Posted on 08/20/2010 2:55:46 PM PDT by RonDog
I will only add that I am much more aggrieved that Ted Olsen, (widower of Barbara Olsen, aka FReeper BKO, who died in the plane that was crashed into the Pentagon on 9/ll) and whom many here thought President Bush should nominate for SCOTUS, IS BOTH for gay marriage AND for the GZM. Ted Olsen on SCOTUS. Wow, that would have worked out dandy, huh? Another turncoat nominee.
Ted Olsen argued the case FOR THE HOMOSEXUAL ACTIVISTS in CA, that resulted in the homosexual judge overruling the people and Proposition 8 we passed,which provided that "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."
The gay judge's ruling is stayed, subject to the Appellate Court, but Olsen intends to argue in front of the Appellate court too. What a guy. What a conservative. He thinks the Constitution permits gay marriage, because to not allow gays to marry, is to discriminate against them.
Beam me up.
When you see some of the responses on this and other threads from the Coulter apologists pertaining to her acceptance to being the KEYNOTE speaker at this perv conference, is it any wonder how we have digressed from being a moral nation so rapidly?
That is very true! Therefore I'm terminating my discussion with you lest anyone get the false impression that I actually know you and care what you think.
“Ann Coulter...you are no conservative”
Yep anyone failing to toe the line must be destroyed.
That seems to be the trend lately and I find it alarming.
God bless her.. thats not an easy job.. One issue Bushbots and snarky psuedo conservatives abound.. its really like trying to herd CATS... Did I say God bless her?... Oh! yeah...
Anyway trying to fire up republicans is like trying to burn wet toilet paper sometimes.. she does piss off the RINOs tho.. they hate her more than the liberals do..
Hate the sin, not the sinner.
I don't think Obama could accomplish that. I think it was done by a well-funded organization.
My whole point in bringing up Ted Olson was to point out that President Bush's former solicitor general, is "actively" working to enact a huge portion of the gay agenda, namely "gay marriage" while pundit, writer, and author Ann Coulter, has merely agreed to give a speech in front of a homosexual group.
Ann Coulter for agreeing to speak before the homosexual group = she's the devil incarnate.
Ted Olson = *crickets*
BEAM. ME. UP.
He would have been another disaster on SCOTUS.
There have been more articles posted about Coulter than Olsen. I only saw one about Olsen.
Yep, there’s a firestorm around Coulter. She’s likely enjoying all the publicity. Might even be fodder for her next book.
Olson (I misspelled his name) thoroughly disgusts me. I’ve seen him on TV twice now. Each time he’s been completely lawyerly smug, if you know what I’m trying to convey. I am thankful President Bush ignored the calls to appoint the turncoat to SCOTUS. Thank God and GWB for Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito.
He obviously had help in sealing his background and making parts of it disappear. That does not prevent him from releasing his information and giving us the transparency he promised while running for office.
I believe our nation and her people are strong enough to survive Obama. I’m not sure we’re strong enough to survive his supporters and entrenched organization. They are my concern.
I think you know that answer!
That's too bad, - you've just lost a good source for truth and morality. whatisthetruth or WITT as his FRiends call him, is one person you should get to know, he will teach you many things, but I guess you, like some others here, can't handle the truth and aren't open to gaining knowledge.
but but but but but, rush had elton at his wedding so IT MUST BE ok, no? I mean if rush is friends with elton and coulter wants to speak at a perv conference sheesh - we as sheeple and bots MUST go along with this, we cannot go against rush and coulter, we must obey and follow what they say and agree with what they do, we must not have an independent thought, must not accept that what they say or do is wrong, must not think for ourselves.
My opinion on associating with homosexual rights groups is that it only gives them standing. There has already been articles posted where “conservatives” are cheering this. The problem is GOProud is not conservative and only works for “gay rights”. I am not ok with that.
It will be interesting to see what she has to say to them.
She’s running rough shod over people who are concerned about 0thugga’s eligiblity according the Constitution.
You have it reversed.
And it will be interesting to find out what she says to the GOProud “gay” agenda pushing people. Will she mention that their stated legislative agenda is not conservative, is unconstitutional (except their support for the 2nd Amendment) and is nothing other than the “gay” agenda with a fake “conservative” label on it?
Or not?
My opinion on associating with homosexual rights groups is that it only gives them standing...I understand.
But, as you and I have discussed before, just TALKING to them does not necessarily imply CONSENT with all their positions.
Here, for example, is Ann "improperly validating" the harridans on "The View" --
What are the odds that she will not similarly challenge the core beliefs of the Homocon crowd -- when she appears before them?
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.