Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: flashbunny

Those are all excellent reasons why you and I and most (if not all) of our fellow FReepers would not have nominated her. They even call President Bush's objectivity on the matter into question. What they fail to do is provide an actual reason to oppose her once nominated. She seems to satisfy the Constitutional requirements for the position. I may not like the choice, but I voted to have the President make that choice and now I have to live with it... right?


209 posted on 10/12/2005 1:39:47 PM PDT by Aldin (George Miller's Rebellious Serf)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies ]


To: Aldin

uh...no.

just because she is nominated doesn't mean we have to lock step support a candidate. If she is not worthy of being nominated, why is she worthy of being supported as the nominee?

Merely because the president nominated her?

Sorry,I wouldn't accept that if clinton was president, and I won't accept it when GWB is president. My standards don't shift based on the party in power.


256 posted on 10/12/2005 2:04:30 PM PDT by flashbunny (Sorry, but I'm allergic to KoolAid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson