T Nation

Kerry Vs. Bush...


Jury duty.

Do you think Bush will serve?

Kerry already did:

Is the President realy that much busier than a Senator?

If he has time to vacation, golf, party at the ranch...he should have time to serve his jurt duty, right?


Strangely, I would've expected that the President's name would be automatically removed from such list.

Another thing learned today.



Arguably. But of course, neither should really have to serve. I have exemption as a student. Certainly, our President and Congressmen should be exempt.


wild guess:

Bush has put in more work hours so far this year than you have


Yes a President is much busier than a Senator.

No way will Bush serve as long as he is President.

Even when Bush is on vacation he is still surrounded by his staffers listening to the various bullshit and making decisions. I cannot imagine doing that in the middle of a trial.

It is funny he and Kerry were both recently picked.


I'd be pissed if he wasted his time serving.


Students are exempt? Wow law enforcement isn't even exempt anymore.

  1. I think the President would be a tad busier.

  2. Though he could have easily gotten out of it, I think John Kerry was happy to participate because he is still thinking about future elections, be it for his Senate seat or for 2008.

Nothing wrong with getting a little free ink talking about what a great jury foreman you were - which is exactly what happened.


Law enforcement officers don't have scheduled exams to take based on lessons given in classes that a student would miss during jury duty for who knows how long. Military is exempt because of officially ALWAYS being on duty.


Good guess, but it all depends on what you consider work.

This year, maybe. Last year, who knows. With a job like the President, I don't think you can realy compare the volume of work without considering the importance of it.

Technically, I put in a whole lot of hours when I was in the Navy, but I didn't really do much work.

The first year I was out I did more actual work per hour, and worked more hours than I ever had before.
Ironically I was a government contractor.

I don't think Kerry would have served if there wasn't some way that it was going to benefit his political career, plus I'm sure Bush doesn't even have to respond to the summons (though he might for political reasons).


As is obvious, a president must be able to make quick, unencumbered decisions for the well-being of our country. He should be exempt.


I second the person who said he would be pissed if the President actually served jury duty while he is in office. That would be ridiculous.

If I were in Massachusetts still, I'd probably be pissed that Kerry served. Though it would be a tough call given how he tends to vote...


I agree with this. My only guess is that the title of President has not been placed outside of the "civilian" category. If military is exempt, that position should be as well.


But beyond whether the President is much busier than a Senator, there are a lot of decisions that can be made in Congress with a single Senator missing... but without the President for an extended period of time is a different matter entirely.


Could you imagine what that court room would look like if he did serve. All the Secret Service, Reporters, protestors, and spectators. It would be a joke of a trial.


True. There's also off-sessions in Congress. If Congress is not in session, I don't see missing a day or two of campaigning in your district to serve on a jury as such a terrible thing.


That's assuming he didn't actually get empaneled, which is probably a good assumption. However, if he were to have to actually sit on a jury, a trial could take much longer than two days.


Why the hell would you want our President serving on jury duty? Don't you think it's a wee bit a TOTAL WASTE OF FUCK*NG TIME EFFORT AND FOCUS? Especially when he has to , oh I don't know???>>>>>>>RUN THE COUNTRY and deal with our war?

Duh. The say Kerry did this but Bush did not....Whaaaaaaaaahhhhh!

Save it for the Bush haters. I'm still floored as to why you would post such a petty and mindless thread.


And beyond that, what attorney (regardless of what kind of case, whether they represent a plaintiff or defendant, etc.) worth his salt would actually not seek to knock out the friggin' President of the United States during voir dire?


LOL, looks like someone forgot to take his prozac this morning. Although the thread wasn't meant to floor you, I must admit that it is an interesting side effect.

This thread was started "tougue-in-cheek" and I was playing devil's advocate. I wouldn't want our president serving jury duty, nor would I want a senator serving jury duty.

My devil's advocate argument is that if he has time to do many other leasure activities, why not serve on a jury? If something came up that needed his immediate attention, he could be excused from the jury duty.

Do I think he realy should serve, am I really upset that he probably won't; no.

I wonder why you would post in here if you didn't like the thread, though I'm not exactly floored by it.

Oh, and it was also meant to see how pissed some people would get about saying anything other than something good about their hero who can do no wrong. I personally don't like very many politicians regardless of what side they're on. :wink: