I don't understand why Democrats do not file impeachment articles against Bush
We must especially beware of that small group of selfish men who would clip the wings of the American eagle in order to feather their own nests.
-- Franklin Roosevelt, State of the Union speech, January, 1941
Every time I think that Bush and the NeoCons have touched the bottom of the human slime pit, I learn that it has a multiple floor basement. And to make things worse, the judiciary is beginning to be more and more peopled by judges who follow NeoCon or religious dictates instead of the Constitution.
Whenever you hear that we can't do anything about judges, remember this:
1) Judges can be impeached. Perhaps the best basis is a conflict of interest.
2) Congress can remove jurisdiction over a class of law suits or even an individual law suit.
3) Judges must take an oath to uphold the constitution. I don't know if this could be used, but some of the decisions are, as far as I can see, totally unconstitutional.
I used to think that the Congress didn't know anything about point 2, above, until I was reading one of the laws that had some environmental impact, and, lo and behold, the bill contained a clause removing jurisdiction over any law suit that might be filed because of environmental impact. And, of course, this wouldn't be a Democrat law, right? Well, no, the bill had both Democrat and Republican sponsors.
If and when the Republicans lose their fixation on sticking together, they should get together with Democrats and figure out what sort of cases the present Supreme Court is not able to handle properly, and pass a law removing the jurisdiction in such cases.
More regarding judges: Republicans held up judicial appointments that Clinton wanted to make year after year. Then they jump all over the Democrats for trying to keep the far more disastrous NeoCon judges off the courts.
I don't understand why Democrats do not file impeachment articles against Bush. So they might lose. They will have shown they are not just "going along to get along." And many Republicans are waiting to get on the band wagon; naturally they would rather not introduce the articles themselves. Which reminds me... Wasn't the House Republican when Nixon was impeached? Got to remember to look that up.
And now for another problem I have not yet seen mentioned: Will people owning lots and property in New Orleans be able to find their property? And will they be able to prove ownership?
As if we did not have enough to worry about there, everywhere you turn there is another worry waiting to break in.
People in New Orleans are under rule by mercenaries instead of their own national guard. Apparently those are the people who are shooting to kill, breaking down doors of private houses, etc., etc. Tears are not enough; we must end this police state NOW.
If there is any way to add injury to injury, Bush will find it. You can bet your booties the corporations will make out like bandits.
© Virginia Metze
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=impeach
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Downing+Street+Memo
-- Franklin Roosevelt, State of the Union speech, January, 1941
Every time I think that Bush and the NeoCons have touched the bottom of the human slime pit, I learn that it has a multiple floor basement. And to make things worse, the judiciary is beginning to be more and more peopled by judges who follow NeoCon or religious dictates instead of the Constitution.
Whenever you hear that we can't do anything about judges, remember this:
1) Judges can be impeached. Perhaps the best basis is a conflict of interest.
2) Congress can remove jurisdiction over a class of law suits or even an individual law suit.
3) Judges must take an oath to uphold the constitution. I don't know if this could be used, but some of the decisions are, as far as I can see, totally unconstitutional.
I used to think that the Congress didn't know anything about point 2, above, until I was reading one of the laws that had some environmental impact, and, lo and behold, the bill contained a clause removing jurisdiction over any law suit that might be filed because of environmental impact. And, of course, this wouldn't be a Democrat law, right? Well, no, the bill had both Democrat and Republican sponsors.
If and when the Republicans lose their fixation on sticking together, they should get together with Democrats and figure out what sort of cases the present Supreme Court is not able to handle properly, and pass a law removing the jurisdiction in such cases.
More regarding judges: Republicans held up judicial appointments that Clinton wanted to make year after year. Then they jump all over the Democrats for trying to keep the far more disastrous NeoCon judges off the courts.
I don't understand why Democrats do not file impeachment articles against Bush. So they might lose. They will have shown they are not just "going along to get along." And many Republicans are waiting to get on the band wagon; naturally they would rather not introduce the articles themselves. Which reminds me... Wasn't the House Republican when Nixon was impeached? Got to remember to look that up.
And now for another problem I have not yet seen mentioned: Will people owning lots and property in New Orleans be able to find their property? And will they be able to prove ownership?
As if we did not have enough to worry about there, everywhere you turn there is another worry waiting to break in.
People in New Orleans are under rule by mercenaries instead of their own national guard. Apparently those are the people who are shooting to kill, breaking down doors of private houses, etc., etc. Tears are not enough; we must end this police state NOW.
If there is any way to add injury to injury, Bush will find it. You can bet your booties the corporations will make out like bandits.
© Virginia Metze
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=impeach
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Downing+Street+Memo
Starmail - 12. Sep, 18:18
