Comments on: Pay Raise for Federal Judges? First, A Performance Evaluation Is In Order http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/01/02/pay-raise-for-federal-judges-first-a-performance-evaluation-is-in-order/ Men's Rights Activism, MRA Politics, Analysis, Commentary and Global News Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:36:56 -1000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: snootfish http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/01/02/pay-raise-for-federal-judges-first-a-performance-evaluation-is-in-order/comment-page-1/#comment-26382 snootfish Tue, 02 Jan 2007 20:52:55 +0000 http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/01/02/pay-raise-for-federal-judges-first-a-performance-evaluation-is-in-order/#comment-26382 Yeah, if the truth be known, they may view their jobs more as enforcers of the status quo than enforcers of the Constitution. Every once in a while they will embrace a novel yet logical and correct argument. They usually dislike anything novel and like to enforce the normal or in other words the status quo. One judge (not a federal judge) once ruled against me because "I have never seen anyone do that before." Well, that is because I am creative and original in my thinking. It doesn't mean it is wrong. Many judges hate doing new things. Yeah, if the truth be known, they may view their jobs more as enforcers of the status quo than enforcers of the Constitution.

Every once in a while they will embrace a novel yet logical and correct argument. They usually dislike anything novel and like to enforce the normal or in other words the status quo.

One judge (not a federal judge) once ruled against me because “I have never seen anyone do that before.” Well, that is because I am creative and original in my thinking. It doesn’t mean it is wrong. Many judges hate doing new things.

]]> By: Roger Knight http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/01/02/pay-raise-for-federal-judges-first-a-performance-evaluation-is-in-order/comment-page-1/#comment-26379 Roger Knight Tue, 02 Jan 2007 19:54:36 +0000 http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/01/02/pay-raise-for-federal-judges-first-a-performance-evaluation-is-in-order/#comment-26379 I would be all for giving them a raise if they EARNED it! The most important thing for any court to do is to ENFORCE THE CONSTITUTION!!!! The way these fheads rely on the FICTICIOUS Younger abstention and Rooker-Feldman doctrines and streatching these ideas WAY beyond what the Supremes allow them to embrace, to AVOID enforcing the Constitution, I say let 'em either accept their present salaries, quit, or START ENFORCING THE CONSTITUTION!!! Here is the deal I have experienced: three judges of the Surpeme Court of Washington found valid the argument that license suspension for child support offends the 14th Amendment because there is no relationship between payment and non-payment of child support in the Amunrud case. However, federal Judges Lasnik and Coughenour of the Western District of Washington prohibited ME from even bringing any further civil actions challenging the enforcement of the child support order on the grounds of "frivolousness" and then backed off and stated that it was because I REPEATEDLY brought my claims when I cited the California Brent Moss decisions. One of my arguments the federal judges did not want to deal with is IDENTICAL to the argument that three state supreme court justices found MERITORIOUS! The reason I kept coming back is that you guys NEVER DO YOUR F---ING JOB!!!! Which is to ENFORCE THE CONSTITUTION AND TO ENFORCE FEDERAL STATUTES SUCH AS THE ANTIPEONAGE ACT!!! Now you want a raise. Let those whom you think are your masters and who seem to be the ones who keep sticking them horse's heads in your beds be the ones who pay it. Leave us taxpayers out of it! You don't serve us and we all know it! I would be all for giving them a raise if they EARNED it!
The most important thing for any court to do is to ENFORCE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!
The way these fheads rely on the FICTICIOUS Younger abstention and Rooker-Feldman doctrines and streatching these ideas WAY beyond what the Supremes allow them to embrace, to AVOID enforcing the Constitution, I say let ‘em either accept their present salaries, quit, or START ENFORCING THE CONSTITUTION!!!
Here is the deal I have experienced: three judges of the Surpeme Court of Washington found valid the argument that license suspension for child support offends the 14th Amendment because there is no relationship between payment and non-payment of child support in the Amunrud case.
However, federal Judges Lasnik and Coughenour of the Western District of Washington prohibited ME from even bringing any further civil actions challenging the enforcement of the child support order on the grounds of “frivolousness” and then backed off and stated that it was because I REPEATEDLY brought my claims when I cited the California Brent Moss decisions.
One of my arguments the federal judges did not want to deal with is IDENTICAL to the argument that three state supreme court justices found MERITORIOUS!
The reason I kept coming back is that you guys NEVER DO YOUR F—ING JOB!!!!
Which is to ENFORCE THE CONSTITUTION AND TO ENFORCE FEDERAL STATUTES SUCH AS THE ANTIPEONAGE ACT!!!
Now you want a raise.
Let those whom you think are your masters and who seem to be the ones who keep sticking them horse’s heads in your beds be the ones who pay it.
Leave us taxpayers out of it! You don’t serve us and we all know it!

]]> By: snootfish http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/01/02/pay-raise-for-federal-judges-first-a-performance-evaluation-is-in-order/comment-page-1/#comment-26374 snootfish Tue, 02 Jan 2007 19:00:18 +0000 http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/01/02/pay-raise-for-federal-judges-first-a-performance-evaluation-is-in-order/#comment-26374 They make many times what the average person does at least in this part of the country (I am sure the ratio is much lower in high cost areas). It really does not matter what what people at various private institutions and law offices make. A Judge should be reasonable close to the population as a whole (not the unusual very high earners). He or she should not be so far above the general population that there is no chance that he can understand things from their perspectives. The average person where I am cannot even conceive of making $165,000 a year. These judges are making enough. If they don't like the job, they can quit. There are many with good qualifications who would accept the job. They make many times what the average person does at least in this part of the country (I am sure the ratio is much lower in high cost areas).

It really does not matter what what people at various private institutions and law offices make. A Judge should be reasonable close to the population as a whole (not the unusual very high earners). He or she should not be so far above the general population that there is no chance that he can understand things from their perspectives. The average person where I am cannot even conceive of making $165,000 a year. These judges are making enough. If they don’t like the job, they can quit. There are many with good qualifications who would accept the job.

]]> By: mirwalk http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/01/02/pay-raise-for-federal-judges-first-a-performance-evaluation-is-in-order/comment-page-1/#comment-26370 mirwalk Tue, 02 Jan 2007 16:49:37 +0000 http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/01/02/pay-raise-for-federal-judges-first-a-performance-evaluation-is-in-order/#comment-26370 I live in Kansas and if you can make 50,000 a year, you are living pretty. Not fantastic but you are far from starving. Yet these judeges make three times as much and want more? I would be tickled pink to make that much. I live in Kansas and if you can make 50,000 a year, you are living pretty. Not fantastic but you are far from starving. Yet these judeges make three times as much and want more? I would be tickled pink to make that much.

]]>