Posted on 06/26/2002 11:48:43 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
This is your wake-up call
My friends, I've been taking a lot of flak lately because of my stand on President Bush and the Republicans. Well, my thinking is that the coming elections are so critical that the very continuation of America as we know it may be at stake.All of our institutions are controlled by liberals. Both houses of Congress are awash in liberals and socialists and moderates and very few conservatives. The Courts are infested with liberal activist judges. Our media and entertainment industries are overrun by liberals. Our universities are overrun by liberals. Our public education systems are overrun by liberals. The liberals control public opinion through their controlled nightly news programs and their daily liberal newspapers. My God, the whole damn country is run by hordes of mushy headed liberals and socialists in biblical proportions! And now they even have the audacity to openly attack patriotism and even God Almighty Himself!
A United States Federal Appeals Court in California has declared the
Pledge of Allegiance to be unconstitutional! And this simply because it contains the phrase, "Under God." I'm speechless! I just sit here and shake my head. Don't even know what to say.
Wake up America! We've been saying that for years. The far right-wingers have been shouting it for decades. Wake up America! Wake up America, the socialists are coming!
And now it's here. The Republic is in grave danger. The liberal activist judiciary has tested the waters. If America does not wake up and not only say no, but hell no to this abomination, then what will the emboldened court take next? Well, I don't know about you, but I'm not gonna sit around on my butt doing nothing while we find out.
Call to action: Get off your Butts! Call or write your reps! Voice your opinion. Demand that they do something about this. Tell them that America will not allow this outrage to stand! Demand of your Senators that they move President Bush's judiciary appointments through the Senate! The Democrat controlled Senate is holding up his appointments, hoping to delay as many as they possibly can until Bush appoints judges more to their liking, or possibly even until they can get Gore or Hillary elected in 2004. God forbid!
And, I'm convinced more than ever, that we must have a complete turnover of the judiciary in the next decade. This is critical. The liberal activist judiciary is getting more and more aggressive. If we do not get some conservative judges in there pretty soon, this game is going to be over.
How do we get conservative judges? Well, I can guarantee you that we will not get them as long as the Senate is controlled by Democrats. We must have a Republican President to appoint conservative judges and we must have a Republican majority so they will be moved through the Senate. This is one of the primary reasons why I want to push so hard to help elect Republicans to the Congress and especially to the Senate. And this is why I want to push so hard to help re-elect President Bush in 2004.
Wake up America! And wake up right-wingers! Vote out the Democrats. Vote in a huge Republican majority so we can retake America from the liberals!
We cannot afford a loss or even a squeaker in the next couple of elections. We must have Reaganesque landslides! Send them to Washington with a mandate from the American people! We want a complete turnover and makeover of the judiciary and all of the government. Give is back our Liberty!
This is not the time for sending a negative message. It does us no good for conservatives to sit on their hands or to vote third party. The only message that sends is to say you don't care if we have wall-to-wall liberals forever. The Democrats will love you. The liberal activist judiciary will love you.
The message you should send is one by pen and ink, or by phone calls and personal meetings. Send a message now to your congressmen and to the Republican Party. Now is the time to send the message. Tell them what we want them to run on and what we want them to do when they get in there. Send them a positive message filled with patriotism and love for God and Country. Tell them that we are fed up with the liberals and we want our country back and we want our rights back. Tell your relatives and your friends and neighbors. Tell them to write and call and visit. And tell them to vote for the Republican in their districts. We must do this if we want it back. We cannot afford to fail.
God bless you all and thank you for bearing with me. I love my country and I love my freedom more than life itself. I don't care what anyone says about me, or what labels they pin on me. From this day forward I am a Bush-bot and proud of it! I am going to help turn this thing around or I'm going down in flames trying.
FReegards,
Jim Robinson
I work in Elk Grove, where the loser lives, and I look forward to seeing a gazzilion bumper stickers reading "One Nation, under God".
My theory is that this person is really a fundamental Christian, and (gasp!) this is a really clever way to induce a huge religious revival.
Now.... that is scary.
Lemme repeat... parents can't cop out on their responsibility of authority! It's turning the job of nanny over to the teachers that has brought on much of the moral rot and destructiveness of today's children. Yes it would be a good idea for teachers to explain at the start of the school year that the pledge is not required if the parents or guardians do not wish it, but to make this the main point is to miss the main point.
PAGE 8
Filing A Complaint Against A Judge Step-By-Step
I f you think the judge in your court case is guilty of misconduct, report it to the state or federal board that oversees judges’ conduct. The following explains the steps you’ll need to take.
What is misconduct? The Judicial Councils Reform and Judicial Conduct and Disabilities Act of 1980 says it is "conduct prejudicial to the effective expeditious administration of the business of the courts." Courts have interpreted this to include fraudulent, corrupt, immoral, illegal and dishonest behavior and any physical or mental incapacity to carry out judicial duties. For example, a judge who makes repeated racial slurs against litigants can be found guilty of misconduct. A judge found to have a serious mental or physical handicap that interferes in the performance of judicial duties is usually asked to retire or removed from office.
However, if you think the judge has made a mistake during your trial or decided your case wrong, you probably won’t succeed in getting the judge investigated for misconduct unless you can prove malice or a repeated pattern of bias or incompetence.
State Judges
How complaints against state court judges are handled varies from state to state, but the procedure for filing a complaint is usually the same. The first thing you need is the name and address of your state agency that handles complaints. You can get it from the American Judicature Society’s Center for Judicial Conduct Organizations, 180 North Michigan Avenue, Suite 600, Chicago, Illinois 60601 (312) 558-6900. Your state’s judicial conduct organization, in turn, can tell where to find the court rules or laws governing the process in your state.
Filing. The first step is to send the agency a typed letter, naming the judge, the court, the county and state, and giving a specific—but brief—description of the judge’s misconduct. State that you are requesting an investigation. Don’t forget to include your own name, address and telephone number.
Screening. The agency staff will review your complaint for merit. Most complaints are rejected at this stage. An extreme example of a complaint without merit: that a ruling was unfair because the judge was a woman.
Investigation. The accused judge is notified of the complaint and given a chance to respond. You and other witnesses may be interviewed. After this, the complaint may be dismissed for lack of evidence. If it is not dismissed, the agency has two options:
1. Private Discipline. If the wrongdoing is not considered serious enough for formal sanctions, the judge will be admonished in a private letter ordering that the conduct not be repeated.
2. Public Discipline. If the agency thinks the case is serious enough, it can recommend a formal hearing. The state’s Supreme Court appoints special judges to conduct a fact-finding hearing and decides whether to dismiss the case, issue a public reprimand, or remove the judge from the bench. About half the states require that proceedings be made public once they reach a formal hearing.
Federal Judges
The procedure for disciplining federal court judges is contained in the Judicial Councils Reform and Judicial Conduct and Disabilities Act. It applies to all federal courts except the Supreme Court. Grounds for discipline are similar to those at the state level.
To file a complaint against a federal judge, you need to write to the clerk of the circuit court in your area (for a list, write to: HALT, 1612 K Street, NW, Suite 510, Washington, DC 20006). Filing. Submit a typewritten statement of your complaint to the clerk of the chief judge in your judicial circuit. Each circuit encompasses several states. For example, to complain about a bankruptcy judge in Seattle, file a complaint with the chief judge of the Ninth Circuit, in San Francisco. View map of the circuits. Screening. The clerk will send a copy of your complaint to the chief judge and the judge being accused. (If your complaint is against the chief judge, it will be reviewed by the judge next in seniority.) The judge can dismiss frivolous complaints, complaints that do not address misconduct or disability spelled out in the law, or a complaint that concerns only the merits of your particular case. Private Discipline. The reviewing judge can take "appropriate corrective action"—privately asking the accused judge for assurance that the questioned behavior will be corrected. Investigation. If the complaint is neither dismissed nor privately resolved, the judge appoints a committee to investigate and report to the judicial council of the circuit. When the council receives the report, it usually investigates further and gives accused judges an opportunity to respond. Formal Discipline. The council either dismisses the complaint or issues some discipline, public or private, short of removal from the bench. (The council can remove bankruptcy judges and magistrates from office, but not District or Circuit judges.) If you are not satisfied with the council’s decision, you can ask the Judicial Conference of the United States to review your case, but it has no obligation to do so. Impeachment. If the Council feels a District or Circuit judge should be removed from office, it recommends impeachment to the Judicial Conference. If the Conference agrees that grounds for impeachment exist, it notifies the House of Representatives.
Now THAT I cannot argue with.
A lesson in patriotism, and a lesson in the law of unintended consequences for the thorn in your side.
Yee-HA!
Question: - Do west coast viewers have to watch Fox at 3am or do you get it three hours later? If you do, be sure to watch between 8 and 8:15.
With all due respect. I agree with the underlying issue in your post. The activists, socialist judiciary and the socialists who call themselves plaintiff's attorneys being vomited from law schools all across the US are a clear and present danger to the Constitution and the Republic. They believe in re-distribution of wealth and forced social changes via lawsuits. They view the Constitution as an anachronism and malleable. This is no surprise to anyone. But note that what has a lot of us "right-wingers" (and a lot of libertarians) pissed off is that we work hard to elect what appears to be a conservative to office, expecting them to do something about this problem and then they:
- switch parties;
- vote liberal/moderate;
- cut deals with the liberals/moderates;
- push for more expansive government (just in different areas than the libs);
- don't work their balls off for those of us that got them elected in the first place;
- [insert your own issues here]
Then the Bush-lovehimoremmigrate crowd jump on one of us for pointing out waffling, rather than politely debate with us. The overall perception is that legitimate criticisms of current WH policies that appear to fall into some of the categories I've noted above are not tolerated by the forum. That may be a misperception, or an unfair one - but it is there. Which leads me to my largest concern:
IF it is true that politicos lurk here to gauge sentiment, we are then sending the wrong message to the R's. They might get the idea that they get a free pass if they take a moderate-to-liberal stance on issues based upon what they see occurring here. What they see occurring here is the "better to elect moderate Republicans than moderate Dems" mindset. That's is just plain foolishness; we already know that moderate R's vote lockstep with liberal D's. Why the hell would we want a wolf in sheep's clothing guarding the chicken coop of the Judiciary? But taking a stance that says elect R's at all costs creates exactly that nightmare and gives less than honorable politicians all the wiggle room they need to get elected and than screw the country.
The current atmosphere of virulence when GW is legitimately criticized is dangerous for conservatism and for the Republicans in general. Polite debate, not attacking the critic by calling into question their patriotism or political convictions, is desired, nay expected - it is the responsibility of all citizens. Without polite debate their is a stifling of legitimate ideas and utlimately what results is an "official" viewpoint - be it of party or government. If a conservative isn't allowed to engage in legitimate discussions regarding their government, and the policies of the official they voted for, the liberals have already won...just MHO.
No doubt; but what individuals do on their own isn't the question here. We're talking about government-imposed religious indoctrination. The real solution is to get government out of the education business, but pending that, government-run institutions shouldn't impose religion on people.
From their Teachers discussion on the Constitution:
Impeachment - A formal accusation against a public official by the lower house of a legislative body. Impeachment is merely an accusation and not a conviction. Only one president, Andrew Johnson in 1868, was ever impeached. He was not, however, convicted, for the Senate failed by one vote to obtain the necessary two-thirds vote required for conviction.Also, in PA -- seems Mr Ed Rendell is running against 'plain joe' Mike Fisher. No bias there, eh?
(Probably just a lazy cut-and-paste job on the latter, but their failure to update their info is suspect.)
If you believe that speaking the pledge in the presence of one atheist second-grader is imposing religion on that child then by preventing the pledge to be spoken the Judiciary is imposing atheism on the Jews, Muslims and Christians in the same classroom.
I would appreciate an politician who honestly says he's an agnostic over one who simply mouths crowd-pleasing pieties (I'm not saying that Bush does that, but some do). I've known athiests and agnostics who lived up to the Golden Rule a lot better than many Christians. Check out the death threats against Newdow on another thread to see what I mean.
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.