|
|
|
let's take the liberals and banish them from the USA
Roman Crusader |
Homepage |
10.01.08 - 1:01 pm | #
|
|
liberal politicians that is
Roman Crusader |
Homepage |
10.01.08 - 1:02 pm | #
|
|
If liberals want a socialist state then they should move to Europe. Why drag those of us who still believe in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence down their socialist pit?
Liberals want a socialist "paradise". Well that already exists across the Atlantic, and they should emigrate there instead of forcing their "change" on us who still believe in the principles of our Founding Fathers.
atheling |
10.01.08 - 1:12 pm | #
|
|
Actually I'm surprised the media is still pushing statism since their betters in Europe whom they adore are beginning to wake up and are disengaging themselves from it. The US media really needs to read more about what their betters in Europe are doing. Tom
ps: Kmiec has become pathetic. He really needs to re-read the life of St. Thomas More to help him rediscover his spine.
TJM |
10.01.08 - 1:19 pm | #
|
|
If liberals want a socialist state then they should move to Europe.
Funny you should mention that because it seems every election we get celebrities who Threaten to move to Canada or Europe if the Republicans win. They never do of course because modern liberalism is about process, not content.
Scott W. |
Homepage |
10.01.08 - 1:39 pm | #
|
|
Interesting that the Christians supporting Obama call themselves the Matthew 25 Network. Aren't the unborn the least of all?
Jan |
10.01.08 - 1:52 pm | #
|
|
Any way you spell it, a shill is a shill.
And whenever my family asks me why I want to expat to Italy I point out that if I'm going to live under a socialist regime, I might as well do it in a place with good sun, good wine, and good churches.
Flambeaux |
10.01.08 - 2:05 pm | #
|
|
My take on the pro-Obama Catholic position
SDG |
Homepage |
10.01.08 - 3:32 pm | #
|
|
Flam- but I live in Philly. At least we have good wine and churches. Sun- not so good.
Gerard E. |
10.01.08 - 3:41 pm | #
|
|
lucifer was the first liberal. and look what happened to him!
Roman Crusader |
Homepage |
10.01.08 - 4:05 pm | #
|
|
It has been suggested in some quarters that Kmiec is doing all this in hopes of getting a Supreme Court appointment, which would add the final vote necessary to overturn Roe. If this is his strategy, I see three problems:
1. The pro-aborts are anything but stupid. To his credit, Kmiec has been unrepentently pro-life, and he does have his long-term record. Any attempt by an Obama administration to appoint Kmiec to the Supreme Court will be bitterly opposed publicly and privately by the pro-aborts.
2. There is, no doubt, a long list of ideologically reliable Democrats who are in line for the next Supreme Court vacancy. They are all ahead of Kmiec.
3. Obama has shown a willingness to toss inconvenient allies under the bus. What makes Kmiec think he's any different?
Daniel Latinus |
10.01.08 - 4:20 pm | #
|
|
Daniel:
That "suggestion" makes absolutely no sense.
Yes, I agree that Kmiec is probably angling for a Supreme Court Justice appointment, but he has no intention of overturning Roe v. Wade.
This is just a naked self interested ploy for power.
God help this man. He has sold his soul for worldly goods.
atheling |
10.01.08 - 5:00 pm | #
|
|
Commenting by HaloScan
|