Bill Pryor Got His Judas Money

<chuckwagon@chuckbaldwinlive.com> | 25 Feb 04 | Chuck Baldwin

[nvskibum]

Both are lawbreakers. That is the similarity.

I guess that as far as you are concerned, it is OK to break laws whenever you do not agree with them.

Don't forget that our political enemies also don't agree with may of the laws to which they are subject. They have and will seize every opportunity to attempt to disregard their legal obligations. How do you propose to compel them to follow the law when our side is exempt from an equivalent obligation?

Frankly, I am more worried about the other side, since I believe many are less constrained than we are by notions like decency and a true understanding of the nature of a democracy. The rule of law is our protection against such individuals.

Conservatives must demand respect for the rule of law. We surely cannot count on liberals to do so.

[John Beresford Tipton]

"Chuck Baldwin's commentaries...may be republished,..providing ... full credit is given"

Hard to imagine anyone wanting to "steal" credit for his ravings.

[Dog Gone]

Wow, that was a pretty good quote. That DG guy is really smart.

[Fester Chugabrew]

I thought the judge who ruled against Moore created law, hence the controversy. At any rate, this should still work out well.

[nvskibum]

I think the problem with Judge Moore is that he persisted in defying the court order even after he lost the case and all appeals, and after the decision against him became final. He had every right to his full day in court, but after he lost, he should have complied with the court order.

After all, he was Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court. What kind of example did he set for the citizens of Alabama, and why should parties in his court be expected to comply with his court orders if he would not comply with those issued by another court? Again, the decision against Moore was fully appealed and upheld and was final.

[nvskibum]

We shall see...

The case of Newsom has barely begun. The Calif. Sup. Ct., which will hear the case soon, is not peopled by a majority of unprincipled left-wing whackos (unlike the Mass. Supreme Court). Lockyer will have to survive in a political environment that has the Governor at about a 60%+ or higher approval rating, and who is about to get the cornerstone of his fiscal plans approved by the voters, despite the displeasure of the Dem-controlled legislature. The Governor does not seem reluctant to put the heat on Lockyer on the gay-marriage issue.

Satan has not won (yet).

[Dog Gone]

I think the problem with Judge Moore is that he persisted in defying the court order even after he lost the case and all appeals, and after the decision against him became final. He had every right to his full day in court, but after he lost, he should have complied with the court order.

That sums it up precisely and accurately. Chuck Baldwin does a grave disservice to conservatives with his attacks on conservatives for obeying the law and court orders.

Perhaps he's an anarchist.

[StonyBurk]

roy S.Moore demanded respect for the Rule of Law.Demanded
that Federal Judges be held accountable to the clear language used and intent of the men who ratified that
instrument. And he was removed for that.You are not
correct to thrust the charge that I think it is "ok" to
defy the law -when I do not agree with the law. Quite the
opposite is True. Like Roy Moore I expect all to be under the Law--unlike the Blind captives who believe in error that
the Federal court is the very essence of Law.As opposed to
what is written and ratified. WHY should they be above the LAW?