1 posted on
07/20/2005 7:33:31 AM PDT by
Babu
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120, 121-140 last
To: Babu
But unfortunately, other than that that, we dont know much about John Roberts.
What's up with that that that?
To: Babu
Wake up people! If Robert's is withdrawn we're not likely to get someione more conservative, now are we?
724 posted on
07/20/2005 4:56:43 PM PDT by
claudiustg
(Go Sharon! Go Bush!)
To: Babu
But unfortunately, other than that that, we dont know much about John Roberts. Stealth nominees have never turned out to be a pleasant surprise for conservatives. Never. Not ever.If the Senate were in Democrat hands, Roberts would be perfect. But why on earth would Bush waste a nomination on a person who is a complete blank slate when we have a majority in the Senate!
The Republicans dont know how to ACT as a Majority...its unnatural to them..Do you think the dimmies would do some like nominating a "blank screen"?
I feel Ann is right on the mark....Roberts WILL probably turn out to be another Souter!
725 posted on
07/20/2005 5:05:03 PM PDT by
texson66
("Tyranny is yielding to the lust of the governing." - Lord Moulton)
To: Babu
I half expected a reaction like this from Annie, but this nomination may prove to be more of a slap in the face to the 'Rats than she realizes.
Remember James Baker's velvet glove?? Judge Roberts nomination may prove to be one that the Democrats oppose at thier own political peril, because it looks like the only thing they can oppose him on is that he's Conservative; and that won't fly.
To: Babu
During the filibuster fracas, one lonely voice in the woods admonished Republicans: Of your six minutes on TV, use 30 seconds to point out the Democrats are abusing the filibuster and the other 5 1/2 minutes to ask liberals to explain why they think Bush's judicial nominees are extreme.Damn straight! I'm glad I'm not the only one who's been saying this.
731 posted on
07/20/2005 5:50:14 PM PDT by
inquest
(FTAA delenda est)
To: Babu
I have just read through 450 of the some 700+ posts relative to Ann Coulters article on the Roberts nomination. Although, like any one else, Ann deserves to have her views scrutinized and criticized on this Board, its unconscionable that so many have denigrated her personally.
It is an absolute disgrace that some posters have attacked her for her body shape; and, her marital status; and, her facial features; and, her purported drinking habits; and imputed uninformed pseudo- psychoanalysis in this vicious ad hominem attack. If ANYONE in the conservative movement didnt deserve such hypocritical treatment from her own, it is Ann Coulter.
Im relatively new to the Board, but I remember Ann and Drudge participating in a rally telecast on CSPAN when Free Republic was in its infancy. She was there to support this Board, and has continually been one of the staunchest supporters of this Board. I recall her saying that, when she traveled and was feeling low, she logged on to Free Republic for sustenance. I remember at the rally, when she spoke to Freepers, she said I love you guys.
Without argument, she has been on the front lines in the battle against liberalism. Unlike those who attack her personally today from the safety and anonymity of their keyboards, she places herself physically in harms way every time she spreads the conservative philosophy at a university. We all know she is vulnerable to personal attack, and we have seen punks try to silence her by confronting her on stage and throwing pies in her face. What we witness on this Board today is FAR WORSE than a cream pie; its a vicious slap in the face. Its an unmitigated abomination.
We all know that when the administration comes under assault, suddenly, the Board is overwhelmed with hatchet men. But the hatchet job done on Ann Coulter today was a Black Day for Free Republic. We attacked one of our most ardent supporters; we mugged the soul of the Board.
Those who engaged in this character assassination should be ashamed, but I know they are not. Ann Coulter is not, and should not be, above criticism as to her views- but these ad hominian attacks by keyboard assassins is dastardly and the pinnacle of ingratitude.
Ann fearlessly endures the attacks of liberals, and she does so in support of the causes that we hold dear. I dont always agree with her, but God, I admire her courage. I couldnt do what she does, and I am so much in her debt for doing for me that which I have no capacity to perform. God hope she has the good sense not to read the Board today- because Im certain that with all she has endured on our behalf, this had to be the greatest betrayal of all.
Et Tu, Free Republic?
TAGLINES
Pzifer: Viagra wont cause dementia or blindness". (Except if one wears a Black Robe)
Clean your muskets and sharpen your pitchforks and get ready to ride to the sound of the guns.(KELO) :o}-
Dems, hello??? We could get out of Vietnam; we cant GET OUT of terrorism.
756 posted on
07/20/2005 6:51:05 PM PDT by
sirthomasthemore
(I go to my execution as the King's humble servant, but God's first!)
To: Babu
I look forward to the confirmation question and answer session. He seems like a solid pick but you have to beware of the unknown. The only negative about Bush is he has grown government by 25% in 5 years. I think this guy was chosen to protect the Patriot Act.
763 posted on
07/20/2005 7:56:08 PM PDT by
John Lenin
(The RATS have struck out but they continue to run the bases)
To: Babu
AMEN ANN! Give 'em hell!! No more Souters!
764 posted on
07/20/2005 7:57:49 PM PDT by
newzjunkey
(San Diego: **YES ON A** Protect Mt Soledad War Memoral from annoyed atheists!)
To: Babu
I can't believe I'm saying this but.... I disagree with Ann! Roberts has served Reagan, clerked for Rehnquist, and in the elder Bush's DOJ. I don't think there is any way he could be a liberal in conservative clothing.
To: Babu
What were you thinking, posting this?
Nearly 800 posts, and Ms. Coulter's opposition almost never stops going after the woman as a chicken-legged drunkard who never loved Bush to begin with. How proud they must be to have demonstrated the "big tent" under which they claim Roberts falls, especially when the only argument Ann raises is that the GOP base deserved assurance and they got temperance, that the tactics here were not her own preference and that those chosen tactics have failed to satisfy constitution-loving supporters of the GOP in the past.
Surely their extended vituperation must have proven her wrong. These cannot be just the all-too-typical attacks on the person that seem to have become common in this forum whenever Bush's actions are disagreed with by anyone, regardless of their conservative credentials. Thank goodness we can expect moderators to correct such discourteous postings where they went over the line. I hope that Ann enjoyed her little foray into the FR forum to see this and appreciated how much those moderators did to ensure she wasn't Slandered herself.
773 posted on
07/20/2005 9:12:36 PM PDT by
LibertarianInExile
(Kelo, Grutter, and Roe all have to go. Will Roberts get us there--don't know. No more Souters.)
To: All
While I'm hoping that Roberts will turn out to be a good pick (OK maybe I'm whistling past the graveyard), Bush could
really redeem himself with a Coulter for SCOTUS pick for the next vacancy. Look at what that achieves - a young appointee, a solid conservative vote, a woman.
It's because of advice like this that I'll never be asked to be a presidential advisor.
:-(
815 posted on
07/21/2005 6:42:08 AM PDT by
white trash redneck
(Everything I needed to know about Islam I learned on 9-11-01.)
To: Babu
I heard about how Coulter appears to hate this appointment, and thinks Roberts ill-suited. Now I've read the article and it seems clear to me is that she said "I don't know" at length and with vigor.
Not a problem. We should know more about Roberts, but this is hardly an indictment of him.
834 posted on
07/21/2005 1:58:55 PM PDT by
lepton
("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
To: Babu
We may not know if he lives in a log cabin, but you can bet that Bush knows.
This is what we hired him to do. I don't always agree with Bush; but I know that he's done a better job in this selection that Kerry would have done.
840 posted on
07/21/2005 2:12:05 PM PDT by
bannie
(The government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend upon the support of Paul.)
To: Babu
Ann is just trying to create some controversy and more opportunities for TV appearances and columns.
Fact is Roberts is very well known in some high circles where Ann isn't a member. He worked in the Justice Department and White House and clerked for Rehnquist who wanted him appointed. Hugh Hewitt has known him personally since college and says he's a conservative in the Rehnquist mold.
To: Babu
Ann is dancing without her fan!!
848 posted on
07/21/2005 3:21:10 PM PDT by
hgro
(ews)
To: SDGOP
Gee whiz, from the looks of this thread, it seems like a whole bunch of other people are disagreeing with one of Ann Coulter's latest rants. They must not be true conseratives, eh?
$50 says Bush could nominate James Dobson and Ann would be out complaining the nominee is a closet abortion lovin' pedophile islamofascist. Is this women EVER happy?
867 posted on
07/22/2005 5:59:30 PM PDT by
BillyBoy
(Find out about the Chicago Democrat Machine's "best friend" in the GOP... www.NoLaHood.com)
To: Babu
To: Babu
TIME TO EAT CROW, COULTER! ROBERTS IS CJ AND MEIRS WILL BE CONFIRMED TOO! HA HA HA GO EAT A F'ING CHEESBURGER BEEEYOTCH....
To: Babu
I trust Mark Levin, true legal scholar over Ann Coulter.
You guys just give her a pass because she is a skinny blond who should "Im a Conservative, you're not" at every turn.
She is wrong on this.
878 posted on
01/21/2006 2:23:11 PM PST by
Cincinna
(The ARKANSAS GRIFTERS want to take over your country. STOP THEM NOW!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120, 121-140 last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson