Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
That is this week's Romney. You never know what Romney will show up.
Yes, Scalia is really moderate; so is Thomas. Fail.
I can't wait until the day Obama replaces Scalia with a non ideologue. Suh-weet!
Fail? Go ahead and name a moderate Justice that was named by a Democrat.
There haven't been many since the GOP has controlled the White House for so many years. That will change soon....can't wait!
I don't read many of your posts. I stick to interesting or intelligent commentary.I'm not a Republican, I'm a libertarian, and with the amount of posting you must know that by now.
Given the number of my posts that you respond to, it's an interesting admission that you didn't read them. Given the shallowness of your responses, it's not surprising, but I wasn't thinking you'd admit it.
You're just not smart enough to know the difference.
And I'm very vocal about disagreeing with Republicans on the war on terror, abortion, the war on drugs, ...
As for the wager, I don't make stupid bets, but I will bet youthe following:
if you win, I'll put in my sig: candycorn was right and I was wrong, Obama won
if I win you don't have to do anything, I don't really care.
Do we have a bet?
With those stipulations sure... How long you going to leave it up for?
Inauguration day
Fail? Go ahead and name a moderate Justice that was named by a Democrat.
There haven't been many since the GOP has controlled the White House for so many years. That will change soon....can't wait!
You're kidding, right? The White House has been controlled by Democrats for the past four years and two Justices were appointed. Were either of them moderates? Bill Clinton was in the White House for eight years. Did HE appoint any moderate Justices?
The truth of the matter is that the GOP has a history of appointing moderates to the Court whereas the Democrats have a history of appointing card carrying liberals to the Court.
I stick to interesting or intelligent commentary.
you might want to try posting some on occasion.
There haven't been many since the GOP has controlled the White House for so many years. That will change soon....can't wait!
You're kidding, right? The White House has been controlled by Democrats for the past four years and two Justices were appointed. Were either of them moderates? Bill Clinton was in the White House for eight years. Did HE appoint any moderate Justices?
The truth of the matter is that the GOP has a history of appointing moderates to the Court whereas the Democrats have a history of appointing card carrying liberals to the Court.
Just because you're in office doesn't mean you get to appoint justices. Getting rid of Scalia will be a very welcome thing since Obama's choice will be 180 degrees opposite of him.
You're kidding, right? The White House has been controlled by Democrats for the past four years and two Justices were appointed. Were either of them moderates? Bill Clinton was in the White House for eight years. Did HE appoint any moderate Justices?
The truth of the matter is that the GOP has a history of appointing moderates to the Court whereas the Democrats have a history of appointing card carrying liberals to the Court.
Just because you're in office doesn't mean you get to appoint justices. Getting rid of Scalia will be a very welcome thing since Obama's choice will be 180 degrees opposite of him.
You amuse me, Candy...I point out the fact that it's the Democrats that are the ones who ALWAYS nominate ideologues to the Supreme Court while Republicans are the ones who have nominated the scant few "moderates" we have and you come up with excuse after excuse for why Democrats never DO nominate moderates.
Just admit it...you hate the idea of a moderate like Romney being able to nominate someone to the Supreme Court but you LOVE the idea of a far left Barack Obama packing that court with far left judges.
Double standard much?
In all seriousness, I don't read a lot of posts by ideologues. Flopper was the most interesting poster here along with RW and a few others. Seriously, when--for example-- Crusader Frank, Gasbag or Conservarag post something, its almost a sure bet it will be slanted, unfair, and inaccurate. That goes for a great many more than those 3 (Bripat comes to mind) but again in all seriousness; why waste my time other than to point out the incorrectness of the post?
I can admit that Obama has lied, made serious mistakes, has been a good president, not great, and lost the debate last week. Few, if any, who are conservatives can admit that Romney has made mistake after mistake, that the chair stunt was stupid, and that he's flip flopped yet again when he's now in favor of regulation, will not sponsor abortion legislation, etc...
I guess it's anything to win and you can't govern if you don't win but it would seem that you would deman at least a modicum of consistency from your candidate. In the next debate he may say that he was the manager for Aerosmith and was the original author of 50 Shades of Grey and you guys will be here with some made up fact to support the claims.
You're kidding, right? The White House has been controlled by Democrats for the past four years and two Justices were appointed. Were either of them moderates? Bill Clinton was in the White House for eight years. Did HE appoint any moderate Justices?
The truth of the matter is that the GOP has a history of appointing moderates to the Court whereas the Democrats have a history of appointing card carrying liberals to the Court.
Just because you're in office doesn't mean you get to appoint justices. Getting rid of Scalia will be a very welcome thing since Obama's choice will be 180 degrees opposite of him.
You amuse me, Candy...I point out the fact that it's the Democrats that are the ones who ALWAYS nominate ideologues to the Supreme Court while Republicans are the ones who have nominated the scant few "moderates" we have and you come up with excuse after excuse for why Democrats never DO nominate moderates.
Just admit it...you hate the idea of a moderate like Romney being able to nominate someone to the Supreme Court but you LOVE the idea of a far left Barack Obama packing that court with far left judges.
Double standard much?
Just because you're in office doesn't mean you get to appoint justices. Getting rid of Scalia will be a very welcome thing since Obama's choice will be 180 degrees opposite of him.
You amuse me, Candy...I point out the fact that it's the Democrats that are the ones who ALWAYS nominate ideologues to the Supreme Court while Republicans are the ones who have nominated the scant few "moderates" we have and you come up with excuse after excuse for why Democrats never DO nominate moderates.
Just admit it...you hate the idea of a moderate like Romney being able to nominate someone to the Supreme Court but you LOVE the idea of a far left Barack Obama packing that court with far left judges.
Double standard much?
Nothing to admit; I started 2 threads about why I don't want Romney appointing judges; he is on record as wanting Roe overturned. If you don't believe me; check his website.
The only ones who can overturn Roe is the Supreme Court whose which members he may and likely will have power to appoint if elected.
There is nothing to admit; I'm always happy to reference my previous statements on the topic.
In all seriousness, I don't read a lot of posts by ideologues. Flopper was the most interesting poster here along with RW and a few others. Seriously, when--for example-- Crusader Frank, Gasbag or Conservarag post something, its almost a sure bet it will be slanted, unfair, and inaccurate. That goes for a great many more than those 3 (Bripat comes to mind) but again in all seriousness; why waste my time other than to point out the incorrectness of the post?
I can admit that Obama has lied, made serious mistakes, has been a good president, not great, and lost the debate last week. Few, if any, who are conservatives can admit that Romney has made mistake after mistake, that the chair stunt was stupid, and that he's flip flopped yet again when he's now in favor of regulation, will not sponsor abortion legislation, etc...
I guess it's anything to win and you can't govern if you don't win but it would seem that you would demand at least a modicum of consistency from your candidate. In the next debate he may say that he was the manager for Aerosmith and was the original author of 50 Shades of Grey and you guys will be here with some made up fact to support the claims.
You are so full of it
You amuse me, Candy...I point out the fact that it's the Democrats that are the ones who ALWAYS nominate ideologues to the Supreme Court while Republicans are the ones who have nominated the scant few "moderates" we have and you come up with excuse after excuse for why Democrats never DO nominate moderates.
Just admit it...you hate the idea of a moderate like Romney being able to nominate someone to the Supreme Court but you LOVE the idea of a far left Barack Obama packing that court with far left judges.
Double standard much?
Nothing to admit; I started 2 threads about why I don't want Romney appointing judges; he is on record as wanting Roe overturned. If you don't believe me; check his website.
The only ones who can overturn Roe is the Supreme Court whose which members he may and likely will have power to appoint if elected.
There is nothing to admit; I'm always happy to reference my previous statements on the topic.
What's obvious is that no Democrat has appointed a moderate in decades! It's the Republicans that have appointed those. One more example of how you folks on the far left are always accusing "us" of being "extreme" when in fact it's YOU that appoint far left ideologues every chance you get.
The reason you can't name a moderate appointed by a Democrat is that THEY DON'T EXIST!!!!
What's obvious is that no Democrat has appointed a moderate in decades! It's the Republicans that have appointed those. One more example of how you folks on the far left are always accusing "us" of being "extreme" when in fact it's YOU that appoint far left ideologues every chance you get.
The reason you can't name a moderate appointed by a Democrat is that THEY DON'T EXIST!!!!
Scalia, Alito, Thomas.
You are just a lying fuck, Oldstyle.
What's obvious is that no Democrat has appointed a moderate in decades! It's the Republicans that have appointed those. One more example of how you folks on the far left are always accusing "us" of being "extreme" when in fact it's YOU that appoint far left ideologues every chance you get.
The reason you can't name a moderate appointed by a Democrat is that THEY DON'T EXIST!!!!
Ummm . . . actually, Gramps, you are simply being a homer. For real, squeal, Alito and Thomas and Scalia are ideologues. That's the point.
So get over it, hmmm.
Nothing to admit; I started 2 threads about why I don't want Romney appointing judges; he is on record as wanting Roe overturned. If you don't believe me; check his website.
The only ones who can overturn Roe is the Supreme Court whose which members he may and likely will have power to appoint if elected.
There is nothing to admit; I'm always happy to reference my previous statements on the topic.
What's obvious is that no Democrat has appointed a moderate in decades! It's the Republicans that have appointed those. One more example of how you folks on the far left are always accusing "us" of being "extreme" when in fact it's YOU that appoint far left ideologues every chance you get.
The reason you can't name a moderate appointed by a Democrat is that THEY DON'T EXIST!!!!
What justices are you considering "moderate"?
Scalia, Alito, Thomas.
You are just a lying fuck, Oldstyle.
What's obvious is that no Democrat has appointed a moderate in decades! It's the Republicans that have appointed those. One more example of how you folks on the far left are always accusing "us" of being "extreme" when in fact it's YOU that appoint far left ideologues every chance you get.
The reason you can't name a moderate appointed by a Democrat is that THEY DON'T EXIST!!!!
Scalia, Alito, Thomas.
You are just a lying fuck, Oldstyle.
What's obvious is that no Democrat has appointed a moderate in decades! It's the Republicans that have appointed those. One more example of how you folks on the far left are always accusing "us" of being "extreme" when in fact it's YOU that appoint far left ideologues every chance you get.
The reason you can't name a moderate appointed by a Democrat is that THEY DON'T EXIST!!!!
Try to keep up, Jake...
I didn't say that Republicans hadn't named any far right Justices...I simply pointed out that Republicans are the only ones that named Justices that were moderates. How that makes me a "lying fuck", you'll have to explain.
Now, you modify it as ou should have in the beginning.
Balance in your accusations, boy, balance.
This is better.
Scalia, Alito, Thomas.
You are just a lying fuck, Oldstyle.
Try to keep up, Jake...
I didn't say that Republicans hadn't named any far right Justices...I simply pointed out that Republicans are the only ones that named Justices that were moderates. How that makes me a "lying fuck", you'll have to explain.
