I can think of one. . .
Posted on 07/01/2005 7:14:03 AM PDT by SueRae
I thought it would be Renquist first -- do you find the timing programmed especially after the confirmation of Janice Brown?
How would they do an all out war against Brown? I am beginning to wonder about that agreement and if the RATs took the bait. I know that sounds strange because I was deadset against the agreement but it did get some confirmed and what if Janice Brown were nominated now to the SCOTUS?
It MEAN that KaliPornia cannot EVEn put together a state budget and live within it. SO what makes you think that the rest of us in the other 47(- Mass and NY) want to hear ANYTHING that come out of your state.
SUPREME COURT JUSTICE SANDRA DAY O'CONNOR SUBMITS RESIGNATION LETTER TO PRESIDENT BUSH
**Watch FOX News Channel or go to http://foxnews.com for more
8:23 AM time stamp
To put the GOP on notice in the event that they should be so foolish as to appoint a "moderate". It's called self-government - you know, instructing your elected servants what they're supposed to do. Why you would feel threatened by this is beyond me.
cajungirl(no)
LOL quick to "casser la paille" I'll bet your hard for your man to handle. We can expect thing to be extremely divisive because it matters so much. If we social conservatives except less then all (ie Stevens, Kennedy, Souter) then, we feel (with good reason), that we will probably get less then nothing.
He should put Bork on that list just to explode some Dems heads.
They will have to work, just like me.
FOX reporter just said "Of course, this has been a HUGE (Hugh) surprise..." Duh. Just another proof that the media is always asleep. Who didn't think this was possible and wasn't anticipating it?
I don't understand.
Great Americans like Ronald Reagan, Condolezza Rice, and Jim Robinson consider themselves Californians... what does that explain about them?
I was fifty and corrected my post to say what I meant. The social conservatives threaten and know they can bring down any republican. But they are not the only people in this tent.
And your insulting tone is uncalled for.
To replace O'Connor, do you think Bush would be more likely to nominate a woman?
Don't know if anyone has said it yet (450+ posts) but I would put money on Viet Dinh.
I can think of one. . .
SOURCES: SUPREME COURT JUSTICE SANDRA DAY O'CONNOR'S RETIREMENT 'IMMINENT'
**Watch FOX News Channel or go to http://foxnews.com for more
8:05 AM time stamp
We can argue all day, this is true, and I'm sure we want the same decision. But no matter what occurs my point remains the same. Based on Bush's record there is NO reason at this time to doubt his intentions.
He can always fail that record, but based on that record benefit of the doubt can only fairly fall to 43 at this time.
How extreme.
Leave Scalia with Thomas and we'll call it a deal.
Rudman pushed Souter, but I believe Sununu told Bush 41 that he personally thought Souter was ok. Is that not correct?
>>What's GWB going to do the rest of the weekend?
"Depose Hugo Chavez" gets my vote.
I think it was both -- do know that his son, GW, was opposed to that nomination and why you saw Rudman not be fully on board with Bush 43.
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.