
The Cato Institute refers to botched paramilitary police raids as "...an epidemic of isolated incidents." Check out the CI's interactive map for a raid near you here.
For a classic view of land sharks at their finest, no one does it better than Saturday Night Live....enjoy your trip into the water by clicking here.
The Constitutional Minimum
A couple months back, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia had this to say about Internet privacy.
“The vast majority of your rights are not constitutional,” he asserted. “Most of them can be taken away.
“Once upon a time, people would have thought it outrageous to have someone pass his hands over your body, and to have to take your shoes off in order to get on an airplane,” he continued. “As it turned out, that freedom was not below the constitutional minimum. Congress could eliminate it.”
Scalia also viewed home addresses as public information.
"Considering every fact about someone's life private is "extraordinary," he said, noting that data such as addresses have long been discernible, even if technology has made them easier to find.Which makes one not only question the right to privacy under the Constitution, but also ask...how silly is silly?
(...)
"Every single datum about my life is private? That's silly."
A group of law students got a crack at an answer.
Well, Fordham Law Professor Joel Reidenberg interpreted that as a challenge. He gave the fifteen students in his Information Privacy Law class a special assignment this semester: Track down everything available on the Web about Antonin Scalia to compile a dossier on him.So far, no pics of just what's under Scalia's robe have surfaced, thank God.
(...)"Justice Scalia said he doesn't care what people find out about him on the Internet," said Reidenberg during his presentation on the transparency of personal information. "So I challenged my class to compile a dossier on him."
Now four months later, at the end of the semester, the dossier (available online somewhere, but password protected) is 15 pages long. Among its contents are Nino's home address, his home phone number, the movies he likes, his food preferences, his wife's personal e-mail address, and "photos of his lovely grandchildren."
Scalia's thoughts on the assignment?
Justice Scalia wasn’t too happy about the Fordham professor’s assignment but didn’t change his position because of it. In a statement to the Above the Law blog, he said:
It is not a rare phenomenon that what is legal may also be quite irresponsible. That appears in the First Amendment context all the time. What can be said often should not be said. Prof. Reidenberg’s exercise is an example of perfectly legal, abominably poor judgment. Since he was not teaching a course in judgment, I presume he felt no responsibility to display any.
Actually, on that front, the Justice got it wrong. It wasn’t poor judgment; it was a good lesson - a reminder for the Justice and all of us, for that matter, that the information we put on the Internet is definitely accessible by anyone with an Internet connection.Read more about all the silliness over at Jonathan Turley's blog here.
3 Guys and a Pizza...
...as so aptly captioned by msnbc.
I am so enjoying former Florida governor Jeb! Bush resurface as the shark he is, granting homage to the campaign ways of Obama.
But the fact he's brought two friends along--House Minority Whip Eric Cantor and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney--to stick their political toes in the riptide, well, this frog couldn't be happier.
Bush used the photo op to convince conservatives that this channeling of Ronald Reagan is getting them no where fast.
Per the Washington Times, “Jeb Bush said Saturday that it's time for the Republican Party to give up its ‘nostalgia’ for the heyday of the Reagan era and look forward, even if it means stealing the winning strategy deployed by Democrats in the 2008 election. ‘You can't beat something with nothing, and the other side has something. I don't like it, but they have it, and we have to be respectful and mindful of that,’ Mr. Bush said.”
He added, “‘So our ideas need to be forward looking and relevant. I felt like there was a lot of nostalgia and the good old days in the [Republican] messaging. I mean, it's great, but it doesn't draw people toward your cause.’”
Romney took a pot shot at Sarah Palin--who supported Romney in his 2008 run for the White House--uttering the sort of comment that normally would infuriate feminists; but again, the governor of Alaska--IMHO--has not proven herself the most stalwart of women libbers and again IMHO, is likely to respond with some great you bet'cha quip later on this week. (As soon as someone writes it for her).
Cantor chose not to throw too many conservative code words around, sitting between the GOP bookends, likely channeling fictional conservative Alex P. Keaton.
Mitt Romney jokingly dismissed Sarah Palin’s inclusion on Time’s list of influential people in an interview broadcast Sunday. He asked, was ‘the issue on the most beautiful people or the most influential people?’”
Of all the Basic Applied Economic Principles of Capitalism in the Post-Industrial Era Seminars in the world, I had to walk into this pizza joint .And you into ours.
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
SCOTUS Thinks Over Auto Privacy Rights
I'm sorry, officer.
You Gant search my glove compartment. (Sorry, I couldn't resist).
I'm a bit giddy with the restoration of privacy rights regarding police access to the contents of my car.
The typical m.o.--
News flash from SCOTUS.
SO. OVER.
You Gant search my glove compartment. (Sorry, I couldn't resist).
I'm a bit giddy with the restoration of privacy rights regarding police access to the contents of my car.
The typical m.o.--
Police across the country were trained that upon arresting the occupant of a car, they could place the arrestee handcuffed inside a police car, and then conduct a full-scale search of the passenger compartment, even though the arrestee could not possibly reach anything inside the car that was stopped. Recently, the Court broadened the Belton rule in Thornton v. United States, applying the rule even when the arrestee had already walked away from the car.
News flash from SCOTUS.
SO. OVER.
Justice Stevens' majority opinion in Gant restores the privacy interests motorists have in their vehicles under the Fourth Amendment. While noting that the privacy interest in a car is less than that in a home, Gant makes clear that the former is "nonetheless deserving of constitutional protection," especially since the searches authorized by Belton included personal effects such as purses and briefcases in the passenger compartment. The "central concern underlying the Fourth Amendment," Justice Stevens explains, is "the concern about giving police officers unbridled discretion to rummage at will among a person's private effects."
Although Justice Stevens asserts that the Court has not actually reversed Belton and Thornton and only narrowed their scope, Justice Alito's view in dissent is more accurate. As Justice Alito writes, "there can be no doubt" that Gant overrules both decisions. Police across the country now will have to be retrained that they can search the passenger compartment of a car only if (1) the arrestee is uncuffed and within reaching distance of the car, or (2) the police have reason to believe there is evidence of the offense of arrest in the car.
(...)
"Overturning the settled law in federal and most state courts, the Supreme Court ruled that police may no longer automatically search the passenger compartment of a car incident to the arrest of one of the car's occupants. Instead, police may search the passenger compartment only if the arrestee is unsecured and "within reaching distance of the vehicle," or if "it is reasonable to believe the car contains evidence of the offense of arrest." In so ruling, the Court reaffirmed that people do have a Fourth Amendment privacy interest in the contents of their cars.Read more here.
David L. McColgin [Supervisory Assistant Federal Defender (Appeals), Federal Community Defender Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania]: "Arizona v. Gant [PDF file] is one of the most significant pro-Fourth Amendment decisions in decades."
Baby, baby
Im aware of where you go
Each time you leave my door
I watch you walk down the street...
Think it over.
Im aware of where you go
Each time you leave my door
I watch you walk down the street...
Think it over.
Obama's Imprint on SCOTUS
Here we go.
The rubber is about to hit the SCOTUS road with an Obama imprint on the nation's highest court. Although I'd love to see one of the conservative judges head for home, at the very least, an Obama nominee will give the far right a peek at just what lies around the bend.
I'm just not certain how much more the Right can take. Ain't it great?
Obama said he would seek a nominee with a "sharp and independent mind and a record of excellence and integrity. I will seek someone who understands justice isn't about some abstract legal theory or footnote in a case book. It is also about how our laws affect the daily realities of people's lives." He said his nominee would be one who is "dedicated to the rule of law, who honors our constitutional traditions, who respects the integrity of the judicial process and the appropriate limits of the judicial role."
With Obama, it's like someone throwing up the sash of a window hidden deep inside in a rotting dank house and with that first beam of sunlight, suddenly the possibilities outweigh the immensity of digging through the decay.
Let the sun shine over at the Washington Post.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
