Yet, it is not a crime to obtain records showing WHETHER you voted.
In a recent controversy, New York Democratic party was reportedly threatening its voters to "out" those of them who did not vote.
And, in the recent audio interview a successful judicial candidate, now judge Lisa M. Fisher clearly admitted that she and her husband purposely made their financial investment into advertising and "marketing" Lisa Fisher to voters by getting access to e-mails of female Democratic voters (Lisa Fisher ran on a Republican ticket) and sending them Facebook ads and targeted newsletters.
When you get sales ads for soap - or other stuff - you usually toss the sales ad in the garbage without looking.
When such a sales ad comes from a pretty female judicial candidate panhandling to you her gender and her children
- female voters were swayed to the point that Lisa Fisher won the judicial seat with (she claims) 18,000 votes over her "competition" (her words, not mine).
In the upcoming judicial elections - and I mainly mean it for voters in Delaware County where the mid-term judicial elections are going to happen this coming November, please, do your own research and do not vote with your own and everybody else's tax dollars based on a sales ad.
Do not count on attorneys to publicly inform you (as they should, as citizens) about qualifications or lack thereof of judicial candidates they know - because the judiciary that "regulates", or rather, controls the licenses and livelihoods of attorneys, invented a self-serving "gag" rule preventing attorneys from discussing judicial candidates at the threat of disciplinary penalty.
I am one of attorneys who spoke against misrepresentations of a bad judge, Carl F. Becker in his upcoming re-election campaign of 2012.
The only other attorney who spoke in the judicial campaign of Carl Becker was praising him. That attorney was not disciplined, even though, in my opinion, he was making false statements to the public about a judicial candidate's qualifications (that he was qualified). I, on the other hand, was immediately turned into the disciplinary committee for my comments which were (a) based on personal experience and documents, facts in public record and (b) constituted an opinion on a matter of public concern.
The judge was "eked out" an election victory (with the help of fraudulent testimonials from buddies who appeared in front of the judge while being his personal friends and who got favors from him), but now ran from office claiming "early retirement" - coincidentally when lawsuits, complaints and audit of Delaware County and Becker's friends, likely, started to make him look too bad for even the New York State Judicial system to keep him on the bench.
Becker, same as Fisher admits in her interview, presented to the public a lot of "testimonials" from various "opinion leaders" - including his buddies in the Delaware Counties, including buddies who appeared in front of him in cases as parties.
Becker was well known to have no shame on issues of self-dealing and dealing for his friends through his public office, conflicts of interest, concealing such conflicts of interest and retaliating against challengers of his misconduct.
I know it is difficult to judge for yourself about a judicial candidate and his or her integrity record, especially when people with knowledge of such record, attorneys who may be in daily contact with such judicial candidate and know him or her through and through, are intentionally gagged by attorney disciplinary rules from revealing qualification flaws of such candidates to the voting public.
Yet, electing a qualified judge should not be a matter of inferior priority for people, no matter whether they have court cases pending or not. They can have such court cases in the future, and it is critical that people who judge such cases are (1) qualified and (2) fair and impartial.
For that reason, I appeal to future voters in judicial elections, in this country and in the State of New York - do you research, do you legwork, ask the candidates "sensitive" questions about their connections, about what they are going to do if in their case a high-ranking attorney, a friend or relative of another judge, or an attorney or party working for the government, commits misconduct.
Watch their reaction. Record their answer on audio or video tape. Videotaping of judicial candidates is permitted by the Open Meetings Law. Keep that record after elections. Make such pledges public. Post your videos to YouTube. Be a truly informed voter and inform others.
Don't be duped by marketing campaigns of judicial candidates who want a nice salary, unlimited power over people, enhanced connections, good career for their children and a taxpayer-backed high pension. They do not want to serve you. They want to serve themselves and their families.
Vote not to put self-serving "entrepreneurs" on the bench.
No comments:
Post a Comment