quote:

Originally posted by x-filer I am just saying while America is becoming poorer and by that i mean trade defiecits and wages dropping the justices and senators shouldnt recieve the stuff they get. Also ud be surprised how easily a politician can be bought.

Look if you restrict the freedoms of any public servant you'll have two really nice outcomes on your hands:

a) A violation of the constitution.
b) Less civil servants.

Gifts according to the very Supreme Court that receives them are considered part of your Free Speech. Free speech, being of course, an unalienable right to all mankind, and preserved for US citizens specifically incase their government woudl want to restrict it in the constitution.

You can't have it that you refuse politicans/judges to recieve gifts. Afterall why not refuse politicans and judges from giving gifts too while your at it?! Its as equal an argument.

If you refuse a public offical from receiving a gift (unless there is a clear conflict of interest) than you would have to refuse a public offiacl from receinvg a gift from anybody. That would mean that $25 rebate the Judges got from their purchase of a 50 pak CD-RWs should be illegal. That 10% off coupon they were giving to everybody who attended that Bar convention to attend a fancy restaurant - illegal.

The next step of course would have to bar the politican/judge from giving gifts to the 'private' sector as not to induly prejudce one private business/person against another. If the judge gives a gift to Charity A instead of Chairty B, that gives Charity A an unfair competitve advantage over Chairty B. Where does it end? The Judge can't give his good friend, or his own grandchildren a birthday gift?

Afterall, while were at it, we should ban all civil servants from having 'friends' or 'family' at all, because they will just influence them and give them gifts over time. And we can't have that. We must make robotmen! Robotmen will save us all!

This is just simply ludicrous, thats all.

___________________
SAVE ZIONIST MUSTARD: BUY ZIONIST KETCHUP!


Click here to support the free mustard alliance.

quote:

Originally posted by St_Andrew thats probably true, but i think its the principle thats wrong, that they are allowed to accept gifts like that. cause they can potentially be bought.

Well that's the reason why we have a free press ... to report on potential conflicts of interest that actually arise.

http://news.search.yahoo.com/search...news-t&toggle=1

___________________
Retro ...

quote:

Originally posted by occrider Well that's the reason why we have a free press ... to report on potential conflicts of interest that actually arise. http://news.search.yahoo.com/search...news-t&toggle=1

yeah, but no one can get the judges out of there except for themselves right? so it doesnt really matter if the press is free or not?

quote:

Originally posted by St_Andrew yeah, but no one can get the judges out of there except for themselves right? so it doesnt really matter if the press is free or not?

Good question because i was wondering about that as well.. there is a case here in ireland at the moment of a sitting judge caught with child pornography on his computer..now the case is complicated..he got off on a technicality..the warrent was issued to late but thats a long storey..basically bottom line is ok the guy is innocent because he was never convicted.. but the evidence is on his computer and in the hands of the police and the government want him removed..but he is refusing and looking for millions in damages for him to step down..salery costs pension etc..and it would appear that they can not force him to stand down even though public confidence in this guy is shattered as regards him dealing with further court cases..ok its a bit off course in the current topic but sort of relavent in that who has the power to remove judges..perhaps its different in the us?

quote:

Originally posted by St_Andrew yeah, but no one can get the judges out of there except for themselves right? so it doesnt really matter if the press is free or not?

No, congress has ultimate authority for pretty much everything in this country when you get down to it. From Article II, section 4 of the US Constitution:

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

One supreme court justice was actually impeached (but acquitted) back in 1805:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Chase

___________________
Retro ...