Skip to comments.
Charley Reese on the "National Disgrace"
King Features Syndicate, Inc. ^
| 04-08-05
| Reese, Charley
Posted on 04/08/2005 10:29:19 AM PDT by Theodore R.
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-74 next last
To: anniegetyourgun
Bingo.
21
posted on
04/08/2005 10:46:46 AM PDT
by
Diogenesis
("If you mess with one of us, you mess with all of us")
To: wrathof59
What happened to Charley, 15 years ago he was a sensible creature, and now he's really gone off the deep-end. Yes, he was very sensible when he was still writing for The Orlando Sentinel. Since then, your guess would be as good as mine.
22
posted on
04/08/2005 10:46:50 AM PDT
by
rdb3
(To the world, you're one person. To one person, you may be the world.)
To: Theodore R.
We are our brains = we are only our brains, so anything goes.
23
posted on
04/08/2005 10:48:16 AM PDT
by
jwalburg
(Nothing opens the closed minds of academic administrators like a pocketbook snapping shut - Williams)
To: Theodore R.
They provided a national megaphone for fanatics to make wild and unsubstantiated and, in some cases, previously discredited allegations about Michael Schiavo and Florida Circuit Judge George Greer Terri's parents and friends, doctors who disagreed with the view of the court appointed doctors, nurses who took care of Terri, and anyone who dares to believe that starving someone to death is immoral.
24
posted on
04/08/2005 10:48:26 AM PDT
by
MEGoody
(Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
To: mikeus_maximus
Exactly right...Reese is 100% incorrect about what constitutes hearsay
where was the editor on this article?
25
posted on
04/08/2005 10:50:29 AM PDT
by
Irontank
(Every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under)
To: Monterrosa-24
Well said and excellent post.
26
posted on
04/08/2005 10:51:34 AM PDT
by
yellowdoghunter
(The Terri issue is legally complicated, but not the moral issue. I want to be on the side of life.)
To: Miss Marple
I firmly believe Charley Reese has something medically wrong with him. LOL. At least he's come out in a way that shows where his heart and mind are. I give him credit for that.
BTW, have you seen the Mae Magouirk case? Another family squabble with life on the line.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1379537/posts <-- Link
27
posted on
04/08/2005 10:52:04 AM PDT
by
Cboldt
To: Monterrosa-24
Most of us still think that there is a spiritual value to human life that goes beyond intellectual capacity.Very well said, Monterrosa.
To: Theodore R.
National polls have shown that an overwhelming majority of Americans, including those who describe themselves as evangelicals, support the decision to remove the feeding tubeI suppose he is referring to the ABC poll. What an a$$.
29
posted on
04/08/2005 10:52:55 AM PDT
by
Digger
To: Miss Marple
When I read the first line of the article, I thought "Wow, Charley Reese took his medication today!"
Two lines later I banished the thought. Silly me, thinking he would point out the disgrace of the MSM's disinformation and slanted reporting, pro-death push-polls and vilification of Christianity.
Apparently the disgrace is a failure to pay proper respect to our government masters in the judicial branch.
30
posted on
04/08/2005 10:53:01 AM PDT
by
thoughtomator
("The Passion of the Opus" - 2 hours of a FReeper being crucified on his own self-pitying thread)
To: Digger
National Disgrace are people like you, Charlie.
31
posted on
04/08/2005 10:53:37 AM PDT
by
Digger
To: rdb3
Is it weird or what that paleoconservatives and Christopher Hitchens-style liberals seem to agree on almost every issue these days?
32
posted on
04/08/2005 10:55:51 AM PDT
by
thoughtomator
("The Passion of the Opus" - 2 hours of a FReeper being crucified on his own self-pitying thread)
To: Theodore R.
Reese does not know what he is talking about when it comes to heresay. He got it dead wrong. He did not consider acts in respons to statements. (ie "what did you do in responst to 'whatever' was said?" or "is what michel doing consistend with 'whatever' was said?".)
Why is the MSM so affraid of this.
By the MSM standards the depressed democrats after the 2004 election should have all gone to hospice because "nobody" would want to live under another Bush administration.
To: thoughtomator
It's not weird at all. It's only logical when you have the same ideological enemies. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, remember?
34
posted on
04/08/2005 11:06:02 AM PDT
by
rdb3
(To the world, you're one person. To one person, you may be the world.)
To: Theodore R.
We are our brains. The rest of our body exists to carry the brain and to obey its instructions. So those with less brainpower are less human, less worthy of life?
To: thoughtomator
Is it weird or what that paleoconservatives and Christopher Hitchens-style liberals seem to agree on almost every issue these days? Very disturbing. I kept checking the sign-up dates for the many FReepers who were rapidly pro-death for Terri Schiavo. Many of them had been here since the early days. It's made me reassess what constitutes "conservative."
To: rdb3
The enemy of my enemy is my friend, remember? Not in the Middle East... there, the enemy of one's enemy is an enemy, round and round ad infinitum.
37
posted on
04/08/2005 11:11:34 AM PDT
by
thoughtomator
("The Passion of the Opus" - 2 hours of a FReeper being crucified on his own self-pitying thread)
To: madprof98
If CERTAIN sexual behavior gets enhanced deference under the law. (medical, special civil rights)
AND
If CERTAIN thoughs get enhanced punshment under the law
THEN
The MSM and the left could easily adopt the USSR concept of political disagreement equals insanity, low quality of life, and Noooooobody would want to live as a conservative, republican and especially a conservatvie or republican who votes that way since society is over 247% liberal.
To: madprof98
I kept checking the same thing, and I was shocked to think that some of those very same people might have been standing next to me cheering on the speakers at the first March for Justice back in 1998.
39
posted on
04/08/2005 11:13:14 AM PDT
by
thoughtomator
("The Passion of the Opus" - 2 hours of a FReeper being crucified on his own self-pitying thread)
To: Irontank
Exactly right...Reese is 100% incorrect about what constitutes hearsay Sorry, but he was 100 percent correct on what constitutes hearsay. a first person tells someone who tells someone else, if the someone else testifies, it is hearsay. Testimony from a person who says they heard it direct from the first person is not hearsay otherwise no evidence would ever stand up in court.
40
posted on
04/08/2005 11:24:08 AM PDT
by
calex59
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-74 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson