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

To: PhiKapMom
Actually, that was more coherent an argument than I was expecting. But it is an argument to vote AGAINST the nominee, not to prevent a vote.
19 posted on 02/26/2003 8:42:32 AM PST by Sloth (I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Sloth
They have to prevent the vote. They'd lose a vote on the floor and she knows it. Gutless wench.
23 posted on 02/26/2003 8:44:10 AM PST by mewzilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

To: Sloth
I agree-- that was more thoughtful than I expected; during HER administration the Republicans engaged in judicial nomination gamesmanship, and now she turns about using their lawsuit and Scalia's opinion as a sword. Interesting. But why devolve into the irrelevant "foster child" theme? Is she still babbling on about "the children"?

RD
85 posted on 02/26/2003 10:34:32 AM PST by reagandemocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | 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