[critter]

It seems to me that in the last few years, a large number of rulings by federal judges on various topics have begun to gravitate toward what can only be generously called rediculous. Are many of these judges egomaniacial fruitcakes who are unduely impressed with their own importance and with their power? Or are they just seeking media attention or just poking at a hornets nest for fun?

Also, does it also seem to you that any nut with an ax to grind can 'shop' around until he finds a federal judge who will make whatever ruling that suits them?

I realize that there are many judges (federal and otherwise) who are fair, honest and try to use their office to serve the people as it should be. Of course, those are never in the news and the media (nor us) give them their due credit.

BUT, have I got the other bunch figured our or is my tinfoil showing?

[Quartus]

It's not coincidence. It's the result of the left having what conservatives do not have - a long term view of things and a definite agenda. Look back at liberal publications from the early part of the 20th century (and forward) and you'll find liberals being encouraged to go into law for the purpose of becoming judges and changing the laws by judicial fiat. Also encouraged to go into politics to change laws directly, into journalism to influence public thought, and into law enforcement to gain the upper hand in that area, and teaching to influence furture generations of children.


Folks can sneer at conspiracies all they want. When my enemy publishes his plan for all to read, and then carries out that plan to the letter, I have no use for people who insist there is no plan.

[greyhound]

Personally, I think it all started with the Immigration Act of 1965.

Certainly I agree with the Civil Rights movement of the early 60's, but I think the Immigration Act was a short sighted reaction to the unfair treatment of minorities in this country, in that we felt that we were "making good" somehow on our poor treatment of African Americans by actively recruiting 3rd World citizens to come here.

Yes, I think 3rd World citizens have made great contributions to American society, but this was also the start of the great Liberal society that exists to this day.

Diversity, tolerance, and multiculturalism are very worthy in their own right. But they must come from the people on up, to have them mandated and legislated leads to the divisions in our society that we are seeing today.

I also think that one of the reasons the leftists are so opposed to the War on Terror (at least in regards to bucking the UN) is that it threatens the great victories they've enjoyed since 1965, but thats a topic for another day....

[4v50 Gary]

I think it started with Roosevelt (Franklin) when he threatened to stack the Supremes unless they stopped ruling his alphabet soup programs as illegal. Having cowered the court, it took about 70 years later before it began to reassert itself. However, the legacy lives in today.

[C.R.Sam]

Agree with Gary.

Sam

[Standing Wolf]

BUT, have I got the other bunch figured our or is my tinfoil showing?

Nope. You've got it figured out.

The difference between old-time oligarchies and today's American judicial oligarchy is the long dark robes.

[El Tejon]

It is a irrebuttable presumption that the black robe impacts the flow of oxygen to the brain.:D

[Waitone]

We're watching the consequences of decisions made beginning with the constitution and early supreme court decisions. We have always been on the track of an imperious judiciary. Fortunately, it is now evident during a time of alternative media.

I think an overreaching judiciary is the fourth major social issue on the country's agenda for the next decade.

I would say progress toward a revolt against an overreaching judiciary is moving along nicely. Every time a story comes out about how one judge blocks an action by individuals or the legislative branch we move one step closer to a popular revolt.