Skip to comments.
CA: Vote No on California's Bond Time Bomb (Proposition 57)
NewsMax.com ^
| Feb. 27, 2004
| Jon E. Dougherty
Posted on 02/26/2004 2:57:28 PM PST by calcowgirl
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-22 last
To: calcowgirl
Hey Cal Cow Girl!
Voting NO on anything that is a yes or no question. Why quibble with what the proposition is? This NO philosophy works until we get that "We really meant it when we said-Marriage = Man + Women-" proposition. Anyone starting a drive for the "We really meant it" provision?
Cheers:
DD
21
posted on
02/26/2004 4:57:29 PM PST
by
DiamondDon1
(Member VRWC (recovering spineless Arnold voter))
To: DiamondDon1
Voting NO on anything that is a yes or no question. Is that a question?
I'm not following you in trying to make some correlation to the marriage issue. I support maintaining the current definition of marriage, i.e. no marriage for homosexuals.
22
posted on
02/26/2004 5:03:27 PM PST
by
calcowgirl
(No on Propositions 55, 56, 57, 58)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-22 last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson