Skip to comments.
The Incredible Chuck Schumer
Redstate.org ^
| July 19, 2005
Posted on 07/19/2005 8:36:00 PM PDT by Founding Father
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-52 next last
Pass the word.
To: Founding Father
His first name isn't Chuck, it just rhymes with Chuck.
2
posted on
07/19/2005 8:37:30 PM PDT
by
Paleo Conservative
(Hey! Hey! Ho! Ho! Andrew Heyward's got to go!)
To: Founding Father
I would like to ask Chuckie a few questions in front of the people in his state. I bet some of his real answers would stun even the New York libs.
3
posted on
07/19/2005 8:40:38 PM PDT
by
satchmodog9
(Murder and weather are our only news)
To: Founding Father
MOre of the same from the left, I'm really getting Fu%$&@(*
sick and tired of their Anti-American Socialist Crap!!
4
posted on
07/19/2005 8:41:48 PM PDT
by
26lemoncharlie
('Cuntas haereses tu sola interemisti in universo mundo!')
To: Founding Father
Oh wait, nevermind. He voted yes with 95 other Senators.Schumer wasn't a senator when Ginsburg was nominated. Other than that wee error, the blogger has a good point.
5
posted on
07/19/2005 8:42:29 PM PDT
by
kristinn
To: Founding Father
Before I read past the title... why isn't there a barf alert attached?
6
posted on
07/19/2005 8:42:48 PM PDT
by
RedBeaconNY
(My cat has a cold.)
To: CHARLITE
7
posted on
07/19/2005 8:43:14 PM PDT
by
King Prout
(I'd say I missed ya, but that'd be untrue... I NEVER MISS)
To: Founding Father
Great job. It might have been a "hangin' curve", but it is one which needed to be whacked in this manner. Thanks again.
8
posted on
07/19/2005 8:46:03 PM PDT
by
Hat-Trick
(Do you trust a government that cannot trust you with guns?)
To: Founding Father
I figured Chuckie would go into cardiac arrest no matter who got the nod from President Bush. Usually when Chuckie opposes someone it means that the person he is opposing has a strong pro-Second Amendment stance. Is this the case with Judge Roberts?
9
posted on
07/19/2005 8:46:46 PM PDT
by
billnaz
(What part of "shall not be infringed" don't you understand?)
To: Paleo Conservative
Puck Schumer?
Schmuck Schumer?
Cluck?
Oh,wait a minute!
I know what it is...
10
posted on
07/19/2005 8:47:23 PM PDT
by
Redbob
To: Founding Father
Great find; I'd forgotten or rather blanked out Ruthie's confirmation hearings love-in.
11
posted on
07/19/2005 8:48:56 PM PDT
by
Redbob
To: Founding Father
Al Scum-auto had Up-Chuck Schumer's current Senate seat when Ginsburg was appointed.
12
posted on
07/19/2005 8:50:22 PM PDT
by
Clemenza
(JJesus CChrist MMade SSeattle UUnder PProtest)
To: Founding Father
I think a putz scumbag schmuck like schumer should answer some question like he puts to people that are respected for their integrity.What makes this schmuck thinks he is so smart he is dumber than a bag of sand.
13
posted on
07/19/2005 8:51:59 PM PDT
by
solo gringo
(Liberal democrats And Flori-duh judges are parasites)
To: Founding Father
If Hillary Clinton wasn't in the Senate, I think Schumer would without a doubt run for President. Not even McCain loves exposure more than he does.
14
posted on
07/19/2005 9:07:23 PM PDT
by
JohnBDay
To: Founding Father
>>It's about like hunting cows in Southwest Oklahoma.<<
Lol!
15
posted on
07/19/2005 9:07:55 PM PDT
by
dangus
To: Redbob
Sort of reminds me of a spelling test one of my friends gave her class...She teaches special education. It was suggested that all words were spelled similar to one that the students already knew.....The list was Duck, Luck, Cluck, Tuck, etc. etc.
100% of her students (even the lowest) got 100% correct.
Next week she used: Hit, sit, bit, etc. They didn't do as well.
16
posted on
07/19/2005 9:12:44 PM PDT
by
hoosiermama
(Mr and Mrs Wilson3 were both working UNDERtheCOVERS!)
To: Founding Father
Great post, thank you.
Praying that Boxer joins Schumer right out front where she can inflict immeasurable damage to the democrat's own positions.
17
posted on
07/19/2005 9:16:14 PM PDT
by
ncountylee
(Dead terrorists smell like victory)
To: Redbob
18
posted on
07/19/2005 9:16:36 PM PDT
by
Jerez2
To: Jerez2
What Roberts needs to do is study every answer that Ruth Ginsburg gave as she avoided giving answers on controversial subjects, and do exactly the same thing when it comes his turn. He should use her words as exactly as possible without actually parroting her, and then the Pubs, when the Dems attack him for not answering, should pull out the Ginsburg responses and say, hey, these answers were fine when you voted Ginsburg through, and Roberts is answering no differently than Ginsburg did, so you have no room to argue in this instance.
To: Gunslingr3
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-52 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