Comments on: A Case of Double Standards http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/08/03/a-case-of-double-standards/ Beating Them With Their Own Sickle And Hammer Sun, 22 Nov 2009 07:25:23 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2 hourly 1 By: basketball picks http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/08/03/a-case-of-double-standards/comment-page-1/#comment-54197 basketball picks Thu, 26 Oct 2006 00:30:42 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2006/08/03/a-case-of-double-standards/#comment-54197 <strong>basketball picks</strong> basketball picks basketball picks free nba picks free nba picks basketball picks
basketball picks basketball picks
free nba picks free nba picks

]]> By: free credit reports http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/08/03/a-case-of-double-standards/comment-page-1/#comment-54196 free credit reports Fri, 20 Oct 2006 21:06:56 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2006/08/03/a-case-of-double-standards/#comment-54196 <strong>free credit reports</strong> free credit reports free credit reports free annual credit report free annual credit report free credit reports
free credit reports free credit reports
free annual credit report free annual credit report

]]> By: kerwin_brown http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/08/03/a-case-of-double-standards/comment-page-1/#comment-54188 kerwin_brown Sat, 05 Aug 2006 07:31:38 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2006/08/03/a-case-of-double-standards/#comment-54188 Carnanitx, According to your argument no one could be a candidate in Texas until the day of the election because you would not know if they were a citizen until that day. I am pretty sure that just means they need to establish their citizenship in Texas before or Election Day. I do think the general drift of argument is probably correct but that particular was flawed. Carnanitx,

According to your argument no one could be a candidate in Texas until the day of the election because you would not know if they were a citizen until that day. I am pretty sure that just means they need to establish their citizenship in Texas before or Election Day. I do think the general drift of argument is probably correct but that particular was flawed.

]]> By: Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/08/03/a-case-of-double-standards/comment-page-1/#comment-54189 Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator Fri, 04 Aug 2006 16:09:40 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2006/08/03/a-case-of-double-standards/#comment-54189 <strong>Ruling keeps DeLay on Texas ballot; GOP to appeal to high court</strong> A federal appeals court ruled Thursday that the name of former House majority leader Tom DeLay must Ruling keeps DeLay on Texas ballot; GOP to appeal to high court
A federal appeals court ruled Thursday that the name of former House majority leader Tom DeLay must

]]> By: camanintx http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/08/03/a-case-of-double-standards/comment-page-1/#comment-54190 camanintx Fri, 04 Aug 2006 14:47:54 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2006/08/03/a-case-of-double-standards/#comment-54190 Comparing the New Jersey and Texas cases is like comparing apples and oranges. The New Jersey law laid out procedures for candidate vacancies 51 days prior to the election but did not say what should happen after the cutoff. That omission is what gave NJ courts the room to rule as they did. In Texas, the law specifically says candidates are ineligible if they are not residents "on the day of the election". Since that determination cannot be made until the day of the election, Republican's cannot change candidates three months out. This is a perfect example of why people should be more aware of how laws are actually worded instead of what they are intended to say. Comparing the New Jersey and Texas cases is like comparing apples and oranges. The New Jersey law laid out procedures for candidate vacancies 51 days prior to the election but did not say what should happen after the cutoff. That omission is what gave NJ courts the room to rule as they did. In Texas, the law specifically says candidates are ineligible if they are not residents “on the day of the election”. Since that determination cannot be made until the day of the election, Republican’s cannot change candidates three months out. This is a perfect example of why people should be more aware of how laws are actually worded instead of what they are intended to say.

]]> By: Conservative Outpost http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/08/03/a-case-of-double-standards/comment-page-1/#comment-54191 Conservative Outpost Fri, 04 Aug 2006 14:43:56 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2006/08/03/a-case-of-double-standards/#comment-54191 <strong>Daily Summary</strong> NEWS: - Senate rejects estate, minimum wage bill - Rice Signals Possible Compromise to Reach Cease-Fire - Israel's Resolve to Take Out Hezbollah Questioned - Bush urges Cubans to work for democracy - Cuba Addresses Washington - Data Contradicts Notion... Daily Summary
NEWS: – Senate rejects estate, minimum wage bill – Rice Signals Possible Compromise to Reach Cease-Fire – Israel’s Resolve to Take Out Hezbollah Questioned – Bush urges Cubans to work for democracy – Cuba Addresses Washington – Data Contradicts Notion…

]]> By: kerwin_brown http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/08/03/a-case-of-double-standards/comment-page-1/#comment-54192 kerwin_brown Fri, 04 Aug 2006 06:30:09 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2006/08/03/a-case-of-double-standards/#comment-54192 I do not know enough about the state or federal laws involved in either case but according to Illinois law a petition with the required number of signatures should have been submitted by this time for any candidate to be considered. I figured it would be similar for New Jersey and Texas. Does anyone know? I do not know enough about the state or federal laws involved in either case but according to Illinois law a petition with the required number of signatures should have been submitted by this time for any candidate to be considered. I figured it would be similar for New Jersey and Texas. Does anyone know?

]]> By: Occidentality http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/08/03/a-case-of-double-standards/comment-page-1/#comment-54193 Occidentality Fri, 04 Aug 2006 04:18:01 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2006/08/03/a-case-of-double-standards/#comment-54193 <strong>Yes, Of Course, Tom DeLay Is The Loser Here</strong> A federal appeals court has ruled that Texas Republicans cannot replace Tom DeLay's name on this November's Congressional ballot. Republicans still want to pursue the matter, and will bring the case before the U.S. Supreme Court. The Election Law blo... Yes, Of Course, Tom DeLay Is The Loser Here
A federal appeals court has ruled that Texas Republicans cannot replace Tom DeLay’s name on this November’s Congressional ballot. Republicans still want to pursue the matter, and will bring the case before the U.S. Supreme Court. The Election Law blo…

]]> By: Expose the Left &#38;#187; Court Ruled DeLay&#38;#8217;s Name Stays on Ballot http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/08/03/a-case-of-double-standards/comment-page-1/#comment-54194 Expose the Left &#38;#187; Court Ruled DeLay&#38;#8217;s Name Stays on Ballot Thu, 03 Aug 2006 20:30:19 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2006/08/03/a-case-of-double-standards/#comment-54194 [...] Update: GOP To Take DeLay case to Supreme Court. Looks like Tom Delay needs to re-activate his webpage. Tom Delay is on the ballot: [...] [...] Update: GOP To Take DeLay case to Supreme Court. Looks like Tom Delay needs to re-activate his webpage. Tom Delay is on the ballot: [...]

]]> By: UrbanGrounds &#38;#187; Blog Archive &#38;#187; Court Rules that Tom Delay Must Remain on Ballot http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/08/03/a-case-of-double-standards/comment-page-1/#comment-54195 UrbanGrounds &#38;#187; Blog Archive &#38;#187; Court Rules that Tom Delay Must Remain on Ballot Thu, 03 Aug 2006 20:29:34 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2006/08/03/a-case-of-double-standards/#comment-54195 [...] More than that, it also fully exposes the hypocrisy of the Democrat party. From John Bambenek at Stop the ACLU: The first, a scandal-ridden New Jersey Senator who was running for reelection abruptly resigns and drops out of the race 35 days before the election. Litigation ensues and the court decides that it should override the law under the concerns to ensure a “full and fair ballot choice” for the voters. [...] [...] More than that, it also fully exposes the hypocrisy of the Democrat party. From John Bambenek at Stop the ACLU: The first, a scandal-ridden New Jersey Senator who was running for reelection abruptly resigns and drops out of the race 35 days before the election. Litigation ensues and the court decides that it should override the law under the concerns to ensure a “full and fair ballot choice” for the voters. [...]

]]>