1 posted on
01/17/2003 9:58:56 AM PST by
TLBSHOW
To: All
2 posted on
01/17/2003 10:00:39 AM PST by
Support Free Republic
(Your support keeps Free Republic going strong!)
To: TLBSHOW
Uh oh, does this mean more spam and you changing your mind about what to think?
3 posted on
01/17/2003 10:01:16 AM PST by
habs4ever
To: TLBSHOW
So today he's not the best President ever, right?
4 posted on
01/17/2003 10:03:02 AM PST by
Wait4Truth
(I HATE THE MEDIA!)
To: rdb3; Khepera; elwoodp; MAKnight; condolinda; mafree; Trueblackman; FRlurker; Teacher317; ...
Black conservative pingIf you want on (or off) of my black conservative ping list, please let me know via FREEPmail. (And no, you don't have to be black to be on the list!)
Extra warning: this is a high-volume ping list.
6 posted on
01/17/2003 10:03:36 AM PST by
mhking
To: TLBSHOW
Is our President doing this for future votes?
7 posted on
01/17/2003 10:05:21 AM PST by
elephant
To: TLBSHOW
To: TLBSHOW
So, is Ruch an expert on Constitutional law, arguing before the Supreme Court and legal precedents? I take it he has been consulting with his knee-jerk legal experts again and is on a rant.
Bush didn't have to file a brief at all. Rush is NOT a legal expert. I stand with the President on this.
To: TLBSHOW
Bush's position is that racial diversity is good, but only if it is acheived based on merit.
20 posted on
01/17/2003 10:18:30 AM PST by
SunStar
(Democrats Piss Me Off !!)
To: TLBSHOW
Rush's accusations that Bush had abandoned the U of Michigan case were bizarre. He unloaded on Bush-but,did not offer any specifics,other than to trash Bush over and over,based on this apparent sentence in the brief (paraphrase)" racial diversity is a goal in college admissions or enrollment". Huh? What's wrong with that goal? That sentence doesn't say anything about affirmative action or racial quotas. Rush offered nothing substantive,no quotes from the brief ,no interviews with lawyers,other than that sentence taken from a liberal reporter's column.Rush could have gotten someone from Justice to further explain the brief,but as of now,the topic of the brief's wording, has been dropped.If Rush truly wanted to discuss the brief,he should have used someone from Justice as his source,rather than the words of a liberal columnist.Rush acted like Bush had personally authored the brief. I trust that Ted Olson did the right thing. Then Rush announced that he is taking 2 weeks and part of a third week off, to go to the Super Bowl and play in 2 golf tournaments.
To: TLBSHOW
Hmmm. Should I trust Ted Olson or Rush Limbaugh with the solicitor's job?
53 posted on
01/17/2003 11:01:37 AM PST by
Cyber Liberty
(© 2003, Raving Lunatic LLC)
To: TLBSHOW
Does anybody have a link for the briefs yet?
If what is being reported about the briefs on this thread is correct, they are not DOJ's doing. This is somebody at the White House at work issuing orders.
If I understood the article in this morning's Washington Times correctly, DOJ was still hard at work revising the briefs shortly before midnight. Doesn't Bush go to bed early? Would he have been vetting the drafts at all, or did he delegate that task to somebody else?
To: TLBSHOW
Just heard Rush... (on tape-delay)... If true, very disappointing.
To: TLBSHOW
He is not happy and spent the first hafe hour on it and first call had to do with this subject r u series?
Dan
115 posted on
01/17/2003 12:26:34 PM PST by
BibChr
To: TLBSHOW
Rush said, Rush said. Who cares what Rush said? Have you read the brief?
127 posted on
01/17/2003 12:39:49 PM PST by
lawgirl
(FREEP Congress--we need Bush's judicial nominees approved!)
To: All
BUMP
229 posted on
01/18/2003 6:10:53 AM PST by
TLBSHOW
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson