Posted on 10/11/2005 4:19:08 PM PDT by shrinkermd
Who elected Bush?
Not Minnesota, not Michigan, not Wisconsin, not Maine, not Vermont, not New Hampshire, not Conneticut, not Massachusets, not New York, not Pennsylvania, not Delaware, not DC, not Illinois, not California, not Oregon, not Washington, not Maryland, not Hawaii.
Not one electoral vote from the land of Pundits and Bloggers except for Virginia's 13 electoral votes.
I suggest that Coulter, Lowry, Kristol, Krauthammer, Ingraham, Fund, J-Pod and the rest first do their jobs in their home states and/or the states of their youths. HELP GET A DAMN PRESIDENT ELECTED, then complain.
We don't want to hear another talk show host out of New York or DC claim that they got Bush elected. Maybe you energized the troops out here but we did the work. You reside in the land of zero, nada, nothing - no Electoral College votes.
This SCOTUS arguement is treating the rest of the Republicans thoughout the country who actually provied electoral college votes for The President the same way the Dems and the news media did after the 2004 election. Hicks, hayseeds, Jesus freaks, rednecks, NASCAR fools......
Many people in the states that actually provided Electoral College votes are at some level of support or at least wait and see over this nomination. The polls say so. Check MSNBC and Drudge.
Posted by: msdl5 at October 11, 2005 05:38 PM
I am sure it's hard to believe, but I am sure you can believe it.
Hang tough! Don't drink the water.
dear lord, quit trying to twist what I said ...all I stated was one of the benefits of winning the popular vote. Get a freaking grip.
The person who posted this did not tell you or anyone else they didn't have a voice. He pointed out all the claims of putting President Bush in office ring hollow when one considers the States actually won and by whom. Actually, the blue states are also notorious for the RINO and RAT Senators who consistently have done their best to keep any conservative out of SCOTUS.
Now THAT'S funny. But you gotta ping the supporters of the thread, not anarchists like me.
Pray for W and Harriet Miers
Their blue-state money is completely worthless because it did absolutely nothing to help Republicans win those blue states.
In politics, electoral votes and victorious candidates are what matter. In the blue states, record-breaking amounts of fundrasing have proven insufficient to buy these things for the Republicans.
"If a few farmers and storekeepers can write a constitution, why can't a "lawyer" who hasn't achieved an elitist level interpret it?"
====
You make a keen observation. Wisdom and a good heart triumps many things. And to think these guys developed a document that has met the test of time.
Of course, now we need only the finest Rocket Scientists, astute pundits, and elite legal minds to decipher the Kings English.
Can't figure why so many are going nuclear without all the facts, and not giving the President the benefit of the doubt...much less the candidate.
I wouldn't want that type of person on the Court....one who jumps to conclusions without hearing all the evidence and reviewing the facts.
So, respectfully, I'm withholding my judgment for a while longer.
What a laugh. Especially coming from a guy like you who is so obssessed that he has to post anti-Bush, anti-Miers material on every thread.
"Their blue-state money is completely worthless because it did absolutely nothing to help Republicans win those blue states."
Uh, I hate to break it to you, but before you keep making yourself look completely clueless, MONEY SENT TO A NATIONAL CAMPAIGN CAN BE SPENT ANYWHERE IN THE NATION!
So, in case you still don't understand it, the moneyh 'blue staters' sent into the republicans was spent all over the country, mainly to help win battleground states.
In most of the blues states, they don't even bother running ads above a minimal level. The money they spend generally goes into battleground states - and that is where the 'blue state' money goes as well.
His personal Driver to head the Transportation Dept.
The family florist as the head of dept. of agriculture,
His Broker as a Replacement for Greenspan.
Well, she was a starry-eyed teenager of 43 when she gave $1,000 to ALGORE. Her formative years? I don't think so. I hope she is a true convert, but the fact of that donation just sends shivers up and down my spine.
Nope. Got warned a time or two, but still managed to show Keyes to be a phony, what with his reparations plan, and his virtual disowning of his daughter because she came out as a lesbian.
Can the RNC be sued for Bait and Switch tactics or Truth in Advertising violations? Some who thought they voted for limited government, conservative judges and private solutions, have found instead bloated pork-barrel spending, "trust-me" (who knows?) judges, and a full retreat from Social Security reform, in its stead we have the proposed reform of posse comitatus. And that's after we "won" the Senate. Durst one wonder what would have happened had we "lost"?
This damn Northeast with all its pathetic RINOS.
Thank goodness we have Republicans like George W. Bush to keep Rockefeller Republican turncoats like Arlen Specter out of office.
Oh wait...
It would probably be one of the few class-action suits filed these days that actually has some merit.
:)
Keep waiting...and don't go to the polls to vote...cause you might miss it. [grin!]
Keep the faith.
What a pantload! Laura Ingraham is a kid. W was sitting in on the Desert Storm deliberations while she was fetching pizza for Clarence Thomas.
If I have to pick which Texan I trust me more to stand up for conservative principles, Tom Pauken or George W. Bush, it sure as hell isn't going to Bush, I can tell you that much!
In as conservative a state as Texas, Pauken never gained any traction. That could be because he has a sour personality, and aligned himself too closely with Pat Buchanan.
He also has a personal animus against John Cornyn because Bush decided that Cornyn would make a better Attorney General than a Patsy.
Neat pix on your profile page...where is it?
hmmm, for some reason I remember you being one of several who were suspended for a short time for 'disrupting' the keyes threads (I agreed with you on that on how horrible a campaign he was running and others refused to see that or tolerate criticism of the senate campaign). Maybe it's because you were always on them and then I didn't see you. Who knows.
Now, these threads seem pretty tame compared to the tempers that flared around the keyes threads in 2004.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.