1
   

Talk about obstruction.

 
 
Reply Mon 30 Jul, 2007 07:05 am
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 726 • Replies: 5
No top replies

 
Pinochet73
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Jul, 2007 09:30 am
@Drnaline,
Drnaline;28391 wrote:


Schumer is a scoundrel, working his butt off, again, to hurt America. GW has appointed nothing but top-quality Justices. I didn't support his effort to appoint the chick from Texas, though. I thought that was ill-advised, but the others are top-flight. GO, BUSH, GO!!!!!!:thumbup: Very Happy Very Happy :thumbup:
aaronssongs
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Jul, 2007 11:33 am
@Pinochet73,
Pinochet73;28419 wrote:
Schumer is a scoundrel, working his butt off, again, to hurt America. GW has appointed nothing but top-quality Justices. I didn't support his effort to appoint the chick from Texas, though. I thought that was ill-advised, but the others are top-flight. GO, BUSH, GO!!!!!!:thumbup: Very Happy Very Happy :thumbup:


Bush appointed what amounted to ideological Neanderthals...we don't need to turn time back to Jim Crow, and pre-civil rights era...we need to be progressive in our thinking and our legislation, that insures the rights of all, including those considered, "the other"....and preserve a woman's right to choose....now, if you want to legislate concerning your own sexual organs, that's one thing...but where does a man get off telling a woman what she can or cannot do with her own body? Why don't you get a mandatory vasectomy, despite the fact that you're probably shooting blanks, anyway...but, just go ahead and get one for good measure....Don't feel so good , being told what to do, do it?
Ever heard of reciprocity...if not...pull out a dictionary, and don't be troubled by the big words.....LOL
aaronssongs
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Jul, 2007 11:36 am
@Drnaline,
Schumer to fight new Bush high court picks,
and well, he should....how dare the court be slanted, precipitously, to the right.
0 Replies
 
Pinochet73
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Jul, 2007 02:43 pm
@aaronssongs,
aaronssongs;28471 wrote:
Bush appointed what amounted to ideological Neanderthals...we don't need to turn time back to Jim Crow, and pre-civil rights era...we need to be progressive in our thinking and our legislation, that insures the rights of all, including those considered, "the other"....and preserve a woman's right to choose....now, if you want to legislate concerning your own sexual organs, that's one thing...but where does a man get off telling a woman what she can or cannot do with her own body? Why don't you get a mandatory vasectomy, despite the fact that you're probably shooting blanks, anyway...but, just go ahead and get one for good measure....Don't feel so good , being told what to do, do it?
Ever heard of reciprocity...if not...pull out a dictionary, and don't be troubled by the big words.....LOL



No worries. I'm not troubled by your total lack of punctuation (ha, ha), or Scooby's, for that matter. I figure if I can make sense out your frantic scribbling and his Scottish gibber-jabber, I can decipher just about anything. :wave2: Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing :wave2:
0 Replies
 
Curmudgeon
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2007 12:15 am
@Drnaline,
What's new about the opposition party attempting to stop a President's nominations to the Supreme Court? This is business as usual, and both sides have always done it. BIG DEAL!
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Talk about obstruction.
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/09/2025 at 04:58:42