It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Sen. Ted Kennedy member of sexist "Owl Club".

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 15 2006 @ 08:42 PM
link   
That is an opinion article. Alito is a great guy, the only problem people have with him is that he is a conservitive!

President Bush has the right and the duty to appoint a conservitive judge!

-- Boat




posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 07:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
And, I would like to say, anyone who holds Teddy Kennedy up as the paragon of virtue needs to have their head examined. The fact that he's still alive speaks volumes about his lack of character.


Yep...

We all know the worthwhile members of the family got taken care of, he shut up and says nothing of major importance or challenge and he is fine and dandy.



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 09:22 AM
link   


We all know the worthwhile members of the family got taken care of, he shut up and says nothing of major importance or challenge and he is fine and dandy.


This is the most pathetically sad statement I have read on here in a long time. Ted says nothing of major importance? Then how has he remained sentaor in Massachusetts for 44 years? Get your facts straight.

And the others were taken care of? What does that mean? You agree that our government should have taken them out? Why? Why not back up your horrific statement with a reason?



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 10:22 AM
link   
Excitable_Boy, I actually liked the Policy of the other two brothers and members of his family, it is his I do not like.

Edward Moore Kennedy, is a joke. Look at his view points on Abortion, prior to Roe v. Wade he was Pro-Life, which can be seen in the 1971 letter he wrote and as soon as Roe v. Wade comes into power he shifts viewpoints.

The fact he was found guilty of a crime and the conviction was suspended due to the fact he was a senator is a joke. However, the worst thing about him is the fact he has been involved in about three major bills, No Child Left Behind, 1965 Hart-Celler Act [Which he supported] and Alternative energy.

Sorry, but the years he has been in power and I can't see one major bill written by him and got through into power that has caused massive amounts of change for the better of the United State's.



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 11:45 AM
link   
WyrdeOne - excellent post!


Originally posted by WyrdeOne
That website is hawking a book.



From the original poster's link:



Schweizer's "Do As I Say" has been touted as a must-read by Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter and many others.


Pillars of honesty, intelligence and integrity, all!
It's funny to see these three endorsing a book about hypocrisy and character flaws in others! Talk about Ted being a hypocrite, what shall we call these people?


Originally posted by WyrdeOne
In fact, I'd like to take this oppurtunity to point out the inane nature of a process that uses unethical criminals as screeners to ostensibly prevent unethical criminals from infiltrating positions of power in our government. The whole thing is a farce.


That is the most sensible thing I've read for a very long time!


And C... Ted Kennedy's is elected to his position by his constituents. If they want a sexist criminal to represent them, it's their choice. Alito is in a position to represent and make decisions for the entire country.

It's my opinion that any information about his character is up for discussion regardless of the character of the questioner.

[edit on 16-1-2006 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 12:00 PM
link   
Maybe you folks missed my link to the Washington Times article, that was not "hawking" a book.

Also, yes its true the people elected Ted Kennedy to be their senator. The same goes for President Bush who ran on the promise of appointing a judge just like Mr. Alito!

I see once again the liberal double standard is in full effect,
.

-- Boat



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 12:08 PM
link   
Kennedy isnt trying to occupy the swing seat on the court fellas. This little club of his may be immoral, but he isnt the one being grilled for one of the highest spots in our gov't, he already has his.
Kennedy was elected too, I might add, not chosen by W.



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 12:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Boatphone
I see once again the liberal double standard is in full effect


It's interesting how you label people 'liberal' seemingly because

- they disagree with this administration
- or some concept you have as a conservative concept
- or because they disagree with any conservative person

I have many opinions from the entire range of the political spectrum and I am neither 'a liberal' nor 'a conservative'. Just because someone doesn't approve of this administration, does not make them 'a liberal'.

Just wanted to clarify and correct that assumption.



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 12:40 PM
link   
It is interesting that you didn't responed to the real point of my post. That President Bush was elected by the people on the promise of appointing someone just like Mr. Alito to the court.

Why do you want the will of the people to be blocked??

-- Boat



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 01:07 PM
link   
I seem to remember reading that a majority of Americans support abortion rights during the first trimester. Something like 68% I believe.
so...not so much...



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Boatphone
It is interesting that you didn't responed to the real point of my post. That President Bush was elected by the people on the promise of appointing someone just like Mr. Alito to the court.


In 2004, when Bush was 'elected' there was no indication that there would be a spot to which to nominate anyone, so I think your statement is another assumption.

Regardless, the president has long lost the support of the majority of the people.



Why do you want the will of the people to be blocked??


I don't.
Electing a president does not assume that anything he does will be the 'will of the people'. They 'elected' him as president, not ruler. In fact there are provisions in the Constitution that guard against the president doing anything he wishes. I smell another assumption... :shk:

Now, how about responding to my point. That you assume if someone is anti-Bush, that they must be a 'liberal'. Ah, never mind. I don't really care.



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 01:27 PM
link   
He is president, not king.
We elected him to lead 1/3rd of our gov't, not dominate all of it.



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
In 2004, when Bush was 'elected' there was no indication that there would be a spot to which to nominate anyone, so I think your statement is another assumption.


Yes, there was, most all of the members of the Supreme Court were (and are) very old. I think it is fair to assume that they all have normal life spans. Also, are you saying that a majority of the American people would have not voted for the President if they had known a spot would open up? That logic seems highly dobious! It is also a LARGE assumption on your part, eh?



Regardless, the president has long lost the support of the majority of the people.


Please, name one President that has keep an over all approval rating of above 50% for his intire time in office. Geez, listen to yourself!



I don't.
Electing a president does not assume that anything he does will be the 'will of the people'. They 'elected' him as president, not ruler. In fact there are provisions in the Constitution that guard against the president doing anything he wishes. I smell another assumption...


Are you saying the President does not have the right down the Constitution to appoint a judge of his choice. You might be interested to know that it is his job under the Constitution to do so. Please, use your head.



Now, how about responding to my point. That you assume if someone is anti-Bush, that they must be a 'liberal'. Ah, never mind. I don't really care.


I was implying that Sen. Ted Kennedy is a liberal not youself. And he is. The facts are there.

-- Boat

[edit on 16-1-2006 by Boatphone]



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Boatphone
Yes, there was, most all of the members of the Supreme Court were (and are) very old. I think it is fair to assume that they all have normal life spans.


So voters could assume that one of them would croak within 4 years? Please? That sounds like something Pat Robertson would say!



Also, are you saying that a majority of the American people would have not voted for the President if they had known a spot would open up?


I didn't say any such thing. Where do you get these ideas?




Please, name one President that has keep an over all approval rating of above 50% for his intire time in office.


I'll name 2.



Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1953-1961
Highest approval rating: 74 percent
Average approval rating: 68 percent
Lowest rating: 61 percent

John F. Kennedy, 1961-1963
Highest rating: 78 percent
Average rating: 84 percent
Lowest rating: 51 percent

Source



What does that have to do with anything? Oh, that's called a 'distraction', right?
Oops, it backfired!



Are you saying the President does not have the right down the Constitution to appoint a judge of his choice.


No, I'm not saying that, either. Where do you get these things? Your responses to me are filled with nothing but distractions. Hmmm... I wonder why.

Bored, now...



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
In 2004, when Bush was 'elected' there was no indication that there would be a spot to which to nominate anyone, so I think your statement is another assumption.


Right, (above) what are you implying. President Bush ran on the promise of appointing a judge just like Mr. Alito. You seem to think there is something wrong with President Bush appointing him.

-- Boat



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 10:02 PM
link   
Alito was a member of CAP, but not an active member. CAP board members say that they cannot recall him attending any of the meetings. So it's not implausible that his memory isn't crisp on his membership - it was over 20 years ago.

Why did he put it on his resume'? Because it was true. Because it's normal to pad your resume' with everything you think is going to help you land that job.

He never lied about it, curme.

Ted Kennedy belonged to the male-only Owls Club when he attended Harvard. He has no right trying to make an issue out of CAP when he was guilty of the same behavior. And whether he is a candidate for SCOTUS or not makes no difference. If it's OK for him to have been a member of the Owl's Club, it's ok for Alito to have been a member of CAP.

Ted Kennedy remains the senior Senator from Mass. because of his brother's coattails and his family name. The Kennedy family is revered in New England. He has not remained senator because of his character, or achievments. He has managed to chair several very lucrative (for his constituents) committee chairs, and he does spread the pork around. So that ensures votes. But he is also at least partially responsible for some major financial boondoggles, like the Big Dig.

Finally, he did receive the CAP papers from Princeton that he threatened to subpoena. And guess what they revealed? Nada. Zip. Zilch.



posted on Jan, 17 2006 @ 11:57 AM
link   
Great post jbeck!

Okay here is an update, Ted Kennedy to quit the club

"as fast as I can"


Interesting. I personally don't think he should quit it. He has a right to belong to any club he wants. Too bad.

-- Boat



posted on Jan, 18 2006 @ 07:23 PM
link   


CAP board members say that they cannot recall him attending any of the meetings.


Funny...they can't recall him attending any meetings and he can't recall being a member. Very convenient!

And the comment from Ted completely out of context about wanting to get out of the Owl Club? Where's your source and what's the context? That was a pathetic addition to this debate....pitiful!



posted on Jan, 18 2006 @ 08:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Excitable_Boy
And the comment from Ted completely out of context about wanting to get out of the Owl Club? Where's your source and what's the context? That was a pathetic addition to this debate....pitiful!


Of course it's out of context! Look at the quote in Boat's signature. It's out of context, too, but apparently he doesn't care about details like that.



In an interview with WHDH Channel 7’s Andy Hiller that aired last night, Kennedy said, “I joined when I . . . 52 years ago, I was a member of the Owl Club, which was basically a fraternal organization.”

Asked by Hiller whether he is still a member, Kennedy said, “I’m not a member; I continue to pay about $100.”

He then said of being a member in a club that discriminates against women, “I shouldn’t be and I’m going to get out of it as fast as I can.”


Boston Herald



posted on Jan, 18 2006 @ 10:12 PM
link   

from Excitable_boy
And the comment from Ted completely out of context about wanting to get out of the Owl Club? Where's your source and what's the context? That was a pathetic addition to this debate....pitiful!

Here are three sources I dug up in about 20 seconds (the network is a little slow tonight for some reason). I had 99,400 choices.

Remember - google is your friend.

AOL News
Boston Herald
Hubpolitics




top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join