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


1 posted on 10/28/2005 7:00:24 AM PDT by LurkedLongEnough
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last
To: LurkedLongEnough

Consensus? I urge you to read the tagline that I've been using for months now.


30 posted on 10/28/2005 7:08:35 AM PDT by Tanniker Smith (By defiintion, we cannot have Consensus until you agree with me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LurkedLongEnough
"I urge the president to take seriously the Constitution's charge and to engage the U.S. Senate – both Republicans and Democrats – in a process of genuine consultation

LOL!!!!!!!!!!
Stupid woman - has never read the Constitution I bet. just uses it for TP.

31 posted on 10/28/2005 7:08:40 AM PDT by grobdriver (Let the embeds check the bodies!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LurkedLongEnough

Will the fat lady still be singing the same song if(God forbid) she ever gets elected CinC? I think not.


33 posted on 10/28/2005 7:09:11 AM PDT by synbad600
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LurkedLongEnough
Is she out of her friggin' mind? No president has EVER had to get a consensus when naming a Supreme Court nominee. Of course, there has never been a president so hated by the left as President Bush is. W needs to tell her, and the rest of the dimoCRACKS to sit down and STFU! This is his job and duty and his alone. Ole Crusty must be practicing for the day she's behind the desk in the Oval Office. That day can NEVER be permitted to happen.
34 posted on 10/28/2005 7:10:24 AM PDT by NCC-1701 (RADICAL ISLAM IS A CULT. IT MUST BE ERADICATED ASAP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LurkedLongEnough

Ann Coulter I think would be a good consensus choice.


35 posted on 10/28/2005 7:10:52 AM PDT by 2 Kool 2 Be 4-Gotten (Is your problem ignorance or apathy? I don't know and I don't care.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LurkedLongEnough

It takes a village you know.


36 posted on 10/28/2005 7:11:05 AM PDT by yobid (Don't pet the sweaty things.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LurkedLongEnough

Tell me they aren't scared! LMAO!


38 posted on 10/28/2005 7:11:39 AM PDT by mosquitobite (What we permit; we promote. ~ Mark Sanford for President!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LurkedLongEnough

Just who in the h3ll does she think she is telling dubya who to pick. I wish someone would dig up the dirt on her that she has stashed away and get her and her usless pervert of a husband out of our lives.


39 posted on 10/28/2005 7:12:52 AM PDT by Dustbunny (Main Stream Media -- Making 'Max Headroom' a reality.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LurkedLongEnough

Yeah. Check with Hill and Bill.


40 posted on 10/28/2005 7:14:46 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (Janice Rogers Brown is the only High Court nominee that is acceptable to me, period.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LurkedLongEnough

Just the way her husband sought consensus when he appointed Breyer and Ginsburg? Breyer, who thinks the words of the Constitution don't matter, that it is "a living and evolving document", that foreign law matters?


41 posted on 10/28/2005 7:15:20 AM PDT by mak5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LurkedLongEnough

Hillary, which part of "the president shall nominate" don't you understand?


43 posted on 10/28/2005 7:16:03 AM PDT by almcbean
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LurkedLongEnough
Sorry, Hillary, but ... been there, done that. Miers was the consensus candidate.

Now, it is incumbent on Bush to appoint a true conservative to counterbalance Ginsberg -- the appointee of your husband.
45 posted on 10/28/2005 7:16:54 AM PDT by TomGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LurkedLongEnough
And President Hillary will do the same for us, right? Wrong.

The liberals have played these games for too long. They call for Republicans to move as close to them as possible, yet they NEVER do the same for the Right.

Why do so many on our side fall for it? Are we the waterboys of the Left? Ignore them.

46 posted on 10/28/2005 7:18:40 AM PDT by Gelato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LurkedLongEnough

Hillary, Bush won - Bush gets to select his judicial nominees - did your rapist husband give up his rights as president to select? Have either of you ever done anything by consensus? How stupid do you think we are?


48 posted on 10/28/2005 7:19:36 AM PDT by yoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LurkedLongEnough
"I urge the president to take seriously the Constitution's charge and to engage the U.S. Senate – both Republicans and Democrats – in a process of genuine consultation in order to identify and ultimately confirm a consensus nominee," the New York senator said in a statement Thursday.

Utter nonsense. And this from a woman who has been touted as a potential SC nominee. Of course. this came from Democrats, no lovers or understanders of the Constituion themselves.

49 posted on 10/28/2005 7:19:39 AM PDT by CaptRon (Pedecaris alive or Raisuli dead)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LurkedLongEnough

Gosh, I guess he should just kneel down and let Hillary decide who is to sit on the court.


50 posted on 10/28/2005 7:22:37 AM PDT by Flint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LurkedLongEnough

Hillary wants a consensus nominee, like Ruth Bader-Ginsburg! Doesn't she have to get on her broom for Halloween?


52 posted on 10/28/2005 7:23:23 AM PDT by Rummyfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LurkedLongEnough
and ultimately confirm a consensus nominee

Anyone want to start a poll of how much longer it will be before Hillary stoops to read the Constitution?

56 posted on 10/28/2005 7:27:24 AM PDT by MosesKnows
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LurkedLongEnough
Consensus, as defined by Hillary Clinton

Pro-choice
Anti-Gun
Anti-War, if it suits the nominee's political purpose
Pro-terrorist rights
Anti National Security
Pro Open Borders
in short, when you hear a lib say "consensus" just replace that with "follow the democratic party line".

So the title of this artcle could have been:

Senator Clinton Urges President To Select Next Supreme Court Nominee By Follwoing Democratic Party Line

60 posted on 10/28/2005 7:30:38 AM PDT by Personal Responsibility (All I want for tomorrow is to make it better than today!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LurkedLongEnough
"Consensus" nominee, huh? I cannot believe the arrogance of that woman! When her husband was President, he named who he thought best reflected his beliefs and his party's philosophy. He didn't go looking around for a consensus candidate. This is another example of Democrats trying to get the President to give them what they can't win at the ballot box.

("Denny Crane: Gun Control? For Communists. She's a liberal. Can't hunt.")

61 posted on 10/28/2005 7:30:49 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last

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