Weather | Sports | Forums | Comics | Classifieds | Calendar | Movies
Re: Scalia stays on Cheney case and tells why, March 19.
I am only a retired "country lawyer," having practiced for more than 50 years. During that time I was also an assistant prosecuting attorney and an assistant New York State attorney general.
I was embarrassed by the logic of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia in defending his reason for not removing himself from the case in which his friend Vice President Dick Cheney is involved before the Supreme Court.
Justice Scalia defends his decision on the basis that in the past, other Supreme Court justices socialized with presidents and high government officials: Justice Harlan Stone tossed a medicine ball with members of the Hoover administration; Justice Fred Vinson played poker with President Harry Truman; Justice Byron White skied with Attorney General Robert Kennedy. Nowhere in the news article was there a mention that any of these officials had a case pending before the U.S. Supreme Court.
Justice Scalia, in his twisted logic, attempts to compare an invitation from a friend to address the friend's law school class with a case pending before the Supreme Court.
The lawyers who helped write our Constitution must be turning over in their graves at Justice Scalia's decision.
The rather lengthy reasoning Justice Antonin Scalia presents in his insistent and rather defiant posture regarding his sitting on the case involving Vice President Dick Cheney, not only further erodes the dignity of the Supreme Court but also demonstrates a lack of decorum which we citizens have come to expect from this, the highest judicial body of our country.
Justice Scalia has succinctly put the matter before us when he states: "If it is reasonable to think that a Supreme Court justice can be bought so cheap, the nation is in deeper trouble than I had imagined."
So cheap, indeed, Mr. Justice, that you give us reason to doubt (for a second time in recent history) the integrity of our ultimate bastion of true justice.
Re: Scalia stays on Cheney case and tells why.
What Justice Antonin Scalia fails to point out in all the historical examples cited concerning the "upper social strata" of Washington is the fact that quite possibly these other judges and Justice Department types, along with their social contacts, were not necessarily involved in any pertinent investigations. What we do know about Vice President Dick Cheney is that he has had prior involvement with companies that had and still have everything to do with energy use and may have vested interests in the politics of the current administration.
Of course we would like to know what has been going on behind these closed doors. Are the best interests of the American people being tended? Or is it more of the same old smoke-filled back-room scenarios? Could it be that some issues are best handled if nipped in the bud? Do these people think we are that stupid? The condescending arrogance of this group is more than a slap in the face to everyday working folks who pay the tab day in and day out.
Even though we are stuck with Scalia and his ilk, come November this bunch is fixing to get a double dose from the voters. So Scalia can hang out in Cheney's duck blind all he likes by himself while we, the people, have our turn in the voting both. We know how to quack-quack also.
As a fellow lawyer, I urge Sen. Bob Graham to commence impeachment proceedings against Justice Antonin Scalia for his arrogant, churlish, elitist, and totally unprofessional refusal to recuse himself in the Sierra Club case. This man flies on Air Force One with a hunting buddy and has the gall to pretend that he is some superior being who was not in the least influenced by the experience. His callous remark about a Supreme Court justice being "bought" so cheaply could be a case, methinks, of protesting too much.
In any event, it is a gross appearance of impropriety under the circumstances. It is time for the legislative branch to end the tyranny of nine unelected officials who not only answer to no one but, when challenged, have the insensitivity to write 20-page memorandums on why they should not. Sen. Graham, please take action now to restore public trust in a decadent judicial system before we start settling our disputes with guns.
Re: Scalia stays on Cheney case and tells why.
Justice Antonin Scalia writes, "If it is reasonable to think that a Supreme Court justice can be bought so cheap, the nation is in deeper trouble than I had imagined."
If we citizens are so naive to believe that friendship has no part in a politician's decisions, then our nation is in much bigger trouble. And why is it that when someone points out a politician's faults, he always compares it to another politician's action in the past, as if two wrongs make a right?
And who is better equipped to manage an endeavor, a person who, when wrong, will change his mind, or a person who stubbornly trudges on?
After reading Justice Antonin Scalia's long-winded, self-serving statement about how he is not disqualified from hearing a case involving his duck-hunting partner, I am reminded what my high-school-educated, farmer's daughter mother would say: "A hit dog always howls!"
Sounds like the justice doth protest too much.
Re: The poet within, March 16.
I feel it would have been more appropriate to investigate and make public the artistic pursuits and accomplishments of Steven Todd Booker's victim, Lorine Demoss Harmon. However inspiring Booker's work may appear, as well as his ability to adjust to the punishment that has been given him, he deserves no time in the spotlight.
I feel that forgiveness comes in all degrees, but we must surely separate the victims from the perpetrators and learn to acknowledge those (the victims) who have left this world deserving of such praise.
Re: Odds are Hard Rock hotel, casino a big hit, March 12.
The story said that Seminole gambling facilities are expected "to boost annual gambling profits $1-billion or more." It's time to put legalized gambling back on the ballot for a vote. The state of Florida could realize substantial revenue from legalized gambling - revenue that is so badly needed, for so many programs that have been cut or are underfunded. Perhaps the Times could take a poll on this issue and see how the new generation of voters feels about legalized gambling.
The Seminoles have prospered on their gambling profits. Their prosperity, along with this enormous new casino, did not come from nongamblers.
Re: U.S. life expectancy rate inches upward, for now, March 18.
Before we Americans dislocate our shoulders patting ourselves on our backs about our recently improved longevity, we should consider the fact that our longevity, compared to the longevity of the world's other developed countries, has plummeted during the last 50 years. At the same time, our health care costs per citizen have risen to the highest in the world.
Figures from the U.S. Census Bureau tell a depressing story. In 1950, life expectancies for American women and men were 5th and 6th among the world's 16 most developed countries - not bad, but not particularly impressive for the richest country in the world. In 1998, life expectancies for American women and men, compared to the same 16 developed countries, were near the very bottom - a sorry 13th and 14th place.
Given our poor longevity, it is both puzzling and disturbing that America has consistently taken first place worldwide in an embarrassing statistic: the health care dollars spent per year for each American. With America at $2,765 (in 1998), our closest competitor for this dubious honor spent only $1,945, with the expenditures by every other country even lower.
How ironic - we spend more money on health care than any other country on this planet, yet our longevity is poor and getting relatively poorer.
We should take a hard look at these figures, acknowledge that we have nothing to brag about when it comes to longevity, and work much harder to find ways to fix the problem. The first step? To recognize that we have fallen into a hole and that it's time to stop digging.
Having worked in surgery before retirement, I saw many motorcycle accident victims. With a great deal of concern, we referred to these victims as "Humpty Dumpty." More often than not, we could not put them together again.
Law or no law, wear a helmet!
Re: Retirement home melee breaks out over salad bar, March 5.
We don't read too much in the newspaper about the seriousness of crime among our elderly (a group I am fast approaching) until a few weeks ago when I read about the food fight at a retirement center in Winter Haven. I truly believe it could be made into a movie sequel of the original Animal House with John Belushi. A good title might be "Animal House - The Advanced Stage."
My question is: What's wrong with picking through lettuce at the salad bar? I do it all the time while looking for the darkest green leaves. The reason someone has not accosted me so far may be that I use the tongs placed in the lettuce container. I would have loved to have seen the melee that occurred at this upscale retirement home. It was probably the most excitement the residents have seen in years and will probably also be something they will talk about until they die.
The last memorable incident I remember was while I lived in St. Petersburg in the early '80s. We had the infamous "Largo 8." What a bad group this was - eight men over the age of 80 who were playing penny-ante poker in their mobile home park. They were all arrested and severely reprimanded. I never met this group, but I know they must have been a real threat to the rest of the residents of Largo. I wouldn't want them living next door to me as I need to keep all the pennies I have for wherever I may be living when I am 80.
As one fast approaching the status of senior citizen, I now understand the importance of exercise, especially my arms. I need to be ready for any food fights that I may encounter when my children place me in an upscale retirement home.
We invite readers to write to us. Letters for publication should be addressed to Letters to the Editor, P.O. Box 1121, St. Petersburg, FL 33731. They can be sent by fax to 727 893-8675 or through our Web site at: http://www.sptimes.com/letters/
They should be brief and must include the writer's name, address and phone number. Please include a handwritten signature when possible.
Letters may be edited for clarity, taste and length. We regret that not all letters can be published.