WP: And the Verdict on Justice Kennedy Is: Guilty

[kskiska]

By Dana Milbank

Conservative leaders meeting in Washington yesterday for a discussion of "Remedies to Judicial Tyranny" decided that Kennedy, a Ronald Reagan appointee, should be impeached, or worse.

Phyllis Schlafly, doyenne of American conservatism, said Kennedy's opinion forbidding capital punishment for juveniles "is a good ground of impeachment." To cheers and applause from those gathered at a downtown Marriott for a conference on "Confronting the Judicial War on Faith," Schlafly said that Kennedy had not met the "good behavior" requirement for office and that "Congress ought to talk about impeachment."

Next, Michael P. Farris, chairman of the Home School Legal Defense Association, said Kennedy "should be the poster boy for impeachment" for citing international norms in his opinions. "If our congressmen and senators do not have the courage to impeach and remove from office Justice Kennedy, they ought to be impeached as well."

(snip)

The conference was organized during the height of the Schiavo controversy by a new group, the Judeo-Christian Council for Constitutional Restoration. This was no collection of fringe characters. The two-day program listed two House members; aides to two senators; representatives from the Family Research Council and Concerned Women for America; conservative activists Alan Keyes and Morton C. Blackwell; the lawyer for Terri Schiavo's parents; Alabama's "Ten Commandments" judge, Roy Moore; and DeLay, who canceled to attend the pope's funeral.

The Schlafly session's moderator, Richard Lessner of the American Conservative Union, opened the discussion by decrying a "radical secularist relativist judiciary." It turned more harsh from there.

more…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A38308-2005Apr8.html

[Coventina]

1. Dear God, please reign in your insane followers.

Thanks,

Coventina.

[Laurab]

20. Praying to God won't help - they're not followers of any God I know

they seem to have created one all their own, who stands for everything the God I believe in doesn't. They're giving MY God (and any God most people believe in, if they believe), a bad name. If I had to believe in THAT God, I'd be an atheist too.

I'm sure you know these people are not Christians. The unfortunate thing is that a lot of people think they ARE Christians. They get a lot of press, and it's always under the "Christian" banner. I wish they'd be reigned in before they destroy the entire world in the name of God.

[Coventina]

24. I stand corrected.

You are right. They don't follow any God/dess I could recognize or believe in.

I've taken to referring to these idiots as "KKKristians"

[olddad56]

41. Only one God, too many interpretations.....

Too many disillusioned saviors, too many lost souls. Too many religious people, not enough spiritual people. Too many people telling you how wonderful God is, not enough people listening to God tell them are wonderful they are. Too many people forcing their will on others under the guise of it being God's will. Religion is for people who don't want to go to hell. Spirituality is for who have been there. Jesus Christ was the Prince of Peace, so why so much violence committed by Christians? Too many Christians killing other people. Too many talking about Jesus, not enough acting like Jesus. Maybe in many cases Christianity has been corrupted.

Every person on Earth is a spiritual being having a human experience. Unfortunately our experience is becoming all to human. Maybe we all need to spend more time listening to God and less time talking about God.

[Bo]

69. Exactly...I don't know of a God that would tolerate them

there way to stupid

[saigon68]

100. They are merely thugs and murderers

Hiding behind "religion"

Whatever the fuck that means

[against all enemies]

79. Reign them in? No way, let them go for it. It's our best chance to win.

[xultar]

2. Culture of Life people wanna kill/ EXECUTE CHILDREN...

:crazy::woohoo::crazy::woohoo::crazy::woohoo::crazy::woohoo::crazy:

[Ilsa]

26. That was my first thought as well. Well put. n/t

[olddad56]

42. only children who have been born.

[intheflow]

66. Too true!

Welcome to DU, olddad56! :hi:

[saigon68]

43. THESE ARE TALI BORNE AGAIN FUNDY NUT-CASES

Wait until they really decide to "CLEAN UP AMERICA".

Mass arrests and "re-education camps" where the detainees will be required to read JAYZEUS 24/7.

[alittlelark]

3. Reading this makes me feel as though I am in an alternate universe...

... Beam Me Up Scottie, This Reality SUCKS!

[leesa]

4. How did these people become so mentally ill?

[NNN0LHI]

9. They drank the purple Kool-Aid n/t

[AlCzervik]

5. i had a few go rounds with Schlafly's local chapter here

and they failed to show at every proposed meeting(in a public place) every time. the Eagle forum is a disguting racists homophonic group and the fact that they are still getting a platform to spew their hate is mind boggeling.

[Fridays Child]

6. When is there ever NOT blood in the water for these lunatics?

[adwon]

7. This is kind of funny

They hate a Reagan appointee. I love it.

[agincourt]

25. Reagen was a reasonable moderate,

compared to the rabid degenerates that control the republican party now. I have never dreamed, that when he was in office, that I would ever say that.

[adwon]

27. That makes two of us

Sad to think that Reagan will probably bump into the second flight of presidents just because he was a flaming liberal next to the twit-in-chief.

[cyr330]

32. What planet are you from?

Reagan was a right-wing asshole, but compared to these morons, I suppose he WAS moderate. It's all relative.

On edit: I misread your post---You said exactly what I wanted to say--sorry!

[Joe Chi Minh]

65. Not that the Chilean

people or the populations of the other central and South American countries (other than the neo-Dives, who own just about everything), would necessarily agree.

[agincourt]

96. I'm comparing him relative to Bush

Not that I found him acceptable as a president. I think Greg Palast pegged him best. However if Bush would have been in power in those days, I think many US ground troops would have been fighting in Central America. More bloodshed then with Reagen in.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

8. Holy crap! Anthony Kennedy is usually somewhere to the right

of Darth Vader, but these freepish nutjobs want to impeach him because he drew the line at executing children???

[Lexingtonian]

17. more like Lawrence v Texas

That seems to be the actual watershed case. Kennedy has teamed with the liberal foursome on social issue cases since that one- O'Connor has gotten more rigid and predictable on which side she falls, so Kennedy is the swing vote when the four (and the lawyers pleading their appeals) know that O'Connor will side with Rehnquist/Scalia/Thomas.

While I do like the outcomes, I hate that he bargains himself into writing the majority opinions for them- he likes wierdly lifeless written language which manages to make good arguments sound annoying and weak. Scalia's dissents, while infernally stupid despite appearing sophistication, get so much deference simply from his far stronger rhetoric and sense of written and oral language.

How Scalia raged in his dissent of LvT is going to go down into the history of the Court.

[MO_Dem]

10. Millbank says these are not fringe characters?

If that's true, God help us!

[cosmicdot]

34. that stood out for me, too

"This was no collection of fringe characters"

the folks he named are fringe lunatics imo ... he shouldn't mix opinions with reporting anyway ...

he's recently spent time at the conservative right-wing Hoover Institution (Condi Rice's patrons) as a "Media Fellow"

Dana Milbank Washington Post March 7–11, 2005

The Media Fellows Program allows print and broadcast media professionals to spend time in residence at the Hoover Institution. Media fellows have the opportunity to exchange information and perspectives with Hoover scholars through seminars and informal meetings and with the Hoover and Stanford communities in public lectures. As fellows, they have the full range of research tools the Hoover offers available to them.

http://www-hoover.stanford.edu/research/media.html

Milbank is a unique name. It could be coincidence that 2 Milbanks
serve on Hoovers' Board of Overseers, as does Richard Scaife and many others......... or maybe not

Jeremiah Milbank · New York, NY
Jeremiah Milbank III · New York, NY
http://www-hoover.stanford.edu/main/boardovr.html

[FourStarDemocrat]

73. He was probrably there for research purposes

but Milbank consistantly reports from a pro-Democratic, anti-Bush administration perspective. I've been reading his reports for many months now, and have observed that.

[MisterP]

75. maybe he meant powerwise: for example, Michelle Malkin is in agree-

ment with the Neo-Nazi militias up in Idaho and down in Fallbrook and Arizona much more often than not, and she isn't treated as fringe because the fiend is on TV 30% of the time!

[FourStarDemocrat]

72. I think he was referring to congressional and senate aides being there

But it was a wrong choice of words, because clearly the implication of the whole article is that they're working on something extremely frightening, as Milbank alluded to the Stalin reference and wrote at the beginning that perhaps Kennedy might want to get himself a few more bodyguards.

[Rose Siding]

11. Impeached "or WORSE"?

These guys are fanning the flames.

[MessiahRp]

12. I want to play this game!

Who wants to get together in a group with me where we can decide the Conservatives are Guilty! We can arrange capital punishment for them and everything! If there are to be no courts or judicial overview and groups (lynchmobs) can decide guilt or innoncence, we should be all over this and start convicting some of these assholes!

Rp

[sonicx]

13. So, they'd impreach the pope too?

[Maraya1969]

92. Hey most of them think the Pope has gone to Hell!

I didn't even like writing that but a lot of them really do believe that Catholics are going to Hell unless they accept Christ as their "personal savior" as dictated by THEM.

[jaysunb]

14. Overeaching again !!

This kind of overeach is one of the few things that give me hope that we'll get our country back....soon. I don't care how Milbank tries to spin this, with : This was no collection of fringe characters.
This crowd has been repududiated repeatedly. Let's cheer them on !

On the downside, I'd hoped Kennedy would get the Chief Justice seat...if we MUST let Bush do it.

[UpInArms]

23. Milbank may have been technically correct in his

This was no collection of fringe characters.

What he should have said was:

This is a collection of freakin' nutcases.

[jaysunb]

28. Bingo !!

But still, great ammunition !

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

62. The republicans ALWAYS over-reach.

It's just one of their fundamental flaws. When they are in power, they overreach. On the other hand, when we are in power, we have a tendency towards complacency which is just as damaging to our majority as over-reaching is to the republicans'.

[Jack Rabbit]

15. Who cares what these misfits think?

??

[AlCzervik]

35. it's not what they think, it's what they say and who listens to them

freeper facists follow their teachings and i beleive their words could lead some of their followers to commit violent acts against judges.

[Jack Rabbit]

38. That's the only real concern

Otherwise, this isn't reasoned discourse; it's cheerleading. Anybody open to this message is already convinced.

Does anybody know if Phyllis Schlafly is Ann Coulter's fairy godmother?

[AlCzervik]

40. i understand they are preaching to the choir but if you

intentionally whip the choir up into a frenzy and they commit a crime you as the frenzy whipper are also culpable.

[Zan_of_Texas]

91. Think like a ruthless global thug for a minute, folks.

I know it's a stretch, but give it a try.

If you are a power megalomaniac, and you are the power behind Bush -- you've already got Congress under your thumb. And the executive branch of course. And the media. All that's left is the judiciary. (Well, there are other countries and the UN, and throw Wolfowitz and Bolton at those little details.)

Implement the end of the filibuster ("nuclear option") to get the most awful judges confirmed.

And, in order to make sure the life-appointment judges already on the court cooperate, get some of the wack jobs to rattle some sabers.

The Supremes can't really be impeached just for deciding the things they've decided (although if they were to be impeached, the 2000 presidential election decision should be the cause) -- so the power mongers can get others to, in effect, threaten their safety.

Think it's an empty threat?

On April 28, 2004, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on the cases of two American citizens being held as so-called enemy combatants, Yaser Hamdi and Jose Padilla. According to a report at Indymedia, David Souter was critical of the government's position.

Two days later, Justice David Souter was attacked by unknown assailants, while out jogging. It was a Friday night at 9 p.m.. He suffered minor injuries, was taken to a hospital, and released about 4 hours later, in the wee hours of the morning. Kathleen Arberg, the Supreme Court's public information officer, said the justice was attacked by "several young men." Robbery was not involved, Ms. Arberg said.

The incident recalled a mishap last summer involving another justice. It was just a week after the Michigan affirmative action decision and the Texas sodomy decision of the Supreme Court last summer that a heavy frame nearly collapsed on Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. The decisions came down the last week of June, 2003.

During July 4th, 2003 festivities in Philadelphia, a large piece of a wood and steel stage frame came crashing down, narrowly missing Justice O'Connor. She was not hit but was heard through an open microphone saying "we could all have been killed." Several other people, including Phily's mayor, were hit. Three were hospitalized and released.


Justice Souter Is Attacked While Jogging
By THE NEW YORK TIMES
Published: May 2, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/02/politics/02SOUT.html

Attack on Souter shows justices' minimal security
By Joan Biskupic, USA TODAY
May 2, 2004
http://www.google.com/url?sa=X&oi=news&start=0&num=1&q=http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-05-02-souter-usat_x.htm

Supreme Court Justice Souter Assaulted
Was Jogging On City Street In Washington
KDKA Channel TWO http://kdka.com/topstories/topstoriestv_story_122171152.html

Justice Souter assaulted during jog
Police sources: Attack appears to have been random
Saturday, May 1, 2004 Posted: 4:48 PM EDT (2048 GMT)
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/05/01/souter.assaulted/index.html


Close Call For Justice O'Connor
PHILADELPHIA, July 4, 2003
CBS News http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/07/04/national/printable561779.shtml


Justice Sandra Day O'Connor nearly clobbered by Constitution
By Michael Fraase http://www.michaelfraase.com/index.php/hasten/justice_sandra_day_oconnor_nearly_clobbered_by_constitution/
Saturday, 05 July 2003

[aquart]

16. Biting the hand that fed them?

Kennedy's conscienceless, sycophantic vote gave them their precious George. What more do they want?

[Kimber Scott]

18. "No man, no problem."

How's that for the culture of life? We need to call them what they really are, the Culture of Death.

[fishnfla]

21. Man, we got a problem

They really,really want the death penalty for anyone, for any reason

[Nancy Waterman]

67. Excellent idea!!

We should use the term Culture of Death to describe them as much as possible: pro capital punishment for everyone; pro any war, anytime for American supremacy!

[Jeff in Cincinnati]

82. Arrest That Guy...

If I said something similar about an elected official -- let's say it was in reference to the President -- I would have the Secret Service on my doorstep and could be arrested for making terroristic threats. Of course, Bush Justice Department isn't going to start arresting its most loyal constituents. Which means that a federal judge is going to die before somebody does something. Culture of life, my ass!

[nadinbrzezinski]

19. Cool! They continue to expose themsevles to the

people for the radical nutjobs they are... COOOOOOOLLLLLL!

By the way, no Kenedy, no Bush the Second, surely they must understand that

[TaleWgnDg]

22. What ignorant sleaze panderings . . .

.
These rightwingers are pandering to ignorants!
They are copping for votes.
Copping to fill their campaign coffers.
Shilling and sleazing for attention . . . like the snake-oil salesmen they are.

"The (federal) Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour. . ." (italicized emphasis added by TaleWgnDg) . . . (The United States Constitution, Article III, Section I, in pertinent part)

Therefore, a federal judge (district court, appeals court, or U.S. Supreme Court) holds his/her seat on the judicial bench for his/her lifetime during "good behavior."

Thus, the U.S. Congress is not authorized by the U.S. Constitution to impeach a federal judge UNLESS upon "bad behavior."

This means that congress cannot impeach a federal judge because congress disagrees with the OUTCOME of a case or cases decided by a judge or judges.

The sole authority the constitution grants to congress regarding impeachment of federal judges is upon "bad behavior," e.g., the inability to sit and hear and decide cases for whatever reason.


.

[CatholicEdHead]

88. "Bad Behavior" is a broad term

in the hands of "Chistian" Conservatives, they can spin the Shivio stance as a "Bad Behavior" to the public.

Scary but true.

[TaleWgnDg]

99. Yes, "bad behavior" is a rather broad term; however, it goes

.
Yes, "bad behavior" is a rather broad term; however, this clause of the U.S. Constitution has been interpreted to mean conduct while a federal judge (personal conduct or professional conduct), not to judicial opinions from the bench. In other words, a federal judge is seated for life and may be impeached ONLY upon bad conduct outside his court decisions. The Founding Fathers intent was to keep the judiciary independent of the political bodies of congress and the president. Any vetting is done by the president and congress during the nomination process before the judge sits on the bench w/ life tenure.

See, e.g., http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/article02/18.html#f756
See also, Grand Inquests: The Historic Impeachments of Justice Samuel Chase and President Andrew Johnson
by William H. Rehnquist, Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, Quill; Reissue edition (February, 1999). http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0688171710/qid=1113121752/sr=2-5/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_5/104-3729050-5642307
________________________________________________________

[iwantmycountryback]

29. These people say they have moral values

and think it should be ok to execute mentally retarded 15 year-olds? I must admit, people like this really make me wonder about evolution.

[cyr330]

30. I disagree strongly with one sentence. . . .

The writer wrote that, "this is no collection of fringe characters. . . ." I don't give a shit if some representatives are included, because these people are ALL a bunch of fucking lunatics on the fringe. . . .

[Technowitch]

31. Let's hear it again for the 'culture of life'!

:sarcasm:

In case you hadn't guessed...

Or, as God said in his interview in The Onion a few years back, "What part of 'Thou Shalt Not Kill' don't you get?! Four words of one syllable each and STILL you manage to screw it up!"

[Lindacooks]

33. Phyllis Schlafly still has her ugly trap open, huh?

Why don't more men tell her to sit down and shut the fuck up?

She's always yapping about how women should stay home; why doesn't she take some of her own advice and STFU??

Oh, and how 'womanly' of her - to want the death penalty for kids.

[FourStarDemocrat]

74. She's just like "Dr" Laura... n/t

[ncteechur]

36. Anyone hear Mark Maron this morning on air america?........

He called the CIA, FBI, and Homeland Security to report this JCCCR group as an anti-American group trying to overthrow the judicial branch of government. It was hilarious.

[BrklynLiberal]

58. That show has become my favorite on AAR.

[caligirl]

37. Bush is the guardian of the radical extremists, the right is bankrupt of

sanity and sense.

[hatrack]

39. I'm surprised that Heydrich, Beria and Ta Mok weren't there as well . .

I think they'd fit right in at the American "Conservative" Union and all of its confabs. :eyes:

[tabasco]

44. Sound's like they got all the whack jobs in one room together.

They should have locked the door and named it an asylum.

[daleo]

45. Have they all lost their minds?

Impeach a Supreme Court judge over his opinion on capital punishment? How exactly is that a crime or misdemeanor? I swear, this bunch is certifiable.

[OneBlueSky]

46. charge 'em all with treason and lock 'em up . . .

then throw away the key . . .

[Daphne08]

47. These folks are just bonkers!

:eyes:

[Voltaire99]

48. Impeach a milquetoast like Justice Kennedy?

Christ, it's like beating up Mister Magoo.

As Wolcott observed recently, the line between US conservatism and sadism has been erased.

[Rose Siding]

49. kick

[Mark E. Smith]

50. Republicans Step Up Attacks On Judiciary

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Christian conservatives, led by some top Republicans, are stepping up their assault on the U.S. judiciary in response to the Terri Schiavo case, saying judges are attacking religion and must be reined in.

At a conference on Thursday and Friday organized by the Judeo-Christian Council for Constitutional Restoration, an umbrella group bringing together many religious conservative organizations, prominent Republicans joined with activists to assault what they termed "judicial activism."

House of Representitives Majority Leader Tom DeLay, under fire for his use of campaign dollars and other ethical problems, addressed the conference in a videotaped message on Thursday in which he denounced a "judiciary run amok."

"Our next step, whatever it is, must be more than rhetoric," the Texas Republican told the conference, entitles "Confronting the Judicial War on Faith."

President Bush, asked about DeLay's comments, said on Friday: "I believe in an independent judiciary. I believe in proper checks and balances. And we'll continue to put judges on the bench who strictly and faithfully interpret the Constitution."

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=8130182

DeLay and the rest of the rubber roomers sound almost like Theocratic Revolutionaries. But the Bush comment is interesting. Will there be a split between the GOP Taliban and those who at least claim to believe in an independent judiciary? Or is Bush actually doing what he usually does, in this case saying one relatively moderate thing while privately scheming for the same extremist measures advocated by the likes of the "Judeo-Christian Council for Constitutional Restoration?"

[rodeodance]

51. "he [DeLay]denounced a "judiciary run amok."-yet he said that

Sen Launtenberg has misinterpreted' him (DU story elsewhere).

[alarcojon]

94. DeLay went to the Pope's funeral?

I wouldn't want that scum in the same county where my funeral is held. Come to think of it, the same hemisphere is bad enough. Hope you got some good photo ops, DeLay.

Dumbass.

[TaleWgnDg]

101. Tom "I'll Do ANYTHING for a Vote" DeLay ?

.
Tom "I'll Do ANYTHING for a Vote" DeLay ?

DeLay is a Baptist, born and raised in Texas. Now. What the hell is he doing at a Roman Catholic papal funeral? ROFLMAO

The same thing he was doing as he chanted on the House floor his undevoted love for a "vegetative state" woman in FL???

What a complete and utter *ssh*le is Tom "Bug-Brains" DeLay.

[Old and In the Way]

52. Keep exposing yourself DeLay.

You will be eventually jailed for your public indecency.

[ljm2002]

53. The judges in the Terri Schiavo case...

...interpreted the law as passed by the Florida state legislature. Their findings were consistent throughout the case. Appeals were made, but the decision was not changed, even after someone was appointed to be Terri's advocate -- thus removing the potential stigma of claims of a conflict of interest on Michael's part.

So, what DeLay et al really want, is to promote activist judges who will rule in the way they want.

Just remember that. They can't get their way through legislation, so they want to intimidate judges to rule AGAINST standing laws in order to ordain an outcome they want. Ergo, they are promoting judicial activism.

And why isn't Tom DeLay pursuing the case of the baby in Texas who had the plug pulled because the parents could no longer pay for his care? That was in DeLay's home state, yet somehow he has not been heard from denouncing the law, nor the judges interpreting the law in that case. Could it be, because GWB signed that bill into law when he was the governor of Texas? Or could it be, because it just wasn't the same opportunity for political grandstanding afforded by the tragic Schiavo case?

[Catch22Dem]

54. *'s response was textbook

You and I both know he doesn't believe a word of it, but the response was perfect.

"I believe in an independent judiciary. I believe in proper checks and balances. And we'll continue to put judges on the bench who strictly and faithfully interpret the Constitution."

Yeah right!

[havocmom]

55. "Our next step, whatever it is, must be more than rhetoric"

So what can DeLay do besides talk? He can't fire judges, therefore, any logical person would take that as a threat either to blackmail, intimidate or physically harm members of the judiciary, all of which are illegal.

Throw the cuff on him and book 'im, Dano!

Gee, when called on his previous remarks, DeLay responded to Lautenberg
with this:

http://rawstory.com/exclusives/byrne/delay_responds_lautenberg_408.htm

<snip> In his response, penned Wednesday, DeLay said that he had received Lautenberg's letter with a "combination of confusion and regret," and asserted that none of his remarks were "threatening, irresponsible, dangerous, inappropriate, intimidating or reckless."

<snip> "Mischaracterizing a call for the judiciary to publicly explain its reasons for taking an innocent woman's life as threatening 'our fundamental democracy' reveals either ignorance or contempt for the framework of checks and balances that make our constitutional republic possible," DeLay concluded in the letter, obtained by RAW STORY. </userdefined>

That was what he pleaded on Wednesday, sounding a bit like a punk kid trying to explain away an appearance on the video of the hold up at a Circle K. So on Thursday & Friday, he speaks to the faithful using EXACTLY the sort of rhetoric RW preachers have used to get some members of their 'flock' to take matters into their own hands and start shooting health clinic workers.

And his part in the whole friggin issue was just a ploy to change the newspaper headlines when his ethics finally came under some scrutiny. His 'Save Terri' vendetta has nothing to do with Terri or religion. Eighty-two percent of the people polled know that. Does the thug really think 18%, or less, is gonna save his ass by making us forget he is more concerned with the culture of HIS life than anybody else?

I repeat, put the cuffs on the man and book him for advocating violence against officers of the court! Failure to do so will only embolden him to keep it up until somebody gets shot or a courthouse and everybody inside gets blown to bits. He hemmed and hawed and said he meant no harm on Wednesday and turned around and got more menacing on Thursday & Friday? Slap him down, HARD!

[Mr_Spock]

56. In the imortal words of Hal "killer" Turner - "I advocate the killing ..."

of anyone who interferes" Where does it all end motherfuckers?? WHERE????????????????????????????

[K8-EEE]

57. It's The CULTure Of Life...!!

Man these people are sooooo nuts. New rule: any judge that doesn't go along with RW extremism gets impeached. Makes sense to them!

[BrklynLiberal]

59. I was just going to post that exact comment. You took the words right off

my keyboard!! This is the culture of LIFE??

[annabanana]

60. So many nuts...

So many influential nuts, all in one bowl.

There is a distillation of crazies going on. What was at this conference was 100 proof.

[tinrobot]

61. They want to execute children?

Phyllis Schlafly, doyenne of American conservatism, said Kennedy's opinion forbidding capital punishment for juveniles "is a good ground of impeachment."

Did I just read that?

The party that advocates a culture of life wants to impeach a sitting supreme court judge so they can execute more children?

Ohhh.... kay...

I say we tie that statement to the GOP like a boat anchor and sink them.

[bling bling]

63. Impeach Kennedy because he doesn't want to execute children.

I guess his culture of life isn't the "right" culture of life.

These Christian groups sure don't seem to give a flying shit about the fact that they are making their religion look like a monster. Anyone who doesn't like to hear disparaging remarks about Christianity ought to be fighting the hi-jackers of the religion, not the people who are just reacting to this madness being shoved down our throats by a bunch of freaks.

[LdyGuique]

64. Reagan was considered a conservative and this shows

how far to the right of conservatives that the RW has actually moved. Kennedy was a Reagan appointment.

[Flubadubya]

68. Damn these people...

damn them all to hell! Let's just destroy America and the Constitution right now and be done with it. :mad: :grr: :mad: :grr::mad::grr::mad::grr:

[indepat]

70. Wonder if any other Federal officials merit an impeachment look?

[struggle4progress]

102. I'd say five Supremes for their election interference in 2000 ...

... and every single Bush appointee.

[DiverDave]

71. Makes me wonder

how fast Sen. Byrd would be jailed if he uttered what a repuke could.

[TankLV]

76. All the cockroaches are coming out of the woodwork now.

No need to scurry around in the darkness - they feel they ARE the "norm" in amerikkka nowadays.

Ugh!

[Zero Division]

77. Republicans attack Conservative and Conservative-appointed judges

as "radical liberal activists". This needs to be a consistent talking point for those opposed to this theocratic, anti-rational assault on the American judiciary.

[depakid]

78. Kennedy should be impeached alright

along with the 4 other "justices" who intervened illegally in Bush v. Gore.

[shadowknows69]

80. I don;t think these people want to be comparing lists

of reasons to impeach "selected" officials

[Pepperbelly]

81. God forgive me but I hope that for each and every participant ...

in this farce should experience egregious, agonizing BURNING everytime they piss. I mean it ... ropes of lava coursing down their urethras and out their exterior plumbing. If there is any justice, the experience should leave them tear-streaked and shaking.

But do absolutely no harm to anything in their bodies.

And I hope it lasts a long time.

[Stinky The Clown]

83. A candid shot of the crowd at this "conference" .....

[benny05]

84. Figures...

The Freepers have decided to eat one of their own. Kennedy voted for W in the SC Case in 2000. Isn't that good enuff?

[Democat]

85. The right wing is always on the offensive - our side is usually on defense

Why?

[JerseygirlCT]

86. Say what?

"This was no collection of fringe characters."

Just because they hold sadly prominent positions, doesn't make this collection of fruitcakes less fringe.

[More Than A Feeling]

87. So now its ok for the radical rightists to quote Stalin?

:scared:

[lala_rawraw]

89. Perfect!

Their own will feed on them, nice thing to watch. In the end, the Supreme Court will remember the 2000 election and will remember that because they appointed a leader, thereby violating the Constitution, they are entirely responsible for all of the events that follow. Much in the same way that thief robbing an elderly man is responsible for murder if that man has a heart attack and dies. So, I agree that he should be impeached, but not for the psychotic reasons given above. But for violating the Constitution and as a result, destroying our democracy. See how one event, butterfly wings, affects all others? But while he is being impeached, we need to start impeachment proceedings against the entire administration on justified grounds. In fact, such justified grounds have never existed before, not even with Nixon. Nixon's crimes look like shining achievements compared to this violation of all that is American.

Think on this: The NeoCons can now never give up their grasp on power, because if they do, all of their crimes will be uncovered. Which brings me to that philosphical question I posted earlier in the week, but like the loser I am, did not bookmark and cannot find (as with all of my posts). I would love to see how the Supreme Court handles this. Perhaps they might publicly state that this administration requires impeachment, since they had no problem installing them to begin with.

[chomskysright]

90. 5 (already) SCARY FACTS ABOUT THE JUDICIARY IN PLACE

COPY AND PASTE AND PASS AROUND AS YOU LIKE; I'M SIMPLY COLLECTING INFORMATION IN ORDER TO 'INNOCULATE' AGAINST ANY NERVOUS SUSPICIONS PEOPLE MIGHT HAVE RE: WELL, WHAT ABOUT THAT 'LIBERAL' JUDICIARY:


President Bush has had MORE than his way re: the appointment of judicial nominees:

FACT: 95% of Bush's judicial nominees have been approved

The fact is that this president has a better record of having his judicial nominees approved than any president in the past twenty-five years. Only 10 of 214 nominations have been turned down. http://www.lightupthedarkness.org/blog/default.asp?view...


FACT: Of the 260 odd appellate judges in the US, over half are Republican appointees.


FACT: Judges are already overwhelmingly narrow and conservative in their interpretation of the law.

Jurisprudentially, judges are overwhelmingly conservative. Why?Because, in their view, they have to be. Judges are rewarded (read: elevated to higher courts) based upon, more than anything else, never getting overturned by a higher court. And how do you avoid getting overturned? By utilizing stare decisis: they are compelled by the common law notion of stare decisis to stand on precedent: meaning that, barring extraordinary circumstances--for example, deciding a state rather than federal constitutional issue; or being in a position to review a question never before posed to a U.S. court--they’re charged to rule on any issue which comes before them in a manner consistent with prior Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court and, in some instances, will feel compelled to remain true even to prior Justices of the court on which they sit.


FACT: The conservative, Christian judge in Florida who refused to allow Shiavo's feeding tube to be reinserted was appointed by
Republicans.
"Dead wrong." That's what Judge Stanley F. Birch Jr. of the 11th US Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta - a conservative judge appointed by the president's own father - just about said last week in a scathing opinion in which he castigated Congress and President Bush for attempting to usurp the authority of the judiciary in the case of Terri Schiavo. "


FACT: We've moved from telephone harassment of judges as inspired by conservative radio hosts to the murder of one judge in Georgia and the murder of a judge's relative in another state, to now Republican Congressional members are making threats:

Two years ago, of two Boston-area conservative radio hosts for encouraging listeners to telephonically harass local judges who made unpopular decisions;http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=5680


Tom Delay (R-TX) and TX Senator John Cornyn have suggested that violence be a possibility for the judiciary who does not rule in the manner that conservative, neo-cons would desire:

""This loss happened because our legal system did not protect the people who need protection most, and that will change...he time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior."Delay: http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=5680

"Senator John Cornyn, a Texas Republican, rose in the chamber and dared to argue that recent courthouse violence might be explained by distress about judges who "are making political decisions yet are unaccountable to the public." The frustration "builds up and builds up to the point where some people engage in" violence, said Mr. Cornyn, a former member of the Texas Supreme Court who is on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which supposedly protects the Constitution and its guarantee of an independent judiciary. "http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/040605K.shtml

[despairing optimist]

93. I hate Schlafly orgasms

They're obscenities. But if the multi-O's come, can impotence be far behind?

[0007]

95. Are these folks in for a big let down!

What a motley bunch of insane idiots.

[Occulus]

97. Would this be treason? n/t

[warrens]

98. They're turning on their own now

This should be fun, watching the mad dogs tearing each other apart. If we're lucky, all we'll have to do is hose the remains down the sewers.