Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: msnimje
This is the attitude of a wimp and that is why I voted for George W. Bush, because he was not a wimp.

It is not the attitude of a wimp. It is the attitude of a man with wimps on his flank in the Senate. They wimped out over the nuclear option.

I see you missed that part of Sowell's column.

177 posted on 10/08/2005 5:43:39 AM PDT by dirtboy (Drool overflowed my buffer...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies ]


To: dirtboy
It is not the attitude of a wimp. It is the attitude of a man with wimps on his flank in the Senate. They wimped out over the nuclear option. I see you missed that part of Sowell's column.

I did not miss his point, I adimantly disagree with it.

James Taranto wrote: The GOP has 55 senators, so six of them would have to vote "no" to defeat a nominee. Coincidentally, that is the number of Republicans who voted against Robert Bork in 1987. But liberal Republicans were more numerous then.
Today there are just three GOP liberals, all from New England--Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island and Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine--who seem likely to vote against a too-conservative nominee.
Only one Bush judicial appointee, an Arkansas district judge named Leon Holmes, has ever received a negative vote from any Republican other than the New England trio.
Virtually any nominee other than Judge Holmes, then, seems assured of at least 52 votes.

179 posted on 10/08/2005 5:50:08 AM PDT by msnimje (If you suspect this post might need a sarcasm tag..... it does!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson