Sunday, May 22, 2005


The title is from a book available on right now detailing some pretty Shady stuff, right out of the Emperor Palpatine handbook.

Here's a letter a friend of mine got all indignant about and took the wrong way.

Dear Name of Voter.,
One year ago yesterday activist judges on the
Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled that gay marriage should be legal in their
state, forever changing the meaning of marriage. These liberal activist judges
decided that their personal support of gay marriage was more important than the
will of the people and the law of the land.
Since that ruling, millions of
Americans have stood up and proclaimed that marriage should only be between one
man and one woman. Last year thousands of volunteers worked to place
constitutional amendments on their state ballots that would define traditional
marriage. All 13 constitutional ballot amendments defining marriage as between
one man and one woman passed overwhelmingly when voters were allowed to choose
how marriage should be defined.
However, activist judges are not content to
let the people decide this issue. Just last week a judge in Nebraska (appointed
by President Bill Clinton) ruled that their state's voter approved
constitutional ban on gay marriage was illegal. Once again the will of the
people is being overturned by the personal beliefs of an activist judge. We must
not allow this to continue!
President Bush has nominated men and women to the
Federal bench who will uphold the laws of the land. They will not seek for force
their values on the American people, but rather, will listen to the will of the
However, liberal Democrats in the Senate led by Minority Leader Harry
Reid have refused to let some of these judges have a fair and final up or down
vote. Instead, the liberal Democrats in the Senate would rather have judges who
impose their personal beliefs than judges who will follow the law. They are
content not to fill these open judgeships and block Bush?s nominees in the hope
that a Democrat wins the White House in 2008 and follows in Bill Clinton?s model
of appointing radical activist judges.
We cannot allow the liberal Democrats
in the Senate to block more of President Bush?s nominees. We need judges who
will follow the law of the land, not judges like those on the Massachusetts
Supreme Court who chose to force their values on all Americans by declaring gay
marriage should be legal.
It is up to you to help make the difference and get
conservative judges confirmed by the Senate.
RexrodeDirector of Conservative DevelopmentRepublican National Committee

My response....

Hate to say it.. but I agree with this message.

Legislation should be done by elected officials, and it's the people in power who have the right to nominate and appoint judges to _Interpret the law_ not make it up as they go.
My opinion is ...

  1. Give the judges an up or down vote and quit filibustering to avoid doing your job.
  2. Introduce legislation that makes the changes you want. You want Gay marriage, get a law passed. That's constitutional. Decrees are done by dictators and that is what the justice system has become lately.

Let me put this in a not so charged kind of light.

Lets say The US govt makes a law, voted unanimously to ban the brutal clubbing of redheaded step children.

Lets say that a tiny population of Evil stepmothers has a judge in their pocket.

Lets say that Judge then rules the law Unconstitutional because every Stepmother has a right to beat redheaded stepchildren. The judge's brief doesn't actually site the Constitution because beating stepchildren isn't part of the constitution. Freedom of Speech is. Freedom of Religion is. (freedom of, not freedom from... sorry) Law in OTHER COUNTRIES is cited. Y'know the kinds that don't apply to Americans.

Lets say that the new President in power wants to replace this judge with a judge that will do his job and not listen to foreign law or make shit up.

Now lets say that for 6 years now that nominated legally appointed and simply needing to be confirmed New Judge is sitting on her hands because the Stepmothers asociation has a minority leader who recites the phone book until 61 Senators decide he needs to piss off so we can vote on this and go home. (That's a filibuster...)

Now lets say the Majority leader looks at the rules of filibustering and says "wait a minute, We filibuster voting on laws, but in 200 some odd years we've never filibustered nominations to office. That's not part of the rules." He decides to let the minority guy try that trick again and decides he'll just set up a regular 51 person approval vote to change the rule back to "No reciting the phone book to get out of doing this Nomination vote."

Now lets say that the Stepmothers who want to beat their redheaded stepchildren (remember them?) they start throwing fits that this is discriminating on their rights to beat the living fuck out of their redheaded stepkids like any Stepparent should.

That's exactly what's going on.... but with gays, so it seems a lot more controversial and hate filled.


Two pennies from a guy who actually went out and voted.


Post a Comment

<< Home