About Me

Name: NOTLEGALROADKILLYET
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

The Labor Peace Act and the Denver Post

Posted by NOTLEGALROADKILLYET on Sunday, January 28, 2007 9:49:52 PM
It appears that the Denver Post has given up on derailing the Labor Peace Act, aka House Bill 1072, for Governor Bill Ritter.  In fact, it now notes that "time is on his side."  The article is "Union bill ticks off business" by Jeri Clausing and starts with a provocative statement:

Everyone knew it was going to happen. They just didn't expect it to happen this fast.

Well, not quite everyone "knew."  In fact, the business community thought they had a moderate commitment to act moderately from candidate Bill Ritter.  Perhaps the "everyone" Clausing refers to is the "everyone at the Denver Post."

It turns out that while Ritter was feeding businessmen a "moderate" baloney, he was telling his labor friends something entirely different:

The business community was unaware of Ritter's campaign-long commitment to support the labor bill.

It is likely that the business community was "unaware" because Ritter was keeping it a secret.  The tactic reminds one of Bill Clinton at his best, doesn't it?  Tell the people in the room not what you will do, but what you think they want you to do, what they want to hear.

The business community exploded, implying that the candidate who wooed them with a moderate pro-business agenda betrayed them by letting the bill rush through the House without any warning.

The word "implying" in this paragraph is easily my favorite word choice in the whole article.  Based on what I'm reading (and reporting on) in both the Rocky Mountain News and in the Denver Post, the business community is doing much more than implying that Ritter back stabbed it.  There is even talk of an initiative to make the state a right-to-work state.

I wonder what other surprises Governor Bill Ritter has up his sleeve for us that the Post will claim that "everyone" knew would happen.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

OK, I'm Confused

Posted by NOTLEGALROADKILLYET on Sunday, January 28, 2007 6:56:05 PM
On the one hand, I have the Gazette Telegraph telling me in a George Will editorial that that 99.9 percent of the 100 million blogs are not serious, and implies that serious people should ignore the remainder as well.  I also have the Gazette telling me two days ago that only 8% of Americans read blogs.  Likewise, the Wall Street Journal tells me that bloggers are imbeciles and their readers are fools.

If I am to buy into that, why do I find out that last spring Harvard Law School held a "Bloggership Symposium." Why is Slip Opinions, an online supplement to the Washington University Law Review featuring original commentary and debate by members of the legal academy, bench and bar (to quote their blog), going to publish the whole symposium this spring?

Why did Tom Delay start his own blog last year? 

Why would the Democratic candidates be kowtowing to the Huffington Post and the Daily Koz?

Why would the new US Senate Republican leadership have hired a blogger to advise them on internet issues right after the election?

Why would I be reporting on law school students using a blog to sharpen their thinking and to improve their grades?

None of the likely readers, with the possible exception of Democratic voters, are lightweights, or "fools" to use the Wall Street Journal characterization. 

The Gazette Telegraph and other MSM outlets are doing a disservice to conservative readers.  Their self serving claim that bloggers are imbeciles is just that, self serving.  The thing that bothers me most is that it convinces conservatives, who should be paying attention, to ignore the damage Democrats are doing to the conservative cause on the internet.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Legal Ethics Las Vegas Style

Posted by NOTLEGALROADKILLYET on Sunday, January 28, 2007 5:42:43 PM
"In Las Vegas, They're Playing With a Stacked Judicial Deck."  At least, that's what the LA Times reports.  They go on to subtitle the article "Some judges routinely rule in cases involving friends, former clients and business associates -- and in favor of lawyers who fill their campaign coffers."

The story begins with a campaign fund raiser for Judge Gene T. Porter, scheduled just four days before the civil trial of the company of Michael D. Farney. 

The fundraiser was organized by Robert D. Vannah, whose firm had the hearing scheduled in Porter's courtroom in four days, would later explain his donation this way: "Giving money to a judge's campaign means you're less likely to get screwed…. A $1,000 contribution isn't going to buy special treatment. It's just a hedge against bad things happening."

Vannah and others in his law firm, along with one of their consultants, made donations worth a total of $13,500, fundraising reports show. It was the fattest combined contribution of the night.

The hearing that Judge Porter was to have in four days involved Mr. Farney's company.  Porter was asked to recuse himself and refused.  Porter was asked for a delay and refused.  Farney hadn't contributed, and bad things did happen to his company.  $1.5 million of bad things. 

If you look at the $13,500 in contributions as an investment (Vannah and Porter would doubtless deny that it was any such thing), the investment might have netted Vannah's law firm several hundred thousand dollars in legal fees, perhaps as much as $500,000.

Justice in Nevada, conceded Cal Potter III, a veteran Las Vegas lawyer, is such that "outside law firms just don't trust Nevada courtrooms."

The LA Times article is nine pages long.  I've only scratched the surface.

The legal ethics rules prohibit what is going on, the article concedes, but they are not enforced against either judges or lawyers.  They are not even enforced against Federal Judges.

It is out of this cauldron of ethics violations that one Senator and lawyer Harry Reid rose to power in the US Senate.  Is it any wonder why he opposes tort reform?  He wouldn't even consider ethics reform.

Until a legal ethics reform movement gets a stranglehold on this kind of conduct, there will always be enclaves of outright judicial lawlessness.  It is amazing that a whole state could be so lawless.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Going to Law School or Know Someone Who is?

Posted by NOTLEGALROADKILLYET on Sunday, January 28, 2007 1:16:11 PM
You might want to put the Volokh Conspiracy on your favorites list if you are headed for law school and want to excel.  It is probably unprecedented for law students to credit a lawblawg for better grades, but that is exactly what happened this week.

I will let the first (there are others) student speak for himself:

I'm writing to thank you for your contribution to the legal blogosphere because it was the primary influence that positively affected my most recent grades. While I can't prove causation, I feel comfortable with the assertion that your blog was a big help. As such, I view your blog as a great legal educational tool in addition to its entertainment value.

I'm currently a 3L. I started reading your blog (daily, sometimes 3 times a day) at the beginning of last summer or maybe in the spring of my 2L year. Over several months of reading entries on the Volokh Conspiracy, I began to acquire significantly better analytical skills. I noticed it in my day-to-day conversations among friends and in my school work.

I'd performed well in my first two years, but I didn't really understand what it meant to write a good law school exam. This last semester, I went into my examines with the confidence that I was going to write 'A' exams (and I did for the most part). My confidence and the knowledge supporting it was, in large part, a product of reading your blog.

There is much more.  Read the comments, as well.

FYI "3L" is a third year law school student.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

When Will it be Morning in Colorado?

Posted by NOTLEGALROADKILLYET on Sunday, January 28, 2007 12:38:29 PM
When I found the Ronald Reagan quote last night, I was actually trying to verify the Karl Marx quote that I had used in an earlier essay.  While I was there, I decided to see if there were any interesting and usable Reagan quotes. 

Ronald Reagan was a very positive politician.  In 1984, his campaign slogan was "It's morning in America."

Republicans need to begin to think about how their party, their officials, and their candidates are framing the issues.  I think that a reasonable analysis of the issues would show that we have become the "anti" party.  Pick an issue that we feel strongly about think about how we ourselves frame it. 

We are the anti-abortion, anti-tax, anti-immigration, anti-stem cell research, anti-public schools, anti-this and anti-that party. It is clear that a large part of the business community has begun to think of us as anti-business or they would not have supported Ritter in the last election.  

I'm not saying that we should change our positions, only that we need to frame them in Ronald Reagan like terms.

Today's Gazette Telegraph provides a good illustration in "Immigrant issues not at top of to-do list" by Ed Sealover. 

Search that article and find a single "It's morning in Colorado" issue.  You won't.  It is an anti-immigration issue. Worse, we seem determined to push the costs of our anti-immigration policies on the business community, reinforcing our emerging anti-business reputation. 

Incredibly, no one, including the bill's sponsors, believes that any of these bills will pass, meaning that they are symbolic only.  Here we find our local legislators making negative press for our party with no real hope of accomplishing anything useful.  Lets do positivie symbolism, if we are going to do symbolism.

If the party wants to prosper, it must find positive issues and identify spokesmen to put them forward. 

Party leaders need to examine the words and deeds of each of its current vocal spokesmen (the folks whose names appear in the paper weekly) to see if they have a history of putting a positive message forward.  If not, those spokesmen need to be asked to step out of the spotlight to make room for someone with a Ronald Reagan like message. 

It can be morning again in Colorado for Republicans, but first we have to find the sunny side of our issues.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

What Would Ronald Reagan Say? I Think I Know

Posted by NOTLEGALROADKILLYET on Saturday, January 27, 2007 11:52:10 PM
If you have wondered what the Gipper might say to the Republican and Democratic Senators who are in such a hurry to abandon Iraq, I think I know:

You and I have a rendezvous with destiny.  We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of [Islamic] darkness.  If we fail, at least let our children and our children's children say of us we justified our brief moment here.  We did all that could be done.

That might shake and shame a few, but not many of the cowards.

Thanks to quotationspage.com.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Lunch With a Friend

Posted by NOTLEGALROADKILLYET on Saturday, January 27, 2007 11:32:25 PM
I had lunch with a man whom I both like and admire.  We two don't usually talk politics.  He is a knee jerk liberal Jew Democrat and I am a knee jerk conservative Scots-Irish Republican.  Even without talking politics, we could talk for hours, and sometimes do.

I sent him an email about this blog some time ago, and he politely told me that it was well written.

It is obvious that the Democrats have been taking the support of the Jewish population for granted at election time for years, nay decades.

There was a time when Democrats were supporters, along with Republicans, of Israel.  That is no longer the case, (in spades) and yet that fact doesn't seem to shake Jews from the Democratic party.  He and I talked about it very briefly.  I wanted him to write one or more guest essays on the subject.  He told me he had been thinking about that subject and would be happy to contribute.

I don't know what he will say, or when he will provide the material, but I look forward to seeing it and forwarding it to you.  I think it could be both educational and useful.

I have intentionally not identified him, and won't unless he asks otherwise.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

It's Hard to Keep Up With Tim Gill

Posted by NOTLEGALROADKILLYET on Saturday, January 27, 2007 11:03:02 PM
The Rocky Mountain News reports in an article titled "Gill's D.C. office to promote gay aims" that:

Tim Gill, a Denver software entrepreneur and top Democratic political donor, has opened a Washington, D.C., office for his newly expanded political funding organization.

Note that the article used the word "funding," and not "fundraising."

It also reports:

Gill Action also hired Bill Smith, a political consultant who formerly worked for Karl Rove and has done extensive media production for political candidates across the country. Smith will serve as Gill Action's national political director.

I guess this proves that Karl Marx was correct about the rope:  "The last capitalist we hang shall be the one who sold us the rope."
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Don't Look Back! We're Gaining On You

Posted by NOTLEGALROADKILLYET on Saturday, January 27, 2007 10:31:14 PM
I have to laugh at the Gazette Telegraph.  It keeps printing articles in the hope that they will keep people from reading blogs.

Just after the New Year, they published a George Will column which I ridiculed in an essay I called "George Will, Luddite."  Yesterday, they published "TV critics' tour news roundup: Shocking, inspiring, depressing,"  a Sacramento Bee article by Rick Kushman. I would love to link it, but they didn't (dare) put it on the net.  Quoting:

If you hang around TV people long enough, you learn some wild things.  My favorite fact, after two weeks of meetings, chatting, and general hanging out with television executives, producers and stars on the annual television critics tour is this:

Only 8 percent of Americans read blogs.  Eight percent.  For all the energy that TV networks-not to mention political operations, and frankly newspapers and news organizations-put into the blogosphere, it is a tiny percentage of people who even notice.

That came from CBS chief research officer, David Poltrack, and MRI Research, a respected New York firm that sampled 20,000 people. 

I think you all blog each other, but I'm not sure the rest of the world is joining in the process that much, Poltrack said.

Ummmm.  Wasn't CBS Anchor Dan Rather brought down and CBS discredited in large part by the detective work of Powerline and others (with the help of their readers)? 

If the Gazette Telegraph wants to discredit bloggers, and they seem to, you would think that it could find a more reputable source that a CBS researcher with the curious name "Poltrack."  I wonder what his real name is?  (Just kidding!)

The Gazette Telegraph would do well to think about who the 8% is, and if 8% is even correct. 

My experience with blogging is that about half of the people who come to my blog come through google searches.  If you asked them if they were reading blogs, they might incorrectly say that they weren't, and believe it.  Go to a Wikipedia article on a modern, well known personage.  If it has any detail at all, it very likely has a few blogs as references. 

The 8% is not a bunch of dummies or people without influence.  I recently met Dick Wadhams, the guru who, if we are lucky, will be leading the Republican party.  When I told him I was promoting Republican blogs, he commented that blogs were a part of the effort to beat Tom Daschle.

Newspapers like to justify their existence by claiming that they provide an in depth version of the news.  That is true when compared to non-cable television and radio.  However, when compared to a blog that wants to do some independent internet searches, newspapers are, themselves, lacking in depth.

There are stories that newspapers choose not to cover.  Is the uproar over the "Labor Peace Act" a story worth reporting in Colorado Springs?  It doesn't seem to be.

The 8%, if it is 8%, are the people who have an appetite for something that the newspapers can't, or won't give them. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Ritter/Colorado Springs Love-in!

Posted by NOTLEGALROADKILLYET on Saturday, January 27, 2007 9:00:46 PM
It is hard to believe that Governor Bill Ritter could meet with 800 Businessmen at the Broadmoor and the Labor Peace Act never be mentioned.  In fact, I'm not sure that the Gazette Telegraph has ever reported either on the bill or the uproar it is causing among the big name business organizations in Denver.

We live in our own little world here in Colorado Springs and can welcome a Democratic Governor with open arms.  He just has to buy us off with a $7 million building and empty promises of business tax breaks.  While I like the thought of expanding UCCS, I doubt that many can be bought with a building.  I also question whether anyone will see any tax breaks out of this legislature, given the speed with which they voted out the Labor Peace Act.

Read all about the Colorado Springs Love-in as reported by the Gazette-Telegraph in a story titled "Ritter Speaks in Springs."
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Do You Wonder What I'm Doing-Part 2

Posted by NOTLEGALROADKILLYET on Saturday, January 27, 2007 8:34:53 PM
Catmman, another townhall blogger, commented to my essay "Do You Wonder What I'm Doing:"
"You are absolutely right.

I linked to a Washington Post article on global warming I had added to a "global warming update" post.

I received countless hits on my blog because on the WaPo website. my blog name was featured under a "What the blogs are saying" section. I received numerous visits from people from the WaPo site who read all my stuff posted and maybe received some of the other side of the argument.

What you posted is really good stuff, and it works.

It's nice to get an endorsement from someone else who is trying to do good work, as well.

The Washington Post is different than many papers.  If a blog links to a Post article, the post comes back to see what was written within half a day.  While there are other papers that may do this, I know of none.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

DA Carol Chambers in the News-Again

Posted by NOTLEGALROADKILLYET on Saturday, January 27, 2007 10:03:03 AM
It was a pleasure to watch Colorado Inside Out on KBDI last night and see the accolades being heaped on Arapahoe County DA Carol Chambers by all panelists.  Her office had just successfully prosecuted Jason Reynolds for road rage murder.  Her husband was favorably mentioned as well.

Just three months ago she and her husband were involved in what had all of the appearances of a show trial conducted by John Gleason's Office of Attorney Regulation.  That "trial" before a structural Kangaroo Court was timed to occur just before the election, and involved four Republicans.   

Despite all of the negative publicity and negative editorials by the Denver Post and the Rocky Mountain News, there wasn't much of a case.   Attorney Regulation tried to slip that fact by the public by releasing its findings to the public on the day after Christmas.

She was found guilty on one minor count and ordered to pay costs.  This order to pay costs is another slap in the face to Arapahoe County taxpayers, who also had to pay for Carol Chamber's defense, to the tune of $80,000.

Attorney Regulation is a creation of the Colorado Supreme Court.  It is not funded by the legislature, but indirectly by the Colorado Bar Association.  The public has no input into the appointment of any of its personnel, who, along with the Presiding Disciplinary Judge, William Lucero, serve at the pleasure of the Chief Justice of the State Supreme Court.  Judge Lucero never faces a retention election, which is why this whole operation can be called a "structural Kangaroo Court."

This was just one more attempt by Colorado Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey, a partisan Democrat, to swing an election.  It is my hope that when she and the four Democratic Justices who keep her on as Chief Justice come up for retention, they pay a price at the ballot box.

In any event, it was good to see that Republican DA Carol Chambers got some good publicity for a change.  You can bet that neither the Rocky Mountain News or the Denver Post will join in the praise.

For my Colorado Springs readers who wonder what is going on, the Gazette Telegraph chose not to cover the this attempt to swing the election in any way.  The only  Colorado Springs coverage was by this blog.  If you wish to look back, most coverage occurred in early to mid October. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (3) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Do You Wonder What I'm Doing?

Posted by NOTLEGALROADKILLYET on Friday, January 26, 2007 11:01:47 PM
Some of you who are new to this blog may have noticed that I take the time to write up media articles which are unnecessarily biased or inaccurate.  

No, I am not trying to bore my readers to tears with repetitive essays, though I risk doing that. 

I am operating under the theory that members of the media are like anyone else.  If someone calls them in a public way enough times for misbehaving, and writing slanted articles and editorials is misbehaving, I think they will modify their behavior. 

They can't claim that their editorial policy serves any public interest.  On the contrary, some of their editorials have done great damage to the public interest.  They have no conscience and will continue until someone objects.

No one seems to be objecting, and until we object in a way that they can observe our objection, there will be no incentive to change.  I'm trying to object, and you can help.

There are at least three ways that the various editorial boards can get the message.  The first is a letter to the editor.  If you read something I have said, and agree, take a minute and send off a note to the editor. You don't have to make threats.  In fact, your letter is more effective if it is threat free.  Just say in an original way that you agree with what I have written.

Second, if you have a blog, take the time to link to the essay with which you agree.  Linking is a form of voting in the search engine world.  If enough links are connected to an essay, that essay moves up in scoring, and therefore position when users do a search.  One of the reasons I would like to see hundreds of Republican blogs is that each blog gets a vote, if only they will use it.

Third is Wikipedia considerations.  If I take the time to write a critical article, someone may take the time to add the information I provided to Wikipedia and to cite the essay as a reference.  Wikipedia requires references.  It is my hope that conservatives will begin to tell the world that our Denver media is so slanted that it should not be taken seriously.  That will get their attention.

If you get tired of reading repetitive essays on the same issues, know that I get equally tired of writing them.  Just skim through them, but believe that I am trying to do good work, work that will benefit all of us in the long run.  If you agree and have a moment, make use of the information and reinforce it.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Bill Ritter: Not in Office Even a Month

Posted by NOTLEGALROADKILLYET on Friday, January 26, 2007 1:45:00 PM
January, 2007 probably hasn't been a good month for Governor Bill Ritter.  Sure, he got inaugurated, but almost immediately the loony left in the state legislature handed him two hot potatoes.

The one receiving the least attention is the attempt to emasculate the electoral college.  That one is plainly unconstitutional, but given the condition of ethics in today's legal system, anything is possible.

The "Labor Peace Act," has put Ritter on the hot seat.  Ritter courted the business community in the last election and got a lot of help.  Now the business community is frightened that it will become easier in this state to organize all union shops. 

The Denver Post would prefer that the bill never hit Ritter's desk because they think he will sign it.  A Ritter spokesman said as much.  That would greatly disturb the business community.

Today, the Denver Post reports on a business luncheon with 400 business leaders that featured Ritter as a speaker.  To describe the business community "greatly disturbed" may be an understatement.  How about "up in arms" against the strangely named "Labor Peace Act?"

If this is "peace," what will the next 47 months of Ritter's term bring?

Here are samples from the Post Article, Labor Battle Entangles Ritter:"

"Business leaders are viewing this as a kick in the teeth right out of the gate," said Tim Jackson, president of the Colorado Automobile Dealers Association.

"I think a number of people on our board are probably delivering him the message that we do oppose this and we really do think it will be bad for business," Chuck Berry, president of CACI, [Colorado Association of Commerce and Industry] said after the speech.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Congressional Ethics Reform-Denver Post Style

Posted by NOTLEGALROADKILLYET on Friday, January 26, 2007 12:37:52 PM
Once again, the Denver Post has a misleading and very partisan editorial today:  "Congress moves to police its own ethics"  It signals its partisan approach with the subtitle: 

Lawmakers should be commended for pushing forward with new ethics guidelines, especially considering the scandals during the Tom DeLay era,

You would think from the tone and information in the article that the Republicans have a monopoly on corruption.  No mention is made of the scandals that brought the Republicans to power in 1994-the House Banking and Post Office scandals.  No mention is made of the $90,000 found in Democratic Congressman William Jefferson's freezer.  No mention is made of the fact that Democratic Congressman Rahm Emanuel knew of Congressman Foley's emails for almost a year before he alerted the press, and then lied about having that knowledge.

You wouldn't know from the editorial that Senate Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid tried to eliminate a Republican proposed rule against Senators voting for projects that benefited lobbyist family member of Senators.  The Post conveniently forgets that Reid's four sons and his son in law are all lobbyists.  It also can't seem to recall that former Democratic Senate Leader Tom Daschle's wife is a lobbyist.

The Post conveniently overlooks the Democratic led filibuster this past week to keep the Senate from identifying the authors of earmark legislation.

Wouldn't it be wonderful if the Denver Post recognized that where there is money, there is bound to be corruption?  Corruption doesn't come with a single party label.  If the Denver Post had any real interest in seeing Congressional rules cleaned up (and it doesn't), it would print more responsible editorials. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous12…67891011121314…5455Next »