Reply to Thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Glocktogo" data-source="post: 1396022" data-attributes="member: 1132">While I think that might help, what would keep a president from appointing and the Senate from approving .gov apologists to the bench? Both sides are in love with their power and most federal judges rule in favor of the .gov now, which is part of the problem. Even elected judges are a problem. Most of them win as a result of campaign funding and winning a popularity contest. Then they&#039;re rarely ousted once they sit on the bench. Finding out information about how effective a judge is has become nearly impossible.Ultimately it all reverts back to the voter. We elect idiots and charlatans, who then go on to do despicable things in the name of appeasing an indulgent and apathetic populace. We&#039;re definitely in the bread and circuses phase in this country. <img src="/images/smilies/frown.png"&nbsp; class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":(" title="Frown&nbsp; &nbsp; :(" data-shortname=":(" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Glocktogo, post: 1396022, member: 1132"] While I think that might help, what would keep a president from appointing and the Senate from approving .gov apologists to the bench? Both sides are in love with their power and most federal judges rule in favor of the .gov now, which is part of the problem. Even elected judges are a problem. Most of them win as a result of campaign funding and winning a popularity contest. Then they're rarely ousted once they sit on the bench. Finding out information about how effective a judge is has become nearly impossible. Ultimately it all reverts back to the voter. We elect idiots and charlatans, who then go on to do despicable things in the name of appeasing an indulgent and apathetic populace. We're definitely in the bread and circuses phase in this country. :( [/QUOTE]

Verification