Order in the Court (Ingraham)

www.LauraIngraham.com ^ | February 26, 2004 | Laura Ingraham

[DMZFrank]

Ingraham says that this is a last resort given the abuse by the courts. Why are we going to the last resort and we havn't taken the first resorts yet? Those first resorts are impeachment, nullification, interposition, and the use of Article III, Sec. 2 of the Constitution.

The marriage amendment should not be necessary. These actions by SF's mayor and the Massachutsetts judiciary are lawless and unconstitutional. We simply cannot amend the constitution every time the left decides to disregard it. We need to hold these officials accountable through impeachment, recall, nullification, interposition and arrest where necessary.

I am so seek of this endless deference to judicial tyranny.

When oh when will some elected executive officer in some state or federal capacity, in fulfilling his constitutional duty to honestly interpet the constitution (federal or state) just disregard the unconstitutional rulings of any court and dare the legislature to impeach him for it? When will some legislature impeach just ONE judge for an unconstitutional ruling?

To say that the courts have the final word on the constitutionality of a law NO MATTER WHAT THEY RULE is to say that the system of checks and balances envisioned by the founders does not exist any more.

Alan Keyes gave the best summation of this issue that I've heard yet. He said that every branch of government has a duty to honestly interpret the constitution. If the president honestly feels the courts make an unconstitutional and lawless ruling, then the president should disregard that ruling and refuse to enforce the provisions that he felt were blatantly unconstitutional. If the Congress felt the president was wrong in this decision, then it was their duty to impeach him for it. If the electorate felt that the Congress was wrong for impeaching the president or the failure to impeach him, they can remove them at the next election, as well as the president for any presidential actions that they considered wrongful.

Lest anyone consider this formula has a recipe for chaos, then I submit to you there is no chaos worse than an unchecked oligarchic Judiciary. We are not living under the rule of law when judges make law up to suit their whims has they engage in objective based adjudication.

[King Black Robe]

Good girl!!!

[Redcoat LI]

I'll bet she smells nice,too.

[tpaine]

I'm listening to George Will on the Laura Ingraham Show right now, and he just pointed out that the most reckless SCOTUS justices of the last 40 years were appointed by Republicans: Warren, Brennan, Stevens, and Souter.
Scary.
10 -Sabertooth-


______________________________________


Made even scarier by Fed judges like the one who just ruled that DC's citizens had no RKBA's..

One wonders how many like him the pubbies appointed.

Republicans are appointing authoritarian socialists to the bench.. Democrats are appointing communitarian socialists..

Why is it surprising that socialism is winning?

[Alberta's Child]

In 100 years (less, actually) the Roe v Wade decision will be seamlessly linked with the Dred Scott decision as examples of terrible court decisions that led to long periods of suffering in the US before a moral status quo was re-asserted.

If you are correct about this, then you can take this to the bank, too:

In 100 years, the Roe v. Wade decision will be portrayed in U.S. history books as part of a concerted effort by conservative, white, male Republicans to exploit women and control minority populations in this country.

The fact that unfettered access to abortion is now an official plank of the Democratic Party will never be revealed to future generations, as will the role of people like Jesse Jackson, the Black Congressional Caucus, the NAACP, etc. in supporting Roe v. Wade.

[Choose Ye This Day]

Great points. Well said. Let's start a list of impeachment candidates.

[Choose Ye This Day]

She's much shorter than I thought she would be.

[marktwain]

My only difference with her is in her use of the phrase "forward-thinking".

You are absolutely correct. Perhaps collectivist-thinking, statist-thinking, or socialistic thinking would be better.

[tpaine]

When oh when will some elected executive officer in some state or federal capacity, in fulfilling his constitutional duty to honestly interpet the constitution (federal or state) just disregard the unconstitutional rulings of any court and dare the legislature to impeach him for it? When will some legislature impeach just ONE judge for an unconstitutional ruling?
-Frank-


______________________________________


Well said..
It makes too much sense to have much of an impact here at FR, but it bears repeating, often..

[Choose Ye This Day]

I vote YES.

[Imagine]

Nice Commentary - right the point.

[reademnweep]

Ingraham is the most prepared, clever, and evenhanded talk show host out there. I would love to see her replace the rants of Hannity on FNC.

[Sloth]

President Bush should make it abundantly clear that this is a last resort given what the abuse by courts on the federal and state level.

It's not a last resort. Attempts at impeachment should come first.

[hattend]

Can you feel the pendulum swing? I can.

I'll feel the pendulum swing when a Republican controlled Senate can end a silly parliamentary trick like a filibuster.

[axel f]

LOL! I didn't get to smell her. sigh

[axel f]

I like shorter, feisty women. But you're right, she is shorter than I thought she'd be too.

[Morgan in Denver]

I didn't question Ingraham's abilities, although the few times I've tried to listen to her program she seems to pander to the left without taking them to task for their views. I heard her interview Robert Reich and all she could do is giggle and keep saying how much she liked him.

My only point was that she whines like a stuck pig caught in a mud hole, and that it's bad enough to turn listeners off. Of course, I could be wrong too, and if I am she will have a long career. The ratings numbers will tell the tale. Speaking of which, I also heard her berate a caller who commented about her whining. Ingraham came unglued and started calling the caller names. Really unprofessional, IMHO.

[Redcoat LI]

I vote YES.

Motion carried,on to new business,the chair recognises the fat drunk from Massachusetts.

[douglas1]

IN some cases the feds pursue charges and verdicts, but only if it is a liberal cause .

[EQAndyBuzz]

So am I laying in bed the other night having this dream about me, Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham and Monica Crowley in a hot tub, drinking margaritas and taking turns inhaling helium and reading from Al Frankens book in Al Frankens voice.

Laura gets up, asks who wants another margarita and as I gaze at her figure emerging from the bubbles, I am awakened by, "honey you will be late for work."