Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Gondring
And then there's this...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rXmuhWrlj4 ...unable to name a Supreme Court ruling she doesn't agree with, other than Roe v Wade?”

Oh Puleeze.
Gov Palin didn't name a Supreme Court ruling she couldn't agree with apart from Roe, and so therefore she can't run for president?
On what planet is that?
I suggest you read up on the histories of past US presidents. Your are doing a rear guard action, and it's not working.

72 posted on 12/06/2008 1:24:04 PM PST by SmokingJoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies ]


To: SmokingJoe
Your red herrings stink.

Gov Palin didn't name a Supreme Court ruling she couldn't agree with apart from Roe, and so therefore she can't run for president?

Did anyone say she couldn't run? Please show me where.

NEWSFLASH for you... you don't appoint the POTUS. The POTUS is elected by electors who are selected by voters...and voters see this as a woman who can't even list a single newspaper or magazine she reads, or describe a single case with which she disagrees. She should study up so she can fire back with an eloquent shredding of Kelo v. City of New London or, heck, educate folks about Stenberg v. Carhart and tie it into Katie Couric's question and Sen. Obama's platform!

Regardless of whether you think our VP and potential President should be fluent American history and government, many voters do--and it makes her a less effective campaigner.

82 posted on 12/06/2008 3:38:38 PM PST by Gondring (Paul Revere would have been flamed as a naysayer troll and told to go back to Boston.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson