Would it be risky for Democrats to oppose the first ever black chief justice? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 01, 2024, 11:52:39 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Would it be risky for Democrats to oppose the first ever black chief justice? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Would it be risky for Democrats to oppose the first ever black chief justice?
#1
Yes (R)
 
#2
No (R)
 
#3
Yes (D)
 
#4
No (D)
 
#5
Yes (L)
 
#6
No (L)
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 29

Author Topic: Would it be risky for Democrats to oppose the first ever black chief justice?  (Read 1958 times)
Smash255
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,454


« on: June 20, 2005, 04:52:28 PM »

No, because they're Democrats. Fritz Hollings didn't recieve any criticism from the media for saying that Bush went to war to protect Israel, but Trent Lott's remark which simply praised Strom Thurmond ended his tenure as senate majority leader.

Lets see Lott praised a Segregationalist & suggested we wouldn't have all these "problems" if he won in his run for President in 1948.  In 1948 when Thurmond ran for President he was a complete & utter racist & ran under the sole platfoorm of keeping Segreation
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.029 seconds with 14 queries.