Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Brit Hume Grapevine: Why Did They Look Into It? (NY Times only 'asking questions' about Roberts)
Fox News ^ | 8/05/05 | Brit Hume

Posted on 08/06/2005 5:45:28 AM PDT by Libloather

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-104 last
To: KC_Conspirator; Liz; Howlin; ALOHA RONNIE; MurryMom
The reason "why" is because they think Roberts will overturn Roe v Wade...

Sure - but does the Supreme Court rule on ANYTHING ELSE BESIDES ABORTION? From the recent Big Media coverage - no!

Judge ___________ (fill in the blank) is the NEXT nominee. And what will the main topic of conversation be in the media? It's not who's first or second amendment rights are being violated. Nope. Judge Roberts - abortion. The next nominee - abortion. The one after that - abortion. Just like all of the left's positions, it's gonna get old...

101 posted on 08/09/2005 2:53:08 PM PDT by Libloather (Just my luck - Hillary is the smartest person in the Milky Way - and picked MY planet to seek power)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: SauronOfMordor
Ah, but I seem to recall some of those lefty reporters insisting that the issues with Monica Lewinsky (and all the other bimbos) should not be looked into because it was Clinton's "personal life."

The NYT was wrong in prying into the Whitewater affair which uncovered absolutely no wrongdoing by either President Clinton or his wife, Hillary Clinton, and no coverup or other criminal activity by any member of President Clinton's administration. The Republicans succeeded only in splattering mud on themselves and costing the taxpayers some $75 million.

Perhaps the NYT has learned from their Whitewater error in the case of Roberts' children. We can be happy they are doing the right thing now. I'm not similarly optimistic about the Republican Party.

102 posted on 08/10/2005 7:33:47 AM PDT by MurryMom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: MurryMom; MizSterious
Why are you posting a reply to MizSterious's comment in #49 to me?

In any event, you are incorrect that no indications of wrongdoing were uncovered, just nothing that a court case could be built out of.

103 posted on 08/10/2005 2:07:15 PM PDT by SauronOfMordor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: MurryMom

Since DemocRATS lack all sense of decency and honor, I can assure you I'm even less optimistic about the 'Rats--and any who support them, including you.


104 posted on 08/10/2005 2:20:41 PM PDT by MizSterious (Now, if only we could convince them all to put on their bomb-vests and meet in Mecca...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-104 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson