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

To: Repeal 16-17
...it puts O'Conner in an awkward position

This whole story is either a complete fabrication by Cruz or it's disturbing on so many levels. For starters, Cruz has no business speaking for Sandra Day O'Conner about her reaction to porn. If this actually happened, should it even have been shared outside court chambers? I find it hard to grasp that the judges watched this with each other, and with aides present, in a male/female environment.

FWIW, the only time I'd watch porn with a guy is in a committed relationship, keeping it personal. NO WAY would a guy, even in that kind of relationship, be allowed to speak for me as to reaction.

This story actually increases the "yuck" factor about Cruz. And I didn't think that was possible.

55 posted on 04/14/2016 11:45:12 AM PDT by grania
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]


To: grania

Obviously, you did not read the article.

But can trumpers read? Or do they just choose not to.

It was about a case before the court.


83 posted on 04/14/2016 2:10:02 PM PDT by altura (Cruz for our country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies ]

To: grania
For starters, Cruz has no business speaking for Sandra Day O'Conner about her reaction to porn.

It would be one thing if super-cougar Sandra Day O'Connor had picked up young daddy Cruz for a drunken one-night stand.

But that's not what happened. This story is legitimate news because it discloses how SCOTUS deliberates on such cases. And we should thank Cruz for it. Because we are subject to the jurisdiction of SCOTUS. And it is our right to know!

114 posted on 04/14/2016 11:34:25 PM PDT by cynwoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | 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