Supreme Court rejects Boy Scouts' appeal

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Tuesday, March 9, 2004

[CWOJackson]

LOL!

I guess that would explain his 11th Commandment.

You're working very hard at trying to be miserable.

[DoughtyOne]

Doing my best Forrest Gump impession:

That may be true, but appointing Supreme Court Justices is sorta like a box of 'chockolots', you never know what your're going to get.

In a way this is true. Some of these guys go off in directions you would never have predicted upon appointment.

[CWOJackson]

Now in all seriousness. Do you actually think there would be chocolate inside one of those Kerry mints?

[DoughtyOne]

I believe there is still a Nixon appointee on the court. Seems like I read that that a year or two ago. I may be wrong.

[Polybius]

For more than 30 years, the Boy Scouts had participated in the Connecticut State Employee Campaign Committee, which allows private groups to receive charitable donations through voluntary payroll deductions from state employees.

Fair enough. Private is private and we don't need money with strings attached.

May I suggest that state employees who support the Boy Scout send whatever contribution they would have may to the drive directly to the Boy Scouts and tell the payroll department why they are opting out of the payroll deduction program.

Polybius, Assistant Scoutmaster

[DoughtyOne]

Nope.

[Antoninus]

What is *wrong* with the Supreme Court since last summer?!

Accoding to an ad I saw in the Wanderer (a conservative Catholic newspaper), the "gays" have been weaseling their way into clerkships for Supreme Court justices--by design. You know, to put a "human face" on a disgusting act and a filthy lifestyle. Sandra "Gay" O'Connor reportedly has or has had a number of "gays" on her staff...

[nutmeg]

ping!

Please Freepmail me if you want on or off my infrequent Connecticut ping list.

[rdb3]

The other scarey thing in your and other's posts is this. Seven of nine Supreme Court Justices have been appointed by Republicans.

And in these confirmations, who controlled the Senate at the time?

You can be sure Kerry won't even nominate anyone you'd like to see on the bench.

Show 'em my motto!

[rdb3]

If our guy won't force through conservative judges...

Show me in the Constitution where the President is allowed to force through judges. I must have missed that part.

And if the President could force through someone, we'd then have a dictator, not a President of a Republic.

Show 'em my motto!

[DoughtyOne]

There's more ways to control people and push through your objectives than appear in the public arena. Strong leaders make alliances and wield power. We can't even keep our ducks in a row.

Look guy, I've seen every excuse in the book why our agenda goes un-advanced. In the business world a chief executive with this record, and the record of the leaders in the House and the Senate, would earn them each a long walk on a short pier.

We have objectives which are almost all going un-achieved.