Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dems Leak Bush's Court Short List
NewsMax ^

Posted on 07/12/2005 2:07:09 PM PDT by MaineVoter2002

Dems Leak Bush's Court Short List

Top Senate Democrats floated the names of potential candidates for the Supreme Court on Tuesday in a meeting with President Bush, describing them as...

(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 109th; bush43; dishonor; judges; judicialnominees; leakingdems; scotus; shortlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 281-283 next last
To: yellowdoghunter

The poster is being lectured because the poster did not read the article.


61 posted on 07/12/2005 2:33:15 PM PDT by Soul Seeker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: livius
Remind me why I bothered to work for Bush's reelection.

Calm down...

Bush "didn't give us any names," Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada said after the session had broken up.

62 posted on 07/12/2005 2:33:43 PM PDT by SunStar (Democrats piss me off!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom

Post #2. The trolls are out in force over this.


63 posted on 07/12/2005 2:33:46 PM PDT by Indy Pendance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Soul Seeker

That is not what I am talking about. Thank you anyway.


64 posted on 07/12/2005 2:33:51 PM PDT by yellowdoghunter (Liberals should be seen and not heard.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: MaineVoter2002

SOB's, Reid was on television just this morning saying that they would not reveal the names.


65 posted on 07/12/2005 2:34:06 PM PDT by mware ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche........ "Nope, you are"-- GOD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yellowdoghunter
Why are you so obsessed with me....?

Nobody is obsessed with you; that seems to be your problem.

Heck, you even think if people post on the same threads as you do they're stalking you.

66 posted on 07/12/2005 2:34:23 PM PDT by Howlin (Who is Judith Miller covering up for?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: MaineVoter2002
It constantly amazes me the stuff that some people on FR are willing to believe. Short list? I think this short list is in the Dems head. I think these people were proposed by the Dems and I think Bush didn't say one way or another what he was going to do or who he was going to appoint.

Bush hasn't given in to the Dems yet, why should he give in on this, the most important thing, outside of the WOT, that he will do while in office?

Quit believing everything you hear and read that is put out by the Dems, you will feel better and keep your blood pressure down.

67 posted on 07/12/2005 2:35:23 PM PDT by calex59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Question Liberal Authority
Would it help if I leaked a list of John Kerry nominees to the Supreme Court?

Whatever you do, don't leak the fact that Kerry's wife is a lowlife scumbag.

The truth might get you snubbed by the MSM.

68 posted on 07/12/2005 2:35:48 PM PDT by CROSSHIGHWAYMAN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom

One thing for sure, I will not work for the "Dubya for Pres '08" campaign. I sure wish the Republican candidate would stand up and announce himself soon.


69 posted on 07/12/2005 2:36:03 PM PDT by RightWhale (withdraw from the 1967 UN Outer Space Treaty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: savedbygrace

You can never trust Newsmax headlines. Or their stories, for that matter.


70 posted on 07/12/2005 2:36:03 PM PDT by Taliesan (The power of the State to do good is the power of the State to do evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

You are obsessed with me....anyone can see that. Please have some consideration for people with dial-up and refrain from posting your stupid pictures. FR is better than that.


71 posted on 07/12/2005 2:36:15 PM PDT by yellowdoghunter (Liberals should be seen and not heard.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Newsmax has the potential to not go down that road, why do they do so? Drudge, worldnetdaily and newsmax better rethink their editorial policies. We are their main readership and we won't tolerate shoddy reporting the sheeple expect from the msm. Of course, they rile up the 'true' conservatives.


72 posted on 07/12/2005 2:36:37 PM PDT by Indy Pendance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: MaineVoter2002
Ok now let me get this straight. THE DUMS GO TO A MEETING AT THE WH. THEY THROW A FEW NAMES AT BUSH. BUSH IS NONCOMMITTAL.....THEN THE DUMS RUN TO THE MSM AND TELL THEM WHO THEY NAMED......AND WE ARE SUPPOSE TO THINK THIS IS THE LIST.

The msm is incompetent and stupid to boot.

73 posted on 07/12/2005 2:36:44 PM PDT by marty60
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

LOL!!! I knew I wouldn't -- figured the D&G's were out while I was typing! :)

That's my acronym for them -- D&G's! Rush the other day said that Doom and Gloomers are liberals. I cracked up laughing!


74 posted on 07/12/2005 2:38:09 PM PDT by PhiKapMom (AOII Mom -- J.C. for OK Governor in '06; Allen/Watts in 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Are you trying to seduce me?


75 posted on 07/12/2005 2:38:10 PM PDT by F16Fighter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: mware
SOB's, Reid was on television just this morning saying that they would not reveal the names.

Integrity personified.

But really this leak is a good thing ... it rules out those two squishy moderate judges.

Bush will never nominate someone known to be a Dem suggestion. That is the kiss of death.

76 posted on 07/12/2005 2:38:41 PM PDT by Oliver Optic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Soul Seeker

Don't bother, he's a troll.


77 posted on 07/12/2005 2:38:49 PM PDT by Indy Pendance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: livius

Don't worry, you don't have to work on his campaign, ever again.


78 posted on 07/12/2005 2:39:23 PM PDT by rabidralph (Stop surveilling--start arresting!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MaineVoter2002
I've read Article 2 section 2 clause 2. It says the President shall appoint . . .Judges of the Supreme Court. . ., but it give no suggestion of time between vacancy and appointment. Also, there is no Constitutional mandate for the number of justices serving on the SC.

Maybe the Present should let two vacancies (when the other occurs) languish, giving and leaving the SC at seven, the current serving justices.

There would be no way to force the President to appoint for about another three years, and maybe some reversal can occur in that time.

79 posted on 07/12/2005 2:39:38 PM PDT by William Terrell (Individuals can exist without government but government can't exist without individuals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale

Gad, I hope not. Can't we have a couple years without a presidential campaign going on?


80 posted on 07/12/2005 2:39:49 PM PDT by Indy Pendance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 281-283 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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