New SCOTUS Judge

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bob001 said:
"Licensed and fully qualified?" You don't need a license to ask questions, and staff political operatives hardly have experience or resources comparable to the FBI. The FBI could go out and talk to everybody that Ford and Kav named as witnesses, all of his other accusers, everybody who knew them, their classmates, and anybody else who might have relevant information. They even have the power to prosecute liars. It's astonishing that Kav himself isn't screaming "I'm innocent. Let's sic the FBI on all these fools." But he's not. There is just no reason why a lifetime appointment to the highest legal authority in America should be rushed.
Click to expand...

I take the time to type out the fact that the committee, both sides are represented by staff lawyers, who are trained to and do routinely investigate witnesses, and this is the response I get.... oy vey.

Do you really think that the FBI would do more than interview the principal witnesses and review the documents proffered to them? they are going to get to "I don't remember where and when it took place," and talk to PJ and Leland and hit a hard stop.
 
eeyore1954 said:
What rule of law is being violated by going forward with the vote.
Click to expand...
Nobody is claiming that going forward with a vote is violating any laws or regulations.

Not everything has to be illegal to be wrong. People are claiming that going forward with a vote is both immoral and detrimental to society in general.

Immoral because the situation relied on dirty tricks and extreme hypocrisy.

Detrimental to society because:

- An individual who may actually be a rapist and a perjurer will be interpreting laws and setting precedents. Not only will this result in the potential for bad court rulings, but it will reduce the respect people have for the supreme court (and respect for legal institutions is necessary for a functioning society)

- It may cause a chilling effect on any women who want to come forward with cases of sexual assault. "Don't bother... men in charge. You won't be believed"

- It increases the amount of partisanship. Sometimes compromise between opposing groups is the best way forward. But now we see that Republicans are happy to have a rapist on the supreme court (and have done everything they can to block the Democrats from investigating) then why should the Democrats bother trusting anything the Republicans ever say or do ever
again? We've seen Republicans engage in that sort of hyperpartisansip before... this just adds to it.
 
MikeG said:
Is any of this bilge anything to do with the events around the SCOTUS?
Click to expand...

Well, I was responding to questions.

But yes, it does tie in with Kavanaugh because much of the opposition to him is rooted in a failure to understand sexual dynamics, a failure to be realistic about men and women and a refusal to accept any sort of limitations being placed on the ability to be a total degenerate.
 
uke2se said:
It explains why he wants a vile person on the court.
Click to expand...

To be fair, it must be pretty lonely for Clarence Thomas there on his own. It's a huge step for Skeptic Tank to advocate to get a kindred spirit on there for him.
 
MikeG said:
Is any of this bilge anything to do with the events around the SCOTUS?
Click to expand...

Everything is about the broad ideological battle between "us" and "them."

Big Dog is treating the Left blocking a SCOTUS nomination like the US treated Vietnam falling to the Communists. It's not about this battle.

It's not about this one person getting or not getting this one position. You couldn't swing a gavel in any Federal Court in the country without hitting a judge with the same level of experience and the same level of support for Conservative/Republican priorities/ideals. The Republicans would lose functionally nothing by pulling the nomination and nominating someone else who was functionally the same.

This is a hill to die defending because all hills are hills to die defending because everybody thinks at some point some magical judge and jury is going to add up all the hills the died defending and award one side the winner and give them the keys to everything.
 
Skeptic Tank said:
Well, I was responding to questions.

But yes, it does tie in with Kavanaugh because much of the opposition to him is rooted in a failure to understand sexual dynamics, a failure to be realistic about men and women and a refusal to accept any sort of limitations being placed on the ability to be a total degenerate.
Click to expand...

Just to be clear: are you of the opinion that women should be owned by men, or that at least men should have their way with women?
 
Skeptic Tank said:
Well, I was responding to questions.

But yes, it does tie in with Kavanaugh because much of the opposition to him is rooted in a failure to understand sexual dynamics, a failure to be realistic about men and women and a refusal to accept any sort of limitations being placed on the ability to be a total degenerate.
Click to expand...

Now I can't tell if you think kavanaugh did what she described or not.
 
JoeMorgue said:
....
It's not about this one person getting or not getting this one position. You couldn't swing a gavel in any Federal Court in the country without hitting a judge with the same level of experience and the same level of support for Conservative/Republican priorities/ideals. The Republicans would lose functionally nothing by pulling the nomination and nominating someone else who was functionally the same.
.....
Click to expand...

It's not quite the same because many federal judges have histories as law professors or public officials. Kav was an aggressive Repub political operative for many years before he became a judge, and he seems to support a view that presidential power is essentially unlimited, claiming that the President can't be subpoenaed or indicted and even claiming that the President can ignore federal law. Kav was not even on the Federalist Society's first list of favorite conservatives. Kav was nominated to protect Trump.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/06/poli...ident-ignore-laws-unconstitutional/index.html
 
Skeptic Tank said:
I favor the kind of sexual dynamic the western world had a couple of hundred years ago, up through the early 20th century.

Not perfect, but I think the value that was placed on chastity, virginity until marriage, marriage being a permanent thing, marriage being focused on creating children, etc. - was a good TARGET.

I emphasize "target" because obviously I know there were tons of people failing to meet those goals. But it does matter what your society is setting as its target in these matters, though.

I don't think teenagers have any business meeting unsupervised in mixed-sex gatherings with alcohol and/or drugs.

I admire the prohibition movement and wish it had succeeded.

I believe Kavanaugh was probably a degenerate lout as a young man, and a lush as well. I believe he, as an adult, holds views which will help us inch back toward being a society where fewer young people are like that. He seems to have matured a great deal.
Click to expand...
Is there a moral place for honesty or Kavanaugh's own claims about honesty?


Based on your own perception of him, Kavanaugh lied about his behavior.
 
Bob001 said:
It's not quite the same because many federal judges have histories as law professors or public officials. Kav was an aggressive Repub political operative for many years before he became a judge, and he seems to support a view that presidential power is essentially unlimited, claiming that the President can't be subpoenaed or indicted and even claiming that the President can ignore federal law. Kav was not even on the Federalist Society's first list of favorite conservatives. Kav was nominated to protect Trump.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/06/poli...ident-ignore-laws-unconstitutional/index.html
Click to expand...

Almost. What you said, but only applied to Republican Presidents and you're on the mark. Kav is above all a partisan hack.
 
Skeptic Tank said:
I believe Kavanaugh was probably a degenerate lout as a young man, and a lush as well. I believe he, as an adult, holds views which will help us inch back toward being a society where fewer young people are like that. He seems to have matured a great deal.
Click to expand...

And you base that on the mature way that he admitted to his former attitudes and deeds and explained how his thinking had changed?
 
dmaker said:
What is the value of virginity before marriage?
Click to expand...

Historically it was primarily expected of women, to ensure that children could be fathered only by the husband. Now it seems more than anything else to be an ostentatious demonstration of religious commitment.
 
River said:
Touche. The crazy rhetoric and identity politics of the DNC are making me come to the same conclusion about never voting democrat again. Insane at times. This is coming from someone that voted for Obama both terms.
Click to expand...

Nope. There’s no equivalence here. It’s not just, say, the RNC that is the problem. It’s the entire Republican Party at the national level, and at much of the state level, that has bought into corruption, treason, incompetence, know-nothingism, institutionalized bigotry (while decrying “identity politics”), and in general the destruction of liberal democracy in favor of a toxic stew of phony populism and real kleptocracy.

They’re trying to turn my country into less than the sum of its parts; much less. I’m not willing to tolerate that, so I’ll have to do what bit I can to stop it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom