What's new
By:
Filters

Supreme Court Justice Kennedy to Retire

Status
Not open for further replies.
Catchall said:
The Supreme Court interprets and upholds the Constitution, yes, but clearly individual biases come into play. Kavanaugh has been labeled as being "right of center." None of the Supreme Court Justices claim to be free of bias.

Kavanaugh is all but certain to be confirmed, and the hissy fit that certain Democrats made in the first couple days of the hearing looks more like posturing and self-promotion on the part of potential candidates for the Democratic nomination in 2020 (Kamala Harris and Cory Booker).
Click to expand...

This is such an ignorant post it’s ridiculous.

#1 the process with hiding Kavanaugh’s records has been abhorrent. The GOP knows that the more we learn about him the less likely he’ll be confirmed. As a result, they’ve hidden most of his records. Dumping 40,000 pages of documents for democrats to read hours before his hearing started after months of demanding their release is likely going to anger democrats. And for good reason.

#2 the president has been implicated in two felonies. He’s currently being investigated by several district attorneys and the former FBI Director as special “councel” (or however trump spells it). Let’s stop ignoring the elephant in the room.

The fate of this president could easily rely on the Supreme Court. Therefore, it’s only logical to be extremely diligent in vetting who he nominates.

It’s not beyond reason to suggest no new SC confirmations until after the new congress is sworn in. Mitch McConnell set that precendent, right? It’s not beyond reason to suggest that trump shouldn’t be given any more SC confirmations until after he’s been cleared from just the current felonies he’s been implicated in. Let alone the Russian collusion that it seems all but likely he was involved in.

If Robert Mueller were to subpoena Trump to ask him about collusion, do we really want Kavanaugh to potentially tip the scales in Trump’s (and Russia’s) favor?

#3 kavanaugh’s answers have been appalling ridiculous. I disagree with Kavanaugh and Gorsuch on nearly everything. But I can admit that gorsuch seemed prepared and sounded forthright in his answers. Kavanaugh didn’t impress. He sounded like a used cars salesman when discussing in particular women’s rights, Brown v Board, and his communications with Trump’s lawyers over Robert Mueller’s investigation.

You shouldn’t be confirmed if you don’t impress in the hearing. But in today’s Trump-led government, he nominates the worst and his cult confirms them, without any thinking.

#4 Democrats are rightfully fighting for democracy, transparency, and decency. Once Kavanaugh guts unions, women’s rights, and continues the deregulation of campaign finance laws that The Federalist Society wants, I think some of you critics might see the democrats in a different light.

Besides, they’re fighting for the political power to overturn all of trump’s nastiness. You don’t get that by laying down and letting trump do whatever he wants to you (which has been the GOP for 3 years now).
 
And can we please stop claiming that this (insert subject) is why Trump won?

No, your (insert reason) isn’t why.

I’m tired of couch political scientists explaining why Trump won to me. Especially when the reason is people fighting for civil rights, reason, and just plain common sense.

“Hey, we shouldn’t put kids in cages. That’s wrong!”

You complaining about it is why trump won.

“Hey, we shouldn’t treat Canada like ****. Russia is ****. Why are we kissing Russia’s *** and attacking Canada?”

You complaining about it is why trump won.

“Hey, why are african Americans being incarcerated at several times the rate of whites? And is there really no alternative to mass incarceration for minor drug offenses? Is marijuana really so bad?”

You complaining about it is why trump won.

“Hey why is the president nonstop tweeting about fox n friends? Doesn’t he have... like a job to do?”

You complaining about it is why trump won.

Just stop. Trump’s “win” in 2016 where he lost the popular vote by 3 million even with the help of Russia didn’t give him a mandate. Nor should it silence his critics.
 
Last edited:
JustTheTip said:
If you can figure out how Kavanaugh is a criminal, then I would love to hear that fishy.
Click to expand...
You didn't comprehend my post apparently. I know nothing about the dude. I said that a poster named bulletproof seemed more concerned about the dude being a criminal than being partisan.
I didn't say I thought he was a criminal. Just that bulletproof did.

I should have known better and not clicked on the "show ignored content" button though. Anytime you quote me you either insult me, misunderstand me, or misrepresent what I said. Which is why I have you on ignore in the first place. My mistake.
 
fishonjazz said:
You didn't comprehend my post apparently. I know nothing about the dude. I said that a poster named bulletproof seemed more concerned about the dude being a criminal than being partisan.
I didn't say I thought he was a criminal. Just that bulletproof did.

I should have known better and not clicked on the "show ignored content" button though. Anytime you quote me you either insult me, misunderstand me, or misrepresent what I said. Which is why I have you on ignore in the first place. My mistake.
Click to expand...

You didn’t say that Bulletproof thought Kavanaugh was a criminal. You said his main issue is that Kavanaugh IS a criminal. You then asked if the other poster was ok with a criminal being a SC justice, implying you also agreed with that.

I believe you if you say your intent was just to post Bulletproofs beliefs, and not your own. The way it was worded seems to imply that you were calling him a criminal, but maybe that’s just my bad reading logic. My apologies.
 
Scalia died early enough in Obama's last year such that there was really no excuse for the Republicans refusing to hold hearings. And, on top of concern by liberals for the fate of Roe vs Wade, the unhinged occupant in the Oval Office nominated someone who Democrats fear may side with the President should Mueller subpoena Trump, and the court have to rule on that. I think it's one main reason Trump nominated Kavanaugh, which polls show is an unpopular nominee.

Overall, the demographics and culture is trending in a direction upsetting to conservatives, so a SCOTUS that is tilted well right of center can only mean continued social turmoil for a long time. Conservatives can try to win the culture wars, they can gerrymander in their favor up the wazoo, but in the long run, the demographics will mean a country where whites are not a majority, and conservatism will not win the culture wars. But Republicans will try to arrest those trends, or cancel them out somehow. They will lose in the long run I believe. Reactionary forces vs inevitable trends. Inevitable is called that for a reason.
 
JustTheTip said:
You didn’t say that Bulletproof thought Kavanaugh was a criminal. You said his main issue is that Kavanaugh IS a criminal. You then asked if the other poster was ok with a criminal being a SC justice, implying you also agreed with that.

I believe you if you say your intent was just to post Bulletproofs beliefs, and not your own. The way it was worded seems to imply that you were calling him a criminal, but maybe that’s just my bad reading logic. My apologies.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. I see how you would interpret it that way. So my bad for the end of my post. I truly know nothing about the dude. I just found it odd that douchebag (lol) k thought bulletproof had a problem with the nomination due to the dude being partisan rather than being a criminal (in bullets eyes). iirc one of bullets posts acknowledged that supreme court justices are typically somewhat partisan.
Seemed to me like bullets biggest problem with the guy is that he is a criminal (again, in bullets eyes) and a whore (which i took to mean he is basically a guy who will do trumps bidding. A yes man so to speak).

IMO most people are at least a little partisan so it would be tough to totally eliminate that from a judge. Hopefully the judge would be honorable enough to try to not let their own beliefs dictate how they dole out punishments or make judgements.
 
Red said:
Scalia died early enough in Obama's last year such that there was really no excuse for the Republicans refusing to hold hearings. And, on top of concern by liberals for the fate of Roe vs Wade, the unhinged occupant in the Oval Office nominated someone who Democrats fear may side with the President should Mueller subpoena Trump, and the court have to rule on that. I think it's one main reason Trump nominated Kavanaugh, which polls show is an unpopular nominee.

Overall, the demographics and culture is trending in a direction upsetting to conservatives, so a SCOTUS that is tilted well right of center can only mean continued social turmoil for a long time. Conservatives can try to win the culture wars, they can gerrymander in their favor up the wazoo, but in the long run, the demographics will mean a country where whites are not a majority, and conservatism will not win the culture wars. But Republicans will try to arrest those trends, or cancel them out somehow. They will lose in the long run I believe. Reactionary forces vs inevitable trends. Inevitable is called that for a reason.
Click to expand...

Correct. To build off this, In response to an unpopular party platform, the GOP has resorted to blatant gerrymandering, voter suppression, Russian collusion, and installing unelected activist judges who legislate from the bench.
 
Douchebag K said:
he's got a criminal record ??
Click to expand...

No, he doesn’t.

This all cane about by someone who claims to have written some emails that Kavanaugh was questioned about. The alleged author says he lied While under oath that would be perjury.
 
Douchebag K said:
he's got a criminal record ??
Click to expand...

I dont know. I said that bulletproof main problem with the dude is that he is a criminal. (Said something about perjury if you read his post)
 
Red said:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/11/politics/brett-kavanaugh-changing-america-supreme-court/index.html
Click to expand...
2hpmlr.jpg
 
When the next justice comes up, I'd actually support nominating Merrick Garland. I would be excited to hear about the impending apocalypse and the end of our republic as we know it.
 
infection said:
When the next justice comes up, I'd actually support nominating Merrick Garland. I would be excited to hear about the impending apocalypse and the end of our republic as we know it.
Click to expand...

I actually think that would be quite the spectacle. Would the Ds cheer or would Garland suddenly be the Devil.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Top