Many of us have been watching the unfolding saga pitting GOVERNMENT AGAINST UNION. While the outcome is a loss for Unions/Working People. My question is: Where do you draw the line at LEGAL and Moral Ethics. Some of the people’s representatives left the State as a way of fighting for the rights of workers. Others stayed behind and plotted a sneaky way to push their agenda forward. My questions is who took the more ethical way to fight. We cannot deny the dissenters brought the government’s UNION ASSASSINATION PLOT, to light. Was there any other avenues for them to take. I don’t know of any, but there may have been. We know there was plenty of input from the residents against the passage of this bill. If you haven’t been keeping up on the situation. The Governor and 18 Republicans were acting in the best interest of Big Business. (Few small businesses deal with unions). To get this bit of business passed those 18 Republicans (One Republican dissented); conspired to strip out any item that would force them to have the required quorum of 20 members to pass the bill. Thus allowing them to pass it with only 18 of the 33 total voting members. I’m sure the vote was probably LEGAL. But was it MORALl? Did they show the ETHICS expected by the people of the state. I have always loved the state of WISCONSIN, But if the actions of the Governor and the Republicans, is a reflection of the people’s ETHICS then I am so very glad to not be a WISCONSIN CITIZEN. Where do you draw the line between Moral ethics and legalit? This a Question Wisconsin Voters must ask themselves when they visit the voting booth again. That Is How I See It. Views: 152
Tag: Legal
Term Limits for Judges
OHave you noticed a change in your Judge over the years. I have. Not only locally but all over the country. With few exceptions. Judges, after serving consecutive terms seem to gain a more god-like feeling. That is to say Judges get an all powerful feel, and I think they sometimes have drawn pretrial conclusions, and nothing will change their mind. Over a course of years they tend to form alliances with political parties, lawyers, prosecutors, and businesses, etc. Some may do this unwittingly, others know they have these relationships. Do these connections influence their decisions. YOU BET! One Judge, a woman, (I don’t know if she had issues against men or this one in particular), I heard of put a man behind bars for contempt of court. “What did he do “, you ask. He had paid his child support 6 months in advance, he worked construction and some winters there was no work. She told him he was in contempt of court because she had ordered him to pay weekly. One Judge, I know of, has been Judge for over 20 years, (how many over I’m not sure). The case I am thinking of the arresting officer testified he observed the suspect in a truck facing west, from his position 1 block east and 1 block north of the infraction, with a building in his range of view. He was able to identify the driver but did not make an arrest, as he was only to observe. When it was pointed out that it would be impossible to see the suspect from his position. The Judge replied, “You have to have the proper binoculars like the officer had”. Do any of you know where I can buy binoculars that can go out and make a couple of 90 degree turns, that is what it would take to see what the officer claimed. Alliances, Relationships, All powerful. That is what you get when Judges stay in office too long. I think 2 terms is more than enough. That Is How I See It. Views: 83
