Maryland is maggoty with illegal aliens who are up on charges. Now this ridiculous precedent is set to allow all of them to demand their own brand of an interpreter.

Impeach and overrule this judgement on appeal.

Unless your son goes to school in a high value strategic military installation the chances of him truly being remotely affected by terrorism in this country are negligable.

Alden Pyle on July 27, 2007 at 10:14 AM

Hey, genius, I wasn’t even responding to you directly. Where did I quote you? I was responding to the thread as a whole.
Cripes, self-absorbed much?
That said, I get the point concerning gay marriage (even though I’m ambivalent) and the ridiculous ruling in PA concerning illegals, but I am still trying to figure out how judges have imposed Socialism and wealth redistribution.
I just happen to think radical Islam is more of a threat to my son’s well being than a liberal judge.

SouthernDem on July 27, 2007 at 8:50 AM

First, gay is happy, call homosexual what it is. Another liberal attempt to hijack even our language and sugar coat the facts.

Second, the reference didn’t COMPARE homosexual marriage to terrorism, it pointed to it as an example in which activist judges have usurped the legislative process to impose their own socialist secular views upon the citizens despite the fact that the VAST majority of the populace doesn’t support these radical fringe minority lifestyle rulings. I also included criminal aliens so as not to fluff the feathers of the PC crowd.

As CLEARLY expressed above and 180 degrees from what you report that I said, I don’t propose the jihaddist threat is a *minor* one, (an attack on the Sears tower MINOR?!) just not a strategic threat.

Although the words you cherry-picked from my post are ones I wrote, the meaning you assigned to them are yours alone.

With critical reading skills like yours, I’m not surpised you don’t **see the logic**.

It is believed that [malaria] afflicts between 300 and 500 million every year, causing up to 2.7 million deaths, mainly among children under five years.

Although one could argue that the EPA, through banning DDT has killed more than both put together…..

So Terrorist

From 1973 through 2002, more than 42 million legal abortions have occurred in the U.S. (AGI).

Yes, I’d say that judges can be more dangerous than the terrorists… just by death statistics.

So it can be done.

Our judges need to have some sense of security so they will make the best decision they know how, rather than a politically expedient decision.

FireDrake on July 26, 2007 at 10:40 PM

I think I just changed my mind. Impeach her.

Did you just support this decision by arguing that it was the best decision she could make, even thought it was not “politically expedient”?

I hope that’s not what you meant.

Just keepin it real, ya’ll.

Yeah? More than Al Qaeda, huh?

Allahpundit on July 26, 2007 at 9:51 PM

Allahpundit, I believe so, too, here is my reasoning.

Al Qaeda lacks the ability to pose a strategic threat to the United States.

Activist judges have the ability to rewire our constitution into their own vision of a socialist, borderless, liberal, eclectic multicultural soup where no one has personal responsibility, everyone is a victim and wealth is *redistributed*.

A strategic attack is one that results in significant geopolitical policy shift by its target. An attack that destroys a strategic-level target such as the U.S. Capitol or that causes mass casualties — kills 1,000 or more people — would certainly rise to this level, but it would DIRECTLY affect only a miniscule percentage of the American population. Activist judges, on the other hand, are a direct threat to EVERY American.

Al Qaeda and other jihadists still pose a TACTICAL threat to the U.S. homeland. In other words, they can still kill Americans on a small scale. They can and will continue to attack soft targets but it is one thing to launch an attack against the Sears Tower… it is quite another thing to succeed in bringing it down.

Defense experts believe Al Qaeda currently lacks the ability to launch a devastating strategic attack. Al Qaeda is still dangerous at the tactical level, but strategically it is only a shell of its former self.

Activist judges are domestic terrorists who are currently in the process of changing every aspect of EVERY American’s life. When faced with a law they disagree with they change or ignore them, (ie. immigration & homosexual marriage)

Activist Judges are blurring the lines between the judicial and legislative branches of our government and that scares me far more than a few whacko Islamo-facists screaming Aloo Akbar!

What a mess!

Just kidding…Seriously, this judge needs to be impeached.

This doesn’t make much sense to me. Anyone know what the story is here?

What this judge did in setting an all-but-convicted child rapist free on such a ridiculous technicality is not the kind of “high crime” or “misdemeanor” that impeachment usually addresses (and I’m one who thought Slick Willie should have been booted right out of office). All the same, it is a terrible moral affront that clearly needs some kind of addressing.

I like the idea of some sort of “sense of the senate” resolution. It may not have much practical effect on the career of a judge with a lifetime tenure, but it certainly couldn’t hurt to make this case as widely publicized as possible. Put the people defending her decision on the extreme-defensive.

Misha on July 26, 2007 at 11:17 PM

I agree with what Misha basically said. When our country abandons the Constitution in favor of moral relativism, “anything goes” moral ethic, sloppy thinking, and socialism, then we are really in trouble.

As you said, the judge exercised bad judgement, but that’s not an impeachable offense.

Misha I on July 26, 2007 at 11:17 PM

Heh. I would rest my argument on the strength of your statement. Well said.

Yeah? More than Al Qaeda, huh?

Guess who’s got a funny feeling this thread will be closed early.

Allahpundit on July 26, 2007 at 9:51 PM

They’re two different kinds of threats, so trying to call one worse than the other is really like comparing apples and oranges.

I mean, I hope that nobody is seriously worried about liberal activist judges setting off a nuke in a major American city or flying airplanes into skyscrapers. If I’m wrong, then I suggest strongly that they seek medical assistance, right now :-)

Liberal activist judges (or socialism in general) is a bigger threat not in the sense as to how many people they can murder right now, I seriously doubt that they’re interested and challenge anybody who would think otherwise to convince me, but it how much damage they can do to society as we know it and, in the case of most of us here I’d wager, how we would like America to be and stay.

Terrorists can hurt us, they can murder horrendous numbers of civilians, they can destroy landmarks and hurt our economy, but they can’t change us, at least not in a fundamental fashion. No matter what they do, what remains will still be America.

Activist judges and statist socialist politicians, on the other hand, can alter our nation in a way that will mean that we, were we to transport ourselves forward in time, wouldn’t recognize the place we landed in as America at all.

Terrorists are a short-term and immediate threat, socialism is a long-term, fundamentally altering one.

It’s really a question of the long view versus the short one.

America as we know it is more likely to survive and recover fully from a nuclear attack than she is to do the same from being transformed from within into, say, Europe. Oh, we could come back from that as well, even Europe might eventually, but it would take an upheaval that would make 20 9/11s look like a walk in the park. Ask any nation fortunate enough to get out from under the jackboot of socialism.

I worry less about getting rid of bad judges I worry more about getting a president who will give us good judges

William Amos on July 26, 2007 at 11:03 PM

this is a good point but then you get people like Spector pushing for rulings that are set by precident.
case in point the Shivo case the biggest problem was the appelate courts couldnt go back to the original rulings of Judge Greer.

If I make a mistake of this magnitude in my job it won’t be long before I am shown the door. Why should it be any different for a judge?