Posted on 09/03/2005 8:07:24 PM PDT by kcvl
Quite the reverse will be true.
Yep, I'd appoint Janice Rogers Brown Chief Justice.
Whether they get it right or not, the arrogance and asburdity of making such a comparison, no matter which side they're on, is reprehesible.
the funny thing is the RATS think it's Bush that bungled NO and that even republicans hate Bush now ! ROFL !
Complete denial.
Prayers.....
Exactly right.
"You can't even give Dershowitz credit for thinking up the accusation of Rehnquist being an "activist." It's just one of the Democrat talking points that Leahy, Schumer, Kennedy, etc. have all been spewing since S.D. O'Connor announced her retirement. I assume they think they can confuse people by reversing the meaning and switching the definition of an "activist judge" with a "constitutionalist.""
That type of misdirection and rhetorical play is classic Dem/Marxist propaganda... Typical deconstructionist claptrap.
Another one is that they claim they are the party of Jefferson.... which is true... in NAME ONLY, because they are antithetical to everything he stood for.
When you hear a Dem use that line, remind them that they are the party founded by a slaveholder, and we are the party which was rescued and rebuilt by the guy who freed the slaves. :)
amen
meekie, hello!!
babbah, can you ping me to the FReep pics, too??
oh, but if bush is impeached, won't dick cheney be president? the dems won't impeach bush.
They'll impeach everyone in succession until it's President Byrd (*shriek!*)
ping
Coming up.
Exit polling organizatoins do not keep precinct pollers on the staff year round. After all they only work 2 days and evenings a year.. primary and general election days is it.
The way exit polling staff are acquired is the company puts adds in the local papers for a one day job. They then interveiw and hire the best people from those that show up. Actually it is about a 4 day a year job.. They get a days training before the election on how to exit poll. What someone or some organization must have done is send ringers to the cattle call for exit pollsters. The ringers people got hired. They had to turn in fake results.
Here is how it worked every year until 2004. The person who polled the voters as they left the polling place was charged with getting the actual numbers from that precinct and sending them to the central office. Lets say they had 50 bellwether precincts in Florida. Perhaps 10 or 15 would have been chosen because they tend to get counted early. Voters news service, when they were doing the exit polls told the board of elections people which precincts they were exit polling.. So they would get counted by the board of elections first.
When the local exit poller calls in the actual votes results from the precints that were exit polled the networks compared the actual votes in the bellwether pricints to the exit poll results for those precincts. If they were in close agreement they would assume that all the precints in the state were accurate and call the state based on the exit poll results.
IN 2000 the so called actual numbers fed to the networks and the exit polls sent to the network agreed. The problem was the actual vote numbers fed to the networks and the numbers from the boards of elections were quite different.
Isn't it funny a whole bunch of precincts exit polls were wrong and then the so called actual results were wrong in the same way. That is a precint that exit polled 55 to 45 for gore... had actual numbers called in to the networks that were 55 to 45 for Gore. However the board of electinons actual count was 50.5 to 49.5 for Bush..
If the exit polls for a precinct were 55 to 45 Gore and the actual vote for the precinst 50.5 to 49.5 Bush.. the networks would not have dared to call Florida for Gore.
They said there were computer errors. But would every error favor Gore and penalize Bush to match the called in exit polls?
That is just beyond belief.
The only believable explanation is those who were exit polling and those that were calling in the actual results to the networks were sending made up figures for both numbers. And they made those made up numbers match.
They tried it again in 2002 with more care used in selecting the precinct workers... but the results were the same. The media held back until they got the real numbers from the boards of elections directly.
In 2004 they had people call the boards of elections for the actual results and this time the exit polls and the actual results did not agree at all.
It is obvious that the media never revealed what actually took place. I could not imagine any good reporter with network clout not being able to get to the bottom of the situation. I think the networks know.. I also thing they have no motivation to report what actually happened.
Good morning! Incredible news to wake up to. The Left will be in a tizzy for the next 3 years!
Dear Common Tator,
I haven't argued that the lamestream media are founts of unbiased knowledge and eternal wisdom.
However, neither did Mr. Bush win in a landslide in either 2000 or 2004. He didn't begin his second term with the political capital of, say, Ronald Reagan in 1985. He managed a real, competent, if not quite entirely comfortable victory in 2004, but nothing like the mind-blowing achievement of Mr. Reagan in 1984.
But Supreme Court nominations aren't exactly election battles. If they were, Justice Bork would have been the deciding vote against the city of New London, CT in the last term. The fact is that even very popular presidents can lose on their Supreme Court nominations. My guess is that it's because the opposition can try (and perhaps succeed) to separate the popular president from the nominee.
However, President Bush doesn't have quite the political capital that President Reagan had, and unfortunately, whatever the actual facts of the situation, President Bush is currently leaking some of the political capital that he has as a result of Iraq and Hurricane Katrina. And $3.50 per gallon gasoline. And sporadic gasoline shortages here and there.
As well, the task before him would be a difficult one even if he currently were currently flying high in public opinion. Unfortunately, the media HAVE done a good job of painting truly conservative judicial nominees in very poor lights, and the Party of Satan HAS NOT really suffered much (if at all) for harming these nominations.
The liberals and the media are going to adopt a campaign of, "One for you, one for us." At least, that's my theory. "You barbarian conservatives get John Roberts, but we civilized progressives get a 'moderate.'"
And if President Bush nominates a true conservative, the line of attack will be that it's all quite unfair.
Now, mind you, it won't quite matter whether their position gains majority support. It will only matter whether their position gains the overwhelming support of traditional Party of Satan constituencies. If it does, then the 45 recalcitrants can continue to be recalcitrant.
As well, a few of the squishy RINOs may take off for the hills, too.
It will be quite a battle.
With all that is on his plate, Mr. Bush may not want to take on this battle. And perhaps he will go squishy on us and nominate another servant of Satan Souter.
Mr. Bush sometimes stands strong, and sometimes goes limp. Sometimes he holds to principle, sometimes he doesn't.
He's a politician. He's better for what I believe and think is good for our country than, say, John Kerry, or Al Gore, or Hillary Clinton, but he's just a politician.
So, I will pray that he does what is right, not what is expedient. I will pray that he fights with all his strength for an excellent, conservative nominee. A nominee who understands that the right to life for ALL human beings undergirds our constitutional system. I will pray that this nominee will prevail and be confirmed, and will lead the court from imposing tyrannically the culture of death on my country to re-affirming the fundamental human rights that serve as the foundation of our national identity.
And, I don't believe that it will be a walk in the park.
sitetest
I just wake up to this news. :(
I tried to sleep knowing this news.
He was a great Chief Justice and a GOOD, GOOD man.
Not sure. I was eleven when he was confirmed.
It will last longer that three years. LOL!
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.