Impeach Judges without further Delay, Congressman

In the spirit of beating a dead horse—or at least removing its feeding tube—liberals have unleashed an all out assault on a Republican from Texas.

I know, what else is new? But what if I told you this Texan’s name was not George W. Bush? Impossible, you say?

Understand that for liberals to hate another Republican anywhere near as much as they despise President Bush, it could only mean two things:

1) That Republican is a conservative who is either attempting to cut taxes, punish judges for overstepping their boundaries, or threatening Roe V. Wade in some way.

2) That Republican is someone who should immediately be nominated as the next President of the United States.

In an act that sent liberals everywhere running in fear, DeLay threw down the gauntlet to the Florida judiciary and other kangaroo courts across the nation over their abuse and mismanagement of judicial authority.

“The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior,” said DeLay, R-Texas. “Congress for many years has shirked its responsibility to hold the judiciary accountable. No longer,”

For starters, DeLay would ask the House Judiciary Committee to conduct a “broad review of the courts’ handling of” the Terri Shiavo case.

The Texas conservative accused state and federal courts of a “failure” to save Terri ’s life, allowing her to die of starvation after her feeding tube was removed by order of Florida Judge George Greer.

As Carl Limbacher from NewsMax wrote: “The outcome has left many lawmakers, ethicists, medical professionals and political analysts angry and frustrated, wondering why - in this day and age, when courts so often extend unreasonable protections to convicted killers and other felons - they could not find legal precedence to spare Terri’s life, at least long enough for one final review of her medical condition.”

As usual, liberals are in a snit over DeLay’s attempt to stop their only remaining form of obstructing the will of the American people—relying on un-elected judges to legislate liberalism from the bench.

At the top of the stack of “Things You Cannot Convince A Liberal,” is the ideas that when Americans reject liberal principles at the ballot box, it means they also don’t want some judge to legislate that decision from the bench through judicial fiat.

As long as the Left can depend on judges to preserve abortion, create sodomy and gay marriage laws from state Constitutions that mention neither sodomy nor gay marriage, and remove God from American life, who needs Congress or the Oval Office?

Joining DeLay in taking issue with the judiciary was Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., who said, “The actions on the part of the Florida court and the U.S. Supreme Court are unconscionable.”

Republican Congressman Patrick McHenry of North Carolina added that the case “saw a state judge completely ignore a congressional committees subpoena and insult its intent” and “a federal court not only reject, but deride the very law that Congress passed.”

That is, of course, if it’s not too busy whining about steroids in Major League Baseball.

In typical fashion, liberals responded by accusing DeLay of advocating violence against judges.

“Threats against specific federal judges are not only a serious crime, but also beneath a member of Congress,” wrote Sen. Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey. “Your attempt to intimidate judges in America not only threatens our courts, but our fundamental democracy as well.”

Imagine America’s surprise at seeing Lautenberg come to the aid of judges who subvert the law and legislate from the bench.

Lautenberg only got elected when, in the aftermath of the Robert Torrecelli scandals, the New Jersey Supreme Court ignored New Jersey election law prohibiting a party from changing nominees less than 51 days prior to the election. Torrecelli bowed out with only 34 days remaining until Election Day.

Ted Kennedy went further, warning DeLay about the dangerous practice of using “violent” rhetoric, in light of the recent murder of a Georgia judge and the killing of a federal judge’s husband and mother in Chicago.

Interestingly, neither of these murders were committed by conservatives—the former was killed by a criminal on trial for rape, and the latter by Islamic terrorists—ironically, two groups liberals would never allow to be starved to death by the government.

If he’s that concerned about the safety of judges, Kennedy should have warned them about the more dangerous practice of marrying Michael Shiavo.

Uncle Ted sneered, ”At a time when emotions are running high, Mr. DeLay needs to make clear that he is not advocating violence against anyone.”

Specifically, Kennedy warned Judge George Greer against getting into an Oldsmobile with DeLay until the matter has settled down a bit.

For those optimists out there, the last federal judge to be removed from office was Alcee Hastings, in 1989.

All of America will be shocked to know that Hastings is now a Democratic congressman from Florida. As Gomer Pyle was fond of saying, “Surprise! Surprise! Surprise!”

When asked about the difference between passing legislation in Congress and legislating from the bench, Hastings is rumored to have said, “What? You mean I used to be a judge?”

Maybe America is wrong about the judges in Florida. Maybe Judge Greer isn’t a murderous thug after all; perhaps he just wants to be a Democratic Presidential candidate in 2008.

Simple explanation for the actions of many liberal judges.

John 8
43 Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.
44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
45 And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not.
46 Which of you convinceth me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do ye not believe me?
47 He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.

Speaking of impeaching Florida judges, the Florida Supreme Court judges who ruled that the 2000 presidential election re-recounts must continue should be impeached. They put "this country and this state into an unprecedented and unnecessary constitutional crisis".

The Florida Supreme Court activist and politically partisan majority came up with the absurd ruling that then Secretary of State Katherine Harris must extend the time period for the county election returns to be received by the Department of State. This ruling violated Florida Statues Title IX, Chapter 102, Section 111 and Section 112. This allowed additional election fraud to be committed by Democrat election officials. These activist judges violated the separation of powers and usurped the power of both the legislative and executive branches of state government.

Reference the FraudFactor.com web page, Florida Election Vote Count Statutory Deadlines - http://www.fraudfactor.com/fffldeadline.html for additional information.

Unfortunately, three of these judges (Lewis, Pariente, and Quince) were on the ballot for confirmation in the same 2000 election in which they later issued that absurd activist ruling.

They were confirmed by 72 percent of the voters who voted that part of the ballot. Interestingly, only 78 percent of the voters who voted for president voted for or against confirmation. Obviously, most voters know little or nothing about the judges on the ballot. We must provide more information on judges before each election. There is more information on this at http://www.fraudfactor.com/fffl2ksupctconfirm.html.

Here are some relevant quotes from the dissenting opinion of Florida Supreme Court Chief Justice Wells, dated Friday, December 8, 2000, as quoted by FraudFactor.com at http://www.fraudfactor.com/ffquotations.html:

"... [T]he majority's decision cannot withstand the scrutiny which will certainly immediately follow under the United States Constitution.

"Importantly to me, I have a deep and abiding concern that the prolonging of judicial process in this counting contest propels this country and this state into an unprecedented and unnecessary constitutional crisis. I have to conclude that there is a real and present likelihood that this constitutional crisis will do substantial damage to our country, our state, and to this Court as an institution.

"... Judicial restraint in respect to elections is absolutely necessary because the health of our democracy depends on elections being decided by voters — not by judges. We must have the self-discipline not to be embroiled in political contests whenever a judicial majority subjectively concludes to do so because the majority perceives it is 'the right thing to do.' Elections involve the other branches of government. A lack of self-discipline in being involved in elections, especially by a court of last resort, always has the potential of leading to a crisis with the other branches of government and raises serious separation-of-powers concerns."

"... any right to contest an election must be construed to grant only those rights that are explicitly set forth by the Legislature."

Here are some relevant quotes from the dissenting opinion of Florida Supreme Court Justice Harding, joined by Justice Shaw, dated Friday, December 8, 2000, as quoted by FraudFactor.com at http://www.fraudfactor.com/ffquotations.html:

"While this Court must be ever mindful of the Legislature's plenary power to appoint presidential electors [under Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution], I am more concerned that the majority is departing from the essential requirements of the law by providing a remedy which is impossible to achieve and which will ultimately lead to chaos. ...

"... Even if by some miracle a portion of the statewide recount is completed by December 12, a partial recount is not acceptable. The uncertainty of the outcome of this election will be greater under the remedy afforded by the majority than the uncertainty that now exists."

Note that Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution grants plenary authority to appoint electors:

"Each state shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress ..."

I don't see the word "judge", "court", or "activist" anywhere in that clause of the Constitution.

- FraudFactor.com

If there were hearings and impeachment venues in Congress regarding these out of control judges, their veneer would be cracked. These judges are such egomaniacs that they would believe they could make mincemeat of any interrogation. In fact, they would be exposed for the ideologues they are.

When the Supreme Court realized that C-SPAN had lifted the aura of purity and invincibility from the halls of Congress by showing that the men and women there were fallible human beings, it vowed to never, ever, never, ever allow cameras into its chambers. There is a reason for that. You would see Justices Ruth Bader Ginsberg and Souter struggle with a simple moral concept to the point of comedy.

Congress should haul these liberal judges before them and have them explain themselves to the American people. I guarantee you these judges will look like complete fools.

Unfortunately, there is a lot of corruption within the 6th Circuit Judicial System. Several of the judges have made such severe Legal Errors! They have no accountability, and everyone is afraid to confront them on the issue. In truth, several of the Judges need to be impeached.

When a 6th Circuit Judge rules with obvious legal error, you can appeal that ruling to the 2nd District Court of Appeals. What do you find there? Appellate Judges married to Circuit Judges, such As Judge Nelly Khouzam (6th Circuit) who is married to Judge Morris Silberman (2nd District Court of Appeal.) Any appeal that appears from Judge Khouzam's court is automatically affirmed (agreed with), due to the "good ole boys" relationships and personal loyalty.

Rather than upholding the Constitution, that they legally swore to when they took office, instead you will find an abuse of Judicial Authority, with NO ONE willing to call them into account for their abuse. If an ethical Florida Attorney (good luck finding one) calls ANY Judge into account, the Attorney risks sanctions (punishment from a Judge) disbarment, and extreme prejudice from the Judges and the Court.

In addition, certain Judges will rule in favor of large Corporations, because they need their financial and political support when it comes time for Judicial elections, so they will rule in favor of a powerful Corporation, irregardless of the Laws. Who suffers? The average citizen.

Unfortunately, in this region of Florida, there is no Judicial accountability, and any Judge may rule any way that He or she pleases. The entire Florida legal system needs a complete overhaul.

RETURN THE CONSTITUTION BACK TO "THE PEOPLE"!!!!!!!!

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.