Skip to comments.
Breaking - Supreme Court Upholds "Colleges who accept Federal Funds must allow Military Recruiters"
FoxNews ^
| 03/06/2006
| Leofl
Posted on 03/06/2006 7:12:47 AM PST by Leofl
Just Breaking!!!! Supreme Court Upholds "Colleges who accept Federal Funds must allow Military Recruiters"
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: antiamericanism; antimilitary; antiwar; campuscommies; codepink; colleges; culturewar; federalfunds; ginsburgsnores; hippies; homosexualagenda; johnroberts; military; militaryrecruiters; militaryrecruiting; publicschools; recruiters; recruiting; recruitment; roberts; robertscourt; rotc; ruling; scotus; solomonamendment; supremecourt; taxdollarsatwork; unamerican; universities; youpayforthis
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160 ... 321-340 next last
To: Republican Red
That picture looks like a still from a Rocky and Bullwinkle cartoon.
121
posted on
03/06/2006 7:55:31 AM PST
by
HIDEK6
To: Republican Red
122
posted on
03/06/2006 7:55:35 AM PST
by
FreedomPoster
(Guns themselves are fairly robust; their chief enemies are rust and politicians) (NRA)
To: Leofl
"Wait! If someone had woken me up I would have voted 'no'!"
To: Republican Red
124
posted on
03/06/2006 7:56:29 AM PST
by
cvq3842
To: Crazieman
this is one time I just might!
125
posted on
03/06/2006 7:56:48 AM PST
by
cvq3842
To: pookie18
Whoops. You beat me to it. GMTA. See 120.
To: commish
Exactly correct, and exactly why we need to get the DoEd out of the K-12 schools. Heck, just disband the whole thing.
127
posted on
03/06/2006 7:57:00 AM PST
by
FreedomPoster
(Guns themselves are fairly robust; their chief enemies are rust and politicians) (NRA)
To: HoustonCurmudgeon
This has nothing to do with ROTC. Not directly, but the same arguments used against military recruiters are made by those against ROTC, and those arguments have been demolished.
To: finnman69
all in twelve hours!
I never thought of it that way . . .
129
posted on
03/06/2006 7:57:24 AM PST
by
cvq3842
To: Brytani
130
posted on
03/06/2006 7:57:56 AM PST
by
italianquaker
(Democrats and media can't win elections at least they can win their phony polls.)
To: pookie18
I didn't think that pic could be made any funnier. I was wrong.... ROTFLMAO!!!
131
posted on
03/06/2006 7:58:13 AM PST
by
demkicker
(democrats and terrorists are familiar bedfellows)
To: Leofl
Unanimous, from what i understand.
Money comes with strings attached. It also mandates nondiscrimination on the basis or race, I believe.
Schools are free to refuse the funds . . .
132
posted on
03/06/2006 7:58:15 AM PST
by
cvq3842
To: Leofl
133
posted on
03/06/2006 7:59:13 AM PST
by
Christian4Bush
(I'd much rather hunt with Dick Cheney than ride with Ted Kennedy.)
To: OldFriend
Really? When I was there from 1986-1990 I had lots of friends that were in it. With all of the Engineering Schools (by and large conservative), I would find that very odd.
To: BladeLWS; All
"WOOOOHOOOOO!
To: doc30
I think (pretty positive) that fed funds are very often from NIH and NHS. Not as much "general operating" money to the administration, but research-support/direct grants money to the professors.
Charles Draper Labs at MIT gets direct federal contract money for sonar and radar research for example.
136
posted on
03/06/2006 8:01:07 AM PST
by
Robert A Cook PE
(I can only donate monthly, but Hillary's ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
To: Leofl
OH..............YEAH!!!!!!!!!! I LOVE this new SC! THANK you President Bush!
137
posted on
03/06/2006 8:01:44 AM PST
by
ohioWfan
(PROUD Mom of an Iraq War VET! THANKS, son!!!!)
To: Leofl
Good for them. It's about time to take away funds from those schools who will not allow our military. Can't have it both ways-YALE...
To: mpackard
Agreed. And the one reason I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on other issues.
139
posted on
03/06/2006 8:02:14 AM PST
by
proudpapa
(of three.)
To: jan in Colorado
Maybe this explains why so many lawyers are repugnant! You may wish to consider that the side that won in this case also was represented by "repugnant" lawyers. And that every time you hear some decision that ticks you off, there were lawyers on the other side who agreed with you.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160 ... 321-340 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