| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 07/19/2005 5:18:23 PM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
new thread http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1446387/posts |
Posted on 07/19/2005 9:23:04 AM PDT by Howlin
Edited on 07/19/2005 5:12:12 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
TICK TOCK...............
Word gets around. I know she's dumb as rocks, but why would she go on a rant without knowing (or having some relative certainty) who it is?
I don't know anymore than you do, but given the rumors floating around...
But the untold story of the 2004 election, according to national religious leaders and grass-roots activists, is that evangelical Christian groups were often more aggressive and sometimes better organized on the ground than the Bush campaign. The White House struggled to stay abreast of the Christian right and consulted with the movement's leaders in weekly conference calls. But in many respects, Christian activists led the charge that GOP operatives followed and capitalized upon.
In dozens of interviews since the election, grass-roots activists in Ohio, Michigan and Florida credited President Bush's chief political adviser, Karl Rove, with setting a clear goal that became a mantra among conservatives: To win, Bush had to draw 4 million more evangelicals to the polls than he did in 2000. But they also described a mobilization of evangelical Protestants and conservative Roman Catholics that took off under its own power. Care to tell any more lies, Howlin?
I think that is why he did not say anything about Gonzales for so long and when he did, he defended him.....he enjoyed seeing us freak out. I don't blame the guy. I would probably do some of the same stuff if I was president just to freak out folks for a little bit.
yup , left the bolsheviks go nuts , they can do all the "over the top Belushi-like" hyperbole contortions they wish , it'll be entertaining
That's FELCHER!
That's because I'm afraid Supreme Court Justices have become tantamount to American popes, and I think that's wrong.
It's gotta be a woman. Just imagine how indignant the folks over at NOW would be if it were another white male.
FYI..CNN's congressioal correspondent Ed Henry just said that many GOP senators have privately said that Clement is NOT the finalist..that it is Patricia Owen..FWIW
Nope.
Did Clinton once fail to move the court to the left as far as he could? Why in world would you tolerate Bush not keeping his promise to move it to the right with Scalia-like justices?
Not only is he not going to appoint a conservative, it is likely that he is going to appoint someone who will not only support Roe, but perform abortions right on the bench!
And also put us in prison camps.
OS: I'd like background on her too (preferably w/key decisions), if you've got it.
But, I don't need a picture of her. Not sure why I'd need one.
Just don't push the red button....
I don't mind the President doing it his way. I trust him. He has not let me down yet.
It could be ... or it could be neither Edith's ... *L*
Patricia Owen.....wow!
Bush will keep his promise and motivate his base if he nominates Edith Hollan Jones. Why in the world shouldn't we expect someone that we KNOW is a Scalia-like originalist?
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.