Tuesday, February 06, 2007


This is not really where we wanted the Blog to go...and yet somehow we ended up here.

Anonymous wrote from another point of view:

Well, how come "THEY" can use the word but I can't? In fact, if THEY can than I can too! It is so disappointing that this simplistic thinking about the linguistic piece of America's most basic unresolved historic issue would be coming from a lawyer, one of society's learned professionals. The pain, horror and ugliness of the 'WORD' was created by white people and perpetuated by white people and manifested through the power of the state by white people (the latter being why lawyers have a special and continuing obligation to stem hatred in all its social or public forms).That African Americans and others have taught us as a nation how to disempower the 'WORD' and make its use socially unacceptable by its creators (in addition to many other nasty words, several of which were applied to descendants of some European) should be a source of inspiration and gratitude to us Caucasians, not feelings of jealousy or resentment. Why, in fact, would any Caucasian, knowledgeable of history, covet their right to use the 'WORD?' YES, I cede my power over that 'WORD' to better arbiters than I of what is painful or embarrassing to them. (And Black Americans, of course, are not the only 'group' to claim control over the use of other hateful words or symbols.)In my opinion, Black Americans have every right to use social or political pressure to infringe the RIGHT of white people to bandy about the horrible, ugly 'WORD', despite one's innocent intentions in using it or doing so in the name of creative or expressive freedom.

Rumpole responds:

Words are indeed just words. I could call you a doughnut, and unless it had some context, it's just a word. The context we are talking about is "hate".

When someone made a slur against a Judge's sexual preference, it was done with hate. And when someone made a comment about another Judge's race, it was done with hate.

I do not excuse anyone, and that includes the person in the class we are talking about- from making comments based on hate. When a black person calls another black person a racial slur, it is not excusable or acceptable. Just like it is not acceptable for one member of a race to injure or murder another member of the same race.

Hate is hate, and we will not tolerate it on the blog.

All it takes is one person making a stand against intolerable behavior to make a change. Rosa Parks didn't sit in the back of the bus, and we will not let our blog be used as a vehicle for hate. She was braver then we are, but we are humble enough to acknowledge she was the teacher and we are the student. She had more to lose than we do, but we honor her memory when we try and learn from her deeds.

On a related subject:

Anonymous said...
No congratulations here. You ignored several anti-Semitic comments that also should not have been permitted. I wish you'd be more consistent and eliminate all of this inappropriate crap. Then, you really would have a first class blog.

Rumpole responds: You're right. If we missed something, and we often do, we apologize for letting the offensive comment remain up. Please believe us when we say it was an error of omission, not commission.

I'm still angry.
Moderation continues.


Anonymous said...

someone yesterday described me on the blog as a "Formicophiliac"...i am only a retired judge / poor old country personal injury lawyer. we don't use those big words at the flagler street court house. Rumpole, my good friend, will you help me figure out what this blog poster meant? your insight humbles me rump...

Ron Magill said...

He's also a zoophiliac!

Anonymous said...


The state commission that polices judges has filed charges with the state Supreme Court against a Broward judge for alleged unethical behavior.

If she contests the charges and loses, Broward Circuit Judge Cheryl Alemán could lose her job.

In a formal notice of charges released today, attorneys for the Judicial Qualification Commission lambasted Alemán, writing ''you have engaged in a pattern of arrogant, discourteous and impatient conduct'' towards attorneys and defendants in her courtroom.

The notice details several instances in which Alemán allegedly behaved with bias or violated judicial rules of conduct, including a 2006 incident in which she sent an attorney to jail for missing hearings in her court.

In the notice, attorneys for the JQC wrote that Alemán has conducted herself ``in a manner that erodes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.''

Appointed by Gov. Jeb Bush in 2001, Alemán first generated controversy after discussing her religious views at her swearing-in.


Anonymous said...

north of the border has some things going on

Anonymous said...

jeff, you're not a retired judge. you were defeated in an election.

just like alan postman who nevertheless refers to himself as a retired judge on his business cards.

and fyi, formicophilia has nothing to do with countertops but rather deviant relations with insects. go figure how someone would align that with you.

The Name Game said...

Wrong Jonathan!...There are other individuals with that moniker! The world does not revolve around you!

Anonymous said...

jeff swartz is not the retired judge talking. it is a much better judge who did a great job on the bench and then retired to go make a gazillion dollars in civil - all well earned. oh yeah, and he's a GATOR too.