Skip to comments.
Supreme Court rejects Boy Scouts' appeal
WorldNetDaily.com ^
| Tuesday, March 9, 2004
Posted on 03/08/2004 11:26:44 PM PST by JohnHuang2
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-51 next last
To: DoughtyOne
LOL!
I'm sure you and the rest of your "Let's Roll Over and Die Party" are going to have plenty of disappointments the rest of your lives.
I'm happy for you, truly I am. Sitting back and doing nothing to change the situation is so much easier then actually doing something...or even trying to do something.
And since you've already come to the conclusion that your doomed, you're never be disappointed politically. You might not be happy but hey, that's just one of the minor costs of the "Let's Roll Over and Die Party".
Oh, and what you consider a glib attitude...well, that simply the will and determination to keep up the struggle. I know that concept might appear glib to you but hey, just sit back a coast along with the ride. Where you end up...well, that doesn't matter...you don't care. All your roads lead to doom.
21
posted on
03/09/2004 12:56:52 AM PST
by
CWOJackson
(What are you complaining about, she called me compassionate...)
To: CWOJackson
Hmmm, and what exactly did any of that have to do with a Supreme Court as flawed as this one is, and was appoint 77.7% by Republican Presidents?
Look CWO, in my second (or thereabouts) response to you, I admitted that I don't have any easy answers on this one. I do however at least have the capaicity to acknowledge that a problem exists.
As for not doing anything, I vote right along with you on many issues. There are times when I can't. I don't have to be in the Republican party to accomplish this.
To: DoughtyOne
"...and was appoint 77.7% by Republican Presidents?"
President Bush isn't one of your 77.7%.
23
posted on
03/09/2004 1:06:20 AM PST
by
CWOJackson
(What are you complaining about, she called me compassionate...)
To: philetus
I hope I'm wrong, but I have a feeling the homo's are going to win this same sex marriage plot. Why? Just because the rule of thumb I've observed for the past 30 years or so is that the conservatives are always right (about predicting what will follow if such-and-such happens) and the liberals always win? Then by the time the conservatives are proved right, no one (read mainstream media and "opinion makers") cares. Of course, the dire predictions of conservatives might have been what they wanted all along.
24
posted on
03/09/2004 1:10:57 AM PST
by
maryz
To: CWOJackson
I will probably vote for Bush this fall, but let's be frank here.
He has spent us half a trillion in debt. He has refused to clamp down on our borders even in the face of terrorism.
He has increased the budget of the Department of Education rather than reign it in.
I could go on with issue after issue that reveal this man is not a conservative. I won't bother.
As I said, I can at least face reality.
To: DoughtyOne
And good for you on the Republican Party. I've never been in the GOP. I've been an independent all my life and have only voted a straight ticket a few times.
But I've always made the votes necessary to best "advance" my ideals and desires, and always will. And that has included a few libertarians at the local level.
I refuse to throw my vote away in protest and I won't just give up.
Like you, Governor Bush wasn't my first choice, but two things changed that.
1) He became one of two choices, and
2) The more I studied what he had done in Texas the more I became interested in the man. He does what he thinks is right, regardless of whichever party he offends.
And while he doesn't do everything I want, and does things I don't like, I don't think he's doing a half bad job and if the Republicans in Congress had any spine I think he'd do a far better job.
And I don't have any illusions about November. There are two choices: President Bush and John Kerry. Now I'm going to do everything in my power to get the President re-elected, and to get him and the GOP to do what I want them to.
26
posted on
03/09/2004 1:12:40 AM PST
by
CWOJackson
(What are you complaining about, she called me compassionate...)
To: DoughtyOne
DO, is he more a danger to your values than the other candiadte that has been endorced by the CPUSA, Noth Korea and Iran?
27
posted on
03/09/2004 1:12:55 AM PST
by
Texasforever
(I apologize in advance)
To: CWOJackson; Texasforever
Since I already said I'd most likely vote for Bush, I think we can dispense with the "Don't I think he's less of a danger than Kerry?" stuff.
Folks, if we continue on in the direction we're headed, we'll have 100% of the Spreme Court appointed by Republicans and will still see our nation skidding left.
Later.
To: little jeremiah
29
posted on
03/09/2004 5:49:15 AM PST
by
EdReform
(Support Free Republic - All donations are greatly appreciated. Thank you for your support!)
To: JohnHuang2
This is outrageous!! Thank GOD they (BSA) have stood up to the challengers. I hope they don't cave!
Now the Girls Couts, on the other hand, are nothing but a feminazi making machine. We will have NO PART in that organization.
This makes me want to send BSA a donataion.
30
posted on
03/09/2004 6:19:32 AM PST
by
StarCMC
(God protect the 969th in Iraq and their Captain, my brother...God protect them all!)
To: CWOJackson
Nasty John the Waffling French Undertaker, who is behind the atatacks on GWB's 9/11 ad, per the American Spectator.
Kerry, who is personally endorsed by Yasser Arafat, Haiti's Aristide, Iran's Mullahs, Traitor "Red Jane" Fonda, Kim Jong Il, (& Kim Il Jong), Mugabe, Marxist thug Chavez of Venezuela, Castro of Cuba, & France's Jacques Chirac, is a weapon of mass economic destruction.
He'll destroy the troops in Iraq, the War on Terrorism,
& the U.S. stock market with all his negative talk and whiny-leftist-liberal sour-puss troop-bashing, Bush-bashing, America-bashing talk & self-aggrandizing, ultra-negative sourpuss whiny elitist personality.
To: maryz
I feel much better today, thank you.
32
posted on
03/09/2004 7:39:10 AM PST
by
philetus
(Keep doing what you always do and you'll keep getting what you always get)
To: philetus
I am afraid that you are correct that the pols will shoot down the marriage amendment. Tom Delay has even indicated that the Amendment is his last choice after all other options and the last nose count I saw showed that less than 1/2 of Senators were in favor of the amendment. Even if that estimate is too gloomy, we have a long way to go to get to 2/3 of the Senators. Also, it doesn't help that the GOP doesn't speak with one voice on this issue and leaders are taking opposing positions.
33
posted on
03/09/2004 7:56:42 AM PST
by
Truth29
To: DoughtyOne
Maybe we'll get lucky. I wouldn't complain about two or three more like Clarence Thomas.
Wasn't that his dad who gave us Thomas?
34
posted on
03/09/2004 12:32:09 PM PST
by
CWOJackson
(What are you complaining about, she called me compassionate...)
To: CWOJackson
It's possible. I'm not sure if it was Bush or Reagan. And yes that would be nice.
To: DoughtyOne
Nominated by President Bush to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit: took oath of office, March 12, 1990.
Nominated by President Bush as Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court: took oath of office October 23, 1991.
In this regard I think George the first did a far better job then Ronald.
36
posted on
03/09/2004 1:22:25 PM PST
by
CWOJackson
(What are you complaining about, she called me compassionate...)
To: CWOJackson
Two choices. John Kerry shaping the Supreme Court for the next twenty years or President Bush. And THIS court was shaped by Ronald Reagan, Gerald Ford, and George H.W. Bush. Not exactly a stellar track record for the GOP.
37
posted on
03/09/2004 1:31:10 PM PST
by
Sloth
(We cannot defeat foreign enemies of the Constitution if we yield to the domestic ones.)
To: Sloth
Sure, Reagan and Ford were disappointing but the last President Bush gave us Thomas so I'm upbeat about it.
And any way you slice it, even Reagans picks have been better then those justices we've gotten from third party presidents.
38
posted on
03/09/2004 1:34:03 PM PST
by
CWOJackson
(What are you complaining about, she called me compassionate...)
To: CWOJackson
Reagan WAS a third party President. He's neither a Democrat nor a Whig.
39
posted on
03/09/2004 1:47:08 PM PST
by
Sloth
(We cannot defeat foreign enemies of the Constitution if we yield to the domestic ones.)
To: JohnHuang2
Wow. Another blow to free speech. Between CFR, indecency, fairness doctrine, and now this - is there anything left of the first amendment?
40
posted on
03/09/2004 1:49:06 PM PST
by
RinaseaofDs
(Only those who dare truly live - CGA 88 Class Motto)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-51 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson