federal judge says he forwarded email with racist Obama joke

[billvon 3,132]

>Even if he has a lifetime record of fair jurisprudence, without any taints of racism
>in his court behavior or his rulings?

Depends on the joke, of course. This was a pretty bad one.

If the principal of an elementary school sent out pedophilic jokes to parents, would you support him keeping his job?

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

they are likely to sit in judgment on cases involving racism and/or politics

Which is kind of a shame that judges are so routinely involved in political issues that should be dealt with politically. I.e., presidents and Congress leaving it to the Courts to overturn legislation when they can do it themselves simply so they don't have to bite a political bullet.

Yeah - I am pissed off whenever I see judicial resources being used in such crap.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Coreece 190]

Quote

some people are rightly held to higher standards than others by naive hypocrites.

FIFY

Some people are just prone to sweat the small stuff I guess...

I just want people to embrace our differences and laugh at ourselves...it worked great for me growing up in a predominately black multicultural area. Who knows, maybe I'm the one who's naive.

Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are...

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

some people are rightly held to higher standards than others by naive hypocrites.

FIFY

Some people are just prone to sweat the small stuff I guess...

I just want people to embrace our differences and laugh at ourselves...it worked great for me growing up in a predominately black multicultural area. Who knows, maybe I'm the one who's naive.

No, you're not

This is what we get when PC is used to drive an agenda

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Coreece 190]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mmF8zOlh_g&feature=related

Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are...

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

>Should such a judge be forced to resign for that?

No. But it would probably be a good idea.

as long as they don't include anything said on this forum

or anything said while playing sports

or anything said at the DZ or around the bonfire

or anything said at the bars

,,,,,,,,, lotta people casting stones - frankly, I see lot's people right here on this site that have very responsible and important jobs - they shouldn't lose jobs because of their postings - though very justifiable based on many comments. I really can't see an exception - not a single one

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[wmw999 2,602]

It was majorly stupid; it's a piece of his record, but doesn't define it.

Let's get back to talking about whether millionaires should have their taxes raised if they qualify for food stamps.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[livendive 8]

Quote

I think the joke is in poor taste
I do not see it as racist

I agree with this. That said, if I were caught forwarding such a joke about my CEO, on my company email account, well, I would probably be dusting off my resume.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

I think the joke is in poor taste
I do not see it as racist

I agree with this. That said, if I were caught forwarding such a joke about my CEO, on my company email account, well, I would probably be dusting off my resume.

Blues,
Dave

Your CEO? Ok, I can agree with that

Obama however, is a politcal figure and is no ones CEO

The only thing close to this is Commander and Chief

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[livendive 8]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I think the joke is in poor taste
I do not see it as racist

I agree with this. That said, if I were caught forwarding such a joke about my CEO, on my company email account, well, I would probably be dusting off my resume.

Blues,
Dave

Your CEO? Ok, I can agree with that

Obama however, is a politcal figure and is no ones CEO

The only thing close to this is Commander and Chief

You don't think the guy at the top of the executive branch is anything remotely like a chief executive officer? It was just such an executive (Bush) who gave this guy his job in the first place.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

I think the joke is in poor taste
I do not see it as racist

I agree with this. That said, if I were caught forwarding such a joke about my CEO, on my company email account, well, I would probably be dusting off my resume.

Blues,
Dave

Your CEO? Ok, I can agree with that

Obama however, is a politcal figure and is no ones CEO

The only thing close to this is Commander and Chief

You don't think the guy at the top of the executive branch is anything remotely like a chief executive officer? It was just such an executive (Bush) who gave this guy his job in the first place.

Blues,
Dave

No, I do not

A judicial nomination is not the same IMO

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 3,132]

>A judicial nomination is not the same IMO

Right. Because they're not elected, they are hired, whereas employees are . . . wait.

I've got it! The CEO doesn't hire people directly, he has other people hire them, whereas Obama hired this . . . . wait, that doesn't work either.

No, this is the difference. Judges can be removed for office for misconduct, whereas employees can never be fired. OK, that doesn't work.

But I'm sure there are other differences. Employees don't wear robes! Well, most of them don't. So there's definitely a difference.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>A judicial nomination is not the same IMO

Right. Because they're not elected, they are hired, whereas employees are . . . wait.

I've got it! The CEO doesn't hire people directly, he has other people hire them, whereas Obama hired this . . . . wait, that doesn't work either.

No, this is the difference. Judges can be removed for office for misconduct, whereas employees can never be fired. OK, that doesn't work.

But I'm sure there are other differences. Employees don't wear robes! Well, most of them don't. So there's definitely a difference.

A CEO is not a politcal figure elected by the people

therefore he/she is fair game (a president)

agreeing or disagreeing with them, including making fun of them is protected free speech (as noted in SC cases)

Not even close

reaching again sir

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 3,132]

>agreeing or disagreeing with them, including making fun of them is protected
>free speech (as noted in SC cases)

And agreeing or disagreeing with your CEO is also protected. No one will ever arrest you for disagreeing with your CEO.

Looks like you have discovered another similarity. Any others?

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>agreeing or disagreeing with them, including making fun of them is protected
>free speech (as noted in SC cases)

And agreeing or disagreeing with your CEO is also protected. No one will ever arrest you for disagreeing with your CEO.

Looks like you have discovered another similarity. Any others?

No sir
You are incorrect here

A CEO had much more ability to fire if you show a disdain

NOT the same

Not even close

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>agreeing or disagreeing with them, including making fun of them is protected
>free speech (as noted in SC cases)

And agreeing or disagreeing with your CEO is also protected. No one will ever arrest you for disagreeing with your CEO.

Looks like you have discovered another similarity. Any others?

Tell me sir

Can Obama fire this judge?

Hmmmmm?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[wmw999 2,602]

It's not as same as billvon says, but neither is it as different as you say. It's just that the remoteness from the president makes it seem "ok" , just as remoteness from others in internet forums makes it "ok" to flame them (well, not here).

If you work for a federal or state contractor, there are probably some fairly stiff rules about how to hire and fire employees; I know that with incompetent employees where I used to work, it was easier to get them on time card fraud (which is unequivocal) than on incompetence. Punching someone, or using company resources to surf or forward porn, or showing up inebriated were also guaranteed.

The judge works for the federal government; the president is, in fact, the head thereof. The fact that your chance of shaking his hand is considerably smaller than mine was of shaking the president of IBM's hand when I worked for them doesn't really change that.

And, ya know -- people called Lou Gerstner some names when he started messing with IBM "standards" like their longstanding no-layoffs policy. It had to be done to save the company, or at least he thought so. But there was a lot of bitterness.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[rushmc 23]

Quote

It's not as same as billvon says, but neither is it as different as you say. It's just that the remoteness from the president makes it seem "ok" , just as remoteness from others in internet forums makes it "ok" to flame them (well, not here).

If you work for a federal or state contractor, there are probably some fairly stiff rules about how to hire and fire employees; I know that with incompetent employees where I used to work, it was easier to get them on time card fraud (which is unequivocal) than on incompetence. Punching someone, or using company resources to surf or forward porn, or showing up inebriated were also guaranteed.

The judge works for the federal government; the president is, in fact, the head thereof. The fact that your chance of shaking his hand is considerably smaller than mine was of shaking the president of IBM's hand when I worked for them doesn't really change that.

And, ya know -- people called Lou Gerstner some names when he started messing with IBM "standards" like their longstanding no-layoffs policy. It had to be done to save the company, or at least he thought so. But there was a lot of bitterness.

Wendy P.

I didnt say it was ok Wendy
And I do not think it was

I did say it was tastless

But as the power goes, the pres and CEO are light years apart

He cant fire this judge
He can remove people to replace them with his people (and yes, a CEO can do this but for differnent reasons) remember the bs over the DOJ lawyers?

There is a seperation between branches too and that is by design

No, they are not alike

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

So you think because he's a judge that he should be forced to resign because of this?

No, I said that because he is a judge who, through his own stupidity has tainted his own reputation, should do the honourable thing and resign.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Quote

So you think because he's a judge that he should be forced to resign because of this?

No, I said that because he is a judge who, through his own stupidity has tainted his own reputation, should do the honourable thing and resign.

If viewing and/or re-telling ethnic jokes makes one "tainted", then I think that all of us are tainted, and there is no one that is not guilty. Therefore, it's a poor excuse to fire someone, because if applied to everyone, we would have 100% unemployment.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

>Even if he has a lifetime record of fair jurisprudence, without any taints of racism
>in his court behavior or his rulings?

Depends on the joke, of course. This was a pretty bad one.

If the principal of an elementary school sent out pedophilic jokes to parents, would you support him keeping his job?

I'd want the principal fired, of course. But that situation is different, and here's why. An elementary school principle has access to hundreds of kids, he has their trust, and he has direct authority over them, and thus if he was a pedophile he would be a great danger to them.

In this judge case however, the joke is about nothing over which he has any control or authority - he has zero impact upon the president's life or reputation. Thus, the joke is harmless, and does not deserve to be justification for termination. Poor taste? Yes. Firing? No.

[kallend 2,182]

Quote

Quote

Quote

So you think because he's a judge that he should be forced to resign because of this?

No, I said that because he is a judge who, through his own stupidity has tainted his own reputation, should do the honourable thing and resign.

If viewing and/or re-telling ethnic jokes makes one "tainted", then I think that all of us are tainted, and there is no one that is not guilty. Therefore, it's a poor excuse to fire someone, because if applied to everyone, we would have 100% unemployment.

No - we aren't all Federal JUDGES whose JUDGMENT is now compromised.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 3,132]

>I'd want the principal fired, of course.

And if this was the only bad thing he had ever done? And if he said "look, I know it was a disgusting joke, but I thought I was just sending it to my friends?"

>In this judge case however, the joke is about nothing over which he has any control
>or authority - he has zero impact upon the president's life or reputation.

Right. But he decides on hundreds of court cases, and the defendants must trust that he is not biased and will not send them to prison simply because they are black. He is the ultimate authority in the court; people go to jail or go free based on his supposedly unbiased opinion.

The problem is not that Obama is offended. No one cares if Obama is offended. The problem is that the one person in our society who is supposed to judge people without prejudice - indeed, the person whose JOB it is to judge people without prejudice -is using courthouse computers to send email that indicates he might have trouble being unbiased while working.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Quote

If viewing and/or re-telling ethnic jokes makes one "tainted", then I think that all of us are tainted, and there is no one that is not guilty. Therefore, it's a poor excuse to fire someone, because if applied to everyone, we would have 100% unemployment.

No - we aren't all Federal JUDGES whose JUDGMENT is now compromised.

Indeed. Some people are engineers. And engineers whose "judgment is compromised" are much more dangerous to society than judges. Heck, judges just sentence individuals to jail, one at a time. But engineers affect the lives of millions of people every day, who work in, drive or use their contrivances. And of course, there's a direct correlation between telling ethnic jokes and competency as an engineer, so this is a very serious matter. I think that with this news story, we should immediately conduct a lynch mob witch hunt review of all e-mails ever sent by engineers, so that we can weed out those bad apples before it's too late. Otherwise, bridges will collapse, airplanes will fall out of the sky, cars will catch on fire, parachutes will fail, oh my!

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

>In this judge case however, the joke is about nothing over which he has any control
>or authority - he has zero impact upon the president's life or reputation.

Right. But he decides on hundreds of court cases, and the defendants must trust that he is not biased and will not send them to prison simply because they are black. He is the ultimate authority in the court; people go to jail or go free based on his supposedly unbiased opinion.

The problem is not that Obama is offended. No one cares if Obama is offended. The problem is that the one person in our society who is supposed to judge people without prejudice - indeed, the person whose JOB it is to judge people without prejudice -is using courthouse computers to send email that indicates he might have trouble being unbiased while working.

Right, that's why it was a dumb thing for him to do. However, absent any evidence of actual racism in his court behavior or his rulings, then one ethnic e-mail joke should not be sufficient to cause him to give up a life of good judicial work.