Law, Order and the Left by Bill O'Reilly

billoreilly.com ^ | 2/26/04 | bluerose

[bluerose]

Love him or hate him I think he hit the nail on the head with this article.

[over3Owithabrain]

Yes he did. Funny how conservatives like Pryor stood up for the law even when he personally disagreed with it. But liberals (including Ah-nold), conveniently ignore illegal gay marriages.

[bobo1]

Exposing hypocrisy from the left is like taking candy from a baby.

You just don't know where to start.

Blessings, Bobo

[Angelus Errare]

He's on the money on this one.

I'd still like that patent of nobility identifying me as "Duke" as long as we're descending further and further into this mess ...

[cake_crumb]

"Love him or hate him I think he hit the nail on the head with this article"

Agreed. I'm nowhere close to being a fan of his, but he got where he is today because when he's right he's right. And eloquent.

[Exeter]

I'm waiting for the mayor of some small Utah community to declare that the ban against pologamy is unconstitutional and starts handing out marriage licenses to multiple wedding parties. Let's see what these protectors of the 1st Amendment will say then...

[.cnI redruM]

>>>>>Either the law rules or it doesn't. And in California and much of the liberal press, it doesn't.


Thank you, Bill O' Reilly. It's good to see that you are at least a demagogue with a conscience. As opposed to Gavin Newsome, who's merely a demagogue.

[cake_crumb]

From what I've seen, Arnold is doing everything within his legal power to put a stop to this without playing into their hands. They WANT to be arrested. They WANT to be martyred. NEXT would come the classic "hunger striks in the prison cell" maneuver.

[.cnI redruM]

And Bill Lockyer did nothing to challenge the ruling.

[expat_panama]

Ok, the left is hypocritical.  Is the right hypocritical too, or do we say that Judge Roy Moore out of line?

[atomicpossum]

Is that the Rosie O'Donnell marriage party?

[Steve_Seattle]

I agree - even the O'Reilly bashers might have to concede he has a point here.

[ravingnutter]

Funny how conservatives like Pryor stood up for the law even when he personally disagreed with it.

Yeah, Moby and crew have been out in full force against the recess appointment of Pryor, trying to get conservatives riled up at Bush by saying that Pryor was the one that "fired" Moore. We just laughed in their face and they got zotted by the Viking Kitties.

[Scenic Sounds]

Love him or hate him I think he hit the nail on the head with this article.

It's a clever piece, but here's the problem - most of the condemnation/criticism of Judge Moore followed his refusal to comply with court orders after the "rule of law" was determined. I suspect that when the City and County of San Francisco loses this case (as I believe it will), there will be compliance with whatever the courts decide.

[OldFriend]

Every once in a while O'R gets it right. Rarely tho lately.

[ravingnutter]

More applicable:

On March 7 [1999], California voters passed Proposition 22, proposed by state senator Pete Knight, which mandates: "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." The proposition, known as the Protection of Marriage Act, passed by a margin of 63 to 37 percent.

Source

Not only are they breaking the law, they are subverting the will of the people of CA.

[ravingnutter]

San Antonio Express-News

Typical for them...I tell their subscription people that call me that I would not read their liberal rag if they paid me. Disgusting piece of trash, not even fit for bird cage liner, the cheap ink that easily rubs off might make the bird sick.

[Zansman]

I'll concede every point in the article once Newsome has violated/ignored a court order as Judge Moore did.

To date, none has been issued and until Newsome defies one, this is an "apples and oranges" argument imho.