Of course he’s clever enough to know that he has to say that the violence is not justifiable, but that he remains concerned by the fact that the judges are “unaccountable”.
[quote=“mofangongren”]This just in – Sen. Cornyn (R-Texas) apparently feels that the killing of judges is just a way for the citizens to hold judges “accountable.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A26236-2005Apr4.html
[/quote]
Just more of the same shit-stirring from mofangongren.
mofangongren,
Why do you post this type of crap? How can any person with even a junior high school reading proficiency level read this article and come to the conclusion that you stated above? The Senator does NOT think that doing violence to judges is a “way” to make them accountable. He simply wonders whether there is a connection between the people’s perception of judges’ lack of accountability and the frustration of the people which results in violence against the judges.
The Senator clearly stated:
Why should anyone take anything you post seriously??
[quote=“Tigerman”]… How can any person with even a junior high school reading proficiency level read this article and come to the conclusion that you stated above? The Senator does NOT think that doing violence to judges is a “way” to make them accountable. He simply wonders whether there is a connection between the people’s perception of judges’ lack of accountability and the frustration of the people which results in violence against the judges.
…
Why should anyone take anything you post seriously??[/quote]
TM,
I think you may be jumping to conclusions by assuming that MFGR either (a) had trouble understanding the article he read, or (b) was deliberately trying to mislead people with a fictional summary.
It is possible, after all, that the Senator actually made the bizzare remark that MFGR mentioned, but that this remark just wasn’t quoted in that particular article. Mofang may just have accidentally cut-and-pasted the wrong link to put in his post. 
[quote=“Hobbes”]I think you may be jumping to conclusions by assuming that MFGR either (a) had trouble understanding the article he read, or (b) was deliberately trying to mislead people with a fictional summary.
It is possible, after all, that the Senator actually made the bizzare remark that MFGR mentioned, but that this remark just wasn’t quoted in that particular article. Mofang may just have accidentally cut-and-pasted the wrong link to put in his post. [/quote]
I took that quote from the article MFGR cited.
TM,
The quote I was looking for in MFGR’s article was this one:
Based on MFGR’s post, I assumed I would find something like this in the linked article. Sadly there was not. That’s why I figure there must have been some kind of mix up with the link. 
[quote=“Hobbes”]TM,
The quote I was looking for in MFGR’s article was this one:
Based on MFGR’s post, I assumed I would find something like this in the linked article. Sadly there was not. That’s why I figure there must have been some kind of mix up with the link. [/quote]
Ah… I see.
Yeah, there seems to be a mix up… but I don’t think its in MFGR’s link.
Maoman hit the nail on the head. Anyone who’s done a few searches on this topic can see that Sen. Cornyn is absolutely obsessed with this “accountability” thing regarding judges. When Cornyn says this violence comes from people frustrated by judges being “unaccountable”, keep in mind that Cornyn is one of the people who is on the record in a hundred different ways saying this is his beef with judges. Cornyn’s latest Senate-floor statements about violence against judges comes in the wake of a very substantial background.
Put another way, it’s as if there were a senator who kept obsessing about “free ice cream” on the Senate floor, in the press, in articles he writes for the National Review, and so on… Then some day, in the wake of three Good Humor ice cream truck drivers getting killed, he comments about how he feels this is probably stemming from a failure of these truck drivers to give away free ice cream. Oh sure, it’s “inexcuseable” to kill ice cream truck drivers, but certainly the senator understands where the rage comes from… 
As a sidenote, are judges “unaccountable” to the public? Federal judges get lifetime appointments, but the most common impeachment proceedings involve the removal of federal judges who have misbehaved. Elected state or local judges, of course, can be un-elected or also un-robed for misconduct. If a judge simply issues dumb rulings, they get reversed on appeal – and these records as well get tracked.
[quote=“Hobbes”]
I think part of the disconnect comes from this last quote, MFGR. As far as I can tell you are the only person in the discussion who thinks that this assertion is even remotely accurate. [/quote]
Fascinating point, Hobbes – and you’re great for raising it. In looking through the thread, I’ve been referring to these three people as widely accepted. I think they are, although following are my brief notes:
Based on Coulter’s books sales, speaking commitments, etc., it would appear that she has broad acceptance among conservatives. Most conservatives appear to think of her as “entertainment”, and she is famous for saying and writing lots of outrageous things precisely because they are supposed to be “funny”. I don’t think her McVeigh comments fall into the same basket, and FS and I have already covered some of that ground. You know that if Coulter had said that “McVeigh” line with regards to the 9-11 hijackers, there would be a big uproar.
GG Liddy also appears to have some broad listenership, and so I wouldn’t say that he’s that far out from the GOP mainstream. He, himself, is not by any means a “moderate” anything – look at the guy, his career, his dietary habits, his ability to hold his hand over a candle, etc. However, again, this is a person who has enough listeners through his syndicated radio program that he appears to be accepted by a lot of “moderate” Republicans. Ironically he did not get in trouble for his statements about shooting federal agents in the head until after the Oklahoma City bombing made everybody (except evidently Coulter) sensitive to the whole domestic-terrorism issue.
Hal Turner is even further along. He broadcasts to 70 countries and appears to be quite a nut. In another thread in the IP forum, I did rate him on a spectrum as being pretty far out there. No telling who is listeners are exactly, but kudos to you for challenging that he is accepted by “moderate” Republicans. Actually, my only basis for lumping Turner in with “moderate” Republicans is that he apparently is a regular guest on Fox News, which does appeal to a broad spectrum of Republicans. However, I’ve already posted that information previously within this thread.
Yeah, determining whether XYZ nutcase is “embraced by moderate Republicans” is a tough issue to settle definitively. Presumably there are few polls on the subject. What’s left? “Anecdotal evidence” I suppose. Subjective judgment based on personal experience. And, I suppose, your suggestion of looking to book sales, television appearences and the like.
I don’t fault you for using this last measure as an indication of mainstream acceptance (as I said, there’s not much else to go on), but I do think that there are some problems with it. As you said, the key to book sales and television appearances tends to be entertainment value rather than message. I have seen Coulter a couple times on TV and generally found her to be something of a clown. The other two people you mention I have never seen before, so I can’t comment.
For my part, about the only information I am left with is my own experience. I know a lot of moderate Republicans. Not one of them embraces the views of the people you are talking about. An imperfect sample? Certainly, but it’s about all I can go one. So even though these folks you mention may sell books or get airtime on radio stations, I see nothing that would indicate to me that they are seen as anything other than freak-show type curiosities. Good people to put on your show when you need a ratings boost; bad examples to hold up as an opinion-leader for moderates of any stripe.
Judges should be accountable.
So what?
So what? He did not say the violence was justified.
No matter how you attempt to spin this, you cannot escape the fact that the senator stated that the viloence is not justified.
Try again. 
Tigerman,
Judges should be accountable and they are accountable. If you think there is a problem, then please explain how they are not accountable enough considering: 1) they can be removed for misconduct; and 2) dumb decisions simply will be overturned on appeal.
What additional level of holding these people “accountable” should we have? The violent sort of “accountability” that Cornyn appears to understand but feels, ultimately, is “unjustifiable” seems a lot like domestic terrorism. I think we can all agree that violence against judges should have nothing to do with accountability notions.
This just in – Frist gets all moderate on judge issues! After pretending to be a neurologist in the heat of the Terri Schiavo situation, we now get a warmer, fuzzier side of Frist.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=584&e=2&u=/nm/20050405/pl_nm/congress_judges_dc
[quote]U.S. Senate Republican leader Bill Frist said on Tuesday that courts had acted fairly in the Terri Schiavo “right-to-die” case, differing sharply from a vow of retribution by his House of Representatives counterpart, Tom DeLay.
“I believe we have a fair and independent judiciary today,” said Frist, now trying to resolve a battle with Democrats over judicial nominations that threatens to tie his chamber into knots. “I respect that.”[/quote]
Hey, good for him! :bravo:
[quote=“mofangongren”]Tigerman,
Judges should be accountable and they are accountable. If you think there is a problem, then please explain how they are not accountable enough considering: 1) they can be removed for misconduct; and 2) dumb decisions simply will be overturned on appeal.[/quote]
I did NOT state that judges are unaccountable. I stated merely that they should be accountable and that the senator’s concern re this matter was nowhere near what you are attempting to spin it.
The Senator clearly stated (though apparently it still was over your head) that he believes that some people might perceive that judges are not accountable and that this perception might be the reason or a reason for some of the violence committed at judges.
That’s an idiotic interpretation of what the Senator stated.
Hobbes,
Coulter’s “Slander” book spent 20 weeks on the NYTimes bestseller list, 8 straight weeks at No. 1 – based on articles dating back 2 years ago she had sold 400,000+ copies. Add in all the people using libraries, paperback sales, etc., and it doesn’t seem to be a merely “extremist” phenomenon. Her “Treason” book apparently did even better.
Again, it would seem that while Coulter, herself, is not thought to be very “moderate”, her audience includes a wide variety of “moderate” people. Keep in mind, too, that in the course of living overseas we all may not keep up with all the political reading at home or even hear too much about it. (Does Eslite even carry this sort of stuff? Pageone might have some books… )
Getting back to the current situation, it would appear that there are extremists on the far-right side who are killing or trying to kill judges. It would also appear that there are people with a lot of access to media on the right side of the spectrum who appear willing to gloss-over, condone, understand, or encourage the killing of judges and/or other federal officials in the performance of their jobs. You simply do not see that on the “left” side of the spectrum.
[quote]DeLay, a Texas Republican, said afterward: “We will look at an arrogant, out-of-control, unaccountable judiciary that thumbed their nose at the Congress and president when given jurisdiction to hear this case anew.”
In a written statement, DeLay said: “The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior.”[/quote]
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=584&e=2&u=/nm/20050405/pl_nm/congress_judges_dc
Perhaps DeLay feels its time for some Cornyn-style “accountability”…
Tigerman, why do you think that’s an “idiotic interpretation” of what Cornyn said. I’ve gone to the trouble of reviewing quite a bit of Cornyn’s record on this accountability issue, including his article for the National Review.
Cornyn clearly thinks that judges are not accountable enough – he has a great track record on saying this over and over. When he says that the violence might be coming from people who have the same frustration he has (i.e., that judges are “not accountable”) there is no real doubt that Cornyn is talking from the basis of understanding. You seem to be pretending that Cornyn does not have this long track record on this issue, so perhaps if you run a few yahoo.com or google.com searches you can read up on it. Just an idea.
Frankly, I think Cornyn’s comments about the judges come off a bit like blaming “short skirts” for why women get raped. However, to be polite perhaps we can revisit the “free ice cream” obsessed senator who spends every waking moment on the Senate floor, in numerous news articles, in National Review commentary that he’s penned himself, etc. I guess when it comes to killers of any type, I’m not willing to grant them any sympathy and am not going to link it to any pet causes of my own.
[quote=“mofangongren”]Perhaps DeLay feels its time for some Cornyn-style “accountability”…
Tigerman, why do you think that’s an “idiotic interpretation” of what Cornyn said.[/quote]
I don’t understand. Are you saying that DeLay does not want Cornyn-style “accountability”? Let’s look at what DeLay was saying:
[quote]DeLay, a Texas Republican, said afterward: “We will look at an arrogant, out-of-control, unaccountable judiciary that thumbed their nose at the Congress and president when given jurisdiction to hear this case anew.”
In a written statement, DeLay said: “The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior.”[/quote]
It would appear that DeLay wants to hold the judiciary accountable. What do you think DeLay means by this? I’d say DeLay and Frist have really split on this issue, wouldn’t you?
This just in – NYTimes’ main editorial slams Cronyn and DeLay, pointing out some interesting factors. I hadn’t seen this until now.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/06/opinion/06wed1.html?hp
[quote]Listeners could only cringe at the events behind Mr. Cornyn’s fulminating: an Atlanta judge was murdered in his courtroom by a career criminal who wanted only to shoot his way out of a trial, and a Chicago judge’s mother and husband were executed by a deranged man who was furious that she had dismissed a wild lawsuit. It was sickening that an elected official would publicly offer these sociopaths as examples of any democratic value, let alone as holders of legitimate concerns about the judiciary.
The need to shield judges from outside threats - including those from elected officials like Senator Cornyn - is a priceless principle of our democracy. Senator Cornyn offered a smarmy proclamation of “great distress” at courthouse thuggery. Then he rationalized it with broadside accusations that judges “make raw political or ideological decisions.” He thumbed his nose at the separation of powers, suggesting that the Supreme Court be “an enforcer of political decisions made by elected representatives of the people.” Avoiding that nightmare is precisely why the founders made federal judgeships lifetime jobs and created a nomination process that requires presidents to seek bipartisan support.[/quote]
Art imitates life!
First Cornyn wants judges to be accountable to right-wing loonies who want to gun them down, then he doesn’t want possible Supreme Court justices to answer the most basic questions from his fellow senators. What way does he want it?? Accountable or unaccountable??
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/03/AR2005080300481.html