Bush: Abortion Won't Decide Court Nominee
By DEB RIECHMANN
Associated Press Writer
COPENHAGEN, Denmark (AP) -- President Bush, shadowed in Europe by a pressing concern back in Washington, said Wednesday he will not select a Supreme Court nominee based on his or her views on abortion or other hot-button political issues.
He urged senators to act "in a dignified way" in what is expected to be a contentious battle over confirming his first nominee to the nation's highest court.
http://ap.washingtontimes.com/dynamic/stor...MS&SECTION=HOME
Full Version: Bush not playing politics with this nomination
Made me laugh.
If you'll recall from the presidential debates, it was clearly Kerry who had the infamous 'litmous test' for judges. He wouldn't pick a judge who might overturn Roe v. Wade or who would end affirmative action.
Bush, on the other hand, wants an originalist. Another Scalia would make me weep sweet tears of joy.
Bush, on the other hand, wants an originalist. Another Scalia would make me weep sweet tears of joy.
You lie.
Another couple of Scalias and Roe v Wade is toast.
Another couple of Scalias and Roe v Wade is toast.
QUOTE (Thaiquila @ Jul 7 2005, 12:29 AM)
Made me laugh.
So you were looking in a mirror then?
QUOTE (dkward2 @ Jul 7 2005, 01:27 AM)
If you'll recall from the presidential debates, it was clearly Kerry who had the infamous 'litmous test' for judges. He wouldn't pick a judge who might overturn Roe v. Wade or who would end affirmative action.
Bush, on the other hand, wants an originalist. Another Scalia would make me weep sweet tears of joy.
Bush, on the other hand, wants an originalist. Another Scalia would make me weep sweet tears of joy.
So true.
dkward wrote:
Exactly true. But TQ and other leftists don't let the truth phase them. It's ok for them to have a litmus test, but conservatives had better not have any expectations contrary to the moral highness of liberals.
Two-faced double standard, don't you think, TQ?
QUOTE
If you'll recall from the presidential debates, it was clearly Kerry who had the infamous 'litmous test' for judges. He wouldn't pick a judge who might overturn Roe v. Wade or who would end affirmative action.
Bush, on the other hand, wants an originalist. Another Scalia would make me weep sweet tears of joy.
Bush, on the other hand, wants an originalist. Another Scalia would make me weep sweet tears of joy.
Exactly true. But TQ and other leftists don't let the truth phase them. It's ok for them to have a litmus test, but conservatives had better not have any expectations contrary to the moral highness of liberals.
Two-faced double standard, don't you think, TQ?
Whatever you want to call it, the struggle to stop the radical right wing conservative Xian fundamentalists to bring the US back in time to before FDR is the good fight, the truly patriotic fight.
We are fighting evil within.
Losing now and losing badly but ...
We are fighting evil within.
Losing now and losing badly but ...
QUOTE (Thaiquila @ Jul 7 2005, 06:34 PM)
Whatever you want to call it, the struggle to stop the radical right wing conservative Xian fundamentalists to bring the US back in time to before FDR is the good fight, the truly patriotic fight.
We are fighting evil within.
Losing now and losing badly but ...
We are fighting evil within.
Losing now and losing badly but ...
Overruling Roe v Wade would take us back in time to a stuation that existed before 1973. Some States with legal abortions, some without. Back then I believe about 2/3rds of the states outlawed abortions, 1/3rd did not. I would suspect in 2005, no more than 4 or five states would do so. MARK
Perhaps, but there is more than Roe v Wade.
There are civil rights, gay rights, affirmative action, women's rights, separation of church and state, etc.
There are civil rights, gay rights, affirmative action, women's rights, separation of church and state, etc.
They would "bring the US back in time to before" the Warren Berger court and its decisions of the 70s, not back in time before FDR. MARK
QUOTE (Thaiquila @ Jul 7 2005, 06:56 PM)
Perhaps, but there is more than Roe v Wade.
There are civil rights, gay rights, affirmative action, women's rights, separation of church and state, etc.
There are civil rights, gay rights, affirmative action, women's rights, separation of church and state, etc.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.