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

Skip to comments.

Scott Brown Doesn’t Rule Out 2012 Presidential Bid (WTH??)
Breitbart ^ | 1/31/10 | staff

Posted on 01/31/2010 11:39:15 AM PST by pissant

Scott Brown Doesn’t Rule Out 2012 Presidential Bid

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.tv ...


TOPICS: Extended News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2012gopprimary; brown2012; democrats; elections; gop; idiot; republicans; scottbrown
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-238 last
To: Reagan Man

I just told you that Reagan and Bush and Bush II were all pro-life. Why haven’t their Judicial nominees voided Roe V. Wade???

Reagan even nominated Sandra Day O Connor who was pro=choice.

Please answer my question . . do not avoid it.


201 posted on 01/31/2010 6:01:20 PM PST by MarkAccord
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]

To: Sparky1776

Likely more than two. I’m already sick of it.


202 posted on 01/31/2010 6:01:26 PM PST by onyx (BE A MONTHLY DONOR - I AM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: onyx

I was being kind :)


203 posted on 01/31/2010 6:01:54 PM PST by Sparky1776
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: MarkAccord

I’ve already answered your dumb question once, newbie.

It takes five justices, four won’t do it!


204 posted on 01/31/2010 6:04:09 PM PST by Reagan Man ("In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: CaribouCrossing

You’re right. No candidate gets a pass. There’s always “something” and several someone’s to remind us of that particular candidate’s short comings, however small, large or rumored.


205 posted on 01/31/2010 6:07:21 PM PST by onyx (BE A MONTHLY DONOR - I AM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man

Kennedy, Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito . That adds up to five.

Even if Roe v. Wade is overturned (which any legal expert will tell you is very unlikely), how will that effect anything? A woman would just have to go across the state line to a pro-choice state.


206 posted on 01/31/2010 6:08:20 PM PST by MarkAccord
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: Sparky1776

Yes, I know. You’re always kind.


207 posted on 01/31/2010 6:08:53 PM PST by onyx (BE A MONTHLY DONOR - I AM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: MarkAccord

Follow the thread and pay attention.

Kennedy is pro-abortion and has been for years. The objective is to overturn Roe, return the issue back to the states and work at getting passage of a Human Life or personhood amendment to the Constitution.


208 posted on 01/31/2010 6:14:31 PM PST by Reagan Man ("In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies]

To: MarkAccord

I don’t think you’re a serious poster when it comes to the discussion of Roe v Wade or you would know that Justice Roberts signaled earlier that week that he is not necessarily driven by stare decisis.


209 posted on 01/31/2010 6:16:21 PM PST by onyx (BE A MONTHLY DONOR - I AM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man

Did you not post that if we elect “pro-life” Presidents, we will thus have Roe v. Wade overturned? Reagan nominated pro-choice O’Conner and Kennedy. Bush I nominated Souter. And Bush II tried to nominated Harriet Myers, who is pro-choice.

I will take my chances with Scott Brown- Michelle Bachmann ticket.


210 posted on 01/31/2010 6:17:16 PM PST by MarkAccord
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: MarkAccord

Bunch of red herrings. O’Conner and Souter are no longer on the high court and Myers never made it. Kennedy was pro-life when Reagan appointed him but since then has shifted to pro-abort. We need one more conservative on the SCOTUS to overturn Roe. Wake up!

Scott Brown is an abortion proponent and supports Roe. I seriously doubt Michelle Bachman would run with Brown and if she did, they would not get my vote.


211 posted on 01/31/2010 6:24:30 PM PST by Reagan Man ("In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 210 | View Replies]

To: MarkAccord

Pay attention, please!

Neither Scott Brown, nor Michelle Bachmann are running for the nomination and for that matter, nobody else is either!

Not yet, anyway.


212 posted on 01/31/2010 6:25:13 PM PST by onyx (BE A MONTHLY DONOR - I AM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 210 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man

“Souter is no longer on the High Court.”

Yes he is . His name is now Sotomyer . . that is who replaced him.

Souter deliberately waited until Obama was inaugurated before resigning his seat.

I also like the McDonnell-Brown ticket. McDonnel is the Virginia Governor.


213 posted on 01/31/2010 6:37:18 PM PST by MarkAccord
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies]

To: MarkAccord
Sotomyer was appointed by Obama! Souter is gone.

Gov Bob McDonnell is a staunch pro-life conservative and man of integrity. I doubt he would team up with anyone who does not believe in the sanctity of unborn life.

214 posted on 01/31/2010 6:43:16 PM PST by Reagan Man ("In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies]

To: nutmeg

Why did you ping me with this when I didn’t say anything bad about him and don’t need to be reprimanded like a child?


215 posted on 01/31/2010 6:45:50 PM PST by chris_bdba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: SharpRightTurn

Exactly


216 posted on 01/31/2010 8:05:23 PM PST by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie
Leave the guy alone. He has not been seated yet.

Note: Conservative talkers who are true blue and not RINOs. Rush, Savage, Levin (I think), Hannity (I think), Liddy, Savage, Malzberg, Cunningham, Dennis Miller (I think) and a few others who are not making fun of “birthers.”

I agree on both points...

217 posted on 01/31/2010 8:25:58 PM PST by nutmeg (Congratulations Senator-elect Scott Brown!!! Gas up the truck!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: norge
I also like post #72 from the little enchilada.

Yup... same here! ;-)

218 posted on 01/31/2010 8:26:56 PM PST by nutmeg (Congratulations Senator-elect Scott Brown!!! Gas up the truck!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: StarFan
I tried to post much much earlier in the thread saying precisely what you said but just then FR went down.

Yeah, FR has sure been having problems lately... it's been down quite a bit in the past few days.

I watched the tape and felt the title was misleading at best. The fact he said he ‘didn’t even have a business card yet’ subtly told Walters how preposterous the supposition was IMHO.

Exactly. ;-)

219 posted on 01/31/2010 9:04:12 PM PST by nutmeg (Congratulations Senator-elect Scott Brown!!! Gas up the truck!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: tioga; Frantzie; norge; RaceBannon
very cool report.

Thanks, tioga. Here's a more detailed "after action report" of those 3 rallies, if you're interested:

After action report - Scott Brown rallies – Monday, 1/18/10

...and another very cool "after action report" by my FRiend RaceBannon:

RaceBannon’s after action report - Scott Brown rally - Sunday, 1/17/10

Again, I DO want to stress that I don't know Scott Brown personally, just met him at these rallies. He seems like the Real Deal to me, and was humbled by the thousands of supporters that came out to participate in his rallies on election eve.

We'll have to see how he does in DC. And - yes - like all of the other elected officials - we should hold his feet to the fire.

220 posted on 01/31/2010 9:17:19 PM PST by nutmeg (Congratulations Senator-elect Scott Brown!!! Gas up the truck!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Jedidah
Sheesh, nutmeg, no need to ping me. I didn’t criticize Brown, just asked for a halt to the blabber about a Presidential run. I’m pretty sure we’re in full agreement.

I'm sorry, Jedidah... we are in full agreement here. I didn't intend to "reprimand" you at all... I was just trying to include you in the discussion on this thread. :o)

221 posted on 01/31/2010 9:26:57 PM PST by nutmeg (Congratulations Senator-elect Scott Brown!!! Gas up the truck!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: onyx

Great post in #153, onyx... thanks for the transcript.


222 posted on 01/31/2010 9:28:47 PM PST by nutmeg (Congratulations Senator-elect Scott Brown!!! Gas up the truck!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: orinoco
Remember what Reagan said “Trust but verify”.

I totally agree... like every elected official, I think we should hold Brown's feet to the fire.

I just don't see why everyone is so concerned that Brown might someday consider running for president (which he does NOT say in the 1:26 minute video clip at the top of this thread). He's not even sworn in as Senator from Massachusetts yet. We'll have to wait and see how he does as senator...

223 posted on 01/31/2010 9:33:50 PM PST by nutmeg (Congratulations Senator-elect Scott Brown!!! Gas up the truck!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: chris_bdba
Why did you ping me with this when I didn’t say anything bad about him and don’t need to be reprimanded like a child?

I'm sorry, Chris... I didn't intend to reprimand you at all. I was repeating another poster's words and just trying to include you in the discussion.

What’s the matter with you guys? was NOT directed at you. Again, I'm really sorry if my post offended you in any way. :o)

224 posted on 01/31/2010 9:40:14 PM PST by nutmeg (Congratulations Senator-elect Scott Brown!!! Gas up the truck!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 215 | View Replies]

To: nutmeg

I love being included. Thanks!

(Maybe we should start a Common Sense Coalition on FR.)


225 posted on 02/01/2010 5:28:32 AM PST by Jedidah (Be bold, be sharp, be blunt -- but show a kind conservative heart. The world watches and takes note.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 221 | View Replies]

To: nutmeg

It is because of his liberal tendencies. He may turn out to be a RINO like Bush!


226 posted on 02/01/2010 7:17:12 AM PST by orinoco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 223 | View Replies]

To: Jedidah
(Maybe we should start a Common Sense Coalition on FR.)

Sounds good to me, FRiend... :o)

227 posted on 02/01/2010 8:20:49 AM PST by nutmeg (Congratulations Senator-elect Scott Brown!!! Gas up the truck!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies]

To: orinoco
It is because of his liberal tendencies. He may turn out to be a RINO like Bush!

I do get that and hope that doesn't happen. We'll have to keep an eye on him and see what he does as Senator from Massachusetts...

228 posted on 02/01/2010 8:23:54 AM PST by nutmeg (Congratulations Senator-elect Scott Brown!!! Gas up the truck!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 226 | View Replies]

To: pissant

Baby steps, Mr. Brown.
Baby steps!

Besides, you may not even have been seated in your senate seat by 2012 if the Dems can help it (and it looks like NOBODY is forcing them to seat you)!


229 posted on 02/01/2010 11:10:28 AM PST by Muzzle_em (Taglines are for sissies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CaribouCrossing

All of what you wrote sounds good. Personal experience is the most authentic information. However, I would prefer he had not honored Walters with an interview. It puts him more in the celebrity category, than the humble public servant category.


230 posted on 02/01/2010 3:35:44 PM PST by La Enchiladita ( This must be what it feels like to live in a monarchy when some little kid becomes king ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: norge; nutmeg

F.U., norge.


231 posted on 02/01/2010 3:38:07 PM PST by La Enchiladita ( This must be what it feels like to live in a monarchy when some little kid becomes king ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: La Enchiladita

I believe your post was meant for “nutmeg”.


232 posted on 02/01/2010 3:42:12 PM PST by CaribouCrossing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 230 | View Replies]

To: La Enchiladita

What does F. U. stand for?


233 posted on 02/01/2010 3:43:57 PM PST by CaribouCrossing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 231 | View Replies]

To: La Enchiladita

No, I was responding to your #75... it says so on the line at bottom of post. You recounted your experience of campaigning with Scott Brown.


234 posted on 02/01/2010 3:50:40 PM PST by La Enchiladita ( This must be what it feels like to live in a monarchy when some little kid becomes king ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 230 | View Replies]

To: La Enchiladita

Don’t understand your hostility, little enchilada. I was agreeing with your post in 72.

Now, if you have other issues, speak freely.


235 posted on 02/01/2010 4:41:45 PM PST by norge (The amiable dunce is back, wearing a skirt and high heels.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 231 | View Replies]

To: La Enchiladita

The only words I wrote in #75 were, “Good post, nutmeg. Well done.”

I had copied and pasted what NUTMEG wrote in her post #71. I also put Nutmeg’s words in quotation marks. Hope this clears up the confusion for you.


236 posted on 02/01/2010 4:47:40 PM PST by CaribouCrossing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 234 | View Replies]

To: norge; Admin Moderator

Just eff off and stay that way. I never posted to you before this thread. Last week, you posted to me and about me on a thread which didn’t concern you and I chose to ignore you. Likewise, on a thread following that where you carried over your ankle-biting. Now, on this thread, you talk about me, once again belittling my user name. You can stop your stalking game and your ankle-biting. I ignored you twice and that should have been clear: No means No means “Knock it off.”

You have been signed up on FR since 1998 and yet have never posted an article, never started a topic, but post your little snarks on threads others have started. Yeah, I could play the game, little girl norgie-porgie, but you interest me not at all. You can stop and consider this a warning.

Last, I don’t need your permission to “speak freely.”


237 posted on 02/01/2010 5:05:55 PM PST by La Enchiladita ( This must be what it feels like to live in a monarchy when some little kid becomes king ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 235 | View Replies]

To: La Enchiladita; Admin Moderator

Just to set the record straight.

1. I simply asked why you would post an “ankle-biting” response to Ansel for posting a Meg Whitman video which to me, as a Californian, was very revealing. Your response to Ansel was, to say the least, dismissive. As you correctly noted, you did not respond, which, of course is your choice, and I would think it is my choice to point that out in conversation with Ansel.

2. My latest post to you was, in fact, supportive of your comments, re the originator of the post in question.

3. I never demeaned you in any post, and, in fact, do my best not to demean any poster. I may respond, at times, with remarks could be somewhat pointed, but I do try to stay away from anything personal...unless it is so obvious that it can’t go without comment. In many posts here, over time, I would guess that I have violated my personal rules with regard to that, and when I have, I regret it.

4. I disagree with many posters at FR, but I always try to be civil about it.

5. La Enchiladita would mean, I presume, “little enchilada” which is how I referred to you. If you take offense, I’m sorry.

6. I have never said to anyone on this forum or anywhere else, “F.U.”, nor have I ever told anyone to “eff off”...ever!!

7. I have also read I Corinthians 13, and do my best to apply it to my life.

8. You are correct. I have been here since 1998 and have never posted an article. For a very personal reason...I don’t know how. Nor have I started a topic, again, for a reason. I don’t know that anyone would be interested in my vanity post.

I find it much easier to respond to posts and comments...I love the back and forth, and isn’t that what Free Republic is all about? In addition, I do learn things from posters, and it challenges me to think. That’s why I would like to have heard why you dismissed so curtly Ansel’s Whitman video. Your response was not very enlightening. My question to you was not combative, but rather, to learn more about Whitman...It does, after all, pertain to my vote, and at this point, I have not made a decision.

9. My user name is just that...a user name. Play with it any way you like. After all, it could be a refrigerator.


238 posted on 02/01/2010 10:13:08 PM PST by norge (The amiable dunce is back, wearing a skirt and high heels.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-238 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