Comments on: MD Governor: Racial Discrimination “Not My Business”

By: Keith

Keith — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 09:54:02 +0000

Racial discrimination! Whose business it is then?

By: justin moore

justin moore — Thu, 01 Dec 2005 13:49:57 +0000

it’s a very nice website you’re having here. faithful, profound, coolblooded nothing comparative to bad: http://www.space.com/ , Full Plane Fetch or not opponents will gnome unconditionally , White Soldier is always White Stake when grass is player it will steal player

By: Seenix Ginlen

Seenix Ginlen — Fri, 14 Oct 2005 06:48:40 +0000

amateur bondage sex

Think Progress »…

By: Victoria

Victoria — Thu, 04 Aug 2005 01:58:56 +0000

Go to the top of this page and click on Supreme Court Ethics(in pink)and move your mouse down. You will find filed under: The Supreme Court and posted by a Judd on July 25, 2005 at 5:38 pm. John Roberts was a member of the Federalist Society. If you look on the next page you will find. Filed under: The Supreme Court and posted by Mipe on July 25, 2005 at 11:10 am. John Roberts has sudden Amnesia. The Washington Post reported that John Roberts was a member of The Federalist Society according to a published copy of a organization 1997-1998 leadership directory. The White House stated that John Roberts has no recellection of being a member. We must ask ourselves do we want someone like this to serve as a Judge for The Supreme Court? (The Highest Court) If he is appointed I hope he does not have a sudden attack(amnesia)while making important decisions. Remember, these are the people, who are appointed, to represent the U.S. who are at the top of our government.

By: Victoria

Victoria — Thu, 04 Aug 2005 00:59:57 +0000

You must first understand the main purpose of the NAACP. 1. To help, protect a people, who were originally transported to this country, on ships as slaves. Our ancesters labored and worked hard to help build this country and was never fairly paid any reparations for our hard labor. Our last names were given to us by the slave masters. Our original religion was taken away from us and Christianty was taught to us as a means of control and to keep the so called Negro in his place. 2. The NAACP is not a private social club. 3. If you are a student you can go on line and find out the purpose or mission of this organization before you comment. From reading your comments you understand what The Elkridge County Club,s reason for existence, but not the NAACP’s purpose. I am also educated and I am concern about our lack of educational progress in this city. But, if you are a reader, then you will understand that some of our problems started from the top with the people we elect as our representatives.

By: Dave

Dave — Tue, 02 Aug 2005 22:08:50 +0000

Regarding The Elkridge Country Club Non-Issue: When do we protest historically Black private institutions (i.e. Howard university in DC) and demand them to be more pro-active in attracting more white students? When do we protest the NAACP for their lack of white members? Elkridge CC is a private club, socially and economically, and limits membership to those who can afford the membership and bask in that social environ. Maybe there should more responsible protests against our failing school systems and the lack of educational progress we have made in this city and country.

By: Victoria

Victoria — Sun, 31 Jul 2005 19:20:59 +0000

On July 31, 2005, the Sunday Plain Dealer, in Cleveland did an article on President Bush nominee John Roberts, for the Supreme Court who was reported to be a member of the Federalist Society. I find this disturbing for someone who is a representative for our court system. Does this mean that he will take this negative attitude against women, blacks, minorities, etc… with him when making decisions?

By: John S.

John S. — Fri, 08 Jul 2005 13:07:58 +0000

It can be tiresome, but would Galileo have let the world go on thinking that the Earth was the center of the universe when he clearly knew otherwise?

We already know that he would – and did – not.

By: KillCon2995

KillCon2995 — Fri, 08 Jul 2005 09:39:19 +0000

Thanks for the support, KillCon. After all, you know you call someone who has openly declared themselves to be your enemy?

Your enemy.

However, unlike their horde of quasi-Christians, I prefer to practice the authentic Christian teaching of turn the other cheekÃ¢â‚¬Â¦

They can slap the one above, and kiss the one below.

Laughing all my cheeks off!

My Pleasure. Anytime John S., and thanks again for all your work. Tiresome, isn’t it?

By: Bigmarunga

Bigmarunga — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 22:34:05 +0000

Who the hell are we to expect 2 elected officials to walk the talk?

By: Think Progress » Steele on The Ehrlich Administration: We Are The Fulfillment of MLK Jr.’s Dream

Thu, 07 Jul 2005 12:55:15 +0000

[...] Yesterday, we wrote about how Maryland Gov. Bob Ehrlich held a $100,000 fundraiser at an all-white country club. Neither Ehrlich or Lt. Gov. Michael Steele think it was a big deal. [...]

By: ED AFJ

ED AFJ — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 02:02:29 +0000

*L* *LOSER* *LOUT* *LOWLY* *LOUSE* *LIAR* *LUNATIC* *LUMP*
*LUDICROUS* *LOW-DOWN* *LOONEY* *LOATHSOME* *LEPER*

By: mapaiko

mapaiko — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 01:14:50 +0000

I just love the Federlist editors…U of M discriminated against whites by doing what exactly? Weighting admission criteria differently upon race? Or economics? Or nepotism? Or socioeconomic status? Zip code? Were all those who were admitted or considered for admission rated equally in all aspects of their ability? Should they be?

Here’s a question – Please explain Harvard’s change in criteria for admissions in the 1920’s and compare and contrast them to admission policies today. Given the ends acheived and the means employed was this a fair policy? Notwithstanding its fairness was the policy constitutionally valid? If so, aren’t you just arguing about semantics…

By: John S.

John S. — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 00:31:24 +0000

Editors-

Yawn.

By: John S.

John S. — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 00:30:26 +0000

Thanks for the support, KillCon. After all, you know you call someone who has openly declared themselves to be your enemy?

Your enemy.

However, unlike their horde of quasi-Christians, I prefer to practice the authentic Christian teaching of turn the other cheek…

They can slap the one above, and kiss the one below.

By: The Editors, American Federalist Journal

The Editors, American Federalist Journal — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 00:27:01 +0000

“What I fear is that if SCOTUS overturned Roe vs. Wade, the Republicans would bury the issue and NEVER let any sort of democratic process on the matter see the light of day. All of a sudden, they would become fierce advocates of the respect for judicial decisions.”

What this demonstrates is John has no idea what the Roe decision did. It took the issue away from legislatures. Overturning Roe would not ban abortion, it would return the issue to legislatures, who would be free to keep abortion legal, or to regulate it in various ways. In other words, democracy. That’s what the Democrats oppose.

By: The Editors, American Federalist Journal

The Editors, American Federalist Journal — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 00:24:38 +0000

Wow, John S. knows how to hyperlink! His mother must be so proud! *L*

By: The Editors, American Federalist Journal

The Editors, American Federalist Journal — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 00:23:16 +0000

Justin,

” it is their job to interpret the law in the most impartial way.”

That’s not what the justices did in Roe. They didn’t follow the written words of the Constitution, they made policy from the bench, which is not their job, and not democratic.

By: John S.

John S. — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 00:22:29 +0000

Justin-

Good catch! As you can see, when one has to weed out SO many fallacies, it can be difficult to stay focused on the issues at hand.

Also, as an addendum to your point, I find it incredibly amusing that Editor seems to think that if abortion were handed to the Congress as a legislative issue, that the result would have to be that abortion is made illegal.

After all, as he puts it, “thatÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s exactly what you on the left oppose.” Which yet again is another misconception by conservatives like him, that somehow Democrats fear democracy. Which is hardly the case.

What I fear is that if SCOTUS overturned Roe vs. Wade, the Republicans would bury the issue and NEVER let any sort of democratic process on the matter see the light of day. All of a sudden, they would become fierce advocates of the respect for judicial decisions.

Much in the way they “blue-slipped” dozens of Clinton’s judicial nominees, until they decided to change the rules to prevent Democrats from doing the exact same thing to Bush. Just like they want to go with the “nuclear” option to stop filibusters which they enjoyed using themselves in the past. And exactly like their changeing of House Ethics Committee rules solely for the purpose of protecting Tom Delay, after they had spent years crowing about making those same rules tougher (on Democrats, anyway).

What I oppose is hypocrisy, pure and simple.

By: KillCon2005

KillCon2005 — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 00:20:39 +0000

*L*

Is this a little face? (L) Nose, mouth… (punch it). (* *) two eyes (well, we all know what goes right between the eyes, don’t we?)

http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2005/06/hunting-of-liberals.html

You don’t debate with them. You don’t apologize to them. You do what John S. does. Thank you, John S., and when the time comes, since they won’t fight in Iraq, we can see how much stomach they have for a fight here. My guess is, not much.