Posted on 07/19/2005 7:39:11 PM PDT by dukeman
Hmm. Certainly a concern. They would never has said as much about Michael Luttig. Pity that he will never sit on the bench, since Bush will most certainly name a woman next time around.
Beware anyone named Alcibiades!
The original Alcibiades of Classical Greece was a dangerous, treasonous, lecherous, decadant dilettante with delusions of grandeur. A blasphemer of the Gods, he switched sides at least 3 times during the Pelopponesian War, ultimately embracing the Dreaded and Wicked Persians.
Anyone who chooses that name knows all of this and should be watched carefully...
Thank you mmercier! It is a refreshing place with nice folks.
"Carni (1000+ posts)
I want to claw my own eyes out and then dip my head in lye but what difference would THAT make? "
Funny stuff!
I'll supply the lye, I wonder where I should FedEx it?
The mental health industry will be working 24/7 to take care of these loons.
Man sometimes it's really fun just to sit back and watch people like this.
This would really be a good time to wear the Club Gitmo shirts, that might just blow a few extra gaskets around this great nation.
Now that has a catchy sound to it:
The DRAMACRATIC PARTY!!
What are they going to do when that whole matter evaporates and Karl Rove is left standing and laughing? DU is going to need massive Suicide Hotline intervention!
" To avoid Luttig or Brown (or even Estrada) should anger us."
I'm more angered by Republicans who throw mud mindlessly. Look at his record. He has written some opinions (few). He has an environment record on coal energy (very conservative) and abortions (supreme court made a mistake).
If you don't think he is conservative enough site examples, otherwise you just sound like a Bush hater.
Holtz
JeffersonRepublic.com
"In 5 weeks there may be no bush White House left. THAT is what we must concentrate on now."
So what does THAT tell you? They were trying to use the Rove issue to push impeachment proceedings, maybe? They definitely got Bushwhacked this time. (I wouldn't doubt it if Rove even played a part...going in as a 'sacrificial lamb' of sorts...but I am only able to say that in hindsight myself.)
Clearly their heads are spinning tonight. They don't know how to get out of the Rovian Maze in which they now find themselves. Should they vote yea or nay on Roberts? Shall they try to rekindle the embers of the Plame naming game flame? How can they even get back on track when they've been broadsided by the Bush-Rove Express?
I hope when a moonbat calls the "suicide Prevention" line they get put on hold.
LOL!
Ya gotta do what ya gotta do!
Anyone ever post this?
Oh, never mind. They'd say the pics were all Photoshopped.
You nailed that. I am having so much fun, that I will have to buy dinner out tomorrow night for sure now!! Thanks for the welcome.
Orca , err, Oprah and Grozny O'Donnell
" not only is Roe v. Wade overturned, but so are ALL federal powers to enforce fair commerce, ensure safe products, food and medicine, "
My God he may actually use the constitution as a check on unlimited government power and return power to the people?
OH PLEASE OH PLEASE OH PLEASE OH PLEASE OH PLEASE .....
SammyBlue (264 posts) =
Response to Original message
150. This is the best the RETARDICANS can do?
This is the best?
A lifetime lawyer, a partisan right wing tool and someone with less juidical experience than Clarence Thomas had when Nebish Boosh nominated him?
SOMEONE GET THE DUCT TAPE. These retardicans are making my head explode!!!
Dang! Someone over there is actually thinking. Who'dathunkit
They don't seem to realize that Rovegate is a lost cause too, because he didn't break any laws.
If only that were true. I'm somewhat disappointed in the pick. Yes, he's got a fine mind and he is conservative. He's a charmer and will be hard for the rats to slime. All good.
But there is NO evidence that he will be a Thomas or a Scalia. From what I can see, he's an incrementalist and is unlikely to lead the Court significantly more rightward than O'Conner. I'm pretty confident that on social issues, he will replace O'Connner as a swing vote, although he may come out right more often than O'Conner. This improves the Court a little; but is not going to contribute the revolution in jurisprudence that is needed to move the Court back from 70 years of abuse of the constitution.
That he will be so easily confirmed validates this conclusion. He's about as good as the dems could have reasonably hoped for and, from their perspective, it could have been a whole lot worse. From my perspective, it should have been a whole lot better.
Maybe he will grow into a more originalist position. Sigh . . .
LOL! A case of highly-contagious and rapidly spreading PEST.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.