>Because it's a lame check. The commision with such a limited mandate is somehow about to set the whole snafu right? Some balance.

The commission was never meant to fix anything, just find out what happened and make recommendations.

>It just shows the erosion of the system. Previously, they were forbidden to accept any such thing from sponsors likely to be involved. Now, only if there's an open lawsuit. Much more precise - and much more open to creation of preventive/preemptive connections between judges and sponsors. To me, that's not bribery just because the law allows it.

Well, I disagree, but we'll have to leave it at that.

>Didn't mean that one - meant the NSA thingy.

I think there is a suit in the works on that as well.

>The perfect wouldn't need higher standards - they'd already breathe them. It's the imperfect who should strive, right?

What, to be perfect? There's a prescription for failure. I don't buy into the whole "higher standards 'cause we're America" bit. Someone, somewhere, is always going to complain about something America does or doesn't do. Look at the flak we took over the tsunami.