So much for judicial impartiality.
Where do I go from here? Today I got a post card in the mail from a candidate for the state Supreme Court. I always thought that judges were supposed to be impartial arbiters of the law and not to come to a case with a preconceived ideology. However, the face of the post card says about the candidate: "A Kentucky Republican, Pro life, Pro right to keep and bear arms". The back side of the card says "Would you rather have a conservative Republican like me on the Kentucky Supreme Court, or someone appointed by our liberal Democratic Governor like my opponent?" Further down it says:"Since my opponent supports Obama's position on abortion, what will she do to your gun rights if elected?"
So, how impartial do you think she will vote on the court? Hasn't she already spelled out her agenda? If this sort of thing isn't against all judicial ethics, it ought to be. Just not sure who to complain to and what good it would do with the election less than a week away. Just really pissed me off.
But, of course, corporations are people too and $$$ = free speech. We've got opinionated SOB's on SCOTUS who vote their agenda rather than follow the Constitution and precedent, why shouldn't it trickle down to the states?
= new reply since forum marked as read
