| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"james g. keegan jr." |
| Date: |
23 Jul 2005 09:13:44 AM |
| Object: |
will white house abandon roberts? |
will the white house abandon roberts, as it did bolton, and for the same
reason?
it seems apparent that the while house has abandoned united nations nominee
bolton through its refusal to release pertinent documents to the senate.
will they make the same mistake with judge roberts, particularly after some
senators have already remarked that roberts was less then open during his
previous confirmation hearings?
.
|
|
| User: "Reasoned Insanity" |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
23 Jul 2005 06:40:33 PM |
|
|
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns969C680F180E1keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
will the white house abandon roberts, as it did bolton, and for the same
reason?
it seems apparent that the while house has abandoned united nations
nominee
bolton through its refusal to release pertinent documents to the senate.
will they make the same mistake with judge roberts, particularly after
some
senators have already remarked that roberts was less then open during his
previous confirmation hearings?
Will James Keegan ever stop posting nothing but crap?
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
23 Jul 2005 09:05:59 PM |
|
|
"Reasoned Insanity" <mintclovers@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:RyAEe.40563$DC2.10798@okepread01:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns969C680F180E1keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
will the white house abandon roberts, as it did bolton, and for the
same reason?
it seems apparent that the while house has abandoned united nations
nominee bolton through its refusal to release pertinent documents to
the senate.
will they make the same mistake with judge roberts, particularly
after some senators have already remarked that roberts was less then
open during his previous confirmation hearings?
Will James Keegan ever stop posting nothing but crap?
i see you were unable to address the subject, again.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Reasoned Insanity" |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
23 Jul 2005 09:51:31 PM |
|
|
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns969CE0D1369C2keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
"Reasoned Insanity" <mintclovers@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:RyAEe.40563$DC2.10798@okepread01:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns969C680F180E1keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
will the white house abandon roberts, as it did bolton, and for the
same reason?
it seems apparent that the while house has abandoned united nations
nominee bolton through its refusal to release pertinent documents to
the senate.
will they make the same mistake with judge roberts, particularly
after some senators have already remarked that roberts was less then
open during his previous confirmation hearings?
Will James Keegan ever stop posting nothing but crap?
i see you were unable to address the subject, again.
The subject is off topic therefore I see no reason to discuss it. If you
ever come up with a subject that has to do with abortion, I might grant you
the allowance of replying to it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
23 Jul 2005 09:58:46 PM |
|
|
"Reasoned Insanity" <mintclovers@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:JlDEe.40566$DC2.14901@okepread01:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns969CE0D1369C2keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
"Reasoned Insanity" <mintclovers@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:RyAEe.40563$DC2.10798@okepread01:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns969C680F180E1keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
will the white house abandon roberts, as it did bolton, and for the
same reason?
it seems apparent that the while house has abandoned united nations
nominee bolton through its refusal to release pertinent documents
to the senate.
will they make the same mistake with judge roberts, particularly
after some senators have already remarked that roberts was less
then open during his previous confirmation hearings?
Will James Keegan ever stop posting nothing but crap?
i see you were unable to address the subject, again.
The subject is off topic
which is what prompted you to respond to it twice already. *smirk*
only a crazy with the word "Insanity" in it's cowardly alias would claim
that the supreme court was off topic for the abortion newsgroups.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Somewriter " |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
23 Jul 2005 09:59:07 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 21:51:31 -0500, "Reasoned Insanity"
<mintclovers@yahoo.com> wrote:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns969CE0D1369C2keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
"Reasoned Insanity" <mintclovers@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:RyAEe.40563$DC2.10798@okepread01:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns969C680F180E1keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
will the white house abandon roberts, as it did bolton, and for the
same reason?
it seems apparent that the while house has abandoned united nations
nominee bolton through its refusal to release pertinent documents to
the senate.
will they make the same mistake with judge roberts, particularly
after some senators have already remarked that roberts was less then
open during his previous confirmation hearings?
Will James Keegan ever stop posting nothing but crap?
i see you were unable to address the subject, again.
The subject is off topic therefore I see no reason to discuss it. If you
ever come up with a subject that has to do with abortion, I might grant you
the allowance of replying to it.
Your response have as much worth as Osprey's word.
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
23 Jul 2005 10:01:32 PM |
|
|
Somewriter <> wrote in news:9v06e1t40o1s1mg349ns4udfn6hngfsohv@4ax.com:
On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 21:51:31 -0500, "Reasoned Insanity"
<mintclovers@yahoo.com> wrote:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns969CE0D1369C2keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
"Reasoned Insanity" <mintclovers@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:RyAEe.40563$DC2.10798@okepread01:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns969C680F180E1keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
will the white house abandon roberts, as it did bolton, and for
the same reason?
it seems apparent that the while house has abandoned united
nations nominee bolton through its refusal to release pertinent
documents to the senate.
will they make the same mistake with judge roberts, particularly
after some senators have already remarked that roberts was less
then open during his previous confirmation hearings?
Will James Keegan ever stop posting nothing but crap?
i see you were unable to address the subject, again.
The subject is off topic therefore I see no reason to discuss it. If
you ever come up with a subject that has to do with abortion, I might
grant you the allowance of replying to it.
Your response have as much worth as Osprey's word.
even coward bobby isn't crazy enough to claim that a justice of the
supreme court is off topic for the abortion newsgroups, as "Insanity"
did.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Somewriter " |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
23 Jul 2005 10:03:13 PM |
|
|
On 24 Jul 2005 03:01:32 GMT, "james g. keegan jr."
<keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote:
Somewriter <> wrote in news:9v06e1t40o1s1mg349ns4udfn6hngfsohv@4ax.com:
On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 21:51:31 -0500, "Reasoned Insanity"
<mintclovers@yahoo.com> wrote:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns969CE0D1369C2keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
"Reasoned Insanity" <mintclovers@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:RyAEe.40563$DC2.10798@okepread01:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns969C680F180E1keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
will the white house abandon roberts, as it did bolton, and for
the same reason?
it seems apparent that the while house has abandoned united
nations nominee bolton through its refusal to release pertinent
documents to the senate.
will they make the same mistake with judge roberts, particularly
after some senators have already remarked that roberts was less
then open during his previous confirmation hearings?
Will James Keegan ever stop posting nothing but crap?
i see you were unable to address the subject, again.
The subject is off topic therefore I see no reason to discuss it. If
you ever come up with a subject that has to do with abortion, I might
grant you the allowance of replying to it.
Your response have as much worth as Osprey's word.
even coward bobby isn't crazy enough to claim that a justice of the
supreme court is off topic for the abortion newsgroups, as "Insanity"
did.
Not yet, anyway.
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
23 Jul 2005 10:05:16 PM |
|
|
Somewriter <> wrote in news:6716e15j27thq4eg8jbv5aps165kfililg@4ax.com:
On 24 Jul 2005 03:01:32 GMT, "james g. keegan jr."
<keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote:
Somewriter <> wrote in news:9v06e1t40o1s1mg349ns4udfn6hngfsohv@4ax.com:
On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 21:51:31 -0500, "Reasoned Insanity"
<mintclovers@yahoo.com> wrote:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns969CE0D1369C2keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
"Reasoned Insanity" <mintclovers@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:RyAEe.40563$DC2.10798@okepread01:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns969C680F180E1keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
will the white house abandon roberts, as it did bolton, and for
the same reason?
it seems apparent that the while house has abandoned united
nations nominee bolton through its refusal to release pertinent
documents to the senate.
will they make the same mistake with judge roberts, particularly
after some senators have already remarked that roberts was less
then open during his previous confirmation hearings?
Will James Keegan ever stop posting nothing but crap?
i see you were unable to address the subject, again.
The subject is off topic therefore I see no reason to discuss it. If
you ever come up with a subject that has to do with abortion, I might
grant you the allowance of replying to it.
Your response have as much worth as Osprey's word.
even coward bobby isn't crazy enough to claim that a justice of the
supreme court is off topic for the abortion newsgroups, as "Insanity"
did.
Not yet, anyway.
true enough.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
24 Jul 2005 12:30:53 AM |
|
|
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
will the white house abandon roberts, as it did bolton, and for the same
reason?
it seems apparent that the while house has abandoned united nations nominee
bolton through its refusal to release pertinent documents to the senate.
will they make the same mistake with judge roberts, particularly after some
senators have already remarked that roberts was less then open during his
previous confirmation hearings?
What was this, Keegan, another one of your dreams? You know, the dream
where Bush would appoint Kim Gandy or Patricia Ireland to the Supreme
Court?
Now how about some reality - have you ever heard of attorney/client
privilege? Roberts papers while at the White House are covered by that
privilege! I am looking forward to your snipping this comment since you
won't have an adequate response to attorney/client privilege.
Keegan, you're getting dumber every day.
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
24 Jul 2005 08:04:16 AM |
|
|
wrote in
news:1122183053.924173.306620@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
will the white house abandon roberts, as it did bolton, and for the
same reason?
it seems apparent that the while house has abandoned united nations
nominee bolton through its refusal to release pertinent documents to
the senate.
will they make the same mistake with judge roberts, particularly
after some senators have already remarked that roberts was less then
open during his previous confirmation hearings?
What was this, Keegan, another one of your dreams?
i see you ran away from the issue.
it is issues like this, and your inability to handle them that causes you
to lie, is it not?
pretty soon, coward bobby will be affiliating himself with you, if he
hasn't already.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
24 Jul 2005 01:44:49 PM |
|
|
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
awthrawthr@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1122183053.924173.306620@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
will the white house abandon roberts, as it did bolton, and for the
same reason?
it seems apparent that the while house has abandoned united nations
nominee bolton through its refusal to release pertinent documents to
the senate.
will they make the same mistake with judge roberts, particularly
after some senators have already remarked that roberts was less then
open during his previous confirmation hearings?
What was this, Keegan, another one of your dreams?
i see you ran away from the issue.
it is issues like this, and your inability to handle them that causes you
to lie, is it not?
pretty soon, coward bobby will be affiliating himself with you, if he
hasn't already.
Yup your dumber by the day, because I specifically head smacked you
with the attorney/client privilege which popped your silly dream. Maybe
if you hadn't snipped it LIKE I PREDICTED YOU WOULD, you wouldn't be
looking so extra dumb right now.
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
24 Jul 2005 01:47:49 PM |
|
|
wrote in
news:1122230689.730567.92070@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
will the white house abandon roberts, as it did bolton, and for
the same reason?
it seems apparent that the while house has abandoned united
nations nominee bolton through its refusal to release pertinent
documents to the senate.
will they make the same mistake with judge roberts, particularly
after some senators have already remarked that roberts was less
then open during his previous confirmation hearings?
What was this, Keegan, another one of your dreams?
i see you ran away from the issue.
it is issues like this, and your inability to handle them that causes
you to lie, is it not?
pretty soon, coward bobby will be affiliating himself with you, if he
hasn't already.
Yup
you liars do seem to band together.
as i predicted, the white house announced today that they will not release
the roberts documents.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
24 Jul 2005 11:14:44 PM |
|
|
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
awthrawthr@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1122230689.730567.92070@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
will the white house abandon roberts, as it did bolton, and for
the same reason?
it seems apparent that the while house has abandoned united
nations nominee bolton through its refusal to release pertinent
documents to the senate.
will they make the same mistake with judge roberts, particularly
after some senators have already remarked that roberts was less
then open during his previous confirmation hearings?
What was this, Keegan, another one of your dreams?
i see you ran away from the issue.
it is issues like this, and your inability to handle them that causes
you to lie, is it not?
pretty soon, coward bobby will be affiliating himself with you, if he
hasn't already.
Yup
you liars do seem to band together.
as i predicted, the white house announced today that they will not release
the roberts documents.
Exactly. Again, it's called attorney/client privilege. I just heard
that Hillary has told friends she will be voting for Roberts. Are you
feeling a bit lonely out there on the leftwingnut?
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
25 Jul 2005 07:57:03 AM |
|
|
wrote in
news:1122264884.933314.71810@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
wrote in
news:1122230689.730567.92070@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
will the white house abandon roberts, as it did bolton, and for
the same reason?
it seems apparent that the while house has abandoned united
nations nominee bolton through its refusal to release pertinent
documents to the senate.
will they make the same mistake with judge roberts,
particularly after some senators have already remarked that
roberts was less then open during his previous confirmation
hearings?
What was this, Keegan, another one of your dreams?
i see you ran away from the issue.
it is issues like this, and your inability to handle them that
causes you to lie, is it not?
pretty soon, coward bobby will be affiliating himself with you, if
he hasn't already.
Yup
you liars do seem to band together.
as i predicted, the white house announced today that they will not
release the roberts documents.
Exactly. Again, it's called attorney/client privilege. I just heard
that Hillary has told friends she will be voting for Roberts.
i heard that bill first told friends that all republicans would vote
against roberts.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
25 Jul 2005 10:32:27 PM |
|
|
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
awthrawthr@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1122264884.933314.71810@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
awthrawthr@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1122230689.730567.92070@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
will the white house abandon roberts, as it did bolton, and for
the same reason?
it seems apparent that the while house has abandoned united
nations nominee bolton through its refusal to release pertinent
documents to the senate.
will they make the same mistake with judge roberts,
particularly after some senators have already remarked that
roberts was less then open during his previous confirmation
hearings?
What was this, Keegan, another one of your dreams?
i see you ran away from the issue.
it is issues like this, and your inability to handle them that
causes you to lie, is it not?
pretty soon, coward bobby will be affiliating himself with you, if
he hasn't already.
Yup
you liars do seem to band together.
as i predicted, the white house announced today that they will not
release the roberts documents.
Exactly. Again, it's called attorney/client privilege. I just heard
that Hillary has told friends she will be voting for Roberts.
i heard that bill first told friends that all republicans would vote
against roberts.
I guess we'll just have to meet - online - after the vote and see who
is correct. By the way Lawrence O'Donnell, the liberal commentator who
is an exec for the TV show "West Wing" predicted on TV that Roberts
would get at least 80 votes to confirm.
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
26 Jul 2005 05:59:42 AM |
|
|
wrote in
news:1122348747.543414.160010@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
wrote in
news:1122264884.933314.71810@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
wrote in
news:1122230689.730567.92070@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
will the white house abandon roberts, as it did bolton, and
for the same reason?
it seems apparent that the while house has abandoned united
nations nominee bolton through its refusal to release
pertinent documents to the senate.
will they make the same mistake with judge roberts,
particularly after some senators have already remarked that
roberts was less then open during his previous confirmation
hearings?
What was this, Keegan, another one of your dreams?
i see you ran away from the issue.
it is issues like this, and your inability to handle them that
causes you to lie, is it not?
pretty soon, coward bobby will be affiliating himself with you,
if he hasn't already.
Yup
you liars do seem to band together.
as i predicted, the white house announced today that they will not
release the roberts documents.
Exactly. Again, it's called attorney/client privilege. I just heard
that Hillary has told friends she will be voting for Roberts.
i heard that bill first told friends that all republicans would vote
against roberts.
I guess we'll just have to meet - online - after the vote and see who
is correct.
what vote?
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
26 Jul 2005 11:50:55 AM |
|
|
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
awthrawthr@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1122348747.543414.160010@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
awthrawthr@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1122264884.933314.71810@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
awthrawthr@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1122230689.730567.92070@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
will the white house abandon roberts, as it did bolton, and
for the same reason?
it seems apparent that the while house has abandoned united
nations nominee bolton through its refusal to release
pertinent documents to the senate.
will they make the same mistake with judge roberts,
particularly after some senators have already remarked that
roberts was less then open during his previous confirmation
hearings?
What was this, Keegan, another one of your dreams?
i see you ran away from the issue.
it is issues like this, and your inability to handle them that
causes you to lie, is it not?
pretty soon, coward bobby will be affiliating himself with you,
if he hasn't already.
Yup
you liars do seem to band together.
as i predicted, the white house announced today that they will not
release the roberts documents.
Exactly. Again, it's called attorney/client privilege. I just heard
that Hillary has told friends she will be voting for Roberts.
i heard that bill first told friends that all republicans would vote
against roberts.
I guess we'll just have to meet - online - after the vote and see who
is correct.
what vote?
You're kidding, right? Maybe if you would read the entire first
sentence and the second sentence before you hit the snip button, you
wouldn't be so ignorant.
The ONLY vote that is refered to in my message and the two previous
messages in the thread is the vote to confirm Roberts. You are
willfully ignorant and doing a good job at it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
26 Jul 2005 12:17:17 PM |
|
|
wrote in
news:1122396655.680288.138980@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
wrote in
news:1122348747.543414.160010@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
wrote in
news:1122264884.933314.71810@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
wrote in
news:1122230689.730567.92070@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
will the white house abandon roberts, as it did bolton,
and for the same reason?
it seems apparent that the while house has abandoned
united nations nominee bolton through its refusal to
release pertinent documents to the senate.
will they make the same mistake with judge roberts,
particularly after some senators have already remarked
that roberts was less then open during his previous
confirmation hearings?
What was this, Keegan, another one of your dreams?
i see you ran away from the issue.
it is issues like this, and your inability to handle them
that causes you to lie, is it not?
pretty soon, coward bobby will be affiliating himself with
you, if he hasn't already.
Yup
you liars do seem to band together.
as i predicted, the white house announced today that they will
not release the roberts documents.
Exactly. Again, it's called attorney/client privilege. I just
heard that Hillary has told friends she will be voting for
Roberts.
i heard that bill first told friends that all republicans would
vote against roberts.
I guess we'll just have to meet - online - after the vote and see
who is correct.
what vote?
The ONLY vote that is refered to in my message and the two previous
messages in the thread is the vote to confirm Roberts.
you haven't been paying attention, unless you're blatantly
misreprsenting again. i suppose a well-known liar like you is perfectly
comfortable misrepresenting.
for there to be a confirmation vote on roberts, his nomination would
have to get out of committee. had you read this thread, the same one to
which you responded more than a half dozen times, you might have noticed
the subject.
now that the white house has been caught lying about roberts past, as he
has tried to cover it up, how likely is it that the nomination will get
out of committee?
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
26 Jul 2005 10:40:09 PM |
|
|
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
awthrawthr@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1122396655.680288.138980@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
awthrawthr@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1122348747.543414.160010@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
awthrawthr@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1122264884.933314.71810@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
awthrawthr@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1122230689.730567.92070@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
will the white house abandon roberts, as it did bolton,
and for the same reason?
it seems apparent that the while house has abandoned
united nations nominee bolton through its refusal to
release pertinent documents to the senate.
will they make the same mistake with judge roberts,
particularly after some senators have already remarked
that roberts was less then open during his previous
confirmation hearings?
What was this, Keegan, another one of your dreams?
i see you ran away from the issue.
it is issues like this, and your inability to handle them
that causes you to lie, is it not?
pretty soon, coward bobby will be affiliating himself with
you, if he hasn't already.
Yup
you liars do seem to band together.
as i predicted, the white house announced today that they will
not release the roberts documents.
Exactly. Again, it's called attorney/client privilege. I just
heard that Hillary has told friends she will be voting for
Roberts.
i heard that bill first told friends that all republicans would
vote against roberts.
I guess we'll just have to meet - online - after the vote and see
who is correct.
what vote?
The ONLY vote that is refered to in my message and the two previous
messages in the thread is the vote to confirm Roberts.
you haven't been paying attention, unless you're blatantly
misreprsenting again.
You misrepresent like you're breathing - it comes naturally to you.
It's practically all you do.
i suppose a well-known liar like you is perfectly
comfortable misrepresenting.
What else could one expect from a liar like you but more accusatory
lies? It's what you do. Why should I be surprised - you support
plucking living human beings out of their mother's womb so that they
can be mercilessly killed with a scissors and suction device. So
constant lying is just your sideshow.
for there to be a confirmation vote on roberts, his nomination would
have to get out of committee. had you read this thread, the same one to
which you responded more than a half dozen times, you might have noticed
the subject.
Look you lying moron, The original subject is whether the White House
will be abandoning Roberts. You ought to know that since you started
the thread - as ridiculous as it is. Now try to pay attention. There
are 10 Republicans and 8 Democrats on the Judicial Committee. Can you
do arithmetic?
Furthermore, All 14 of the Gang of 14 are expected to vote for Roberts.
Try wrapping your pea brain around that.
now that the white house has been caught lying about roberts past, as he
has tried to cover it up, how likely is it that the nomination will get
out of committee?
No one has lied about Roberts' past. He said he didn't remember being a
member of the Federalist Society. If you think his lack of memory about
a trivial matter like that is going to unravel the confirmation, you
have less than a pea brain. Your desire to call it a lie is yet another
example of what a big fat liar you are. You ought to be ashamed of
yourself except that you're apparently so mentally ill that you are
suffering from diminished capacity.
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
27 Jul 2005 09:28:37 AM |
|
|
wrote in news:1122435609.084045.18420
@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
i suppose a well-known liar like you is perfectly
comfortable misrepresenting.
What else could one expect from a liar like you
proof of one of your lies is appended. you will not support your similar
claim because you are lying again.
*you* posted the following lie:
"You're also the Bush-hating idiot who claims to have become a Republican"
"news:1118452714.336492.48490@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
then you ran away like the liar you are when you were challenged to support
your lie with evidence.
run away again now, coward.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
28 Jul 2005 06:14:11 PM |
|
|
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
awthrawthr@yahoo.com wrote in news:1122435609.084045.18420
@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
i suppose a well-known liar like you is perfectly
comfortable misrepresenting.
What else could one expect from a liar like you
proof of one of your lies is appended. you will not support your similar
claim because you are lying again.
*you* posted the following lie:
"You're also the Bush-hating idiot who claims to have become a Republican"
"news:1118452714.336492.48490@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
then you ran away like the liar you are when you were challenged to support
your lie with evidence.
Why would I reply to your false accusations?? You still haven't learned
the difference between a mistake and a lie. Let me break it down for
you: your accusation is a lie.
And what's really sweet is watching you self destruct in your fantasy
world thinking that Roberts won't be confirmed. Your sickness isn't a
lie - it's delusional.
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
28 Jul 2005 08:18:47 PM |
|
|
wrote in
news:1122592451.655294.83530@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
wrote in news:1122435609.084045.18420
@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
i suppose a well-known liar like you is perfectly
comfortable misrepresenting.
What else could one expect from a liar like you
proof of one of your lies is appended. you will not support your
similar claim because you are lying again.
*you* posted the following lie:
"You're also the Bush-hating idiot who claims to have become a
Republican"
"news:1118452714.336492.48490@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
then you ran away like the liar you are when you were challenged to
support your lie with evidence.
Why would I reply to your false accusations??
ummm, it was you who made the false accusation, as shown above. i see
you're still far too much the coward to admit to your lie, althogh it has
been commented upon often.
i suppose so many have called you a liar that you get confused.
run away from me again, coward.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
29 Jul 2005 11:29:38 PM |
|
|
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
awthrawthr@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1122592451.655294.83530@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
awthrawthr@yahoo.com wrote in news:1122435609.084045.18420
@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
i suppose a well-known liar like you is perfectly
comfortable misrepresenting.
What else could one expect from a liar like you
proof of one of your lies is appended. you will not support your
similar claim because you are lying again.
*you* posted the following lie:
"You're also the Bush-hating idiot who claims to have become a
Republican"
"news:1118452714.336492.48490@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
then you ran away like the liar you are when you were challenged to
support your lie with evidence.
Why would I reply to your false accusations??
ummm, it was you who made the false accusation, as shown above. i see
you're still far too much the coward to admit to your lie, althogh it has
been commented upon often.
i suppose so many have called you a liar that you get confused.
run away from me again, coward.
PS. How is your defeat of John Roberts coming along?
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
30 Jul 2005 06:12:17 AM |
|
|
wrote in
news:1122697778.921783.21140@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
wrote in
news:1122592451.655294.83530@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
wrote in news:1122435609.084045.18420
@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
i suppose a well-known liar like you is perfectly
comfortable misrepresenting.
What else could one expect from a liar like you
proof of one of your lies is appended. you will not support your
similar claim because you are lying again.
*you* posted the following lie:
"You're also the Bush-hating idiot who claims to have become a
Republican"
"news:1118452714.336492.48490@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
then you ran away like the liar you are when you were challenged
to support your lie with evidence.
Why would I reply to your false accusations??
ummm, it was you who made the false accusation, as shown above. i see
you're still far too much the coward to admit to your lie, althogh it
has been commented upon often.
i suppose so many have called you a liar that you get confused.
run away from me again, coward.
PS.
keep running away coward.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
29 Jul 2005 11:28:32 PM |
|
|
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
awthrawthr@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1122592451.655294.83530@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
awthrawthr@yahoo.com wrote in news:1122435609.084045.18420
@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
i suppose a well-known liar like you is perfectly
comfortable misrepresenting.
What else could one expect from a liar like you
proof of one of your lies is appended. you will not support your
similar claim because you are lying again.
*you* posted the following lie:
"You're also the Bush-hating idiot who claims to have become a
Republican"
"news:1118452714.336492.48490@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
then you ran away like the liar you are when you were challenged to
support your lie with evidence.
Why would I reply to your false accusations??
ummm, it was you who made the false accusation, as shown above. i see
you're still far too much the coward to admit to your lie, althogh it has
been commented upon often.
What you keep missing is that you immediately and incorrectly accused
me of lying. You don't seem to be able to grasp that - falsely accusing
someone of being a liar does not earn you a response.
It is not a lie to make a mistake. When will you ever learn that? Will
you ever learn that?
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
30 Jul 2005 06:11:44 AM |
|
|
wrote in
news:1122697712.779933.153590@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
wrote in
news:1122592451.655294.83530@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
wrote in news:1122435609.084045.18420
@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
i suppose a well-known liar like you is perfectly
comfortable misrepresenting.
What else could one expect from a liar like you
proof of one of your lies is appended. you will not support your
similar claim because you are lying again.
*you* posted the following lie:
"You're also the Bush-hating idiot who claims to have become a
Republican"
"news:1118452714.336492.48490@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
then you ran away like the liar you are when you were challenged
to support your lie with evidence.
Why would I reply to your false accusations??
ummm, it was you who made the false accusation, as shown above. i see
you're still far too much the coward to admit to your lie, althogh it
has been commented upon often.
What you keep missing is that you immediately and incorrectly accused
me of lying.
on the contrary, i acurately accused you of lying and of being a coward.
It is not a lie to make a mistake.
no it is not.
show readers when you posted your admission of error and apology. then
show readers the date of your orignal "mistake."
*SMIRK*
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Sebree" |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
26 Jul 2005 04:45:37 PM |
|
|
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
awthrawthr@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1122396655.680288.138980@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
awthrawthr@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1122348747.543414.160010@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
awthrawthr@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1122264884.933314.71810@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
awthrawthr@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1122230689.730567.92070@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
will the white house abandon roberts, as it did bolton,
and for the same reason?
it seems apparent that the while house has abandoned
united nations nominee bolton through its refusal to
release pertinent documents to the senate.
will they make the same mistake with judge roberts,
particularly after some senators have already remarked
that roberts was less then open during his previous
confirmation hearings?
What was this, Keegan, another one of your dreams?
i see you ran away from the issue.
it is issues like this, and your inability to handle them
that causes you to lie, is it not?
pretty soon, coward bobby will be affiliating himself with
you, if he hasn't already.
Yup
you liars do seem to band together.
as i predicted, the white house announced today that they will
not release the roberts documents.
Exactly. Again, it's called attorney/client privilege. I just
heard that Hillary has told friends she will be voting for
Roberts.
i heard that bill first told friends that all republicans would
vote against roberts.
I guess we'll just have to meet - online - after the vote and see
who is correct.
what vote?
The ONLY vote that is refered to in my message and the two previous
messages in the thread is the vote to confirm Roberts.
you haven't been paying attention, unless you're blatantly
misreprsenting again. i suppose a well-known liar like you is perfectly
comfortable misrepresenting.
for there to be a confirmation vote on roberts, his nomination would
have to get out of committee. had you read this thread, the same one to
which you responded more than a half dozen times, you might have noticed
the subject.
now that the white house has been caught lying about roberts past, as he
has tried to cover it up, how likely is it that the nomination will get
out of committee?
Unfortunately, the likely answer to that question is "highly likely".
The more that I hear about Roberts, the more he sounds like he is very
much like what the far right wants on the USSC bench, young, very
conservative, and very Repugnantcan.
Mark Sebree
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
26 Jul 2005 05:15:31 PM |
|
|
"Mark Sebree" <sebree@infionline.net> wrote in news:1122414337.320049.47670
@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
for there to be a confirmation vote on roberts, his nomination would
have to get out of committee. had you read this thread, the same one to
which you responded more than a half dozen times, you might have noticed
the subject.
now that the white house has been caught lying about roberts past, as he
has tried to cover it up, how likely is it that the nomination will get
out of committee?
Unfortunately, the likely answer to that question is "highly likely".
The more that I hear about Roberts, the more he sounds like he is very
much like what the far right wants on the USSC bench, young, very
conservative, and very Repugnantcan.
perhaps you are right. you certainly are with regard to your sense that
roberts is the dream-child fo the extreme right.
still, i think there are signs of conflict within the gop. i believe that
there are one or two fairly credible republicans within the house and
senate, although that belief is growing less firm. all it's going to take
is one call for rove's resignation and the whole house of cards will come
tumbling down, including roberts, just as it did with watergatge.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
24 Jul 2005 02:47:40 AM |
|
|
wrote:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
will the white house abandon roberts, as it did bolton, and for the same
reason?
it seems apparent that the while house has abandoned united nations nominee
bolton through its refusal to release pertinent documents to the senate.
will they make the same mistake with judge roberts, particularly after some
senators have already remarked that roberts was less then open during his
previous confirmation hearings?
What was this, Keegan, another one of your dreams? You know, the dream
where Bush would appoint Kim Gandy or Patricia Ireland to the Supreme
Court?
Now how about some reality - have you ever heard of attorney/client
privilege? Roberts papers while at the White House are covered by that
privilege! I am looking forward to your snipping this comment since you
won't have an adequate response to attorney/client privilege.
Keegan, you're getting dumber every day.
Just when you didn't think that was possible, keegan proves it is
possible to get dumber by the day. I kind of feel sorry for the sap,
him and his cronies have such a pathetic little life..if you want to
call it a life.
They think their posts are going to start some type of a revolution
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: will white house abandon roberts? |
24 Jul 2005 08:05:41 AM |
|
|
"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:1122191260.189925.174200@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Just when you didn't think that was possible, keegan proves it is
possible to get dumber by the day.
so claims coward bobby, the abortion newsgroups most prolific liar and the
coward who is so frightened of me that he only dares to flame me in
responses to others, not to me directly.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
