How the wingnut lunatic fringe is perverting the judicial system

The wingnut lunatic fringe that now controls the repugican party can't stand our system of government. They claim to love the Constitution, but they detest the bill of rights (other than the part dealing with guns). They have no respect whatsoever for the judicial branch, and if a judge ever tried to actually enforce the Constitution in court, repugicans brand that judge an activist who simply must be stopped.

The latest move by repugicans is supremely un-American, and ought to scare the hell out everyone. They're trying to get rid of judges who they simply disagree with. But it's really more than that, and they admit it. They're trying to scare judges into not siding with the Constitution. If the judges fear for their careers, the activists think, maybe they won't decide certain cases certain ways, even if they think the law requires it.

Now think about that again. The repugican party wants judges to decide court cases not based on the law, but rather based on a well-founded fear of retribution should they decide in a manner that Republicans don't like.

What part of this is any different than the Soviet Union or any other two-bit dictatorship?  And why aren't Democrats going ballistic over this?

From the NYT:

After the State Supreme Court here stunned the nation by making this the first state in the heartland to allow same-sex marriage, Iowa braced for its sleepy judicial elections to turn into referendums on gay marriage.
Enlarge This Image

The three Supreme Court justices on the ballot this year are indeed the targets of a well-financed campaign to oust them. But the effort has less to do with undoing same-sex marriage — which will remain even if the judges do not — than sending a broader message far beyond this state’s borders: voters can remove judges whose opinions they dislike.

Brian S. Brown, executive director of the National Organization for Marriage, which has spent $230,000 on television ads criticizing the Iowa judges, said he understood that removing the three judges would not change the same-sex marriage ruling. (It was a unanimous ruling by the state’s seven justices.) But Mr. Brown said he hoped the judges’ ouster would help prevent similar rulings elsewhere by making judges around the nation aware that their jobs are on the line.