What was true yesterday, is still true today . . .

[TaleWgnDg]

.
What was true yesterday, is still true today . . . unfortunately in this instance. More than two years ago I wrote an email to a large group of internet friends. One of whom posted my email on their website. Check it out on google: "Bush is packing the federal courts" OR "packing the federal courts" (yes, use the quotation marks).

It's about Bush packing the federal courts, written in June 2003 before the 2004 presidential election, in attempts to inform folks that whomever they voted for as president, they were also voting in the highest court of the land, the U.S. Supreme Court. And, the deep and lasting affects of such votes. Geez, I waxed and whined about getting folks angry, involved, and active . . . same today. Although some of the names of Bush's federal judicial nominees have changed, some (the worse of the worse) remain the same . . . take a gander, here:

http://www.newsgarden.org/columns/TaleWgnDgcolumns.shtml
(this is not my website but was posted here w/ my permission; I do not know who most of these ppl are who have posted other articles on this website)

Pass this around with my permission, no problem.





"Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely." - Lord Acton (1887)












__________________________________________________

U.S. Senate, May 23, 2005
FOURTEEN "MODERATE" SENATORS BROKER DEAL: A SUMMARY

"Memorandum of Understanding on Judicial Nominations"

With enough votes to swing the Senate, the group of 14 pledged that filibusters would be used against judicial nominees only "under extraordinary circumstances" by the Democratic minority.

In turn, the group avoided the "nuclear option," under which the Republican majority would have used a procedural vote to change Senate rules to eliminate filibusters on judicial nominees.

Specifically, the group pledged to vote for cloture -- an end to debate/filibuster -- for three judicial nominees:


1.) Priscilla Owen, for a seat on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in New Orleans, Louisiana.

2.) Janice Rogers Brown, for the U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Columbia.

3.) William Pryor Jr., for the 11th U.S. Circuit Court, based in Atlanta, Georgia.


The group made no commitment to vote for or against cloture on two nominees (or on other nominees):

William Myers, for the 9th U.S. Circuit Court, based in San Francisco, California.

Henry Saad, for the 6th U.S. Circuit Court, based in Cincinnati, Ohio.
__________________________________________________


.

[Double T]

1. POWER CORRUPTS!! TERM LIMITS FOR ALL POLITICIANS,.....

JUDGES AND THEIR APPOINTEES WILL HELP STOP THE PROBLEM

[Doc_Technical]

2. Term limits.

I remember about 13 years ago, the republicans were screaming about
setting term limits.

In fact, some of the republicans who won election in 1992 and 1996
ran on the promise that they would only serve two terms.

After the "revolt" with the "Contract with America" and solid gains
in both Federal and State offices, the cry for term limits diminished
to vertual silence.

Many of the newly elected Republicans then said they really didn't
mean it about serving only two terms; another example of Republican
"Promise Keeping".

[bahrbearian]

3. Congressman George Nethercutt rings a bell.

[TaleWgnDg]

4. Term limits . . . it went all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court . . .

.
Term limits . . . it went all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court . . . and the Court ruled upon the case in 1995: (1) that term limits are unconstitutional, (2) that there already exists "term limits" at the voting booth every federal election, and (3) that this case was decided as to federal office-holders only, not state office holders which were not at issue in this case.

The U.S. Supreme Court case was: U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, 514 U.S. 779 (1995) (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=000&invol=U10278)
See also: http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1337943




.