SIGN THE SCJ IMPEACHMENT PETITION! (VANITY)

self | 6/24/05 | self

[purpleland]

Also, throw out the career politicians in Congress who have been selling-out America for years!

Follow the "Marxist take-over" of Santa Monica Calif. by the Fonda-Hayden cabal. Started with rent controls which drove out the original owners causing them to sell-out below market value, etc.

[RAY]

A disgusting ruling by an arrogant court.

Check out this petition site:

http://www.petitiononline.com/5amend/petition-sign.html

An email correspondent's comment:

"FOLKS: This past week, SCOTUS (Supreme Court OF The United States) once again, has attempted to rewrite OUR Constitution to totally change the original intent as written by the Founders.

Eminent Domain was NEVER intended to be used by government EXCEPT to obtain property for roads, public buildings, schools, military bases and other necessary government usage.

This past week, the Supreme Court rewrote the Constitution, stating that it was legal for cities to condemn private property under Eminent Domain, to purchase and then resell to developers and other special interests, supposedly to benefit the community and the city by increasing tax revenues.

THIS IS TOTALLY BOGUS!

Please click on the link below and add your signature to the petition for a Constitutional Amendment to put a stop to this invitation to even more corruption within government and the theft of private homes and property for the financial benefit of a few.

http://www.petitiononline.com/5amend/petition-sign.html"

[fatnotlazy]

Can the President provide an executive order? Can Congress do anything to help protect our individual property rights?

***

The fact of the matter is that politicians do tend to pander to those who give them the most money. This is true of Dems, Republicans, maybe some of the other parties as well. I'm not naieve enough to think that any politico really cares about us average joes and janes most of the time.

Sometimes, a rather huge outcry might persuade politicians to remember who else helped elect them...and who can turn them out in the next election. That might make having a petition like this, coupled with effective use of the media, advantageous.

I believe there have been some stirrings in the legislative branch (and maybe in a few states as well) to come up with a law that would protect property rights...one that the justices would have to uphold. I don't know if that will really happen, but I guess it's worth a shot.

[RebelTex]

"Good Going Laz "

Oh, great - I do the work and he gets the credit, lol.

;^D

[RebelTex]

Several posters have suggested in the thread that everyone email the petition or a link.

At the very bottom of the petition page is a 'Send this to a friend' link which opens a form to email the petition. The form has a comments section, but my test did not capture the comments.

The test email did have the following info:

From: tell_a_friend@petitiononline.com
Subject: [name] sends you SCOTUS Impeachment Petition
The body of the email has the petition.

Please send it out to your friends.
FReegards,
RT

[doctorhugo]

Whoa there cowboy! You know that I AGREE with you on the USSC judges, BUT NO Supreme Court Justice has ever been impeached that I know of. And despite the ludicrous decision, make that decisions too, you can't impeach a judge for rendering an opinion/decision that you disagree with, BECAUSE it will always come down to YOUR INTERPRETATION of the constitution vs. THEIR INTERPRETATION and diffences in interpretation do NOT constitute any form of malfeasance in office.

Flooding the Chief Justice with mail indicating outrage, with REASONS SPECIFIED, would appear more effective. If we all visit other sites of a conservative bent, which many of us do, and plant the seed of this idea I think it may well have an effect, ESPECIALLY if you'd pick up on my tag line of the GANG OF FIVE (O"Connor doesn't need to be #6 as she's out!) HOW ABOUT IT? The MEDIA LOVES TAG LINES for their sound bites and THE GANG OF FIVE can be irritating!

[Ravenstar]

Cowboy? Just because it has not been done before doesn't mean it shouldn't be. Just how far would a justice have to go in ignoring the meaning of the Founders before you would charge a judge with violating his oath of office? If your answer is never then you are allowing the judiciary unequal power and therefore they are the dictators you will accept. I honestly would like to know at what point ignoring the Consititution you would consider a violation of a justices oath of office and therefore subject to impeachment. Just because it hasn't happened doesn't mean it shouldn't happen.

Ravenstar

[mr_hammer]

I believe the only way change can be effected is a lobby similar to the NRA be formed by property owners. Call it National Private Property Owners Association, or NPPOA. What this situation demands is dollars. I regret that we have to pay for our Constitution to be upheld, but it has helped us to retain our firearms for more than a hundred years. Money talks and B%$#@@#!&^% walks. Let's face it, it is the lure of cash that got us into this problem and you have to fight fire with fire.

[doctorhugo]

Guess I owe you an explanation of the "Whoa there Cowboy!" reference. That was intended to imply the cowboy galloping off after the bad guys.

Now to your point Ravenstar, remembering I'm a pragmatic realist and opine from that perspective and HAVE signed that petiion, okay! Impeachments originate in the House of Reps. Can you imagine the current Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert, rising to offer up a Bill of Impeachment for one or more of the Justices of the Supreme Court. The press and the lefties would crucify him and the Repubs/Conservatives. It would turn into a charade for all the political poseurs like Kennedy, Pelosi, Reid, Boxer,...maybe throw in Dodd and some others like Bobbie 'White Like ME' Byrd. REMEMBER! Demon-crat lefties are genetically predisposed to whining and the Fourth Estate is only too happy to give them the crying towel and the stage. What I'm saying is what you want ain't a-gonna happen. What COULD happen to direct public attention to the problem of justices in the high court legislating from the bench would be an all-out, groundswell assault on the TAX-EXEMPT status which the ACLU enjoys and VIOLATES. A valid case can be made for this regarding the group whose unwritten mission is to "destroy us from within". The court, observing such on the sidelines, would see a public tide on the rise heading their way.

Sometimes...a full frontal assault is not the best move when the enemy is open on his flanks!