Posted by 
About AG Troy King’s interest in that West Virginia case before the U.S. Supreme Court … not only did our Attorney General file a friend of the court brief (mentioned here), he also asked to participate in oral arguments before the Supreme Court. Motion denied.
From the story “Ala. AG requested to argue for Massey” in the Charleston (WV) Gazette online this morning:
King’s motion to participate in oral arguments on March 3, which was denied, argues a Supreme Court decision regulating the recusal of judges would impinge “upon the states’ prerogative to craft recusal policies that are based on their own experiences with their various (and varied) judicial selection methods and that respond to the circumstances, needs and expectation of their own constituencies.”
I find this really interesting.
Related Articles:
Legislative Dispatch
Purple Dot Connection
2010 Big List
2010 Senate Elections
2010 House Elections
Press Releases
I am not suprised that Troy King has been polling strongly. He ran suprised many in the recent Madison County poll.
A decision in this West Virginia case could really change the way Judicial races are funded in this State. If a Judge, whose campaign you funded, can’t vote on your cases, that kind of takes the incentive away to fund a Judicial race.
No it doesn’t.
Trial lawyers are always going to support judges who are sympathetic to Slip and Fall cases and, likewise, corporate defense lawyers will fund judges who don’t believe in jackpot justice.
You don’t have to have an actual case in front of a judge to support his/her judicial philosophy.
This whole issue about judicial “reform” is a red herring from the ambulance chasers.
Actual voters don’t give a fart’s whiff about judicial reform, op/ed boards and bar associations do.
John Tyson 2010
Is that his weight now???
if the shoe (slipper) fits, wear it.
This comment has been removed.
As always, if you have questions, feel free to contact me.
This comment also removed.
Comment #7 complained that I had not removed comment #4 which had been posted 15 minutes prior to the complaint.
I would have left comment #7 except that it repeated the objectionable part of comment #4, so it would have been silly to remove 4 and not 7.
However, comment #7, unhappy that I had not removed comment #4, also said,
Danny, you are getting a little too partisan, I mean selective, in your yanking of comments.
On what basis do you say that?
FYI:
* If you have any question about why a particular comment was pulled, contact me and I’ll tell you why it was.
* If you see a comment that you believe crosses a line, I would be glad to be made aware of it.
* I can’t control what flavor of reader starts leaving objectionable comments, but of the last eight comments I have removed, not counting the two in this thread just now, four were aimed at figures on the left, and four were aimed at figures on the right.
* If you’d like to start a blog, let me know and I’ll help as much as I can.
You can read here and here some thoughts about appropriate comments on the site.
Fifteen minutes. LOL.
Post 1, where in this post is there any reference to TK’s polling numbers? I have not seen any, but I would certainly be interested in them.
Troy keeps trying to convince everyone he has terrific poll numbers, but in a Huntsville poll this weekend he was beaten by Tim James who is not even in statewide office now. Troy has no chance. I’ll tell you where Troy’s poll numbers ARE high: NEGATIVES.
Madison County Men’s Breakfast Club
Undecided, 81 votes (40%)
Tim James, 32 votes (16%)
Troy King, 28 votes (14%)
Bradley Byrne, 25 votes (12%)
Luther Strange, 16 votes (8%)
Mike Hubbard, 14 votes (7%)
Kay Ivey, 9 votes (4%)
Jack Hawkins, 0 votes (0%)
Res Ipsa Loquitur
Oh, I thought Post 1 was talking about a real poll with real numbers.
Old Prosecutor, would be interesting however with the lax rules on campaign disclosure, Alabama has, won’t surprise me to find application lacking.