Lawmaker wants to impeach 'activist' judge

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=37670 ^ | March 20, 2004 | WorldNetDaily.com

[calcowgirl]

Colorado lawmaker wants to impeach a judge who ordered a former lesbian in a child custody case not to teach her daughter homosexual behavior is wrong.

Unbelievable.

[archy]

American courts need to pay more attention to international legal decisions to help create a more favorable impression abroad, said U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor

I couldn't agree more. Hanging a few foreign internationalists ought to get their attention in exactly the manner needed.

The Verdicts

1. The President: In accordance with Article 27 of the Charter, the International Military Tribunal will now pronounce the sentences on the defendants convictedon this indictment.

2. Defendant Hermann Wilhelm Goering, on the counts of the Indictment which you have been convicted, the International Military Tribunal sentences you to death by hanging.

3. Defendant Rudolf Hess, on the counts of the Indictment on which you been convicted, the International Military Tribunal sentences you to imprisonment for life.

4. Defendant Joachim Von Ribbentrop, on the counts of the indictment on which you have been convicted, the International Military Tribunal sentences you to death by hanging.

5. Defendant Wilhelm Keitel, on the counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the International Military Tribunal sentences you to death by hanging.

6. Defendant Ernst Kaltenbrunner, on the counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the International Military Tribunal sentences you to death by hanging.

7. Defendant Alfred Rosenberg, on the counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the International Military Tribunal sentences you to death by hanging.

8. Defendant Hans Frank, on the counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the International Military Tribunal sentences you to death by hanging.

9. Defendant Wilhelm Frick, on the counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the International Military Tribunal sentences you to death by hanging.

10. Defendant Julius Streicher, on the counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the International Military Tribunal sentences you to death by hanging.

11. Defendant Walther Funk, on the counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the International Military Tribunal sentences you to imprisonment for life.

12. Defendant Karl Doenitz, on the counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the International Military Tribunal sentences you to ten years imprisonment.

13. Defendant Erich Raeder, on the counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the International Military Tribunal sentences you to imprisonment for life.

14. Defendant Badur von Schirach, on the counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the International Military Tribunal sentences you to twenty years imprisonment.

15. Defendant Fritz Sauckel, on the counts of the Indictment on which you have Ben convicted, the International Military Tribunal sentences you to death by hanging.

16. Defendant Alfred Jodl, on the counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the International Military Tribunal sentences you to death by hanging.

17. Defendant Arthur Seyss-Inquart, on the counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the International Military Tribunal sentences you to death by hanging.

18. Defendant Albert Speer, on the counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the International Military Tribunal sentences you to twenty years imprisonment.

19. Defendant Konstantin Von Neurath, on the counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the International Military Tribunal sentences you to fifteen years imprisonment.

20. The Tribunal sentences the Defendant Martin Bormann, on the counts of the Indictment on which he has been convicted, to death by hanging.

[PistolPaknMama]

I fear we are fast approaching the day when SCOTUS declares the Constitution to be "unconstitutional".

They're accomplishing this in increments. Whatever happened to our "system of checks and balances." The government was set up so that one branch could not invoke tyranny, and we are way past that with the judiciary system. And the other two branches just turn a blind eye.

[DMZFrank]

Impeachment, nullification, interposition, and the use of Article III, Sec. 2 of the Constitution all need to be considered.

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. Congress can and should impeach federal judges for blatently unconstitutional rulings that manufacture law.

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.

[little jeremiah]

Homosexual Agenda Ping + Judicial Activism and why it will ruin our country completely unless it is stopped Alert.

Some very good comments on this thread, and another article posted about SCOTUS Justice O'Connor who desperately needs to retire and let someone better fill her spot. (She's not the only one who needs to retire, though.)

Let me know if anyone wants on/off this pinglist.

[archhee]

Do others find this too or am I the only one, but after reading a few comments in FR, I feel I need a shower.

Help me to understand how hate and bigotry can be allied with a free republic.

At the bottom of this page I read: Please: NO profanity, NO personal attacks, NO racism or violence in posts.

[little jeremiah]

What kind of hate and bigotry do you see? On this thread, or elsewhere?

Are you talking about the articles, or the comments?

Kindly enlighten me.

[scripter]

Looks like somebody got banned...

[little jeremiah]

Well, after archee (?) complained to me about "bigotry", for some reason, it rang a bell of suspicion in my mind, so I checked "in forum", and lo and behold! Three comments in one year, so I alerted the mod.. Looked like a stealth troll to me.

If they think they can prate about "bigotry" and stick around, they've got another think coming.

Used to be, discrimination was considered a necessary and good thing. If a person doesn't discriminate what to eat and what not to eat, who to look up to and who not to look up to, between virtuous behavior and vicious behavior, they won't live long.

[little jeremiah]

Hmmm - how did you know so fast... Are YOU a moderator now?
~ ;-)

[scripter]

Maybe. Keeping folks guessing is more fun and sometimes timing is everything. ;-)

[little jeremiah]

Hmmmm - I hope you are remunerated handsomely! 6 figures at least. :-)

I bet you guys have secret meetings, fancy cars with special doo-dads, walkie-talkies, and cool sunglasses.

[scripter]

At least 6 figures, but what those figures are I can't say... Squares, parallelograms, circles, triangles, rectangles, lines, etc. But if you know of the special doo-dads, you, too, must be a mod. ;-)

[little jeremiah]

Well, I'll have to admit that fancy doo-dads are just one of my specialties.

Beyond that, my lips are sealed.

[little jeremiah]

Personally, I'm very comfortable being bigoted against same sex sodomy (and any other kind, BTW).

[little jeremiah]

It counts, it counts!

Or, as the Srimad Bhagavat Purana says (in my own words...) by hating evil, one's heart becomes purified and closer to God.

IOW, it's cool to hate what's bad and love what's good!

(That way we can also look into our own hearts to reject the bad and hold close to the good...)

That's why we need to use our God-given discriminatory powers to discern what's holy and good from what is evil and bad.

More proof (as if any was needed) that liberalism is mental illness. But it's criminal insanity, not the harmless kind.

Love you too!

[thiscouldbemoreconfusing]

My ruling would be YES!, but, who knows what ginsburg and her minions on the court would say.