Posted on 07/19/2005 5:06:14 PM PDT by Mo1
Edited on 07/19/2005 5:10:19 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
New thread time
colmes response,,
pretty limp.. like his honeymoon nite.
did I say that? ;-o
"Turbin has said he will oppose him, this is a very good sign."
Very good indeed if Durbin is the Rats point man on this!
When will they EVER learn?
When will SOME OF US ever learn? (that means me, too)
Lindsay Graham was on Hannity even before the pick sounding like Jesse Helms. I mean, he was stoked, saying that a USSC pick was NOT a part of the "deal," and making clear that Bush should nominate a "solid conservative." Hmmm. Sounds like Mr. Constituent contacted the senator.
Leahy and Schumer are finally HELPED OFF THE STAGE.
Schumer: "We're not answering anymore"
THANK GOD
Dirty and ugly is the only thing Democrats know anymore.
CNN upcoming: a well rounded list of guests from Dick Durbin, Jeff Greenfield, Bill Schneider, David Gergan...sheesh: DU Central on CNN.
That's what I thought I heard.
Schumer named the stakes. "The Supreme Court makes law," he said. He sees the court as an extra legislature for the 'Rats to control.
"The Record of John G. Roberts, Jr.: A Preliminary Report This preliminary report provides a summary of the record of John Roberts, who has been a judge for less than two years, having been nominated by President George W. Bush to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and confirmed in May 2003. In compiling this report, we have examined Roberts’s pre-judicial record as well as his limited record on the bench, focusing primarily on cases raising concerns with respect to civil rights and individual liberties. Overview: Roberts’s record is a disturbing one. Among other things, Roberts is hostile to women’s reproductive freedom, and he has taken positions in religious liberty and free speech cases that were detrimental to those fundamental rights. Roberts has limited judicial experience, but even his short tenure as a judge raises serious concerns about his ideology and judicial philosophy. For example, dissenting opinions by Roberts have questioned the constitutionality of the Endangered Species Act and argued that Americans tortured by Iraq when it was a terrorist state can receive no compensation. This preliminary review of Roberts’s record indicates that it falls far short of demonstrating the commitment to fundamental civil and constitutional rights that should be shown by a Supreme Court nominee."
Someone needs to tell Chuck, the Dems, the media and Alan (watching H&C) that they can fume all they like, we don't give a damn. We don't need them to confirm a Justice.
And it sounded great! Let the games begin! lol!
Fine by me. There will continue to be fewer and fewer of them in Washington with each election.
That's a lot of happy!
It's all up to Specter now. I truly wish Sessions was in charge of the committee. But I get the feelin that Specter will faithfully carry the GOP water on the Roberts nomination.
Color me bewildered.....
The general DU consensus seems to be "We're doomed. We can't beat this guy. Say goodbye to America."
BWA-HA-HA-HAAA!
over Scalia? Scalia has earned it I think, it must be hell to work on that court with Stevens, Ginsburg, Souter and Breyer.
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.