Comments Posted By Depleted Uranium
Displaying 1 To 5 Of 5 Comments


I guess name calling is where we're at. My guess is I was a registered, mouth breathing Republican many years before you had the opportunity. No matter. I don't mind discourse, but to assume those who disagree with your point of view are "Freepers" and Neocons, is condescending and presumptive. I agreed with more of your post than you might think. The problem is,I think there are problems equally as pressing as who the next member of the SCOTUS will be. None of the people you name would make a bad Justice. Problem is that is where our focus will be until Christmas or longer. We'll go through the filibuster, the Nuclear Option and in the end, probably lose another nominee, all in the name of marking our territory. I want a competent Justice. I can see your point that Ms. Miers was not making a compelling case to become the next Justice. However, I think you want much more than competence and clear thinking on the bench. You want legislation from the bench and that sounds like you don't mind playing the Liberal game. I want Judges. The Congress is about all the legislation I can take on a day to day basis. Please don't tell me what a "good" Conervative/Republican/Thinkingman you are because the future is so much more important than the present. As for you, Scott et al, I disagree with your line of thinking. However, to pull off what you want now, in 2006 and especially 2008, you're going to need the help of those in the party who feel the way I do. Was Bush elected by a slim margin because of who he was or because that's as many votes as the party could muster? Is your message going to generate the votes needed in future elections, or are you just going to feel better knowing you fought the good fight? Hack all of us "Freepers" off and carry on. Never thought John McCain would look good to me.

Comment Posted By Depleted Uranium On 30.10.2005 @ 19:09

By the way. Scott. Is it going to be the party line that when a Republican President is in his fifth year, he's a lame duck and we're moving on to three years from now, thanks alot for your service but we have bigger fishes to fry here? Hell, let's just impeach the SOB now and get on with it...something's lame but I don't think it's the duck.

Comment Posted By Depleted Uranium On 29.10.2005 @ 22:38

Well, maybe so ScottAln, you may be right, I may be crazy (sorry,I stole that). What I do know is that the Democrats and the MSM have been licking their chops for weeks over the possibilty that Ms. Miers would bow to pressure from "Mainstream" Conservatives and darned if the prophecy didn't come true. So now we're a party in disarray, we've "lost our focus", and the Red Meat Democrats are back again. I just don't think this was the fight, the battle, or the war, but we disagree. Just be wary of what we face with the "Nuclear" Nominee. I'm not sure the political capital is worth it. Obviously, we disagree. You can hope more agree with you than with me.

Comment Posted By Depleted Uranium On 28.10.2005 @ 20:44

I am constantly amazed by folks like FastNed, Bill Bennett, Ann Coulter, on and on , ad nauseum, who wish to inform my ignorant out-of-the-beltway Midwest Red State Ass that I should bow down to their representation on my behalf with the "true" conservatives. With friends like you, I sure don't need those Democrat enemies! I'm happy your smugnissess have interevened on my behalf, lest I go and let someone have her day in "court" as it were. So from now on, you as the arbiters of what is right (pun intended) and what is wrong with Conservatives, just tell me what to think, and I'll go along. Gosh, it seems that's why I didn't remain a Democrat. Anyway, FastNed, we're right here for you, buddy. You lead on and we'll be right there. After all, all good Conservatives think alike. Right?

Comment Posted By Depleted Uranium On 28.10.2005 @ 18:55


Why the hullabaloo because the president nominated one of his trusted counselors because we don't have enough background on her. He's apparently known her for more than 20 years and trusts her instincts. If we're going to question someone's validity because he or she once supported liberal causes, then we might as well be ready to lose a lot of support (including me, by the way). I thought the idea was to bring converts along. Do we really believe GW surrounds himself with closet liberals just waiting to unmask themselves as soon as they get the lifetime appointment? Believe what you like but I have more faith in the man.

Comment Posted By Depleted Uranium On 3.10.2005 @ 18:41



Pages (1) : [1]

«« Back To Stats Page