In response to demi @ 90 you replied,

I love doing the legalese translations when I have the time to really dig into an opinion or an order. But I always wonder if it’s just my law wonk-ness, or if folks are getting something out of it. That’s helpful — thanks!

Count me among those who appreciate your work on this! Multiple “amens” to Loo Hoo’s post @91, too!

Bob in HI

Dear VoteVets.org Supporter,

Wow! Last week, we asked you to write to the Senate, urging them to support the bipartisan GI Bill for the 21st Century, and reject a watered down bill offered by John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and Richard Burr. You responded – with force – sending 16,000 letters to the Senate! Add that to the 30,000 petition signatures on the GI Bill that we took to the Hill, and op-eds around the country that our veterans have written on the GI Bill, and we are dominating efforts to get a new GI Bill passed.
Now it’s time to take it to the next level, and get a letter to the editor in every daily newspaper in America!
CLICK HERE TO SEND A LETTER TO THE EDITOR ON THE GI BILL
Letters to the editor are the most read part of the paper, so when you submit a letter, it will be read by tens of thousands of your friends and neighbors. If we can get a letter to the editor in papers across the country, it’s the strongest message we can send that we will not allow the Senate to cave on such important legislation for our veterans. With all of you – 95,000 people strong – blanketing newspapers with letters to the editor is a goal we can reach.
The stakes couldn’t be higher. The bipartisan new GI Bill (S. 22) is poised to pass the Congress and go to the President. It will update GI Bill benefits to keep up with the cost of college, allowing those who served in Iraq and Afghanistan to get the higher education that we’ve promised our veterans since World War II. Senators McCain, Graham, and Burr, by introducing legislation that would cut the benefits in S. 22, are attempting to split the Senate, so nothing gets passed, and our veterans’ service is not honored.
ANGRY? WRITE A LETTER TO THE EDITOR OF YOUR PAPER TO MAKE IT CLEAR!
Our Letter to the Editor tool is easy to use. Just plug in your zip code, use our talking points to write a quick letter, and hit send. That’s it! In just a couple of days, your letter could be in the daily paper, read by thousands and thousands of people!
Please take a second, today, to take this quick action to help our veterans.
Thank you for your support.
Sincerely,
Jon Soltz
Iraq War Veteran
Chairman, VoteVets.org

A legal corporation is not designed to be a socially progressive entity; it is designed to maximize shareholder value (unless the managers steal it all). This is a fundamental disconnect.

Justice has been weakened by tax laws that basically enable and encourage the financial subversion of ‘justice’… or at least, that’s where we’re headed. IMHO, it is not sustainable, and people need to recognize that this contradiction isn’t working in an era of global economics and climate change.

Some things shouldn’t be for sale.
How do we make sure that ‘justice’ isn’t put on the auction block b/c of campaign funding structures?

The volume of these ads and efforts was quite small, incidentally, compared to what we saw from the pro-BIAW contingent, who flooded the airwaves with negative ads about the incumbents.

And we saw something similar last year when we had an initiative on the ballot to require the insurance industry to pay up according to their contracts. The industry spent about $11 million on ads and we were inundated with awful smarmy ads. Progressive groups finally organized

I totally agree with Dave that this is what occurred.
I’d simply point out that the time, energy, and money required to ‘fight back’ is a huge lost opportunity on other issues.

And it is also very worrying that for 20+ years now the ’so-called ‘Moral’ Majority’ has been spouting off AS IF their point of view is the only ‘moral’ one; that seems to have made some of the wingnuts feel entitled — and enabled — in the whole process of politicizing justice.

Ironically, at least from my particular small perch, this has driven some Republicans out of the GOP from sheer revulsion at the jackboot tactics being employed by claiming the GOP mantle. It’s led extremists to claim the GOP, and left the moderates and old-timers (who are Main Street, fiscal conservatives) politically homeless.

A case of unintended consequences, but it is still toxic and still playing out.

Great topic and sorry I’m late to the thread. This type of discussion is very valuable. I really treasure your insights, those of Mr. Bastress and the other posters. From a practical perspective, one of my best friends from college, now a law professor, is running for the NC Supreme Court.

On the plus side for her, these are supposedly nonpartisan races and there’s public financing. On the other, the incumbent, a decent guy, is being held up by his Repub brethren as the last domino standing against complete Dem dominance of state government.

She’s an expert on family law and professional ethics — would be a great addition to the court. Will be working my buns off for her and may solicit some ideas here after the distraction of the NC primary passes.

Please don’t ever think you’re being too much of a legal wonk for us. I’ve learned so much here. (Also helps me talk to my daughter, the law student. *g*).

That magical teacher we had: 15+ kids at a time meant 15 styles of learning. She believed that to her core, bless her heart, and it showed in all her interactions with the students.

The 2004 election cycle was really where the sea change in special interest involvement in judicial elections occurred.

And I’d use Washington State as a Cautionary Tale.
But people need to realize it’s not only the courts — how is it that these same groups have become so powerful that they can even control USAG appontments?!!

I feel like this post kind of ‘digs beneath the roots’ and we are starting to follow the hideous, diseased roots of a very toxic plant that’s running rampant and quite destructive of justice (and of ‘fairness’ so necessary for social stability).