Author: admin

American politics could use more candidates like Senator Bernie Sanders. He may be the last true gentleman to be in that arena.

I am not offering an opinion on who you should vote for in this Presidential election but Senator Sanders has conducted his campaign with an uncommon civility not seen anywhere else this year.

He has refused to run negative advertisements against either of the opponents he has faced in the contest for the Democratic Party nomination. He has repeatedly refused to criticize Hillary Clinton on the issue of her private e-mail server.

When it is apparent that she is more knowledgeable about an issue, particularly in the area of foreign affairs, he has readily acknowledged it. He treats his opponents with respect and has displayed a dignity throughout the debates and town hall gatherings consistently.

The contest for the Republican Party nomination appears to be little more than a demolition derby with Donald Trump driving the biggest car. He called Mexicans “rapists and criminals.” He has called for a ban on all Muslims entering the country. He has insulted African-Americans, the disabled, his opponents, the media and anyone else that draws his ire. Just as disappointing, his fellow Republican opponents have remained mute during his verbal assaults on Mexicans, Muslims and other immigrant groups, particularly the two who celebrate their own immigrant stories, Rubio and Cruz.

Equally refreshing is Sanders refusal to employ his own super-Pac. The United States Supreme Court, in its infinite wisdom, has allowed the electoral process to become a cesspool by its dubious holdings that corporations enjoy the same rights as people and that the unregulated, undisclosed sources of vast sums of money somehow constitute the exercise of free speech. As a result, for the rest of this year you might be afraid to turn your television on due to the commercials you might see.

I don’t know who will ultimately prevail in either nominating contest but Sanders deportment throughout this process is a breath of fresh air.

I have a three year-old granddaughter who is very big on “Do Overs.” She likes to wake up adults in the morning and if you get up ahead of her, you have to get back into bed and pretend you’re asleep so she can still wake you up. The same is true of unwrapping a present. She likes to help. If you unwrap a gift in front of her without her help, she’ll make you re-wrap it so that she can help you unwrap it.
Earlier this year an anti-abortion group based in California secretly recorded videos purporting to show Planned Parenthood officials agreeing to sell fetal body parts for profit. Planned Parenthood officials charged that the recordings were heavily edited and created a misleading account of the interviews with the filmmakers, who themselves posed as willing purchasers.
The ensuing uproar led to demands that the U.S. government defund Planned Parenthood and one candidate for President, Carley Fiorina, claimed the video showed a live aborted fetus, when it plainly did not. The Lieutenant-Governor of Texas demanded that the District Attorney of Harris County based in Houston open a grand jury investigation of Planned Parenthood to see if criminal charges against the organization and its officials were warranted. Both public officials are registered Republicans too.
In one of those “Be Careful What You Ask For” moments that we rarely see, the grand jury did bring criminal charges. It indicted two members of the anti-abortion group for their conduct in making the videos and cleared Planned Parenthood of any wrongdoing.
Now, the lawyers representing the indicted anti-abortion activists want a “do over.” They contend that the grand jury became a “run-away” grand jury that indicted the wrong parties. They want a “do over” in which a second grand jury is empaneled.
A “run-away” grand jury is a grand jury which ignores the wishes of a prosecutor and its members decide for themselves who and what it will investigate. They are historically rare and were most often seen in the last century when some of them decided to investigate official corruption in various localities like New York City on their own.
Since members of a grand jury are the sole determiners of both the credibility of witnesses and what facts occurred, it is hard to see how the findings of this grand jury and the charges it brought are flawed. This is particularly so because a grand jury cannot take any official action unless a majority of its members are in agreement.
Following indictment a judge may examine the evidence that was presented to the grand jury to see if it is legally sufficient to support the criminal charges lodged but getting “do over” in which charges are represented to another grand jury absent a finding that the evidence is insufficient is unheard of.
The Harris County prosecutor who describes herself as “pro-life,” has declared that her office is “open to hearing the lawyers concerns” and her spokesperson has suggested that “Sometimes justice is served by dismissing cases.”
That would be the ultimate “do over” and would hardly inspire confidence in the justice system.
It’s far more serious that waking someone up or unwrapping a present.

Have you ever noticed that when politicians advocate putting “boots on the ground” in a combat zone, it’s always someone else’s boots? Never their own.
This has become increasingly evident during this 2016 Presidential campaign as the candidates try to outdo one another in appearing the most forceful about getting “boots on the ground.”
A look at all of the candidates in both parties reveal that while many could have been called, few chose to go. (Sorry about the Biblical analogy).
Donald Trump could have served in Vietnam but suffered from plantar fasciitis. He hasn’t disclosed which foot was afflicted. Ben Carson and Jeb Bush were also at an age when they could have served in Vietnam but for unknown reasons did not. All three of them advocate sending troops to battle ISIS
Governor Chris Christie, Senators Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio could have served in the first Gulf War in 1991 but apparently chose not to. All three of them advocate sending troops to fight ISIS.
On the Democratic side, Bernie Sanders could have served in Vietnam but did not. To be fair, he does not advocate sending troops to any combat zones. Hillary Clinton’s position is somewhat nuanced. While she supports a No-Fly Zone in Syria, she does not favor putting boots on the ground. Her husband, former president, Bill Clinton, famously avoided the draft during the Vietnam War. Martin O’Malley was too young to have served in Vietnam and too old to have served in the First Gulf War. He too does not favor either a No-Fly Zone in Syria or committing American troops.
What can you take away from this?
The late columnist, Mike Royko, had a term he used to describe politicians who favored sending others to fight wars while they avoided it. He called them “war wimps.”
It would be interesting to see how those politicians who favor sending troops to combat zones would vote on a restoration of the Selective Service Draft that would encompass their children of both genders.
My guess is that they’d oppose it, while still advocating sending other people’s children to bear the burden they avoided.
I’m not sure which candidate in either party is going to win the caucuses in Iowa tomorrow night but this bears thinking about as we head into the November 2016 election.

The American humorist, Mark Twain, once wrote that there are three kinds of lies: “lies, damned lies and statistics.”
In March of last year, Duke University basketball coach, Mike Krzyzewski, Was the only Division I men’s’ coach to win 1,000 games. It was expected that Syracuse University basketball coach, Jim Boeheim, who had over 966 wins was expected to be the next Division I men’s’ coach to cross that threshold.
That expectation was dashed on March 15, 2015 when the NCAA stripped Boeheim of 108 victories due to eligibility issues some of his players had during earlier seasons and which the University had disclosed through self-reporting. On December 3, 2015 the NCAA denied Boeheim’s appeal and upheld the sanctions it imposed. Boeheim now ranks sixth in most victories.
This isn’t the first time or the first sport in which the NCAA had sanctioned an athletic program by stripping the coach of victories. The University of Michigan’s basketball program was stripped of 113 victories for violations, Penn State head coach, Joe Paterno was stripped of 112 victories following the conviction of assistant coach, Jerry Sandusky, for committing multiple sex offenses against children in the Penn State locker room.
The use of this kind of sanction is a curious one since it calls into question the historical integrity of the NCAA’s record keeping and raises more questions. If those 108 victories are nullified how is the won-lost record of the defeated team affected? Does that team now get to claim a victory? What about the points scored by the individual players? Are they nullified too?
Even more curious is the NCAA’s determination to uphold the sanction despite having reinstated the 112 victories Paterno’s team won while Sandusky was sexually abusing children. It certainly makes one wonder about the NCAA’s priorities.
I think Twain would characterize this one as a damned lie.

Since Ted Cruz raised the topic, I guess we should talk about “Values.”
Cruz says that Donald Trump has “New York values,” which he defines as “socially liberal, pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, focus around money and the media.” He doubled down on that appraisal the following day with his faux apology.
So, since we’re talking about “values,” let’s talk about what Cruz represents.
Ted Cruz is unabashedly anti-immigrant.
Despite his self-proclaimed stirring narrative about being the product of an immigrant marriage and being born in Canada, he has rushed to proclaim the need to tighten the borders and has applauded Donald Trump’s advocacy of building a wall on the southern border of the nation.
When Trump proclaimed that Mexican and Central-American immigrants were “rapists” and criminals, his lack of criticism and silence, despite also being Hispanic, was deafening. Trump’s call to bar all Muslims from entering the United States was greeted with the tepid response that it wasn’t his idea.
Cruz would turn back the clock on marriage equality and every other right sought or obtained by our fellow gay Americans, including the right to be treated equally in public accommodations and other businesses serving the public.
Cruz would like to outlaw a woman’s right to choose and supported stripping the requirement that contraception be provided under the Affordable Care Act. He would defund Planned Parenthood. He is opposed to equal pay for women and voted against the Violence Against Women Act.
Cruz opposes affirmative action and supports abolishing the Departments of Education, Commerce, Energy and the Internal Revenue Service.
His pronouncements on the campaign trail stop just short of substituting a theocracy for democracy. I suspect that a proposal to replace the Department of Justice with a Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice isn’t too long in coming from Cruz.
The Republican Party appears to be panicked at the prospect of a potential Trump or Cruz candidacy for President. If I were them, I wouldn’t be too alarmed. All they need to do is find a Vice-Presidential nominee that is more moderate than either of them.
I’m sure Mullah Omar is out there somewhere.

Anatole France once wrote, “The law in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal bread.” If he were alive today, he would have to add “unless you are suffering from Affluenza.”
On June 15, 2013 Ethan Crouch, age sixteen, driving on a restricted license, stole a case of beer and went joy-riding with three friends. He hit four pedestrians who were killed and his passengers were left paralyzed and with brain injuries. He was charged with four counts of vehicular manslaughter and other charges. His very wealthy parents hired a metal health expert who testified that Crouch should be spared prison because he was suffering from “Affluenza.”
He testified that “Affluenza” made Crouch “unable to link his bad behavior with consequences because of his parents teaching him that wealth buys privilege.” To the astonishment of everyone, the judge apparently found this opinion credible and in December 2014 sentenced Crouch to ten years’ probation with conditions requiring that he not drink alcohol or drive.
In early December of 2015, Crouch’s “affluenza” was apparently unabated because he appeared in a video on Twitter participating in a drinking game. Crouch’s mother apparently suffering from her own case of “affluenza,” because, rather than have her son face the consequences of his probation violation, fled with him to Mexico where they were captured on December 28, 2015.
It seems that there is only one way Crouch will be cured of this wretched condition. He needs to learn the consequences of his bad behavior by pondering it for a long time in a jail cell. His mother could benefit from this treatment too.

Welcome to my blog.
For the past nineteen years I’ve been somewhat restricted by the Code of Judicial Conduct from commenting about news and current events. In this New Year and in retirement, that restriction is lifted and I’m free to comment without reservation.
So, from time to time, I plan on sharing my thoughts on such topics as crime, court cases, gun control, gun violence, political candidates and elections, and whatever comes to mind that piques my interest.
If you’d like to see those thoughts, just bookmark this page and visit whenever you can. When I post a new entry I’ll be sure to mention it on my Facebook and Twitter page.
I welcome comments and thoughts you might have and the discussion they might provoke, I certainly welcome opinions and views that differ from mine. I do want this to be a place for thoughtful, civil exchange of views. In order to ensure that and to avoid the kind of hateful abuse that appears on sites that allow anonymous postings, you’ll have to establish an account with your name, an e-mail address, a user name and what you’d like to use as a password
. I hope you will visit often and be part of a constructive dialogue.