Read a newspaper - save good reporters.....

If we keep losing newspapers at this fast paced rate, will we ever have a reporter of this caliber again... From Socialized medicine to war in Vietnam to the Palestine/Israeli conflict; seems like all the news of the past is in some way still the news of today.

If you have the time - enjoy the video....

From Democracy Now.... June 18, 2009
Twenty years ago today, I.F. Stone died at the age of eighty-one. He was the premier investigative reporter of the twentieth century, a self-described radical journalist. I.F. Stone’s legacy of work spanned the New Deal, World War II, McCarthyism, the Cold War, Israel/Palestine, the civil rights movement, the Vietnam War and beyond. He scooped reporters right and left. As the FBI tracked him, he tracked down the story. He is best remembered for his self-published I.F. Stone’s Weekly. At its peak in the 1960s, the one-man publication had a circulation of about 70,000. We speak to his biographer, D.D. Guttenplan, and air historic recordings of I.F. Stone at the 1965 Vietnam teach-in in Berkeley, CA, and on The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour. [includes rush transcript]

To read, listen to, or watch the whole story:
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/6/18/american_radical_the_life_and_times

Judges.... Is there a perfect way???

The hot topic in recent days has been that of judges. Not only because of the newly hope to be appointed after much scrutiny, Sonia Sotamayor, but because in many states it is Primary election time and time to elect judges. One of the amazing things is that most people don't even know there are judge race much less even know who there are. I am amazed that such an important position are taken for granted by the voters; well I guess for granted that is unless you are unlucky enough to go before one. Then if that were to happen could you have the judge excuse themself because you may have voted for him. Or better yet maybe your attorney donated to that particular judges campaign. Yes they claim they are supposed to be nonpartisan positions and they get to cross file on both the Dem and Rep sides of the ballot but we who pay attention always know what party they really belong to. They claim not to be politicians but they are always showing up to every political function there is so that they can schmooze with the committeepeople and powers to be to get elected. Now if that isn't a politician then what is. And talk about a lawyer frenzy - wow they all come out .... And we don't even know if they are half way good lawyers but they want now to be a judge. So if they are a crappy lawyer and happen to be popular among their peers, they can just get a promotion because of their meritocracy, to a judgeship. What better ally to have if you are a litigating lawyer then an incompetent judge that you may have helped get elected. And who is it that supports the judges the most and gives them great ratings when they are still attorneys...... You got it..... Fellow attorneys.....Never know when it may be your turn.

Now I am not saying that appointed judges are any better. They really have to kiss butt to get appointed. They have to be real party members to get appointed by the power to be. At least elected judges are beholding for a small fraction to the people.... Appointed judges only have one person voting for their approval... the appointor. So these lawyers keep in touch with party powers and get their name out there because schmoozing is really important.

And why lawyers? Are they the only ones who can make a good judgment? Albeit that they may know case law - judgment is usually based on a variety of conditions and most judges mix the law, life and circumstances to come up with their decision. An intelligent person can and will learn the law and/or have clerks who can look up certain case laws for them to interrupt. That person could be - an English professor, a social worker, an accountant or maybe a housewife. I would agree that they would have to have some qualifications but just solely going to law school should not be the only requirement.
If we are to be tried by our peers - what about the judge?

Finally it is the salaries. I saw that locally here in Pa. that the judges average a salary of anywhere from 75K for a district judge to 180K to superior court judge. Why should being a judge also become a way for some to get rich - fat - and lazy. For that much money and of course benefits they should have to be evaluated every year - and by a civilian board - to determine if they should keep their jobs.

Now although it may seem like an imperfect system - and it is - we can only hope that the cream rises to the top and maybe that crappy lawyer makes a great judge. But until we find that perfect system and appoint or elect Solomon like judges - please let's research who is running and pay more attention to who we blindly elect.