I've often noticed, and remarked, that so-called liberals tend to get their frilly pink panties in a bunch whenever they percieve a Republican has committed some grave sin against the sacred Constitution - and have similarly noted that they conveniently fall rather silent whenever a Democrat craps on self-same sacred text.
So, I cannot wait for my local legions of Constitutional Defenders to go absolutely ballistic now that one of their own has just decided he doesn't need to follow long-standing Constitutionally defined rules for the appointment of judges in the Commonwealth.
Despite an official vote by the Governor's Council against the move, the Governor of Massachusets has appointed a radical lesbian activist attorney to the judiciary. Maureen Monks is about to become the newest judge of the Middlesex Probate and Family Court. Governor Deval Patrick ignored the official vote by the Council and announced he will swear her in.Monks is the former co-chair and founding member of the Massachusetts Lesbian and Gay Bar Association (MLGBA). She is on the board of directors of the far-left Massachusetts Law Reform Institute and is pro bono counsel for Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD).
So, a homosexual-activist judge is about to be anti-Constitutionally installed to the Family and Probate Court by neo-liberal socialist Governor Coupe Deval Patrick and, well, let's just say that condemnation among the conveniently outraged has been in rather short supply.
One can only imagine what would have happened had Mitt Romney decided to pull such a move - but standards are different for Republicans, of course.
Governor's Councillor Mary-Ellen Manning said, however, that the Council had concerns about Monks' "attempts at hiding her agenda".Manning said the Councillors "needed to overcome embellishments" in Monks' resume. But even more damning, she said, is "an intentional omission from her resume - teaching same-sex marriage concepts to high school students".
Gosh, can't imagine why she would want to keep that off her resume - after all, this is Massachusetts.
Manning said that Monks lied to the Council about the numbers of men compared to women whom she has represented in divorce cases. Monks told the Council that she had represented 65 per cent women and 35 per cent men in those cases. Manning said, "A review of the scheduled appearances at the relevant counties revealed quite a different ratio. With dozens of appearances in the last eight years, she has represented only one man in a divorce. In her Governor's Council questionnaire, she stated that she has 'represented hundreds of women and men and divorce.' No doubt she has represented hundreds of women - as for the men?"
Ah Councilor Manning - there you go trying to let facts get in the way of a politically-motivated appointment to the family courts. Silly, silly of you.
Oh, and did I mention that every member of the Governor's Council is 1) elected by the voters and 2) a Democrat?
"The past can be a predictor of the future," concluded Manning. "We cannot allow a nominee who embroiders her resume and misleads this Council with inaccurate statistics to sit on the bench where the stakes are so high. It is not my impression, and I daresay it would not be the public's perception given these facts, that Attorney Monk will be evenhanded in her application of the law."
Au contraire, Councilor. Soon-to-be Judge Monks - a homosexual-activist liar and radical - sounds to me to be precisely what we should expect to get from Deval "Together We CAN!" Patrick, and your political party, by the way.
I know that's somewhat, erm, inconvenient - but there it is.
pusswillies.....yeah they said if George W Bush was relected laws would be overturned and it appears they were right :-) they just didn't say it would be by Democrats....though we knew they would be!
Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion