|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » General Discussion |
Liberal_in_LA (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Apr-02-11 05:22 PM Original message |
It doesn't matter that Scalia's son's firm reps wal-mart - Scalia would have ruled for Wal-mart anyw |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SpiralHawk (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Apr-02-11 05:25 PM Response to Original message |
1. Screaming conflict of interest (R) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Rhiannon12866 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Apr-02-11 05:27 PM Response to Reply #1 |
2. Bush* v Gore. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Curmudgeoness (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Apr-02-11 05:35 PM Response to Original message |
3. Lower than a snake's ass. This describes RW conservatives |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BrklynLiberal (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Apr-02-11 05:36 PM Response to Original message |
4. RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Liberal_in_LA (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Apr-02-11 05:38 PM Response to Reply #4 |
5. there is NO CHANCE Scalia would rule against a big corporation and for women |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SpiralHawk (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Apr-02-11 05:45 PM Response to Reply #5 |
6. Of course, Uncle Clarence Thomas (R) has Scalia's ample ass (R) covered |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Liberal_in_LA (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Apr-02-11 05:58 PM Response to Reply #6 |
9. yup. Two votes in Wal Mart's pocket |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
malaise (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Apr-02-11 05:48 PM Response to Original message |
7. There are rules? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AlabamaLibrul (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Apr-02-11 05:52 PM Response to Original message |
8. The difference is that |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pacalo (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Apr-02-11 08:47 PM Response to Original message |
10. It's NOT okay. And there you have it -- Scalia sided with Wal-Mart & against women's |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MadMaddie (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Apr-02-11 08:51 PM Response to Original message |
11. Did I miss the ruling? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
former9thward (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Apr-02-11 09:22 PM Response to Reply #11 |
12. No. The ruling won't come until June. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
madamesilverspurs (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Apr-02-11 10:55 PM Response to Original message |
13. One wonders |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Thu May 02nd 2024, 12:32 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » General Discussion |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC