Who Hijacked Our Country

Tuesday, June 01, 2010

God is Angry at America’s Judicial System

And He has spoken to Craig Candelore and told him to get those sinners and heathens out of His Chosen Country.

Craig Candelore has been instructed by the voices in his head — er, ahem, “God” — to become a judicial candidate for the San Diego Superior Court.

Candelore is a family law attorney and is one of four conservative Christian candidates for San Diego Superior Court this June 8th. He said:

“We believe our country is under assault and needs Christian values. Unfortunately, God has called upon us to do this only with the judiciary.”

Candelore and the other three candidates want to be “God’s ambassadors on the bench.”

School boards across the country have already been swamped with conservative Christians. Now it seems their next targets are the nation’s courtrooms. This campaign is financed by the usual coalition of NRA-types, homophobes and fetus worshippers.

San Diego’s District Attorney is alarmed at this campaign. She said:

“Any organization that wants judges to subscribe to a certain political party or certain value system or certain way of ruling to me threatens the independence of the judiciary. Judges should be evaluated based on their qualifications and their duty to follow the law.”

And there’s a well-grounded fear that America’s judiciary could become just as corrupt and for-sale-to-the-highest-bidder as Congress and state legislatures already are. Just what we need.

According to the Brennan Center for Justice, the “Christian” Right has been making larger and larger donations to judicial campaigns in the past few years. A spokesman for the Brennan Center said:

“An effective way in driving policy is to try to influence who is on the courts in a state, particularly the highest court, the supreme court. It's cause for concern because Americans expect courts to be places where people get a fair trial.”

Gee, there’s a concept.

This “Christian” campaign to bring God back into the courtroom is called “Better Courts Now.” How’s that for a euphemism. Better Courts Now was largely founded by the late (good riddance Asshole!) Don Hamer, San Diego County's Zion Christian Fellowship pastor.

You’ve gotta give these Biblehumpers credit — they always vote, and they’re experts at zeroing in on local “snooze button” races that most voters don’t bother with.

It all comes back to “All Politics Is Local.” If you don’t want your own city council, school board, district courts and county offices to be infiltrated by a bunch of snake-handling whackjobs — follow all of these local races, learn who the candidates are, and Vote!

Labels: , , ,

24 Comments:

Blogger Tim said...

Well God damn!!!!
Pretty soon I'm going to give up..
retreat to the woods
get a gun
shoot myself
miss and become a born again loser
move back to the city
tell everyone else how to live

and the cycle continues. Amen

June 1, 2010 at 7:10 PM  
Blogger Lew Scannon said...

Funny, but I thought that conservatives disdained activist judges who legislated from the benches. Worse yet to have Christian Zionists on the bench who have a double set of standards; one for Israel, and one for everybody else.

June 1, 2010 at 7:16 PM  
Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Just what the founders wanted, a theocratic judiciary.

June 1, 2010 at 10:28 PM  
Anonymous S.W. Anderson said...

"We believe our country is under assault and needs Christian values," said Craig Candelore, a family law attorney who is one of the group's candidates. "Unfortunately, God has called upon us to do this only with the judiciary."

I guess we're just damned lucky God didn't whisper in these mad mullahs' ears that heathen judges should be beheaded in a stadium somewhere.

This really is scary. If Californians put these guys on the bench, we'll soon have Pat Robertson/Jerry Falwell types seeking judgeships all over the country.

Unbelievable.

June 2, 2010 at 12:12 AM  
Anonymous S.W. Anderson said...

Lew Scannon, conservatives only object to judges who are activists in the ways conservatives don't want them to be.

June 2, 2010 at 12:14 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So if my views on morality and religion differ from theirs, I can forget any idea of getting a fair trail? Hello judicial review city!

The Spanish Inquisition is back again.

Erik

June 2, 2010 at 12:25 AM  
Blogger Randal Graves said...

Only with the courts? Why not all three branches, especially with the legislature full of San Francisco and Taxachusetts lie-bruls, and that Manchurian Islamic Kenyan in the WHITE House? They just made Fundie Jesus cry.

June 2, 2010 at 7:42 AM  
Blogger T. Paine said...

The disdain for life (fetus worshipers), constitutional rights (NRA-types), and condecension towards Christianity in general is apalling in this posting and the attached comments. One wonders if the statement was made by someone that was a Wican running for a judicial office, if you would be equally outraged?

I don't condone legislating from the bench regardless of a person's political ideology, but in recent generations the VAST majority of that has been done by the left; NOT the right.

Further, for those that truly are Christian and seek to "love their neighbor" and follow Christ's commandments, why is that a bad thing to have someone with a moral compass and compassion on the bench?

The law absolutely should be ajudicated as written, and not as the ACLU would like it to be in contrast to Constitutional intent and the historical precedent as set forth by our founders.

Those of you that are so quick to disparage these things may want to take another look at what your "way" will ultimately bring to the country. Look at the level of discourse we already enjoy because of this nonsense. It is disgusting, frankly.

June 2, 2010 at 7:57 AM  
Blogger Tom Harper said...

Tim: I think you've got it dialed; that's their M.O.

Lew: Nah, conservatives have no problem with judicial activism; they just don't want those judicial activists to be secular or liberal.

Dave: Since that one ringleader is talking to God, he's probably talking to George Washington and Thomas Jefferson too.

SW: I can't believe they're putting all that energy into local courts that are mostly nonpolitical. Imagine going to Superior Court for a divorce or custody hearing, and having to wonder if you're holy enough and righteous enough to suit the judge's fancy.

Erik: A fair trial is less important than having the correct religious beliefs :)

Randal: There there now, let me comfort the little Fundie Jesus. OOPS.

TP: No, I wouldn't want a Wiccan judge either; at least not if she/he was enforcing Wiccan beliefs from the bench. For that matter, if somebody was campaigning for a judicial vacancy by saying "I want to be Pan's ambassador" (or Allah's, or Buddha's), some "Christian" vigilantes would probably arrange a little "accident" for that would-be judge.

And you've gotta admit, a lot of anti-abortionists have absolutely no regard for human life after the fetus has been born. Some of the most zealous warmongers and corporate murderers and their enablers are anti-abortion.

I only mentioned "NRA types" in the post because the article said gun enthusiasts are part of this "Christian judges" coalition. I personally can't imagine what the connection would be between religious beliefs (or lack thereof) and owning a gun.

June 2, 2010 at 1:00 PM  
Blogger Dave Dubya said...

TP,
Your protestations of victimhood ring hollow.

The condescension is directed at the hypocrites, the self-proclaimed Christians who never display an iota of "Christian" love.

Most of these types are authoritarian, corporatist theocrats. And I'm glad you bring up a Wiccan. Does anyone actually believe a self-described Wiccan, no matter how best qualified, could EVER be elected in this right wing country? Come on.

We have a de-facto unconstitutional religious test for office in this country, and you know it. Politicians always wear the facade of Christianity. Bush and Cheney made such pretensions while exhibiting levels of deceit and bloodlust that Satan himself would envy.

Right Wing "Christian" judges always rule in favor of the rich and powerful. It is Mammon they really worship.

Your "Way" has led to inquisitions and witch hangings. History has more than enough proof of what theocracy brings.

Religion has NO PLACE in government for a free democracy. It breeds inequality, not fairness.

June 2, 2010 at 1:00 PM  
Blogger Tom Harper said...

Dave: Our comments must have crossed in the mail, so to speak. Excellent reply.

June 2, 2010 at 1:02 PM  
Blogger TomCat said...

Dang!! Impeach whoever wins!

June 2, 2010 at 1:08 PM  
Anonymous S.W. Anderson said...

Paine, go looking among conservative pols, strategists, activists and fund raisers if you want to find some industrial-strength condescension toward Christianity and Christians.

For that matter, go looking among conservatives generally for people who don't tell you what true believers they are, but show you they are in how they speak and behave, starting with not routinely bearing false witness.

Good luck.

June 2, 2010 at 1:24 PM  
Anonymous S.W. Anderson said...

Tom wrote: "I can't believe they're putting all that energy into local courts that are mostly nonpolitical."

It's laying the foundation. These guys gain credentials as judges, for later on when they will run for, or seek appointment to, the bench of higher courts.

June 2, 2010 at 1:29 PM  
Blogger Allancando said...

You are assuming they will legislate from the bench, and that we should have all atheist on the bench!

You also assume that our courts are in great shape and rule impartially, but if you did the research you would see that our courts not only DON'T elect judges (about 80% are appointed) but "trust and confidence" in them, is at an all time low and getting worse.

SO cheers to a God less county and shoot the first guy who prays. O and while we are at it, lets double check the judges these candidates are running against(they are already on the bench and were appointed) and make sure they don't have any faith. Funny that our country was founded on religious persecution. These kinds of blogs are what destroy them...

June 2, 2010 at 2:07 PM  
Blogger Lew Scannon said...

One wonders if the statement was made by someone that was a Wican running for a judicial office, if you would be equally outraged Yes. If someone were to run for a judgeship and promised to make decisions based on not the Constitution, but their own belief system, then yes, I would be outraged
for those that truly are Christian and seek to "love their neighbor" and follow Christ's commandments, why is that a bad thing to have someone with a moral compass and compassion on the bench? Morality is not the exclusive province of any religion; Islam is actually a morality based belief system. But one cannot serve two masters. So if someone claims their belief system as being their main "moral compass", then the Constitution must take a back seat.

June 2, 2010 at 2:14 PM  
Blogger Tom Harper said...

Allancando: Jeez, dial down the hysteria a notch or 2, will ya?

I don't care what a judge's religious beliefs are, as long as those religious beliefs don't influence the judge's decisions. That's pretty much the gist of this post and most of the comments here.

June 2, 2010 at 4:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

T Paine said:

“but in recent generations the VAST majority of that has been done by the left; NOT the right.

Further, for those that truly are Christian and seek to "love their neighbor" and follow Christ's commandments, why is that a bad thing to have someone with a moral compass and compassion on the bench?”

We have had straight Republicans for since 1980 appointing conservative judges. Not so much in the Supreme Court, but all the lower courts has been jam packed with conservative courts, those are the people doing the bulk of the work. Forget Clinton as you may remember the Republicans stalled almost all of his appointments for the whole 8 years leaving a huge gap for GW Bush to fill.

Finally Define Christian The Conservative’s lead by the right that favor money, distain those with less rights, support capital punishment, draconian punishments, anti civil rights, and have passed laws on our own personal morality (what we can do in the bedroom)? I’ve never seen any “compassion” out of them.

Or those from the Liberal side of the Church who gave us judgments favoring: who we can marry (interfaith/racial), what kind of sex we can have in the bedroom (sodomy), what two consenting adults can do (that previous had to be married), Civil rights given to those that are a different color, ethnic group, religion (and working on Sexual Orientation), Even given a majority group in this country WOMEN rights in which were previously denied due to bible interpretations from the right. This Group you Conservatives have labeled anti-Christian, communist, socialist, and condemned to die in hell.

More Recent Issues like Bob Jones University and Rand Paul show me that Christian Right has their own agenda and litmus test contrary to my constitutional rights.

Erik

June 2, 2010 at 5:54 PM  
Blogger Snave said...

What Lew said... I also thought all these conservative people didn't like activist judges who legislate from the bench. And S.W.'s response to that was right on.

As far as Wiccans getting elected, how about a professed agnostic or atheist getting elected to most any office in this country? If it happens, it sure doesn't happen often. I would submit there are far more Christians in office in Congress and the Senate than there are atheists, agnostics, or people of other faiths besides Christianity. I would like to hear a convincing argument against that assertion...

So for those of us who are agnostics or atheists who mostly just want to be left alone, how do all the "persecuted" Christians think WE feel? We are the ones in the decided minority.

And most agnostics and atheists are not militant seekers of the ouster of Christianity from the United States! Like with any group, a handful of a few give the whole bunch of us a bad name.

With something like 80% of the US being Christian or professing a belief in a Christian god, I have never understood the fear and the resultant persecution complex so many of the right-wing Christians in the country show.

When religion ruled, that period in history was known as the Dark Ages. I don't want to go back to those times (or even to the 1800s, as so many Tea Partiers seem to think would be a good idea).

While many on the right hope and pray for a theocracy, I for one do not. They may want such a thing, but I don't think they have a clue as to what the country would look like should it happen.

I just want people to leave me alone when it comes to what I believe or don't believe, and I am definitely happy to leave them alone... that is, unless they try to take over the government of the United States of America.

Like Lew said later in the thread, judges need to respect the law. If any judge is going to make decisions not based on law but rather on his or her personal religious beliefs, I do not want such a person on the bench.

June 2, 2010 at 7:11 PM  
Anonymous S.W. Anderson said...

Allancando wrote: "You are assuming they will legislate from the bench, and that we should have all atheist on the bench!"

You're correct on the first part. It's their stated intention. On the second part, you're jumping to a conclusion not supported by any facts. (I notice you didn't try back it up with any facts, either.)

There are many people of various faiths serving as judges, and that's OK. Their faith is part of who they are, and presumably to some extent it informs their view of the world, their fellow man, right and wrong, and so on. That's OK, too. In fact, it's inevitable.

There are no doubt agnostic and atheist judges as well, and that, too, is OK. The fact we have a healthy mix is especially OK.

What is not OK is having a judge override or ignore facts, dismiss testimony, read things into settled law and/or worst of all, render judgments and opinions based on a notion he or she is doing God's will; that he/she is on a special mission from God, or anything like that.

Finally, here's a tip. Debating capably requires respect for facts and a willingness and ability to apply logic.

June 2, 2010 at 10:40 PM  
Blogger T. Paine said...

Anderson, I am in total agreement with your last statement, sir.

June 3, 2010 at 9:05 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I saved this story till near the end:

I was once talking to a State Judge years ago. He was appointed by Reagan so he passed the conservative litmus test. I asked him about activist Judging and Judicial restraint and he replied: " I am one third of the checks and balance that the founders set up and I intend to do my job to the fullest, To have 'restraint' would be like having congress not to make a law!"

He further replied that "I wouldn't be so 'activist' if our legislators would make so much 'bad law'. They pass laws that in spite of the fact their own analyst told them it would not pass legal muster, I have to overturn it, and then I get called an activist for doing it!"


Erik

June 3, 2010 at 10:49 AM  
Blogger Alex said...

Your article lacks any in site into what the candidates were really running for. They wanted voters to elect their judges per the California Constitution. But since they were openly christian they were labeled as bad guys? Are you saying that all the judges should be atheist or should go under ground with their faith? And please acknowledge that our courts are in very bad shape when it comes to "impartiality", FACT there are many government surveys that have shown that the hijacked appointment of judges (77%) is what has put our courts in the corrupt state their in. FYI the AP article by Julie Watson was a hit piece the sitting judges PAID her to do. Please read the response to her false article: http://sites.google.com/site/candeloreforjudge/

Please set the record straight and quite blaming the first guys that came along to help fix the courts, and stop saying that they were on a mission for God when none of them actually said that. You did preciously what the SYSTEM wanted you to do and think. The truth is always but a step away!!

June 14, 2010 at 2:48 PM  
Blogger Alexfredrick said...

Your article lacks any in site into what the candidates were really running for. They wanted voters to elect their judges per the California Constitution. But since they were openly christian they were labeled as bad guys? Are you saying that all the judges should be atheist or should go under ground with their faith? And please acknowledge that our courts are in very bad shape when it comes to "impartiality", FACT there are many government surveys that have shown that the hijacked appointment of judges (77%) is what has put our courts in the corrupt state their in. FYI the AP article by Julie Watson was a hit piece the sitting judges PAID her to do. Please read the response to her false article: http://sites.google.com/site/candeloreforjudge/

Please set the record straight and quite blaming the first guys that came along to help fix the courts, and stop saying that they were on a mission for God when none of them actually said that. You did preciously what the SYSTEM wanted you to do and think. The truth is always but a step away!!

June 23, 2010 at 2:36 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home