New SCOTUS Judge II: The Wrath of Kavanaugh

JoeMorgue said:
I think it's even broader and more basic than that.

The Democrats and Republicans had both settled so much into their roles, safe in the idea that they know the other side as well as they knew themselves and safe in the assumption that both sides were largely playing the same game. They got so good of the pantomime wizards duel that we call modern politics that they forget how to play the game any other way.
Click to expand...

I have no idea what you're saying.
 
acbytesla said:
Isn't that what both sides are worried about?
Click to expand...
indeed.

This is all about midterms and posturing. I think the Dems have screwed up this one, but there's hope. I think most people don't want to hear about high school hijinks, so if the Republicans try to overplay their hand on this, it will just make people mad.
 
The “investigation” was directed by the individual assigned to get Kavanaugh confirmed, and was designed to deliver no significant results. But Kavanaugh already had a history of perjury and extreme partisan activism, and further demonstrated emotional immaturity that should automatically disqualify him from a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court.

In other words, it should never have come to this sham investigation. He’s a terrible candidate, and it speaks volumes of the corruption, bad faith, and general debasement of today’s GOP that they would promote him.

There are plenty of qualified judges who would interpret law in a sufficiently “right” way (see Gorsuch, Neill), that are otherwise fit to serve. There is no excuse for pushing Kavanaugh, none; no matter where you are on the political spectrum, this is just plain bad - and bad-faith - governance. It’s also shortsighted; if they confirm him, he will be damaged goods and simply drive ever-greater opposition to their agenda and candidates.
 
Minoosh said:
Rehnquist, O'Connor and Thomas once stood up for "the little guy" by ruling opining that a person growing medicinal weed in their back yard was not a threat to interstate commerce. They lost, though.

I seriously believe that a president and/or a congressional coalition could get some serious bipartisan support by campaigning to remove marijuana from the Controlled Substances Act.

ETA: And don't let the FDA or Big Pharma get anywhere near it.
Click to expand...


Herbal remedy.
 
sts60 said:
The “investigation” was directed by the individual assigned to get Kavanaugh confirmed, and was designed to deliver no significant results. But Kavanaugh already had a history of perjury and extreme partisan activism, and further demonstrated emotional immaturity that should automatically disqualify him from a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court.

In other words, it should never have come to this sham investigation. He’s a terrible candidate, and it speaks volumes of the corruption, bad faith, and general debasement of today’s GOP that they would promote him.

There are plenty of qualified judges who would interpret law in a sufficiently “right” way (see Gorsuch, Neill), that are otherwise fit to serve. There is no excuse for pushing Kavanaugh, none; no matter where you are on the political spectrum, this is just plain bad - and bad-faith - governance. It’s also shortsighted; if they confirm him, he will be damaged goods and simply drive ever-greater opposition to their agenda and candidates.
Click to expand...

we demand more hearings and an FBI investigation!
gets more hearings and an FBI investigation
the hearings and FBI investigation were a sham!

predictable as the tides...
 
Belz... said:
Slings and Arrows said:
That's a very good rule of thumb, worthy of being elevated to a law.

Trump's First Law of Winning:
If it pisses off the "Left", it must be the right thing to do.​
Click to expand...

A monstrous thought if I ever saw one. You'd throw the whole world under the bus if it could give you some Schadenfreude.
Click to expand...


This is certainly true. He has basically said as much in the past.

But Sling's post lacks some important emphasis. It should have read like this;

If it pisses off the "Left", it must be the "Right" thing to do.​

That would have made more sense, from his POV.

Also more accurate.
 
Last edited:
Belz... said:
If you want to determine if something's a lie, there are things you have to do.

Take you DOK attacks somewhere else.
Click to expand...

We are not required to determine if something is a lie. If someone claims something is a lie, it is on them to make a case. They receive no assistance from the reader.
 
The Big Dog said:
we demand more hearings and an FBI investigation!
gets more hearings and an FBI investigation
the hearings and FBI investigation were a sham!
Click to expand...

If you ask a mechanic to inspect your car for problems, and he looks at it for 4 seconds before declaring "looks fine to me" you wouldn't object?
 
quadraginta said:
There seems to be some room for disagreement as to exactly what those rules entailed.

Or it did, and you aren't paying attention.
Click to expand...

Yeah, no.

It is totally inconsequential. The fact that the dems are complaining that they had to be slightly inconvenienced is absolutely ridiculous at this point.

they had to go to another room in their office building just like every other FBI background report.

PoorDems, mild inconvenience is worst inconvenience.
 
The Resistance dopes on the twitters are outraged that 49 dems will have a total of one hour to read the report.

The stupidity, it burns....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom