Kavanaugh Confirmation Hearings

[Dead Duck]

So...
Can a supreme court justice carry a gun....... in his own courtroom?

 

[Dead Duck]

I don't understand [STRIKE]politics[/STRIKE] Women. Just when I think I've got it figured out something good comes out of it.

FIFY

 

[OakRiver]

Better than man going where no man should go.

I mean, he was in the Navy....

[video=youtube;nmGuy0jievs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmGuy0jievs[/video]

 

[Kutnupe14]

Seems like we lost a couple of posters in here after the vote.

Im still here! Not surprised at the vote, Kavanaugh checked all the boxes for right-leaning people, so his character is more of an afterthought than anything. Such is an the state of American politics, good men/women who get things done, have been replaced by iffy persons (we agree with) who try to get things done.

 

[Clay Pigeon]

Wait. Racist? Really? Are you serious, or are you just used to calling leople hou don’t agree with racist. Ow, maybe you meant to say sexist. Because that could apply. But race isn’t even mentione ld in what you quoted.

Yeah, I should have used sexist. Not so long ago here, members were put on vacation or perma banned for alot less ignorant posts...exspecially when it's backed up with more posts.

 

[Tombs]

Im still here! Not surprised at the vote, Kavanaugh checked all the boxes for right-leaning people, so his character is more of an afterthought than anything. Such is an the state of American politics, good men/women who get things done, have been replaced by iffy persons (we agree with) who try to get things done.

I like how a combination of a media circus and terrible hearings are all you care about to judge a man's character. Because we all perform well when half the nation has pitchforks and torches out for ourselves and our family, over a false accusation, right?

 

[Kutnupe14]

I like how a combination of a media circus and terrible hearings are all you care about to judge a man's character. Because we all perform well when half the nation has pitchforks and torches out for ourselves and our family, over a false accusation, right?

Thick skin, it used to be a thing.... not so much anymore.

 

[KG1]

Im still here! Not surprised at the vote, Kavanaugh checked all the boxes for right-leaning people, so his character is more of an afterthought than anything. Such is an the state of American politics, good men/women who get things done, have been replaced by iffy persons (we agree with) who try to get things done.

So you’re saying Kavanaugh is an “iffy person” that’s incapable of “getting things done”? Seems to me he’s been quite accomplished and has been praised for his prior accomplishments (including his judicial temperament and fairness) until this political hit job attempt. Would you have said the same thing about Kavanaugh if this ill gotten smear campaign never took place?

 

[Dr.Midnight]

Im still here! Not surprised at the vote, Kavanaugh checked all the boxes for right-leaning people, so his character is more of an afterthought than anything. Such is an the state of American politics, good men/women who get things done, have been replaced by iffy persons (we agree with) who try to get things done.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Im still here! Not surprised at the vote, Kavanaugh checked all the boxes for right-leaning people, so his character is more of an afterthought than anything. Such is an the state of American politics, good men/women who get things done, have been replaced by iffy persons (we agree with) who try to get things done.

Like Trump? Are you starting to come around Kut?

 

[KG1]

For me this whole thing boiled down to rule of law against rule of the mob which the radical Democrats embrace. President Trump and now Justice Kavanaugh held fast and never caved in against the irrational angry mob. They refused to withdraw the nomination. To me that shows fortitude and strength of character. The rule of law won out with yesterday’s confirmation vote.

 

[femurphy77]

I just read the news, is it safe to open the bunker and come out?

 

[NKBJ]

Read about senators getting death threats.
Wondering if the violence will crank up.
Yeah, probably. Hope not.

 

[jamil]

Im still here! Not surprised at the vote, Kavanaugh checked all the boxes for right-leaning people, so his character is more of an afterthought than anything. Such is an the state of American politics, good men/women who get things done, have been replaced by iffy persons (we agree with) who try to get things done.

Yeah. But wouldn't you agree that the left leaning people may be seeing more than is there in terms of character flaws, because of negative bias? Just like the right leaning people may be seeing fewer character flaws because of positive bias. If that's the case, and I'm quite confident that it is the case, why must it be the case that right leaning people approve of Kavanaugh, despite the character flaws you perceive, because character is an afterthought? Couldn't it be, and isn't it more likely, that they don't see the same character flaws that you do?

Don't you think the arguments both sides are making would exactly flip for these exact circumstances, if the parties traded places? I'm not saying the behavior would flip. Republicans, at least not today's Republicans, don't actually have a BAMN playbook that Democrats make so much use of today. I'm saying the arguments in the same circumstances but parties switched, would be pretty much the same. Democrats would be claiming the Democrat didn't do anything wrong, and the other side would be calling Democrats immoral for ignoring what are obvious character flaws in their perception.

This thing we have going on especially in American society, where we attribute low moral character to people we disagree with, as the primary reason for the disagreement, is not healthy, not accurate, and intellectually dishonest. We should stop that.

 

[Ziggidy]

How'd we get back on Feinstein?

I don't see any line forming with that thought......

 

[Ziggidy]

Thick skin, it used to be a thing.... not so much anymore.

Being on the right, I have noticed a very quick shift in the physical make up of most (if not all) progressive demoncrats (socialist). Their skin is so thin you can almost see right through them. go figure, right?

 

[Expat]

Read about senators getting death threats.
Wondering if the violence will crank up.
Yeah, probably. Hope not.

I wouldn't be surprised if the lefties will have another Scalise type shooting in the works soon.

 

[KG1]

Yeah. But wouldn't you agree that the left leaning people may be seeing more than is there in terms of character flaws, because of negative bias? Just like the right leaning people may be seeing fewer character flaws because of positive leaning bias. If that's the case, and I'm quite confident that it is the case, why must it be the case that right leaning people approve of Kavanaugh, despite the character flaws you perceive, because character is an afterthought? Couldn't it be, and isn't it more likely, that they don't see the same character flaws that you do?

Don't you think the arguments both sides are making would exactly flip for these exact circumstances, if the parties traded places? I'm not saying the behavior would flip. Republicans, at least not today's Republicans, don't actually have a BAMN playbook that Democrats make so much use of today. I'm saying the arguments in the same circumstances but parties switched, would be pretty much the same. Democrats would be claiming the Democrat didn't do anything wrong, and the other side would be calling republicans immoral for ignoring what are obvious character flaws in their perception.

This thing we have going on especially in American society, where we attribute low moral character to people we disagree with, as the primary reason for the disagreement, is not healthy, not accurate, and intellectually dishonest. We should stop that.

Isn’t it funny how lack of character didn’t really come in to question for the way the Democrats handled the process? It seemed to me that kudos were given for a well played game instead which ultimately didn’t win out in the end.

 

[jamil]

For me this whole thing boiled down to rule of law against rule of the mob which the radical Democrats embrace. President Trump and now Justice Kavanaugh held fast and never caved in against the irrational angry mob. They refused to withdraw the nomination. To me that shows fortitude and strength of character. The rule of law won out with yesterday’s confirmation vote.

I'm not sure I'd characterize what happened as rule of law. It happened within and by the rule of law. But I think that republicans aren't above scuttling the rule of law for ideological reasons.

I said that Republicans don't have a BAMN playbook. And that's true. Had the situation reversed, and it R's were the minority trying to scuttle a D nominee, they're not above playing some tricks, but it's doubtful they'd be so desperate that they'd bring unsubstantiated claims, and collude with "witnesses", law firms, and the press, to make them stick.

When the Republicans had the Senate, to scuttle Obama's nominee, they just ignored it. As much as we didn't want Garland to be nominated, that's not a trick that we would want reciprocated if those circumstances flipped. "Lame Duck" isn't a reason not to take up a nominee. And we'd rightly have complained about it.

I'm glad it turned out the way it did. America is better off for it with Gorsuch over Garland. But it did not happened within the spirit of "rule of law" either. When Democrats have power, why couldn't they just do the same thing for their whole time in the majority? They plausibly claim they're just playing out the logical conclusion of a Republican precedent. And if they have any political clout, they'd get away with it. Do we want congress to function only when the majority is of the President's party?

But yeah, other than that, the Dem side was definitely mob rule.

 

[KG1]

I'm not sure I'd characterize what happened as rule of law. It happened within and by the rule of law. But I think that republicans aren't above scuttling the rule of law for ideological reasons.

I said that Republicans don't have a BAMN playbook. And that's true. Had the situation reversed, and it R's were the minority trying to scuttle a D nominee, they're not above playing some tricks, but it's doubtful they'd be so desperate that they'd bring unsubstantiated claims, and collude with "witnesses", law firms, and the press, to make them stick.

When the Republicans had the Senate, to scuttle Obama's nominee, they just ignored it. As much as we didn't want Garland to be nominated, that's not a trick that we would want reciprocated if those circumstances flipped. "Lame Duck" isn't a reason not to take up a nominee. And we'd rightly have complained about it.

I'm glad it turned out the way it did. America is better off for it with Gorsuch over Garland. But it did not happened within the spirit of "rule of law" either. When Democrats have power, why couldn't they just do the same thing for their whole time in the majority? They plausibly claim they're just playing out the logical conclusion of a Republican precedent. And if they have any political clout, they'd get away with it. Do we want congress to function only when the majority is of the President's party?

But yeah, other than that, the Dem side was definitely mob rule.

I agree with your assessment of the GOP's tactic concerning the Garland nomination but with that being said the tactic employed never attempted to utterly destroy the nominee's reputation with the kind of brutal tactics that you described in Kavanaugh's case. Merrick Garland moved on with his reputation iintact.