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

To: etradervic
The Left will then do what they always do and make themselves look like idiots by attacking her personal religious beliefs.

I thought from the beginning that that was probably Bush's ploy: Put up an Evangelical woman candidate, get the Democrats to hammer her for her religion, and that way get them to weaken themselves even further in the heartland. A woman works better for this than a man, because it makes them look worse when they hammer her.

The only trouble with this ploy is that she isn't qualified to sit on the court and is only doubtfully conservative.

10 posted on 10/16/2005 12:32:22 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: Cicero

Sandra O'Connor was 3rd in her Stanford Law School class. First was some guy named William Rehnquist.


12 posted on 10/16/2005 12:46:27 PM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Cicero
The only trouble with this ploy is that she isn't qualified to sit on the court and is only doubtfully conservative.

Unlike some, I will not say that she is not qualified. I do not think that you need to be a judge or a Constitutional scholar to serve on the Supreme Court or to interpret the Constitution. My objection is that we should not be in a position where we are "doubtful" concerning how she will rule.
14 posted on 10/16/2005 1:10:26 PM PDT by etradervic (I love the smell of napalm in the morning. It smells like...victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | 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