Jim Billings, the system
is designed to be illusory on the judges. Not even the Republican Party leaders
can answer your questions as they too are in a quandary, and have asked me the
same questions.
Generally, there is never
an outsider challenger to a sitting judge. The reason for this is that only
those who carry the title of nobility (forbidden by the U.S. Constitution) of
esq. may run. And should one dare to run, woe be unto him if he does not win,
for then he must appear as a lawyer in front of the very person he challenged
for his seat. Basically, that lawyer must consider it the end of their
career.
Almost without exception,
when a judge does decide to retire, he does so just before his time is up so
that the governor my seat a new judge. Then, when the election takes place, he
is listed on the ballot as an "incumbent judges," which, as a practical matter,
always wins the election.
There is a very
purposeful plan being carried out when it comes to judges. This is because they
know that if you can control the judges, you can control all the rest of
government.
Now why is it that the
electorate is kept in the dark when it comes to judicial candidates? Knowledge
is power, and the objective is to keep the electorate ignorant when it comes to
who to vote for. When it comes to voters and judges, they follow the ingredient
of of raising mushrooms; "feed'em sh_t, and keep'em in the dark. Gee, from the
voters perspective a name is a name, and if he is listed on the ballot as an
incumbent, then he must know what he is doing, so like in any communistic
country, just punch the name, even if it be the only name on the ballot.
It's called "a choice of one."
I have advised even those
in the Republican Party, and those who asked me such as you have, to just vote
"No confidence" in respect to judges on the ballot. This means you will be
better off to not vote ignorantly for an unknown. Remember, in a later recall
effort of that judge, you need only a percentage of the votes by which he was
elected to the bench within that county. If he only got one thousand votes to
get him elected, it may only take less than a hundred signatures to start a
recall of him.
Hopefully, this advice
will be of assistance to you.
-Ron Branson
Mr Branson
Why is it that the ballot for some judges running for certain
jurisdictions contain only one name? What iss the purpose of voting if
there is no selection? At other times you may see three judges running
for office. I have yet to see one that I am familiar with. As a
citizen I cannot get background information on any judge running for
office. Where do they come from? Who puts them on the ballot? Who decides there
term? How in the world can anyone vote for someone they know nothing
about?
If you have any information on this I would love to here about it.
JIM BILLINGS
California
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.17/505 - Release Date: 10/27/2006