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

Skip to comments.

Leahy’s Surprise Attack
National Review Online ^ | 10/9/02 | Byron York

Posted on 10/09/2002 7:25:37 AM PDT by FreedomWarrior

October 9, 2002 9:25 a.m.

Leahy’s Surprise Attack

Another Bush nominee is whacked by the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Tuesday's meeting of the Senate Judiciary Committee was supposed to be a routine affair — a brief consideration of some lower-court judges, a discussion of pending legislation, and a quick adjournment so senators could move on to their next appointments.

It didn't work out that way. Instead, the routine gave way to an impassioned argument that revealed a level of bitterness inside the committee that has not been seen in more than a decade. And that bitterness is not just the result of profound ideological disagreements. Now, it is personal.

The subject was the nomination of Dennis Shedd to a place on the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. Shedd is well known and respected inside the committee. He is a former top aide to Sen. Strom Thurmond and served as chief counsel of the committee in the 1980s. He has been a U.S. District Court judge in South Carolina for the last eleven years and was nominated by President Bush for an appeals-court seat on May 9, 2001. He received the American Bar Association's top rating, and had a hearing before the committee on June 27 of this year.

But the committee has not voted on Shedd's nomination, meaning it cannot go to the full Senate for a confirmation vote. Shedd had been scheduled for a vote on September 19, but Democrat Edward Kennedy, who opposes the nomination, asked that the vote be delayed — a standard procedure under the committee's rules. According to those rules, a nomination that has been placed on an agenda but then delayed will be taken up at the next business meeting.

That next meeting was Tuesday. Republicans were sure that Shedd would be on the agenda, but late Monday, they learned that committee chairman Patrick Leahy had removed Shedd's name from the list of nominations to be considered. Orrin Hatch, the committee's ranking Republican, was outraged. This is personal, Hatch said. Everyone knows Shedd, and knows that the committee usually shows some deference to former staff members. But in this case, Hatch charged, Democrats were attempting to "violate, ignore, and/or abuse this rule for the expediency of the desired outcome."

"I am struck by the irony," Hatch said at the meeting, "that several members of this committee who support the rule-breaking removal of the Shedd nomination talk a good game about the importance of judges following the law and not ignoring it when it would suit them to do so. Today we learn that such talk is just talk."

Even Thurmond, the terribly frail 99-year-old Republican who once chaired the committee and made Shedd its chief counsel, made an appearance at the meeting to express his anger. "In my 48 years in the United States Senate, I have never been treated in such a manner," Thurmond read from a prepared statement. "You assured me on numerous occasions that Judge Shedd would get a vote, and that is all that I have ever asked of you. I have waited patiently for over 17 months, and I have extended every courtesy to you."

Speaking to reporters after the meeting, several Republicans echoed Thurmond's charges and all but accused Leahy of lying to them. "I approached him several times" to talk about Shedd, said GOP senator Sam Brownback. "He assured me numerous times that he was going to see that this got through." Hatch also said Leahy had pledged a vote on Shedd. "He promised me," Hatch said. "He promised Senator Thurmond."

"This is all politics," Hatch said, "and it's rotten politics, at that."

It's not entirely clear why Leahy canceled the Shedd vote. It was widely believed inside the committee that at least one, and perhaps two or three, Democrats planned to vote for Shedd, which would easily send the nomination to the full Senate. But it is also true that in recent weeks civil-rights groups have ratcheted up their attacks on Shedd. On October 2, the Congressional Black Caucus sent a letter to Leahy repeating earlier charges that Shedd's record shows "a pattern of insensitivity toward the issues that most affect minorities." In July, NAACP delegates meeting at the group's convention in Houston voted to oppose Shedd's nomination. Shortly afterward, NAACP president Kwesi Mfume wrote Leahy a letter saying that "Judge Shedd's membership to [sic] the Fourth Circuit would further radicalize a court that has practiced judicial activism in a manner that hurts racial and ethnic minorities and disenfranchised Americans."

Now the Shedd nomination, after coming so close to a committee vote, appears to be in limbo. Late yesterday, Hatch, along with Thurmond and Iowa Republican Charles Grassley, sent a letter to Leahy invoking a rarely-used rule requesting a special meeting of the committee. If Leahy agrees, the meeting will be this week. But a meeting is just a meeting. Right now, there is no evidence that Leahy plans to allow Shedd to move forward.


TOPICS: Editorial
KEYWORDS: leahy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last

1 posted on 10/09/2002 7:25:37 AM PDT by FreedomWarrior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: FreedomWarrior
Too bad the Republicans did not have the guts to Bork each and every Clintler appointee.
2 posted on 10/09/2002 7:30:06 AM PDT by nonliberal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

There's A Better Way To Beat The Media Clymers (And You Don't Have To Skate)!

Donate Here By Secure Server

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794

or you can use

PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com

STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD

3 posted on 10/09/2002 7:30:13 AM PDT by William McKinley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreedomWarrior
The RATS have proven again that they are scheming liars, and we need to get this information out to GOP activists around the country.

Pickering. Owen. Estrada. Shedd. And dozens in limbo.

4 posted on 10/09/2002 7:30:23 AM PDT by mwl1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreedomWarrior
Tell me again why Trent Lott agreed to "share power" with these petty criminals?
5 posted on 10/09/2002 7:31:28 AM PDT by rudypoot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mwl1; PhiKapMom
Yet another reason to 'walk over glass' to get a majority in the Senate!
6 posted on 10/09/2002 7:32:34 AM PDT by JulieRNR21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: FreedomWarrior

"I am struck by the irony," Hatch said at the meeting, "that several members of this committee who support the rule-breaking removal of the Shedd nomination talk a good game about the importance of judges following the law and not ignoring it when it would suit them to do so. Today we learn that such talk is just talk."

Why, they are not lying, they are just communists,... err.. Democrats!

7 posted on 10/09/2002 7:34:40 AM PDT by TLI
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rudypoot
Trent agreed to 'share power' (abdicate is more like it) because he was told to do so or his closet history would be outed to the mediawhores.
8 posted on 10/09/2002 7:38:45 AM PDT by MHGinTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: FreedomWarrior
It is a ******* outrage that it has even taken this long for Shedd to have a vote in the first place.

President Bush should RECESS APPOINT ALL NOMINEES that have waited six months or longer for hearings at the first opportunity after January 3, 2003. Time to play hardball with the commies.

9 posted on 10/09/2002 7:39:39 AM PDT by PetroniDE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreedomWarrior
bump to keep track of this issue
10 posted on 10/09/2002 7:40:55 AM PDT by LiteKeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreedomWarrior
Wasn'T Leahy a communist or socialist before he decided the DemocRATs were a better vehicle for his views?

Bush should simply stop nominating candidates to the federal courts until Congress hopefully changes composition or the DemocRATs see reason.

Thanks to the success of this behavior, we have that freal Souter on the Supreme Court.
11 posted on 10/09/2002 7:43:43 AM PDT by ZULU
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreedomWarrior
This is getting more and more evil. The President must do the recess appointments, or we will never get any judges into place. The evidence that liberal judges are ignoring law and ruling in partisan political ways is mounting. This has gone on too long, and the White House must act when the Congress recesses.
12 posted on 10/09/2002 7:45:28 AM PDT by ladyinred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LiteKeeper
TAKE BACK THE SENATE!!!

Leahy is a snake. I cannot stand that man.

13 posted on 10/09/2002 7:45:41 AM PDT by Wphile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: FreedomWarrior
Related Articles:
Shedded by Judiciary: Senate Democrats cast off another appointee
Source: Wall St Journal; Published: October 9, 2002

Miguel Estrada May be Next Victim Of Judiciary's 'Gang Of Ten'
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: September 09, 2002; Author: Paul M. Weyrich

Toward Priscilla Owen, Not Even The Pretense Of Fairness
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: August 01, 2002; Author: John Nowacki

The Owen Nomination: Liberals Don't Let Truth Stand In Their Way
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: July 18, 2002; Author: John Nowacki

Democrats Hold Judicial Nominations for 406 Days and Counting
Source: CNSNEWS.com; Published: June 21, 2002; Author: Christine Hall

Judge The Senate Judiciary Committee Not By What It Says, But What It Has Done
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: | June 06, 2002; Author: John Nowacki

The Left Keeps Trying -- And Failing -- To Smear Brooks Smith
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: May 16, 2002; Author: John Nowacki

Pickering Battle Places Congress on Verge of 'Institutional Crisis'
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: March 07, 2002; Author: Jeff Johnson

Make them pay for 'Borking': David Limbaugh rebukes spineless Republicans to support Pickering
Source: WorldNetDaily.com; Published: March 5, 2002; Author: David Limbaugh

The GOP's Post-Pickering Strategy
Source: National Review Online; Published: March 1, 2002; Author: Byron York

Pickering Fight Shows Liberals At Their Worst
Source: Roll Call.com; Publblished: February 21, 2002; Author: Mort Kondracke

Still Pestering Pickering
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: February 19, 2002; Author: John Nowacki

Dismantling Democracy through Judicial Activism
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: February 12, 2002; Author:Tom Jipping

'A Troubling Pattern': Ideology Over Truth In Judicial Confirmations
Source: Too Good Reports; Published: February 10, 2002; Author: Paul E. Scates

Democrats Blast Bush Judicial Nominee
Source: CNSNEWS.com; Published: February 08, 2002; Susan Jones

The Next Big Fight: The first major judicial-confirmation battle of the Bush administration.
Source: National Review: Published: Feburary 6, 2002; Author:Byron York

SYMPOSIUM Q: Should the Senate Take Ideology into Account in Judicial Confirmations
Source: INSIGHT magazine; Published: February 4, 2002;
Authors:
Ralph G. Neas -- YES: The ideology of nominees for the federal judiciary matters more now than ever
Roger Pilon -- NO: Since judges apply law, not make it, the Senate's concern should be with judicial temperament

What is the Judiciary Committee Trying to Hide?
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: January 29, 2002; Author: Thomas L. Jipping

Blasting Conservative Judges: Liberals Launch Their Campaign
Source: cnsnews.com; Published: January 24 2002; Matt Pyeatt

Judicial Confirmation Lies, Deception and Cover-up
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: December 11, 2001; Author: Thomas L. Jipping

Senator Leahy Does Not Meet His Own Standards
Source:.cnsnews.com; Published: December 07, 2001; Author: By John Nowacki

Senator Daschle Must Remove 'Leaky Leahy' From Judiciary Committee
Source: Too Good Reports; Published: December 4, 2001; Author: Rev. Louis P. Sheldon

A Disgraceful Blocking of Nominees
Source: The Wall Street Journal (ltr to ed) Published December 3, 2001

Mr. Leahy's Fuzzy Math
Source: Washington Times;Published: December 3, 2001; Author:Editorial

Sen. Patrick Leahy; Our Constitutional Conscience?
Source: Too Good Reports; Published: December 2, 2001; Author: Paul E. Scates

Judicial confirmations called significantly low
Source: Washington Times; Published: November 30, 2001; Author: Audrey Hudson

Patrick Leahy - Words Do Kill
Source: PipeBombNews.com; Published: November 29, 2001; Author: William A. Mayer

Judicial Profiling
Source: The Wall Street Journal; Published: November 27, 2001

Sen. Leahy's judicial hostages
Source: Washington Times; Published: November 21, 2001

Judges Delayed is Justice Denied
Source: CNSNews.com ; Published: November 20, 2001; Author: Thomas L. Jipping

Partisanship is Prevalent with Leahy's Judicial Confirmations
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: November 15, 2001; Author: John Nowacki

Leahy And Daschle Are Coming Face To Face With Their Own Words
Obedient Democrats
Source: CNSNEWS.com; Published October 26, 2001; Author: Thomas L. Jipping

Why is Daschle Blocking Judges needed to Try Terrorists when we Catch them?
Source: Banner of Liberty; Published: October 26, 2001; Author: Mary Mostert

Pat Leahy's Passive Aggressive Game
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: October 25, 2001; Author: John Nowacki

Operation Obstruct Justice
Source: Washington Times; Published: October 25, 2001; Author: T.L.Jipping

Daschle wins struggle over judicial nominations
Source: The Washington Times; Published: Oct 24, 2001; Author: Dave Boyer

Leahy doctrine ensures judicial gridlock
Source: Washington Times; Published October 22, 2001

Senate's judicial powergrab: Tom Jipping tracks Dems' assault on courts
Source: WorldNetDaily.com; Published: June 28, 2001; Author: Tom Jipping

Dems Will Shut Down Judicial Confirmations
Source: CNSNews.com Commentary from the Free Congress Foundation; Published: June 13, 2001;
Author: Thomas L. Jipping


14 posted on 10/09/2002 7:47:09 AM PDT by Stand Watch Listen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreedomWarrior
"In my 48 years in the United States Senate, I have never been treated in such a manner," Thurmond read from a prepared statement. "You assured me on numerous occasions that Judge Shedd would get a vote, and that is all that I have ever asked of you. I have waited patiently for over 17 months, and I have extended every courtesy to you
Where is the headline:

Democrats lie to Senior Citizens!
15 posted on 10/09/2002 7:47:41 AM PDT by chnsmok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chnsmok
"Democrats lie to Senior Citizens!"

And not just about this issue!

16 posted on 10/09/2002 7:53:45 AM PDT by Real Cynic No More
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Real Cynic No More
It is my fond hope that, after we'd dispatched Carnahan, Wellstone and a few other senate Asses (and take control of the Senate), President Bush starts at the top of the nominee list with a new Judiciary Committee.
17 posted on 10/09/2002 8:01:21 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: FreedomWarrior
Even Thurmond, the terribly frail 99-year-old Republican who once chaired the committee and made Shedd its chief counsel, made an appearance at the meeting to express his anger.

God Bless ol' Strom.

And may Leahy rot in H#!!.

18 posted on 10/09/2002 8:01:57 AM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreedomWarrior
Kwesi Mfume , a convicted felon.
19 posted on 10/09/2002 8:05:49 AM PDT by hgro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreedomWarrior
HIDEOUS BOSTARDS
20 posted on 10/09/2002 8:14:47 AM PDT by Quix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreedomWarrior
"On October 2, the Congressional Black Caucus sent a letter to Leahy repeating earlier charges that Shedd's record shows "a pattern of insensitivity toward the issues that most affect minorities."

Of course there aren't any specifics about just what constitutes "insensitivity," only the sound of liberals whining.

I've just re-read my copy of the Constitution and I have failed again to find anything in there about judges being required to be "sensitive."

21 posted on 10/09/2002 8:16:15 AM PDT by nightdriver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ZULU
Of course, every time Leahy is in the news, the question of WHY Leahy would be one of two senators singled out to get the most highly processed Anthrax from supposedly "Islamic Terrorists" should be asked.

Not that it ever is.
22 posted on 10/09/2002 8:20:54 AM PDT by John H K
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: FreedomWarrior
Kwesi Mfume wrote Leahy a letter saying that "Judge Shedd's membership to [sic] the Fourth Circuit would further radicalize a court that has practiced judicial activism in a manner that hurts racial and ethnic minorities and disenfranchised Americans

And how would that be? By applying the law even handedly without bowing to special interests?

23 posted on 10/09/2002 8:29:49 AM PDT by CaptRon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreedomWarrior
Leahy can do this, of course, because the media will tolerate lies and corruption. News of this is appearing on National Review and a few other conservative sources. But the great unwashed public doesn't even know that there is a holdup on appointing judges, because the major media have never told them about it. At most, a few people have heard that there is some sort of partisan deadlock, probably because Bush is trying to appoint racist judges.
24 posted on 10/09/2002 8:59:27 AM PDT by Cicero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreedomWarrior
I am sick and tired of trying to work with these anti-American, obstructionist and petty sneaks. I wish President Bush would make a slew of recess appointments and be done with it.

My God...we need to take back the Senate.

25 posted on 10/09/2002 9:16:19 AM PDT by pgkdan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
Leahy can do this, of course, because the media will tolerate lies and corruption.

Yes, the media underreports this kind of stuff. But the real solution has to come from other Senators. Your word has to mean something in the Senate (not to us, which would be nice) but to the other Senators.

Leahy and his constituents will pay for this when no one supports him on the minor things. Jim Jeffords comes to mind as an example.

26 posted on 10/09/2002 9:20:24 AM PDT by Drango
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: FreedomWarrior
bttt
27 posted on 10/09/2002 9:47:43 AM PDT by kayak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wphile
TAKE BACK THE SENATE!!! bump

28 posted on 10/09/2002 9:54:35 AM PDT by Bigg Red
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
Bush and team are calculating that he can regain the Senate, and that the near-term obstruction of his nominees helps enrage the GOP base. If we do not succeed in recapturing the Senate, then I suspect you'll be hearing a lot more about the treatment of the Bush judicial nominees. It's called the bully pulpit that the president occupies.
29 posted on 10/09/2002 10:18:57 AM PDT by mwl1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Bigg Red
The Commies are have the dirty tricks book in full distribution to the leftist politicians and theri backers.

Now they have figured out that by holding up law and order justices, they can continue their attck on democracy, and the very fiber of a once great nation.

We must get out and vote them out in greater numbers than ever before. We must campaign in our own areas to get the voters to the polls to knock the leftists out!

Ops4 God Bless America!!!
30 posted on 10/09/2002 10:22:16 AM PDT by OPS4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: FreedomWarrior
Can we kick Vermont out of the union, or at least remove their right to vote?
31 posted on 10/09/2002 10:32:09 AM PDT by Corporate Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreedomWarrior
Leahy is about to get SPANKED by the U.S. Senate for LYING. What a crumb bag Leahy is.
32 posted on 10/09/2002 10:35:56 AM PDT by 1Old Pro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Drango
bump
33 posted on 10/09/2002 10:53:12 AM PDT by lepton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: mwl1
It's called the bully pulpit that the president occupies.

Well, I don't believe he'll actually use the office as a bully pulpit until the day after he wins his second term and not until then.Heck,how can he? Because I tired of the Bias of All TV News,(I really shouldn't have to absorb Bias when my day is over ) I just read online each day.

34 posted on 10/09/2002 11:02:33 AM PDT by Pagey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: PetroniDE
Hear, hear! The gloves are off. Now it's a street fight. I say if we don't take back the Senate, GWB should recess appoint the whole conservative dream team and then let the whining babies protest to no avail.
35 posted on 10/09/2002 11:10:10 AM PDT by Sender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: FreedomWarrior
If the Republicans take back the Senate this year, Lehay may as well dig a hole and pull it in on himself. He won't get the time of day from any member of the majority after this BS. He just burned his last bridge.
36 posted on 10/09/2002 11:16:01 AM PDT by Ditto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ditto
We need to get the treatment of Shedd out to everyone we can, because they'll never hear about it via the news media.

Pickering. Owen. Estrada. Shedd. A dozens of others in limbo.

37 posted on 10/09/2002 11:23:39 AM PDT by mwl1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: FreedomWarrior
DemonRATs: The horde of power mad barbarians!
38 posted on 10/09/2002 12:33:24 PM PDT by F.J. Mitchell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OPS4
We must campaign in our own areas to get the voters to the polls to knock the leftists out!


You are so right!
39 posted on 10/09/2002 12:55:06 PM PDT by Bigg Red
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: FreedomWarrior
Bump
40 posted on 10/09/2002 4:00:13 PM PDT by cinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreedomWarrior
The democraps strike again.
41 posted on 10/09/2002 4:03:23 PM PDT by Saundra Duffy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nonliberal
Sigh. It's not a question of "guts," but one of precedent and conducting the work of the senate with civility and fairness that kept raw, bitter partisanship unders some degree of control. There is a reason for old-fashioned "gentlemen's agreements." Republicans — and, quite frankly, most Democrats prior to the Bork nomination — worked within time-honored Senate precedent. The Democrats of today do not. To them, power is all. Republicans of today are like a disciplined boxer observing Marquis of Queensbury rules while fighting for their lives against the most vicious of street thugs. It isn't a lack of courage, but a lack of understanding of the enemy that is the problem for Republicans.
42 posted on 10/09/2002 4:18:03 PM PDT by Wolfstar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic
Strom is quite the old warhorse, isn't he. He offers us a superb object lesson in not going quietly into that good night. God bless him, indeed.
43 posted on 10/09/2002 4:20:57 PM PDT by Wolfstar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: FreedomWarrior
The Republicans must confront these lies at every opportunity; in the committees, on the floor of the Senate, and in the press. War is war.
44 posted on 10/09/2002 4:22:12 PM PDT by LaGrone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreedomWarrior
Democrats were attempting to "violate, ignore, and/or abuse this rule for the expediency of the desired outcome."

Same old, same old. Democrat policritters don't believe in rules or laws, except as applied to thee and me, but not to them.

45 posted on 10/09/2002 5:23:41 PM PDT by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nonliberal
The Repulsiv-cans that hold themselves out as leaders in the Senate don't have a set of balls among them. Lott is a smooth-haired twit and Hatch is equally worthless. Pretty much a bunch of damned weaklings, if you asked me.
46 posted on 10/09/2002 5:32:10 PM PDT by pointsal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rudypoot
Tell me again why Trent Lott agreed to "share power" with these petty criminals?

Good question. Just imagining Trent Lott's insipid, smiling turncoat face makes me want to smash it. GRRRR.

When's he going to get it that Democrats simply cannot be trusted!

47 posted on 10/09/2002 6:42:15 PM PDT by pray4liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
It isn't a lack of courage, but a lack of understanding of the enemy that is the problem for Republicans.

Maybe it's time they started arming themselves with grenades.

48 posted on 10/09/2002 6:43:20 PM PDT by pray4liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: FreedomWarrior
But I keep being told that there is no difference between the parties; both are socialist. It is all so confusing.
49 posted on 10/09/2002 6:44:56 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
I agree. The Pubbies are going to have to get a severe case of rectal/cranial inversion so that they can see things from the leftist point of view.
50 posted on 10/13/2002 6:20:21 PM PDT by nonliberal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next 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