Posted on 08/02/2005 11:46:13 PM PDT by zarf
At the very least, Roberts should be asked the same question again, under oath, at his confirmation.
Gee, who would that "oath" be to? Mickey Mouse, Dumbo, or in Hitchens' case, the impersonal and totally meaningless dialectics of history? [irony, sarcasm] What the heck does an anti-Christian atheist care whether it is "under oath" or not? He wins a Twilight Zone Award for that one.
How long till they modify the oath for testimony? Have they done that already?
What a stupid reply. Your sarcastic quip adds no value to the discussion other than to show your ignorance.
Stupid? I'm not the one who doesn't know who Chris Hitchens is. Now THAT is showing your ignorance.
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.