To: AM2000; MeekOneGOP; 4ConservativeJustices; GeronL; cainin04
I see that the Dems have reverted to their ol' standby:
WHITES ONLY
-good times, G.J.P.(Jr.)
To: Do not dub me shapka broham
Well, in all fairness, we don't know why he's opposed to Clarence Thomas.
Of course, if he had a good reason I'm sure he would've stated what that reason was.
3 posted on
11/21/2004 12:22:15 AM PST by
AM2000
(I am not responsible for the contents of this post.)
To: Do not dub me shapka broham
It is just unbelievable that blacks are so gullible as to block vote for these racists.
6 posted on
11/21/2004 7:14:41 AM PST by
shubi
(Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom,must undergo the fatigues of supporting it.)
To: Do not dub me shapka broham
bump! Looks like Harry Reid will be giving us plenty of food for PhotoshOps, eh?? .....
7 posted on
11/21/2004 7:41:50 AM PST by
MeekOneGOP
(There is only one GOOD 'RAT: one that has been voted OUT of POWER !! Straight ticket GOP!)
To: Do not dub me shapka broham
IMHO Justice Thomas or Scalia are the only two worth considering for CJ. Both are brialliant and their decisions reflect their respect for the law as written, not injecting activism into their decisions. Neither relies on foreign law as a basis for decisions, as do 6 of the other justices (IIRC, only Thomas, Scalia and CJ Rehnquist have that position). I like Scalia's position on stare decisis, and Thomas' on states rights, but if it were my choice, I'd pick Thomas.
14 posted on
11/22/2004 6:06:45 AM PST by
4CJ
(Laissez les bon FReeps rouler)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson