What's new
By:

MN Senate Ruling Deals Coleman Setback

NewHampshire Black Bears said:
It will END, when the HERITAGE FOUNDATION, the RUTHERFORD INSTITUTE, and Richard Mellon Scaife,..............FINALLY realize that they're WASTING money on an LOSER !!!

BUT, in the meantime, let them SPEND and WASTE....SPEND and WASTE, and SPEND and WASTE.

Nothing HURTS a neocon more, than to SPEND MONEY,.............ESPECIALLY when their "ROI" is ZERO !

SUCKERS !!!!
Click to expand...


Do the Demorats and Liberals really need "ANOTHER" comedienne in D.C. ?

Besides, Fraken's funny in a stupid kind of way !

"SUCKERS!"
 
FA Mikey said:
Bears, they meaning the gays had the right to marry based on a supreme court decision. The prop 8 was to take away the rights they had under the California constitution. They didnt go out and try through a ballot measure to get this right, it was another group that fought to take it away.
Click to expand...

A bold clear case of activist Judges exceeding their authority......that's why it went the route.
 
The big MN regret are the people who are sorry they voted for Coleman. His numbers are in the toilet. Its a power play by the GOP and Coleman to deny the people of the state their fair representation in the senate.
 
FA Mikey said:
Although best left for another thread.

Do you mean that silly case where the state Supreme Courts handed down a ruling of equal protection under the law and the religious zealots unable to live with a minority group having a equal standing, created a referendum to take away a fundamental right the supreme court had affirmed they were entitled too?
Click to expand...

Yea Mikey, it always the 'religious Zealots' keeping you down.
Do you have empirical proof or just pulling it out of the orifice?

B) xUT
 
FA Mikey said:
The big MN regret are the people who are sorry they voted for Coleman. His numbers are in the toilet. Its a power play by the GOP and Coleman to deny the people of the state their fair representation in the senate.
Click to expand...

No, it is a legal challenge as the law prescribes......not how the liberals think it should go.

You aware there are more counted votes than ballots cast?

Isn't that odd??
 
I'm not a fan of either Coleman or Franken, but if there was ever a case for holding a do-over election in order to speed things up, this one might be it.

Allow only those who voted in November to re-cast their ballots, and don't allow ACORN, MoveOut.Org or other special interest groups to pad the voter rolls one way or the other... It would probably cost less than the recount & appeals process, and if the anti-Coleman people are correct, Franken will win in a landslide.
 
delldude said:
No, it is a legal challenge as the law prescribes......not how the liberals think it should go.

You aware there are more counted votes than ballots cast?

Isn't that odd??
Click to expand...
I guess they should have flown people in to the state and then pounded down the doors where the recount was taking place and demand the vote NOT be counted. BLAH BLAH BLAH you dont want them counted in one election and you want them counted in another. It would seem the conservatives are more concerned with holding power and position then the actual voting process.
 
FA Mikey said:
I guess they should have flown people in to the state and then pounded down the doors where the recount was taking place and demand the vote NOT be counted. BLAH BLAH BLAH you dont want them counted in one election and you want them counted in another. It would seem the conservatives are more concerned with holding power and position then the actual voting process.
Click to expand...

You kill me Dude.....that's exactly what Franken's people attempted to do.............. :lol:

Tell me of Cris Dodd's denial...I liked that one...........
 
"Tell you what"..................Coleman's "running" to the Supremes, would IMHO, be like cutting his own throat. Here's why.
Because the whole C/F issue is Soooooooooooo complex,..........and that the Supremes said in 2000 that basically it was a "one time deal" etc..etc..etc, that they(the Supremes) would be loathe to hand the REPUGS ANOTHER.."nod".

Sure, you'd get Scalia/Roberts/Alito, and Thomas to "go along"(likewise for Stevens/Ginsburg/Souter and Breyer).......BUT could very well have Kennedy......."tossing one" to the DEMS,..under the disguise of taking the "stink" off of the Supremes, should they 2 for 2, for the Repugs.

Kennedy is not a Hard core conservative................( he's kinda like O' Conner)(Bless her ROE v WADE heart) 🙄
 
Isn't justice supposed to be blind and free of party lines?....

This isn't about throwing either side a bone or following core beliefs, Bears. It's about interpreting the laws in question in a fair and impartial manner.
 
NewHampshire Black Bears said:
It will END, when the HERITAGE FOUNDATION, the RUTHERFORD INSTITUTE, and Richard Mellon Scaife,..............FINALLY realize that they're WASTING money on an LOSER !!!

BUT, in the meantime, let them SPEND and WASTE....SPEND and WASTE, and SPEND and WASTE.

Nothing HURTS a neocon more, than to SPEND MONEY,.............ESPECIALLY when their "ROI" is ZERO !

SUCKERS !!!!
Click to expand...

I would suggest that you pick up a copy of "Liberty & Tyranny" Mark Levin's best seller No. 1 on Amazon and now No. 1 on NYT best sellers lists. Before you start throwing around the word "neocon", you might want to learn what "neocon" really means. How about paleoconservatism, social conservatism and libertarianism. I'll let you read Levin's book to learn what conservatism really means rather than what the MSM, Moveon.org and Daily Kos think that it is. Who knows, you might find out you are really a conservative after all. Perhaps if you re-read the Declaration of Independence and really try to understand what our Founding Fathers meant when they created the document. The Conservative believes in the dignity of the individual and we as human beings have a right to live, live freely, and pursue that which motivates us not because man or some government says so.
 
PineyBob said:
Being that I am one I'm thinking the answer might be no.

I'm just not one of those Do as I say not as I do Christians. Jerry Falwell was neither moral nor did he speak for the majority.
Click to expand...

I agree somewhat, as I have been known to pull a smackdown on some of the more self righteous , indignant and pious Christians myself. :shock:

Maybe we should start a new thread on the subject and discuss our theologies?

B) xUT
 
eolesen said:
Isn't justice supposed to be blind and free of party lines?....

This isn't about throwing either side a bone or following core beliefs, Bears. It's about interpreting the laws in question in a fair and impartial manner.
Click to expand...

Demorats and Liberals Creedo " Laws were made to be broken!"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top