Posted on 05/30/2004 8:54:37 PM PDT by Badray
your attempts to belittle me are a miserable failure.
old enough to remember holding my sobbing girlfriend, after she had what would have been my first child sucked out of her.
abortion is murder and your support of Specter is your abortion if he assumes the chair of the SJC.
there are you happy now ?
your attempts to belittle me are a miserable failure.
old enough to remember holding my sobbing girlfriend, after she had what would have been my first child sucked out of her.
abortion is murder and your support of Specter is your abortion if he assumes the chair of the SJC.
there are you happy now ?
that was in 20+ years ago. I'll never forget it and I'll never forgive myself for it. if I am too crude for you, than stop posting to me.
Don't take this personally, but you're an "idiot," you're "dumb," and you're "stupid." It was pointed out that you're vile, as well.
LOL, thanks, I needed a laugh right then.
you support a pro-choice Republican and I am an "idiot" "dumb" "stupid" and "vile, as well"
go figure
As a pro-lifer I'm ashamed to have you fighting at my side.... not because of your history, but because of the way you think it gives you license to be an ass.
I'm a 43yr old white male, I have no ass.
i do apologise for offending you so often. Its just that no one seems to grasp the importance of protecting the SJCC right now! Specter is too liberal and pro-choice for the chairmanship. He will not allow "real"conservative judges on the bench and if the SC has a death or retirement I gaurantee you he will use the roe v wade litmus test and block ANY conservative appointment. that is the root of my vileness, so as a pro-lifer, you should revile Arlen Specter, not vote for him.
The above statement could be applied to your efforts as you campaign for leftist Arlen Specter.
off to work, be back soon
halfway to 500 bump...
another personal attact. Nice language for a "pro-lifer"
The above has governed my voting habits all my life however unaware I was until recently that Buckley said it. But there are exceptions to every rule. Not voting for Specter on this occasion is one of them.
Your level of anger about it is misplaced. Have you expressed such anger against Specter? He is the one who is truly deserving of your ire, NOT Badray.
Hooray for Badray and every other principled patriot! I wish you luck in ousting Spectre.
To everyone else in this thread except nonliberal, nodems, and zeugma; the principles we conservatives hold dear can be espoused by whomever, even a principled conservative dem. I know that sounds like an oxymoron but relatively speaking, some dems are simply more conservative than some republicans. Heck, in the South, dems are usually more conservative than any republican from the Northeast.
I know you will have to hold your nose to vote for a dem, but I have had to hold my nose to vote for some republicans. As nonliberal knows, we Iowans had a good chance at unseating Tom Harkin, but the "party faithful" Republicans blew it and nominated Ganske instead. I knew Ganske couldn't beat Harkin, and told many people before the general election.
Same thing has happened with other chances, such as Bob Dole, for one. Why do republicans keep shooting themselves in the foot? When there is a conservative vs. a "known" but liberal republican in the primary, the party drinks the koolaid rather than taking on the issues in a frontal assault.
As to whether we are better off with a "D" or an "R", let me tell you; my own congress-liberal, Tom Latham(R-IA4), has a worse voting record on the issues (conservative vs. liberal) than neighboring Leonard Boswell(D-IA3).
Do I want Latham to gain power, prestige, seniority, and possibly a senatorship? Heck no! I want him replaced! Senator Grassley, too, for that matter. And when Harkin's seat is up for grabs again, I will once again be supporting Bill Salier for Senate. Just too bad we have no republican primary to challenge Latham this time.
Hang tough, buddy. You're doing the right thing.
Sometimes it's hard to be a conservative first and a Republican second. Sometimes the pubbie cheerleaders can be as abrasive as their dem counterparts and just as shrill and unreasonable. I get the same reaction when I state my refusal to ever vote for a Bush again.
Every warning issued by Thomas Jefferson on political parties was true.
Every warning issued by Thomas Jefferson on political parties was true
Uh Stevie, I believe that you are referencing, a famous farewell speech by one of the Founders of the Constitution, about political parties.
It wasn't Jefferson(Libertarian "hero" who decided to attack isalmic terrorists(Brabary Pirates) contrary to modern Liberatarian opinion), it was Washington.
JMO, you are not a conservative, but a misguided malcontent hack for Hillary flying monkey, Hoeffel.
And it seems that you are beating yourself off on the prospect of Hoeffel(Hillary fly monkey) getting the Senatorial seat in PA.
Seems plausible with a screenname like yours, Designer.
Six years is a long time.
The loss of Senate control during a judicial picking period that will give us two to three new SCOTUS members in addition to numerous other high federal posts would be absolutely devastating!
Talk about throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Yes, Specter cannot be relied on to vote conservatively, nor can several others. His seat is what is important, because the Senate schedule and committee membership is controlled by the party with a majority.
If the dems take the Senate back, the damage could be incalculable. Specter's line of reasoning is now changed a bit. I would assume his voting will reflect what happened in the primary. We can only hope that is the case, but we know the outcome of a democrat in that seat. That fact is certain and unarguable.
Better the devil we know in this case, but in the end it is a matter to be decided by those who are voting.
My 2 cents have been put in the pot on this issue, and I hope you do the right thing.
Thanks Bradray!!!!!!!
So please explain how Joe Hoeffel(Hillary follower) will be better to conservatives(per your reply #313).
You can't and thus silent about Hoeffel.
Your assumption that you know the history of this debate and the participants is misplaced.
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.