[Congressman Billybob]

This court outcome is no surprise to me. My experience (mostly in federal courts) is that most judges will obey and follow the law, regardless of their political opinions. And if the trial courts fail to do this, they will usually be straightened out by the appeals courts.

There are exceptions to this rule, including several on the US Supreme Court. But I note that ALL of the federal judges have been appointed because they were either wired into the Republican structure, or the Democrat one. Almost all were politically active before being appointed to the bench. And NONE of them were third-party or independent in their pre-court politics.

Therefore, absent the tendency of most judges to obey the law, I would never have won most of my federal cases which (with only two exceptions) for independent or third-party candidates. (The exceptions were Jerry Brown, Democrat, and George Bush, Republican.)

Congressman Billybob

Latest column, "Paying the Wrong Piper," discussion thread on FR. Article is also on ChronWatch.

[capocchio]

Therefore, absent the tendency of most judges to obey the law, I would never have won most of my federal cases which (with only two exceptions) for independent or third-party candidates. (The exceptions were Jerry Brown, Democrat, and George Bush, Republican.)

Would you please translate. Just what are you trying to say: were you representing third party candidates, what connection do third party candidates have to the Texas case and what are Jerry Brown and Bush doing in there, as they are not third party?

Between the double negatives, the missing word (s?) and the lack of readily discernable connection, I'm not sure how your examples illustrate your point.