What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
31 Comments
- timothybryce, on 10/11/2007, -5/+12Wow, next thing you know they'll tell us that Supreme Court justices are picked based on political considerations...SCANDAL
- LowRentDiggs, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7Being a Republican and being a politician are 2 different things. No judge should be appointed because he's a politician and that's what is happening.
- heaintheavy, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7Sorry to tell you this, Charlotte_Web, but considering political affiliation when filling civil service positions is a violation. And who said anything about the President being involved in this? I certainly didn't. Unless you know something I don't know and the order to pick these particular judges came all the way from the president himself.
Actually, that wouldn't surprise me in the least. Perhaps you should be on Congress' sopena list when it investigates this matter? - weightman, on 10/11/2007, -4/+8"Half lacked experience in immigration law."
Awesome. Those with "experience" have been doing a totally pathetic job and seem to have no respect for the USA's right to enforce its laws. - heaintheavy, on 10/11/2007, -7/+10Before the neocons start yelling that there is nothing against using politics to pick these people, you are wrong. It is a violation of the Hatch Act.
Read up before posting your lies...
http://www.osc.gov/hatchact.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatch_Act_of_1939 - generalloy, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3"Just another part of the Bush plan to hire incompetent people who are loyal political operatives in every place possible."
You said it-- paging Monica Goodling. What an incompetent bimbo.
Never mind Gonzales, Wolfowitz, FEMA's Michael D Brown, etc....and we all suffer because of it. - smacksaw, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Dugg down - this is OLD news
- postaldave, on 10/11/2007, -7/+8OMFG! 1/3 of judged picked by republicans are REPUBLICANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
how the hell did that happen???
no democrat would EVER do that!!! - Charlotte_Web, on 10/11/2007, -8/+9Stop the presses... politicians like to pick judges who align with their party's platform.
Yawn... Wake me when you have another startling revelation, Captain Obvious.... - Charlotte_Web, on 10/11/2007, -5/+6You may want to read those links, yourself. According to both of them, the Hatch Act gags federal employees from participating in political activity; it does not bar the President from appointing employees whose political beliefs he already knows.
- rcook18, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1 Aschocobo, you are so correct.
"and what is this ***** with neocons, that whenever someone points out anything with the Bushies, they feel the need to bring up Clinton, as if to justify and rationalize anything that the Bushies do?"
I have never seen the Bush apologists out in such force as they are today. - MadScientist68, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Let's all keep in mind that this is "the Post"...otherwise known as "the comPost". You would never have seen this type of "analysis" and hard-hitting, investigative "journalism" when Clinton was doing this very same thing. ( http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=1100097840 ) (Yes, Leviathan777, they DID do this you koolaide drinker). If they do "cover" it it's justifide and touted as "a bold step to revolutionize the justice system ushering in a new era of justice for the united states of america") even though it's much worse by a factor of 11.
- rawsteak, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1call me ignorant, but i totally thought they were talking about the shirt ties that candidates were wearing... come to think of it, that would make a lot more sense... i think i would actually forgive an administration that said "hey, sorry guys... his tie was just that much cooler... we didn't think he would was going to do so poorly! our bad, seriously, our bad."
- OwdenBowden, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Anyone within the Government (elected office) that places the needs and the welfare of illegal immigrants, above and beyond that of the Citizens of the United States of America is guilty of TREASON. As such they should be tried for their crime and then Hung from the neck until dead!
As far as these illegal immigrants are concerned - Secure the boarder's first and then go round up each and everyone of the Millions and then deport them. I don't care if you are "Paying Taxes" you are not suppose to be here. You violated the Law of the Land and for that you will now be banished from this country for the rest of your life! This includes all of the "Children" that these people have had here illegally.
And for the record - You cannot enforce the law by breaking the law. As such - those who broke the law by being here illegally and then having children here illegally (seeking to gain American Citizenship) are in violation of the law which in turn cancels out their children's Birth in this country and voids their citizenship!
G-d Bless the United States of America. - Leviathan777, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4Just another part of the Bush plan to hire incompetent people who are loyal political operatives in every place possible.
Yeah, it's illegal, too. And no, the Democrats don't do it.
This administration is the most corrupt in a hundred years.
But go ahead and keep thinking it's fine, you fascist *****. It worked great during Katrina, didn't it? It's been working great with our food safety, hasn't it? - urbannomad23, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1that's pretty shameful and immoral if you ask me.
- migtex1234, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Certainly, re: political appointmentss. Look at Nancy P.'s son's 180,000 job. Based on talent,
ho, I think not. Nancy P. also obtained her own plane, provided by taxpayers, she also went, at taxpayer expense, to meet with the emeny, which, use to labeled as tratior. The Democrat's &
Republicans have always done what they want. Totally disregard for what is best for America, their motto: What is best for me!!! Look at the rules, the Demo's have tried to change... ho ho.
Clip off free speech, courtesy of Waxman, Force the Immigration Reform (total disregard of what the Citzens want (to the cost of Trillions), use of taxpayers dollars on pet projects (regardless of need or reason) want to sneak in more taxes by allowing last minute ammendments to Bills, etc. Very sad that Congress has become the enemy of all taxpayers & business. All they want, is to do what they want. Very scary group! - CourtesyFlush, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1"Would you rather hire a dumb guy with 10 years direct experience, or would you rather hire a smart guy with 10 years of indirect experience?"
Half of these people don't even have real jobs, let alone the opportunity or know how to actually hire anyone.
Questions such as yours are wasted in a place like this. - aschocobo, on 10/11/2007, -14/+14Diggeral, you're spewing ***** and you know it. had you bothered to RTFA, you'd have seen this:
"The Post analysis is the first systematic examination of the people appointed to immigration courts, the relationships that led to their selection and the experience they brought to their position. The review, based on Justice records and research into the judges' backgrounds, encompassed the 37 current judges approved by Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales or his predecessor, John D. Ashcroft, starting in 2004."
see that? it says 37 since 3004, not 10.
approx. 12 judges. and out of those twelve, six were considered unqualified to serve as immigration judges.
and what is this ***** with neocons, that whenever someone points out anything with the Bushies, they feel the need to bring up Clinton, as if to justify and rationalize anything that the Bushies do? we've all heard of "Goodwin's Law", now meet "Shakran's Law":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakran%27s_Law
Clinton isn't the president right now, and hasn't been for six damn years.
/no, i am not Shakran
//yes, i reinstated the page simply because it applies, and because the practice runs rampant among neocons who believe the argument is a good place to hide when trying to bail out of the onslaught of criticisms of the bush admin, which they've blindly supported without question.
p.s.: i'm not a democrat either, so don't even try that angle. - angrygalactus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Here comes the NAU, no longer Americans, but North American Union citizen.
- AladinSane, on 10/11/2007, -6/+5So basically, the vast majority of Judges picked for this position did NOT have Republican ties, so this obviously means that they were picked by Republicans based solely on partisan politics. Gotcha. I swear, don't people EVER get tired of being idiots? Like, EVER? As for the "Half didn't have Immigration law experience"- well, for that to matter, you'd have to show that there were other Judges up for the same position that DID have immigration law experience. Apparently, ***** like the Submitter think that people should just be BORN with immigration law experience, since any attempt to GET such experience clearly means that you're playing Partisan politics. BTW, maybe the Subby could tell us: were the "half" without experience entirely on the TWO-THIRDS non-Republican side?
Grow the hell up, people. The biggest problem America faces isn't in it's leadership: it's in the pinheaded populace, who continually whine about everything. OMG! A third of appointed Judges had Republican ties! TEH HORROR! Clearly, they ALL need to be Democrats for the system to be fair! - texmeg, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0why is this such shocking news? this is nothing new and it's not just the immigration judges. it just so happens that immigration is a "hot" topic right now and so it's what gets highlighted.
- DiggeralToolz, on 10/11/2007, -17/+16An entire third [1/3; 3.333 out of 10, ...] since 2004 have had Republican connections? I'm outraged!!! America's Democrats would never pull this sort of ill concieved party partisanship. No siree! Just look at how they've dealt with William Jefferson. Most Ethical Congress Ever!
- JimmyTheClam, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1No, ***** You.
Nice third-world country you built there.
Please don't export the concept to anywhere else. - withincontext, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1You just proved that a douche is a douche, regardless of his origin. Way to speak the international language of asshat!
- irvman21, on 10/11/2007, -11/+9They certainly are the most ethical congress ever, just look how they passed those ethics reforms right after taking office...
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -6/+4The idea that anybody would accuse Bush of being strict on immigration is unbelievable. He's a total pussy.
- cheekymonkey63, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0LOL @postaldave
I am in agreement with that . Fact is politicians are crooked though . Most are out for their own gratification . This is not surprising to me though especially if Bush has anything to do with it . Look at how the good old US of A is right now because him. whole issue of immigration anyways is moronic in fact , i mean why can not people just go where they want to live if it means a better life for them or their families. Apart from finding a better way to decipher those who actually want a better life and those with terrorism on their minds. Do we really need a bloody politician telling us how to live our lives . and we have all seen especially in the last years of what the republican office can breed . Look at whose running the country right now and the shape its in financially, warring,and ecologically. - Flare, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2I'm mexican! F*ck you all gringos!
- Charlotte_Web, on 10/11/2007, -6/+2Oh, and BTW... experience is not the only qualification for a job.
Would you rather hire a dumb guy with 10 years direct experience, or would you rather hire a smart guy with 10 years of indirect experience? - Flare, on 10/11/2007, -9/+1The submitter clearly has no editorial knowledge whatsoever. It is clear that if you put an acronym in the title (GOP), you MUST write the meaning in the paragraph below; so that everybody knows what the hell you're talking about.
Instead of wasting your time submitting stories all day, go to school.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is