You know who you are: the largest, most knowledgeable, and wisest people of this state. You voted against a socialistic premise that you are not capable of spending your earned resources properly. You have rejected that only certain people, in governmental positions, are better fit to distribute what you produce than yourself. You voted for the retention of freedom and of independence. It was only a few weeks ago on the Fourth, that we celebrated the most sanctioned and undeniable philosophy. Or, why celebrate? You know the power that we the people still have when our governor was elected. And, many of you would have voted for the independence philosophy if you thought it would have done any good toward true people's governance. Well, if you want to bring forth to law your good ethics, morals, and core values, get active in the political movement you have the self welcome to energize. Buford Johnson needs your assistance in making your state a great state for you, your children, and all the people here. It's your call. Either, settle for complacency and let rogues run your life, or set your voice and strength resounding the independence battle cry.
I would recommend calling Buford Johnson. He's running for U.S. Senate. He was vice chair of the political party that chose Ventura as its gubernatorial candidate two years ago. His web site is gojohnson.org.
I had planned to write of high national debt, and its market effect of raising interest, which is a cost to the poor and an income for the rich. And I had planned to write of the conservative tax relief which is more income for the rich, and only increased interest for the poor. I was planning to show how tax savings for the rich further bloats a speculative stock market, while tax savings and interest savings for the poor would increase the market for real production.
However, the Republicans' campaigning for morality in the White House makes all this pass, outmoded. To improve the economy they will give our taxes, rebates, to the rich. To improve our schools they will give other taxes to non-tax-paying churches. To fight problems of drugs, and problems of indigence, they will give more tax money to our non-taxed church organizations. To save our Social Security System they will take money from it, and expect those who have trouble putting enough food on the table, and keeping a car running, to invest in the bloated speculative stock market.
If you have studied history, you will know that these same policies were followed in the latter days of the Roman Empire, and in the U.S. in the 1920s. Then you might note that those who ignore history or do not understand it can force all to relive it.
So, in their sanctimonious references to the flag, God and motherhood, is it really the religious, the moral, and thoughtful of the country that can cheer, or even be cheerful?
Dennis G. Gordon
I read with interest your article about my opponent boasting that judicial elections are a lot of bull and his unfounded allegation that the Minnesota Supreme Court has shut down the entire judicial election system. When we as judges take our oath of office, we do assume significant responsibilities and obligations on behalf of society. Some of these responsibilities may in fact affect some of our personal freedom, such as free speech. However, free speech has never been an unbridled right without bounds. When lawyers take their oath of office to become lawyers, they also have some of their freedoms affected.
For instance, confidential statements made by clients to attorneys are protected by the attorney/client privilege and an attorney is not free to discuss that information with others without the client's consent what the client has told them. Similarly, for good reason, judges are not to talk about cases that are under advisement or that are yet to come before the court, nor announce their views on disputed legal or political issues.
These limitations have their roots in our almost 800-year-old common law tradition of having neutral, impartial judges decide cases and controversies brought before them by our citizens without partisan considerations and without preconceived notions. Judges are to listen to both sides and interpret and apply the law and make a decision. Policy decisions are delegated to the legislative and executive branch under our constitutional system. Political party endorsement of judges is contradicting to our system of justice.
Judicial candidates and challengers are free to discuss all other issues relating to our courts. We can talk about leadership, court initiatives, management, personnel, budgets, case loads, rules and procedures, etc. Other important issues such as personal qualifications, experience and community involvement are also open for discussion. Since I have been on the Supreme Court for about two and one-half years, a number of major initiatives have been accomplished, including adopting rules to proscribe frivolous litigation and opening up some of the juvenile court proceedings. Currently, the Supreme Court is studying jury reform, business courts, complex litigation and encouraging alternative dispute resolution to help our citizens resolve their cases short of trial. Minnesota is recognized as a leader among the states in these areas, and I do believe that most of our citizens are extremely satisfied with the functioning of our courts.
I plan on being in Brainerd on Sept. 7 and 8 to discuss some of these issues and answer questions about our court from our citizens.
James H. Gilbert
The end of petroleum is near.
Jerrold C. Turnquist
Brainerd Dispatch ©2013. All Rights Reserved.