sage advice Jim Cummings On Apr 1, 2005 11:17 PM, Anthony West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > My personal recommendation -- as a former political editor who used to > specialize in Pennsylvania judicial politics, but also as a busy voter with > little time to research and decide about these individuals, about whom it is > impossible to learn much -- is as follows: > > Always vote NO on judicial retention. Every single judge, every single time. > NO. > > The reasoning is that the cards are immeasurably stacked in favor of judges' > winning retention races. If any judge has EVER been defeated for retention, > I can't remember it. So if you vote NO on retaining a judge who happens, > unbeknownst to you, to be great -- relax, it won't hurt him. The only way > your NO vote could actually have an impact on a race would be if a judge > were so outstandingly abominable that he had actually overwhelmed voter > apathy and ignorance with his awfulness. If yours was the deciding vote that > pushed such a clod off the bench -- well, it probably would be a good thing. > > So from now on, make your voting task easier. Just say NO to judges. It's > the right thing to do. > > -- Tony West >
-- Jim Cummings J. W. England Library/ILL University of the Sciences in Philadelphia 600 South 43rd Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-4495 USA Telephone: 215-596-8969 Fax: 215-596-8760 democracy for Iraq should start with a referendum on the US occupation ---- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see <http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
