Skip to comments.
Rush Limbaugh: Why Do We Have To Play Games?
RushLimbaugh.com ^
| 10/3/05
| Rush Limbaugh
Posted on 10/03/2005 5:19:12 PM PDT by wagglebee
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-104 next last
To: wagglebee
My word... why are you even in this party. I mean, here you are, a voter, voting for men who are so easily duped. Your words: EVERY OTHER Republican president.
If they are duped, and you continue to vote for them... I guess that makes you the most duped.
61
posted on
10/03/2005 6:35:41 PM PDT
by
carton253
(It's better to have a gun and not need it than not have a gun and need it.)
To: Huck
"Affirmative cronyism."
Yes, I think that's the kind that's Constitutional isn't it?
What's that about the cock crewing twice or was it thrice?
62
posted on
10/03/2005 6:36:26 PM PDT
by
Cautor
To: SpringheelJack
I believe (but I am not certain) that Bentsen later expressed some misgivings for being on the ticket with Dukakis.
63
posted on
10/03/2005 6:40:12 PM PDT
by
wagglebee
("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
To: the gillman@blacklagoon.com
64
posted on
10/03/2005 6:42:49 PM PDT
by
Republic
(Michael Schiavo LIED about having a college degree on his guardianship application,)
To: carton253
My word... why are you even in this party. I mean, here you are, a voter, voting for men who are so easily duped. Your words: EVERY OTHER Republican president. If they are duped, and you continue to vote for them... I guess that makes you the most duped.
No, it means I have ideals and believe that the GOP has the answers for America. I am also a realist who understands that everyone makes mistakes.
Reagan was the finest president we will ever see, yet he clearly was misinformed about O'Connor and to an extent about Kennedy, do you disagree with this?
65
posted on
10/03/2005 6:44:05 PM PDT
by
wagglebee
("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
To: wagglebee
I don't think Bush being duped is the relevant concern here. Bush, from the outset, has confirmed his appreciation that he presides over a country that is split between red/blue -- with the red only slightly dominant. The balance of the Supreme Court was errantly to the blue for the last decade or so. The selections of Roberts and Miers will correct appropriately. We should not expect Bush SC choices to do more than that...MORE would be volatile, not fair. And Bush is a great president.
66
posted on
10/03/2005 6:44:13 PM PDT
by
My back yard
(The future will be your past catching up to you.. Honky Tonk Philosophizer Dwight Yoakam)
To: Osage Orange
"Well, I guess god has spoken.............. " I'm glad you used the lower case g.
67
posted on
10/03/2005 6:45:46 PM PDT
by
Past Your Eyes
(I'm just sitting here on the Group W bench.)
To: ovrtaxt
The problem is with the wimpy way that the GOP presents it's point of view. They should be LOUD AND PROUD
Vast majority of politicians on both sides have no real political philosophy other than being in power
They are scared to death of the MSM
It is just that the MSM backs the democrats so they appear as fighters
If the MSM turned on them they would go belly up just like most of the GOP
Only thing politicos respond to is pressure whether from the MSM--the Voters or special interest groups
Real statesmen can be counted on one hand if that
68
posted on
10/03/2005 6:48:05 PM PDT
by
uncbob
To: My back yard
When the SCOTUS ended its last session, it was made up of seven justices who had been appointed by Republicans and two who had been appointed by Clinton, yet there were only three and a half conservatives (I will give Kennedy the benefit of the doubt and acknowledge that he sometimes voted with the other conservatives). So, the errancy on the court seems to have had more to do with how GOP presidents chose their nominees and less to do with the party who appointed each justice.
69
posted on
10/03/2005 6:49:06 PM PDT
by
wagglebee
("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
To: Clintonfatigued
Sense? I haven't heard any sense from these boards today. I can't believe how everyone's overreacting. She just may be the best thing that could possibly happen...a real stealth conservative.
70
posted on
10/03/2005 6:51:39 PM PDT
by
Hildy
To: dts32041
You, FReeper, are way out in left field, but you are entitled to alienate yourself if you wish.
Maybe you are just a troll!
To: wagglebee
I have a bad feeling about all of this. Coming in behind a real judge like Roberts this nominee appears to be totally underwhelming. Aside from her philosophy being as clear as a black hole, she's never been a judge....ever, anywhere. As far as I'm concerned she's unqualified. You don't go hire someone for a top job, and fill the position with someone with no hands on experience.
We can always hope that The President, the same person who looked in to Vladamir Putin's eyes and "got a sense of his soul", has looked into Mrs. Miers's eyes a bit longer and really knows what she is all about.
72
posted on
10/03/2005 6:54:33 PM PDT
by
KoRn
To: wagglebee
Rush Limbaugh: Why Do We Have To Play Games?Three words: Gang of 14. They set the parameters for this process by realizing that the moderates in both parties, if they banded together, could control the nomination process.
73
posted on
10/03/2005 6:55:05 PM PDT
by
dirtboy
(Drool overflowed my buffer...)
To: wagglebee
Well, if you are going to change the topic of the converstaion... I don't think Reagan was duped. I think he knew exactly who he was nominating...
I think its highly insulting to Reagan to accuse him of such stupdity.
74
posted on
10/03/2005 6:56:15 PM PDT
by
carton253
(It's better to have a gun and not need it than not have a gun and need it.)
To: Accygirl
You know, I have been an evangelical conservative believer in the Lord Jesus Christ since 1978, and I would prefer to be in close fellowship and follow the leadership of Rick Warren over Pat Robertson ANY DAY!!!!!
Pat needs to retire!!!!
To: mosquitobite
Well said and done! Well said and done INDEED!
To: carton253
Well, if you are going to change the topic of the converstaion... I don't think Reagan was duped. I think he knew exactly who he was nominating... I think its highly insulting to Reagan to accuse him of such stupdity.
I believe the term I used was "misinformed." However, I am interested in your opinion, why do you think Reagan chose to replace Bork with Kennedy if "he knew exactly who he was nominating"?
77
posted on
10/03/2005 6:59:58 PM PDT
by
wagglebee
("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
To: mosquitobite
Though it was said well, your final comment is a little strained.
We all care, but most think if one is right on the Pro-Life issue at the SCOTUS level, they will be naturally right on all the others as well.
Perhaps your argument should be laid at how that concept is flawed.
To: wagglebee
Goodness...who wouldn't?
After getting trounced and embarrassed by the guy's campaign skills (tank helmet thing), I would be angry at Dukakis for destroying and trashing the balance of my political life too!
To: joyspring777
I don't know about that. Like I said, Harry Reid is Pro-Life. Wanna wager on his interpretation of the commerce or the general welfare clause?
80
posted on
10/03/2005 7:07:53 PM PDT
by
mosquitobite
(What we permit; we promote. ~ Mark Sanford for President!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-104 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