posted on 04/26/2003 10:33:36 AM PDT
If the supreme court decides this case wrong, we'll have gay marriage nationwide within a year, a la Roe v. Wade.
To: Kay Soze
Poll Freeped and article posted.
posted on 04/26/2003 10:39:03 AM PDT
posted on 04/26/2003 10:45:12 AM PDT
by Kay Soze
(For every 100 Osamas created in the fight on terrorism - we shall simply elect one more "W")
President Bush's support for Santorum contrasted sharply with his response to the firestorm that erupted after Republican Mississippi Sen. Trent Lott praised Strom Thurmond's 1948 segregationist presidential campaign.
Night and day........ whether noted or not I guess comparisons are legit .
posted on 04/26/2003 10:55:32 AM PDT
(.......Beware of Idiots bearing gifts........)
President Bush's support for Santorum contrasted sharply
The truth is likely that Bush wishes Santorum had kept his mouth shut.
For Bush to have to remind everyone that Santorum was "inclusive" indicates that there may have been some doubt.
posted on 04/26/2003 10:58:49 AM PDT
I still don't get it. If people are demanding that Santorum resign because of something he didn't say, why not also demand the resignations of people like Feinstein, Boxer, Schumer, Clinton, et al, for things they haven't said?
...The only thing that upset them was the delay in the White House's defense of Santorum...Philadelphia mayor John Street, gearing up for his reelection bid this fall, last night claimed his likely 'pub opponent Sam Katz was friends with Santorum - "they're in the same political family" - and Katz in effect disowned Santorum - "he shouldn't talk about who my friends are when he knows nothing about it" - at least Bush finally came out in support - maybe he learned from the Lott fiasco that running away from the problem doesn't make it go away.....
The White House finally threw Sen. Rick Santorum a life raft.
Good news. He's being lynched by the media and by the extreme, radical, crazy, loony, and very dangerous, lefties. Hopefully he'll come out of this stronger than ever.
posted on 04/26/2003 12:12:00 PM PDT
(This post is over.)
Santorum claimed that once the courts admit they have no ability to restrict certain kinds of relationships, it creates the precedent to allow other forms of relationships (ie: polygamy) that most of America is against. That's not controversy-worthy. Of course, liberal reporters are doing their best to take Santorum down...but I'm guessing they'll fail this time.
Weasel wording by W. That makes it sound like his support is onditional on Snatorum being "inclusive" of perverts. Santorum is being given another chance to show how "tolerant" of perversion he is. Should he stick to his guns, the knife will come from the backside.
posted on 04/26/2003 1:49:15 PM PDT
Fleischer said Bush ''believes the senator is an inclusive man.''
What else is he going to say? That Santorum likes to exclude people?
It's sad that Santorum doesn't have the political grace to extract himself from the mess he's gotten himself into.
All he has to say is that he doesn't believe in having the Govt barging into people's bedrooms and arresting them for homosexuality or adultery.
Santorum's shown extremely poor judgement in his handling of this controversy.
posted on 04/26/2003 9:48:53 PM PDT
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson