Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Florida Voters..Know your judges
floridasupremecourt.org ^ | 10-28-2006

Posted on 10/28/2006 4:52:53 AM PDT by ThreePuttinDude

Upon receiving my sample ballot for the upcoming election, I noticed in the non-partisan section the names of the Florida Supreme Court Justices up for re-election. What I noticed were names that brought back memories of the 2000 election, and all of the nightmare antics we had to go through due to the state court.

Names to remember:

Justice Fred R. Lewis

Justice Barbara Joan Pariente

Justice Peggy A. Quince


TOPICS: Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: florida; floridasupremecourt; rejectthejudges
Names to remember:

Justice Fred R. Lewis

Justice Barbara Joan Pariente

Justice Peggy A. Quince

1 posted on 10/28/2006 4:52:54 AM PDT by ThreePuttinDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ThreePuttinDude


2 posted on 10/28/2006 5:12:16 AM PDT by NautiNurse (Katherine Harris for U.S. Senate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NautiNurse

I did that yesterday!


3 posted on 10/28/2006 5:14:18 AM PDT by tiredoflaundry ( The kinder we are to terrorists, the harsher we are to their potential victims.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ThreePuttinDude

I voted two days ago in Florida and voted to not retain all the judges on the ballot. I know they all will be retained even though many deserve to be stoned in the public square.
I now they will be retained but voted against retention in the hopes that maybe they will feel some pressure to discontinue their judicial social agenda.
I am just flabergasted that more judges are not targeted by disgrunteled folks screwed by their activism.
Who the hell are judges to push social issues to their liking?
Why is it that freaks like sandra day insist we the people not criticize judges?
Too opften Florida judges like those in N.J. are just wrong and in disregard of our constitution.


4 posted on 10/28/2006 5:14:51 AM PDT by Joe Boucher (an enemy of islam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NautiNurse

Right, voted against them all.
R. Fred Lewis, liberal Democrat
Barbara Joan Pariente, liberal Democrat
Peggy A. Quince, liberal Democrat

District Court, Emerson R. Thompson, Jr., liberal Democrat

Proposed Amendments:
State Constitution #1, yes
#3, yes
#4, no
#6, no
#7, no
#8, yes


5 posted on 10/28/2006 5:22:58 AM PDT by pleikumud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NautiNurse

Already voted.

And I voted "No" on all three.

Unfortunately, since I am not a Dem'crat, I cannot vote again on this issue in this election.

But those of you who have not yet voted, you can help out here.

And by the way, a kind word (and vote) for Katherine Harris, who was upholding the law in 2000, while these three were mangling it.


6 posted on 10/28/2006 5:25:32 AM PDT by alloysteel (Facts do not cease to exist, just because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: tiredoflaundry; pleikumud; alloysteel
We can't forget that Alex Sink is the wife of 2002 Dem gubernatorial candidate Bill McBride.


7 posted on 10/28/2006 5:41:33 AM PDT by NautiNurse (Katherine Harris for U.S. Senate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: tiredoflaundry

Does anyone have any info on the 4th district court of appeals in west Palm Beach.


8 posted on 10/28/2006 5:46:16 AM PDT by Unicorn (Too many wimps around.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Unicorn
If you click on the links to the above judges, it will take
you to the State of Florida courts web page, and you should
be able to find the information you're looking for.
9 posted on 10/28/2006 5:50:37 AM PDT by ThreePuttinDude ()...On 9-11 & 7-7 Islamic missionaries came a callin'.....()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: NautiNurse

Alex Sink is a typical Democrat, in that she will tell any lie in order to get elected. Her TV ads talk about "run away spending" in the Jeb Bush years! And DemoRat Jim Davis says if he were elected governor he "has a plan" to cut property taxes by $1 billion. This is of course total BS. Davis and Sink would be pushing a State income tax in the first 30 seconds if they were elected. They would attempt to turn Florida into another liberal welfare state with higher and higher taxes, huge increase in State government spending, and a resultant decline in business and employment. In short, they want to undo what Jeb Bush has accomplished.


10 posted on 10/28/2006 5:50:55 AM PDT by pleikumud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Unicorn

Try this.
http://www.4dca.org/judgesfrm.html


11 posted on 10/28/2006 5:51:41 AM PDT by tiredoflaundry ( The kinder we are to terrorists, the harsher we are to their potential victims.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: alloysteel
And by the way, a kind word (and vote) for Katherine Harris, who was upholding the law in 2000, while these three were mangling it.


12 posted on 10/28/2006 5:53:06 AM PDT by NautiNurse (Katherine Harris for U.S. Senate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: pleikumud
Alex Sink is a typical Democrat, in that she will tell any lie in order to get elected.

Excellent points. Alex published an invitation to a rally supporting herself first, and her husband back in 2002. It was full of typos, from the candidate touting himself as "the education candidate."

Alex invited women to a Tampa Bay Really, and told us to "Bring all you friends." I'll never forget how hard I laughed when I read it. Rally, I did.

13 posted on 10/28/2006 6:03:08 AM PDT by NautiNurse (Katherine Harris for U.S. Senate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ThreePuttinDude; All
These Judges are SO CONFIDENT
that they have
NOT RUN ANY ADVERTISING
NOT RUN ANY CAMPAIGN!!!




They are not concerned at all.
They are not intimidated by any voters.



14 posted on 10/28/2006 6:21:24 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NautiNurse; All

TOO FUNY

She is the female dog who would not change her name to her husband's last name.

Now SHE! is ussing a MAN's name to cause confusion!

So now we officially know who is the female dog to the female dog in that relationship.

sad.


THANKS FOR THE HEADS UP


BUMP TO THE POST!


15 posted on 10/28/2006 6:27:52 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: NautiNurse

Bump. Thanks, NautiNurse. That looks like the ballot I cast yesterday. Go Florida Pubbies! No to the Florida Supreme Court Judges. Here's hoping Governor Crist will be naming their replacements in January.


16 posted on 10/28/2006 6:49:02 AM PDT by LadyNavyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NautiNurse

My wife and I already voted NO!!!! Besides that we didnt give a sh-t what the media said and voted for Harris


17 posted on 10/28/2006 7:11:47 AM PDT by italianquaker (Democrats and media can't win elections at least they can win their phony polls.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: italianquaker

Harris is far better qualified than Nelson. Nelson doesn't represent the average Floridian. He votes in the Senate as if his constituents were all liberal Democrats. When the Clintonistas say "jump", Nelson says "how high?" Nelson is a pompous, air-head, has-been, blow-hard, good ole boy who thinks he can continue to vote like Kerry and still get re-elected in Florida. Space cadet Nelson will be retired soon.


18 posted on 10/28/2006 7:57:16 AM PDT by pleikumud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: ThreePuttinDude

If I remember these judges are the ones who violated Florida State Statutes by overturning the 2000 presidential election. They also violated Florida Statute and the Florida Constitution when they approved the killing of Terri Schiavo.

I am a Floridian and I will vote for their removal.


19 posted on 10/28/2006 8:46:01 AM PDT by lastchance (Hug your babies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pleikumud

I have a question: how come no to the vets reduced homeowners insurance? Also the 'majority vote'. Thanks for your input!

junkie


20 posted on 10/28/2006 9:27:36 AM PDT by spacejunkie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: spacejunkie

I believe the "majority vote" was put in there because in 2008 there is going to be a DMA put on the ballot. I think this was put on by the trial lawyers.

Also, it has a lot of support because of the fact that PIG PENS are regulated in the FL constitution due to a referendum. Also as FL gets more and more republican, it becomes very likely abortion will make it onto the refrendum question.


It is a two edged sword.


21 posted on 10/28/2006 10:22:08 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Unicorn; All

If you want to know your judges - here's an easy way to do just that:

Go to Yahoo (I don't Google) - and search for the names - and I found it's even better if you search with the title of Justice or Judge before the name.

I found out all kinds of information about these people - when they were previously elected or appointed - AND WHO APPOINTED THEM. And .. you can also find out how they ruled on important issues. Most of the time - the person who appointed them will be a well-known Governor or President - and it's a very big clue as to how the judge will lean. Do not trust any judge appointed by democrats.

Of course, there are some exceptions - but it's just another way of being able to judge the judges for yourself.

THEY CAN'T HIDE FROM US ANYMORE!


22 posted on 10/28/2006 10:25:52 AM PDT by CyberAnt (Drive-By Media: Fake news, fake documents, fake polls)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: CyberAnt

Respectfully you can not count on that in FL.

In FL you have to be a FL lawyer for 5 years and over 18. You run the pro-left gauntlet of the JQC HOWEVER since the FL is so NON-diverse with so many leftist kooks, it is very very very very very hard to find a conservative who happens to be a lawyer.


The FL is now very big into pushing judicial independence which is just code for imposing "thought crime" controls on judicial candidates.


23 posted on 10/28/2006 10:42:58 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

Last line should read,

"The FL BAR is now...."


24 posted on 10/28/2006 10:49:23 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: spacejunkie

Not sure which one you mean when you say "homeowners insurance".
I asssume by "majority vote" you mean #3, on which I voted Yes, because it seems the amendment would make it more difficult to amend the state constitution by requiring 60% of the voters instead of a simple majority. I don't think the consitution should be amended frequently or simply to please special interests (such as "protect the pigs").


25 posted on 10/28/2006 12:53:21 PM PDT by pleikumud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: JulieRNR21; kinganamort; katherineisgreat; floriduh voter; summer; Goldwater Girl; windchime; ...
Florida Freeper


26 posted on 11/01/2006 11:52:13 AM PST by Joe Brower (The Constitution defines Conservatism. *NRA*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
I know several conservative lawyers, including my husband.

You find the conservative lawyers doing things like real estate, commercial litigation, securities work, etc. Oh, and in the Prosecutors Offices.

You usually don't find them on billboards or with a 1-800-ASK-JOEY phone number. :-)

27 posted on 11/01/2006 12:31:32 PM PST by Chanticleer (Courage is not simply one of the virtues but the form of every virtue at the testing point. Lewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Joe Brower

Vote NO on all three bump.


28 posted on 11/01/2006 12:32:39 PM PST by windchime (I consider the left one of the fronts on the WOT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: pleikumud
Handy dandy const amendment booklet that you paid for already

#1 Yes
#2 removed
#3 Yes (no more pregnant pig amendments)
#4 No
#5 removed
#6 No (raises taxes for everyone else)
#7 No (raises taxes for everyone else)
#8 Yes!

and always: Vote like a pirate! (R)
29 posted on 11/01/2006 1:05:48 PM PST by Dominick ("Freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought." - JP II)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ThreePuttinDude

Why are those twerps listed as "non-partisan"?


30 posted on 11/01/2006 1:29:39 PM PST by bobjam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ThreePuttinDude

I didn't remember any of the names (as I didn't live in FL at the time) so I voted against all of them. I don't normally do that, as I normally don't vote if I don't know anything about a candidate, however I remembered 2000, and thought it likely that they were involved.
susie


31 posted on 11/01/2006 1:42:36 PM PST by brytlea (amnesty--an act of clemency by an authority by which pardon is granted esp. to a group of individual)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dominick

I voted against Amendment 3. Why should we (the people) take more power away from ourselves and apportion it to the legislature. Yes, our constitutional amendments are often trvial in nature, but they do serve the will of the people. I think one of the great things about our state is that if the general public disagree with the professional politicians, we can overturn them. I would, however, vote for amendment 3 if there were a way for the public to modify STATUTES via referendum as opposed to modifying the state constitution. The legislature had a chance to do this last year. It was a move supported by Dems and opposed by Republicans. In my mind, the best way for the citizen initiative process to work is via statute, and not constitutional amendment. Since that isn't an option, I'll vote NO on 3. BTW, I voted against retaining all three liberal justices.


32 posted on 11/01/2006 2:10:41 PM PST by MedNole
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: MedNole

The admendment process has been usurped by large lobbying groups, pay for lawyers to write the text, pay to fight the challenges, pay for canvassers to get signatures, and pay for political advertizing.

It is not a citizen's initiative anymore. It is a way for activists to lobby without a politician involved.

A citizen group would have to really get a groundswell of support to get ANY thing past the judges, lawyers and then the negative ads from "profssional" activists.

SO IMHO, Yes on 3, and vote like a pirate! (R)


33 posted on 11/01/2006 5:25:28 PM PST by Dominick ("Freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought." - JP II)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: ThreePuttinDude

I voted "NO!" on all threeofem!


34 posted on 11/01/2006 8:22:13 PM PST by Taxman (So that the beautiful pressure does not diminish!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NautiNurse
Three NO's for this Florida FReeper and three more from my spouse BUMP!

Thank you NautiNurse for the reminder!
35 posted on 11/02/2006 2:55:07 AM PST by poobear (Political Left, continually accusing their foes of what THEY themselves do every day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ThreePuttinDude

Any 411 on:
Circuit Judge, 18th Judicial Circuit, Group 20
Patrice J. Pilate or
Charlie G. Crawford

County Court Judge, Group 10
Judith (Judy) Atkin or
William L. (Bill) Powell, Jr.


36 posted on 11/02/2006 10:36:10 AM PST by shove_it (no good deed goes unpunished)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shove_it

WHOAH! Rethink Amendment #3, people!

Are we a government of the people, by the people and for the people or a government of the politicians, by the politicians, for the politicians?

Most conservatives would likely want to Vote NO on Amendment #3, if you did it in pencil, you might want to erase. See here for a very lucid argument.
http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061103/OPINION/611030377/1030/OPINION01

Basically: Amendment #3 keeps government in the hands of the people when the legislature refuses to listen to the populace.

Quoting from the link above:
By requiring that any proposed amendment be approved by 60 percent of the voters, rather than a simple majority, it would certainly make changing the constitution much more difficult. But it would do so by further restricting the only avenue Florida citizens have for initiating changes in law or the constitution that the Legislature has failed to address.

Legislature too often fails to protect the public interest. Instead, special interests hold lawmakers in sway, through political contributions and other incentives, and thwart popular causes.

Critics of the initiative process like to cite the famous pig-crate amendment, but important changes have been made through initiative, for example, requiring full public disclosure by state and county elections officials. The Sunshine Laws.

((The legislators would never have voted to have their actions in full view of the public. It took US to do that. Trying to force this with a super-majority would be virtually impossible.))

No other state requires a supermajority for approving an amendment.

I suggest a NO vote - keep the power in OUR hands instead of theirs. Or at least do a little more research on your own and think it over.


37 posted on 11/03/2006 1:07:20 PM PST by FossilChik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: ThreePuttinDude; JennieOsborne; politicallyincarrect; /\XABN584; 3D-JOY; 5Madman; ...

Great thread on the JUDGES !! here is my 2cents worth on this election..


http://www.vote2006.DavidOsborne.net

My Tallahassee Voter Guide.. includes all races including the Local Stuff...


38 posted on 11/03/2006 5:34:35 PM PST by davidosborne (DavidOsborne.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MedNole

You are right. No on 3. In 08 we are going to have a constitutional amendment against gay marriage. I don't want to have to meet the 60% barrier. Majority should be enough. An mark my words, they want Amendment 3 to pass so we cannot pass the ban against gay marriage with just a majority vote.


39 posted on 11/03/2006 5:48:07 PM PST by rep-always
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: shove_it
County Court Judge, Group 10.

When my daughter was getting a divorce, earlier this year, folks told her to get Judy Atkin. She was even told by one fellow who's former had Atkin and took him to the cleaners...so to speak. And sure enough, my daughter got her and cleaned her ex's clock. What I noticed, during the proceedings, was that Atkins was very, very sharp, especially in the courtroom under fire. Now that's Atkins' abilities in family court. She is tops. How she might be as a judge, I can't say. I do know she was expensive and charged more than the average divorce lawyer. Also, she is a democrat.
40 posted on 11/03/2006 5:53:46 PM PST by looois
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

I don't recall ever seeing advertising by Florida's Supreme Court Justices. Are they even allowed to advertise?


41 posted on 11/03/2006 9:27:26 PM PST by skr (We cannot play innocents abroad in a world that is not innocent.-- Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: davidosborne

BTTT


42 posted on 11/04/2006 3:09:42 AM PST by E.G.C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: looois

Thanks for your input (#40)


43 posted on 11/04/2006 4:21:39 AM PST by shove_it (no good deed goes unpunished)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: skr

The are allowed to advertise but the language they use is severly limited.

They just did an absurd endorsement from lawyers. Seriously, any jusdge is going to intimidate a lawyer into say "sure you should keep your job" especially when they control conflict appointments.

The FL actually FOUGHT allowing judges to answer more specific questions on their personal beliefs.


44 posted on 11/04/2006 4:26:49 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: NautiNurse

bttt


45 posted on 11/04/2006 4:45:30 AM PST by Guenevere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

Thank you for the information.

I just want to know how they voted on the cases before them. Decisions speak louder than ads.


46 posted on 11/04/2006 10:47:44 PM PST by skr (We cannot play innocents abroad in a world that is not innocent.-- Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: skr

Judge want merit retention because it is de facto life tenure.

No judges bother with advertising because no judge has ever been "not retained".


47 posted on 11/05/2006 5:44:35 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson