In Massachusetts, the eight elected members of the "Governor's Council" decide on who will be your judges. Are they looking out for you -- or for the special interests? [MassResistance photo]
Posted on 11/04/2012 4:07:51 AM PST by daniel1212
Litmus test for judges? You must support abortion rights, gay marriage, affirmative action -- or be rejected. It could happen in Massachusetts after Tuesday's vote!
Who will be choosing your judges? It could be people more radical than you ever imagined. This is what could happen when the conservative establishment starts to go soft.
|
|
As we've repeatedly pointed out, in Massachusetts the elections for Governor's Council, though usually overlooked, are actually among the most important. These are the eight people who approve the nomination of judges. Judges serve for life (until retirement). An activist, biased, or incompetent judge can -- and often do -- affect the state for decades. As we know, Massachusetts has a horrible history with this.
The Democrat running in a key district, Michael Albano, a former Mayor of Springfield, would be every pro-family citizen's nightmare. If you think the activist judges who imposed "gay marriage" on this state were outrageous, that's just the beginning.
Here's what the local Hampshire Gazette wrote about Albano today:
He says he will use support for gay marriage, abortion rights and affirmative action as a litmus test for deciding on judicial appointments.
"I make no apology for that. We're not going back," Albano said. "I fought hard for those civil rights throughout my career and I am going to safeguard them as a member of the Governor's Council."
Albano has certainly not tried to hide his radical views about the judiciary. Earlier this year, Albano's campaign released a video wherein he describes his views on homosexual activism, the courts, and the peoples' right to vote very clearly.
| VIDEO: Albano reveals his radical views. |
|
Here's what Albano says in the video:
My record as mayor [of Springfield, MA] goes back quite some time. I was actually one of the chief litigants in that case back in 2004 before the Supreme Judicial Court in Massachusetts, which legalized gay marriage. And I've also worked with legislators to make sure that it didn't get on the ballot for referendum in subsequent years.
Because as you know, there's been 34 states across the country that have attempted to put this question on the ballot and all 34 have failed. And any time you look at civil rights over the years, civil rights should not be subject to referendum. Civil rights should be the law of the land.
And going by state referendum has not proven successful. So we have to rely on the courts. And I'm confident that the Supreme Court of the United States will uphold it at some point when it reaches that point.
We've made progress in Massachusetts. We're the first state. I was very pleased to see President Obama come out in support of gay marriage. And we'll see how it plays out in the years ahead. But clearly, the gay, lesbian, and trans -- transgender community has made a great deal of progress over the years.
We thought we'd seen everything. But this really takes the cake.
Mike Franco is a stellar pro-family Republican candidate, running against Albano. He knows about the problems with activist judges, is fearless, and won't back down to the liberal establishment. We've known him for years and he's a first-rate guy.
 |
Mike Franco is well-known in conservative circles. And of course, he's dissed by the RINO establishment. |
Unfortunately, Mike's long-time principled conservatism has had the usual effect: The RINO Massachusetts GOP has shunned him and the well-funded moderate "pro-family" PAC has refused to help him. Even Scott Brown's campaign, which is trying to curry favor with the "gay" community, has stayed away.
But despite all that, Mike is running one of the best Governor's Council campaigns we've seen. He has incredible support from the local Tea Parties. There are hundreds of signs around, constant standouts, great press coverage and even radio ads. (Albano, on the other hand, has no signs; he says that signs are "bad for the environment"!) Many experts are saying Mike has a good chance of winning this one.
Albano has also been linked to corruption, which has become publicly discussed in the campaign. But today the (left-wing) local newspaper, the Springfield Republican, endorsed Albano -- no surprise there.
Here's the latest local TV coverage of this race:
This is what we're up against. As we've said before, what starts here usually ends up spreading across the country. But real Massachusetts conservatives are fighting hard.
If you live in the 8th District (i.e., the western part of Massachusetts) please tell ALL your friends to vote for Mike Franco!
Sounds like a judicial selection process that would be supported by both Romney and Scott Brown. I grudgingly hope Romney wins and that conservatives in the House and Senate keep him to account. I hope that Brown loses and that his loss is compensated for by a win in another state. Brown’s campaign has lurched so far to the left that Brown would be very comfortable in the Dem Senate caucus. If I see one more Brown “I love abortion, I love gays, I love Obama” ad, I’ll scream.
a few questions come up:
Western Mass Governor’s Council Seat .... will go DEM ... what happened with the primary vs. Albano?
What is it about Lizzy Warren that is appealing that y’all wanna get rid of Brown and replace him with Lizzy? Did Brown’s NO vote on Elena Kagan annoy Freepers? Or is it his opposition to ObambiCare?
Maybe little is a little nuts.
‘well-funded moderate “pro-family” PAC’
who is that?
Mass Citizens for Life endorsed Franco. Not sure what group they refer to. Unfortunately, Franco is running in a looney-tunes district where people dance to the music.
As has been said, the Republicans will do what the Democrats did, except slower. And Republican in NE is not even as conservative as a Democrat in North Carolina i suppose.
See chart here for some interesting correlations
As has been said, the Republicans will do what the Democrats did, except slower. And Republican in NE is not even as conservative as a Democrat in North Carolina i suppose.
See chart here for some interesting correlations http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Statistical_Correlations.html
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda or moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search
[ Add keyword homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
After Romney wins, the next battle is to take over the Republican party.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda or moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search
[ Add keyword homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
After Romney wins, the next battle is to take over the Republican party.
we have 3 liberal state supreme judges up and we’re trying to get them booted out as all liberal judges should be
I am so tired of Liberals/Progressives forcing their ideas on the rest of us. This whole “it’s MY way or the highway” that these Lefties have make me sick. This is crimializing thought!
Many of them think their ideas are right....many of them are WRONG.
I think Mass. should impeach a few of its leaders
Thank you for the ping, Wagglebee.
I know nothing about North Carolina Democrats, but I know Democrats around here in rural Missouri. The former congressman, former state senator, and former state representative were all Democrats, all pro-life, and all opposed to homosexual marriage. In the case of the former state rep, it wasn't just being allowed to vote for conservative stuff when the votes didn't count, he was one of a dozen Democrats known as the “dirty dozen” who broke ranks and helped Republicans override our former Democratic governor's veto of some pro-life legislation.
I'm not saying this to defend the three Democrats I mention; they had plenty of problems on other issues. Furthermore, all of those three are now retired, voluntarily or otherwise, and their seats have been taken by Republicans in the last few election cycles. But that doesn't mean the Democrats have gone left; on the contrary, one of our two local delegates to the Democratic National Convention was a member of a fiery conservative charismatic church whose pastor used to be the head of our local ministerial alliance against pornography and other local problems. (In fairness to her, she's black, and the Democrats tend to tolerate black evangelicals better than white evangelicals.)
My point is that there's something **SERIOUSLY** wrong when some Yankee Republicans act worse than traditional Southern Democrats.
America already has one liberal party. They're called Democrats. Why do we need two liberal parties?
U mean this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EffEaMXQAbc
I hear you, but is anyone listening?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.