The two-party system protects itself once again

Comments

  1. Qui Tam says:

    Bob @ 1 – you make some pretty impressive points and I hope voters do remember. Unfortunately I must submit two things. #1 – The Supreme Court’s actions here solidified their re-elections for they ignored the law for certain individuals who are quite politically powerful. #2 – In New Mexico, one person can be worth 10,000 votes for at the family reunions held annually usually during the summer the family decides who to vote for then they all collectively vote for the same candidate as a block. Collect about five families and a candidate is invinsible. I learned that this is the way it works in New Mexico way back when I caught glimpses of things that are usually hidden from newcomers. And incidentally, newcomers are expected to abide by the laws and just wait till one of the good ole boy/girl judges acts as an accomplice ruins your life with injustice everybody, you see if you blow the whistle suddenly laws can be made up and abuses of law can effectively shut someone up (see definition of colour of law). And then worse things can happen but I won’t go into that…right now.

    One of the ironies of course is that another reason Judges are beholden to placing some above the law is because some have the real dirt on the Judges. Another thing I would like to point out to all readers that I learned way back when is that in New Mexico politics factual reality is rarely, if ever, what it is presented to the public to be…

    Fortunately for voters and New Mexico’s citizenry, sites like http://www.nmpolitics.net strive for transparency and truth.

    Maybe that is why Gary King attacked and tried to silence Heath Haussamen recently. For more on that enter key words in the search box on this website.

    Fixing it all? Well good luck, notice the current New Mexico’s US Attorney’s last name? Some had high hopes for David Inglesias but we see how he ended. And then there was Greg Forratt but that’s another rich untold story for another day. And as for the FBI, anyword on the whistleblowers who risked their lives going to them in regard to the alledged criminal activity of former Secretary of State Mary Herrera?

    Ah yes, and people wonder why I ask. My response to them? Why do you ask?

  2. Bob@1 says:

    The New Mexico Supreme Court….hmmm. I think that the folks that comprise it should look for work elsewhere, perhaps making license plates in one of our fine correctional institutions. Their decision and blatantly false assessment of the law can only make us wonder how effective is a court that is sworn to uphold the laws of New Mexico but make decisions like a court of clowns. We should give them due respect but after this how much respect is really due? Appearances suggest that they see themselves as beyond the law, that the law must suit them or the needs of their political partners — how does that benefit us, the people they supposedly serve?  I doubt they care what we think, so they make a decision with no regard for the truth, pepper it up with a dash of disrespect and call it a day leaving us to gnash our teeth impotently at least until the next election…..if enough of us remember. 

  3. Qui Tam says:

    Politicians are above the law in New Mexico. I learned that years ago. And when they destroy lives they are given a pass. A lot of times the Judiciary acts as an accomplice. Whistleblowers are left dangling in the air, voters are disenfranchised, criminals repeat their crimes and the beat goes on.

    And then there are those who defend the criminals and criminal activity. Spin it. Twist it. Excuse it… until they become victims. Many of them are too ignorant to realize they are victims.

    A new generation of voters become disenfranchised because of the seedy criminal elements that they hear and read about in the press and on television. They avoid politics/voting like the plague. The Union is not served and the creepy politicians keep creepin away.

    Excellent Supreme Court of New Mexico, collectively you probably just disenfranchised one thousand more.

    *Petra, I am particularly ashamed of you…and yes we were once on a first name basis.

  4. Astute Observer says:

    Good article Heath.  The law IS clear and the Supreme Court IS supreme, in spite of the law.