According to The Arizona Republic, McCain himself signed off on this.
To: mkjessup; stephenjohnbanker; Hildy; AuntB; DoughtyOne; TigersEye; cripplecreek; Grunthor; ...
McCain vs. Hayworth = RINO ArmageddonIt's time to clean house.
2 posted on
12/16/2009 5:32:53 AM PST by
rabscuttle385
(Purge the RINOs! * http://restoretheconstitution.ning.com/)
To: rabscuttle385
I’d like to see Hayworth run, I’d vote for him.
4 posted on
12/16/2009 5:46:28 AM PST by
exbrit
To: rabscuttle385
This fit of desperation and evil is laughable. If one has not entered a race, what can stop one from talking politics on a radio show set up expressly to talk about politics?
5 posted on
12/16/2009 5:49:16 AM PST by
stephenjohnbanker
(Support our troops, and vote out the RINO's!)
To: rabscuttle385
Does that dolt Woods see the difference between an un-declared private citizen and a candidate????.........I didn’t think so.
7 posted on
12/16/2009 5:59:06 AM PST by
Dawgreg
(Happiness is not having what you want, but wanting what you have.)
To: rabscuttle385
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Free the First!
8 posted on
12/16/2009 6:09:40 AM PST by
EternalVigilance
(By choice, they've removed themselves from the "We" in "We hold these truths to be self-evident...")
To: rabscuttle385
That means more people are going to vote for JD. People don’t like bullying tactics by scum like McCain.
13 posted on
12/16/2009 6:49:49 AM PST by
freekitty
(Give me back my conservative vote; then find me a real conservative to vote for)
To: rabscuttle385
JD needs to get in the race.
14 posted on
12/16/2009 6:53:38 AM PST by
Grunthor
(There is no such thing as unconditional love.)
To: rabscuttle385
You guys remember when we used to have freedom of speech in this country? Those were the days...
To: rabscuttle385
16 posted on
12/16/2009 9:35:08 AM PST by
NormsRevenge
(Semper Fi ... Godspeed .. Monthly Donor Onboard .. May yur bandwidth exceed your girth)
To: rabscuttle385
This Grant Woods is a real character. In his own webpage he brags about winning, oops, that he 'successfully argued'
Lewis v. Casey before SCOTUS for AZ. (it was about Inmate's 'rights' in filing lawsuits)
Well, excuse me but IMO a Wino going through Detox could have won that for the State of AZ. It was such a slam dunk that even Ruth Buzzy went with the majority (it was 8-1). This is a snip of what Scalia wrote in the Majority Opinion:
.... Bounds v. Smith "does not guarantee [inmates] the wherewithal to transform themselves into litigating engines capable of filing everything from shareholder derivative actions to slip-and-fall claims."
And if you prolly haven't guessed, this overturned a ruling by the 9th Circus that sided with the inmates.
Again, anyone could have 'won' this for AZ it was so STOO-PID™ to begin with. So if I was Woods I'd find another case to cite on my webpage.
17 posted on
12/16/2009 10:46:44 AM PST by
Condor51
(The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits)
To: rabscuttle385
Am I not mistaken, but did not Grant Woods officially switch to the Democrat party, yet he is running interference for Captain Strawberries ?
19 posted on
12/16/2009 4:30:52 PM PST by
fieldmarshaldj
(~"This is what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps !"~~)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson