Kavanaugh
POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Friday, June 10, 2022 18:02
VIEWED: 48592
PAGE 6 of 7
Trump haz been destroying & degrading the goverment all along, so Kavenough wuz the perfect choise. Putin iz a master puppeteer. He haz widened the divide between rite & left, now this will divide men & wimin.
Every little crack iz an opportunity to break America into smaller and smaller chunks. And the work uv seperating us from our allies iz continuing at an amazing pase also.
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early
http://www.7532020.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Originally posted by captaincrunch:Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
But they're too tough for you to answer...
Wrong again - they're TOO EASY to answer. I'm guessing you got an email directive that said: "our new position is:" Blame the Democrats. "They aren't good enough." That's like blaming a women for being assaulted. "She should have known better to wear that."
Don't hold the GOP responsible.
Don't look at the insurmountable votes available.
Don't look at so many things because why would you do that when you can just shift attention elsewhere?
What's one of the main reasons women are treated like second class citizens and always will be?
Easy! Women like you.
You should probably ask second class citizen women in the Middle East. You won't find any here.
I would do that why? The sh*t you post.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by JO753:
Every little crack iz an opportunity to break America into smaller and smaller chunks.
What you're referring to here is Authoritarian Left inter-sectional identity politics.
If Trump is guilty of anything here it was taking advantage of the damage already done.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
As a disappointed Democrat ... I expect more of them.
In terms of....? Undo MATH? They tried with what they had, which should have been enough, but, yanno, there's that whole math thing and the fact that those Republicans clearly did not care who they put on the bench as long as he was a republican.
What could they have done?
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
And BTW, I've laid plenty of blame on Republicans, as you could see from my old posts. So this is an outright lie.
On this subject??? Cite them then - otherwise BS.
THEY HAD THE NUMBERS. It was a GOP math certainty and in this entire thread I saw nothing from you that holds any Republican accountable, or even Kavanaugh of being an obvious GOP stooge.
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Here's as piece of advice for everyone, including me.
Our discussions would be FAR more productive if we would stop arguing with the voices in our heads. It seems like people (like GSTRING, SHIT, and THUGR) spend FAR too much time imputing motives and points of view to others .... motives and points of view which those others don't have.
Why not just stick to responding to WHAT POSTED, instead of ranting at something that might not even exist? If we could manage to do that, as well as NOT RESORTING TO PERSONAL ATTACKS WHEN WE HAVE NOTHING RELEVANT TO POST, I'm sure our discussions will be a lot more rational. Unless people here have an interest in being IRRATIONAL, that seems like a better avenue. Right?
Translation: lots of words that mean: "quit pointing out my bullsh*t!"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
As a disappointed Democrat ... I expect more of them. - SIGNY
In terms of....? Undo MATH? They tried with what they had, which should have been enough, but, yanno, there's that whole math thing and the fact that those Republicans clearly did not care who they put on the bench as long as he was a republican.
What could they have done? - CC
The roots of the Democrats' failure go back decades. At some point, the Dems became corrupted by their campaign contributors (for Hillary that would be George Soros and family, Saudi Arabia, big pharma, and international "wealth management" firms that help you create shell companies and instant foundations, Uranium One) and stopped representing Americans, especially working Americans. At one time, they maintained the fiction that they represented blue collar Americans AND the victims of race, class, and gender oppression; but they dropped the "blue collar" vote and became instead the party of slivers of self-identified victims.
The Dem's proximate failure was to run Heir Apparent Hillary Rodham Clinton, and then to double down on that failure by NOT LEARNING from their mistake and instead spending their next two years focusing on RUSSIA!! RUSSIA!! RUSSIA!! which - polls show- most Americans don't give two shits about. The Dem's previous mistake, under Obama, was to foster a "recovery" which made the insanely wealthy even MORE wealthy but which left working Americans gasping for the hope and change that he promised.
At this point, why should anyone pay attention to the Dems? Unless you're committed to victimhood, the Democratic Party has nothing for you. And even then, all they have are words and cheap, meaningless gestures like unisex bathrooms.
I'm not saying that the Dems aren't in some ways better than the Rebups in some fashion: They still support Social Security and Medicare, and altho Dem Congress/Obama fucked up healthcare the Dems COULD fix the problems they created.
BUT, working Americans feel that the Dems don't have their back. Obama was just "more of the same/ bail out the banks/ fuck the working stiff" and Hillary promised to be even more of more of the same. They REALLY need to retool their message and their policies. Because you can fool some of the people all of the time, all all of the people some of the time, but eventually Americans clue in that they've been stiffed, again.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND
America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:You shouldn't use words you don't understand.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Originally posted by JO753:
Every little crack iz an opportunity to break America into smaller and smaller chunks.
What you're referring to here is Authoritarian Left inter-sectional identity politics.
If Trump is guilty of anything here it was taking advantage of the damage already done.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:WHO DID THIS, JO?
Trump haz been destroying & degrading the goverment all along, so Kavenough wuz the perfect choise. Putin iz a master puppeteer. He haz widened the divide between rite & left, now this will divide men & wimin.
TRUMP??
Allegations which SHOULD have been brought forward the week that they were received, so that they could get a thorough investigation and measured discussion, instead of sitting in someone's office for months??
Allegations that were whipped into a froth of last-minute hysteria?
The party that did this was the Dems.
They had no interest in finding out if any of this was true. All they wanted was to get a tearful woman on the stand with accusations that other women could identify with. Now, what I see are women upset at Kavanaugh because they were done dirty by SOME OTHER GUY IN THE PAST.
More bullshit, more "identity politics", more hysteria, more irrationality. Brought to you by ... the Dems.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND
America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
The roots of the Democrats' failure go back decades...
zzzzzzz only half of the first sentence in and I/we it's confirmed that SIGGY is up to her usual long foam filled dodge non answer. One has to wonder what she's so afraid of? Why the hiding?
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
At some point, the Dems became corrupted by their campaign contributors ...
Hardcore Fox conservatives would be so proud of your complete capitulation.
So back to my questions:
As a disappointed Democrat ... I expect more of them. - SIGNY
In terms of....? Undo MATH? They tried with what they had, which should have been enough, but, yanno, there's that whole math thing and the fact that those Republicans clearly did not care who they put on the bench as long as he was a republican.
What could they have done? - CC
I'll add - how can you blame democrats for not being able to stop Kavanuagh?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I'm not "hiding", it's just that you purposefully misunderstood my statement, and so I have no reason to respond to your purposeful misdirection.
As a disappointed Democrat ... I expect more of them. - SIGNY
In terms of....? Undo MATH? They tried with what they had, which should have been enough, but, yanno, there's that whole math thing and the fact that those Republicans clearly did not care who they put on the bench as long as he was a republican.
What could they have done? - CC
I've expected more of the Dems for YEARS.
Quote:
They tried hard with what they had".
The reason why "what they had" was so few votes ... AGAIN ... goes back to what they did over the long run. And in term's of
Quote:what they did was play dirty, and appeal, ONCE AGAIN, to hysterical identity politics. Which is what got them in this pickle to begin with.
trying hard
The Dems have STILL not learned their lesson: Instead of dividing America into smaller and smaller slivers of self-identified victims groups (does a nonwhite older civilian female have more rights than a transsexual in the military?) they should get back to representing ALL Americans. Yanno, when Hillary called nearly half of the voting public "deplorables", that was emblematic of everything wrong with the Democratic Party. They paid the price when they lost that election, and if they keep up with that, they'll continue to pay the price.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND
America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by reaverfan:Quote:You shouldn't use words you don't understand.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Originally posted by JO753:
Every little crack iz an opportunity to break America into smaller and smaller chunks.
What you're referring to here is Authoritarian Left inter-sectional identity politics.
If Trump is guilty of anything here it was taking advantage of the damage already done.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
You mean like when you constantly misuse the word Nazi?
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I use it perfectly. Your lack of education has left you unable to recognize common words and their correct usage.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Why I’m Leaving the Republican Party
The Kavanaugh confirmation fight revealed the GOP to be the party of situational ethics and moral relativism in the name of winning at all costs.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/tom-nichols-why-im-l
eaving-republican-party/572419/
"The Kavanaugh confirmation fight revealed the GOP to be the party of situational ethics and moral relativism in the name of winning at all costs."
... It did? Not the endless voter purges? Not the asking for Russia's help on live TV to hack your political opponents and shouting "lock her up" about a woman who your own investigations had proven not guilty of any criminal wrongdoing? Not Mitch McConnell refusing to hold a hearing for a Supreme Court Judge nominated by a liberal president, for no reason? Not the Republicans in congress stating point-blank that their entire goal during Obama's administration was to just not allow him to do anything, even if it would be good for the American people? Not the Republicans voting for a complete imbecile who can barely string sentences together, believes actual conspiracy theories, and is barely being restrained from tanking the world economy by terrified aides in his own administration?
None of that "revealed" that the GOP used moral relativism? This? This was the final straw?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I'm not "hiding", it's just that you purposefully misunderstood my statement, and so I have no reason to respond to your purposeful misdirection.
I've expected more of the Dems for YEARS.
So you blame them for not going back in time? Ok.
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
The reason why "what they had" was so few votes ... AGAIN ... goes back to what they did over the long run. And in term's ofQuote:what they did was play dirty, and appeal, ONCE AGAIN, to hysterical identity politics. Which is what got them in this pickle to begin with.
trying hard
AGAIN - So you blame them for not going back in time? Ok ok.
"Hysterical identity politics?" So that's what you think women who stand up when they are sexually are doing? You sound like a bro again. "Damn those hysterical women! Can't they just take a beating without makin' such a fuss? Is that too much to ask?!?"
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
The Dems have STILL not learned their lesson: Instead of dividing America into smaller and smaller slivers of self-identified victims groups (does a nonwhite older civilian female have more rights than a transsexual in the military?) they should get back to representing ALL Americans. Yanno, when Hillary called nearly half of the voting public "deplorables", that was emblematic of everything wrong with the Democratic Party. They paid the price when they lost that election, and if they keep up with that, they'll continue to pay the price.
Oh ok, so what should they have done to keep Kavanaugh from the SC?
Undo MATH? They tried with what they had, which should have been enough, but, yanno, there's that whole math thing and the fact that those Republicans clearly did not care who they put on the bench as long as he was a republican.
What could they have done? - CC
Any time now...
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by reaverfan:
I use it perfectly. Your lack of education has left you unable to recognize common words and their correct usage.
lol. Whatever you say, social terrorist.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by captaincrunch:
Oh ok, so what should they have done to keep Kavanaugh from the SC?
Undo MATH? They tried with what they had, which should have been enough, but, yanno, there's that whole math thing and the fact that those Republicans clearly did not care who they put on the bench as long as he was a republican.
What could they have done? - CC
Any time now...
Just keep doing what you're doing.
It's working out splendidly for you, innit?
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
GIVEN THE SITUATION - what SHOULD democrats have done? Well, what COULD they have done? In terms of getting a different outcome, probably nothing. (And I suspect they didn't come forward with all those allegations earlier because they knew that those allegations wouldn't withstand a thorough investigation, maybe not even a far more intensive criminal investigation.)
But you know that old saying: if you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is to STOP DIGGING. Democrats should stop playing identity politics because all it does entrench the sides even more. Women may be more motivated to vote for democrats. But guess what, republicans have also become more motivated as well. So democrats need to STOP DIGGING that victim-hood hole.
What they SHOULD have done is formulate a principled stand on the issues that make Kavanaugh unsuitable. Then formulate a path to fairness and a better future for all. And express that opposition and that hope in clear terms. Repeatedly. Let people know democrats stand for something besides dirty, desperate politics, and business as usual.
It would have done absolutely nothing to keep Kavanaugh out of the Supreme Court. But it could bring democrats back to political relevance, instead of being the impotent, passing afterthought they are now.
tic tac
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:No, I blame them for not learning lessons from the past
I'm not "hiding", it's just that you purposefully misunderstood my statement, and so I have no reason to respond to your purposeful misdirection.
I've expected more of the Dems for YEARS.- SIGNY
So you blame them for not going back in time? Ok.- GSTRING
Quote:No, I blame them for not learning lessons from the past.
The reason why "what they had" was so few votes ... AGAIN ... goes back to what they did over the long run. And in term's ofQuote:what they did was play dirty, and appeal, ONCE AGAIN, to hysterical identity politics. Which is what got them in this pickle to begin with. - SIGNY
trying hard
AGAIN - So you blame them for not going back in time? Ok ok.- GSTRING
Quote:Is it POSSIBLE, do you suppose, for you not being a complete ass?
"Hysterical identity politics?" So that's what you think women who stand up when they are sexually are doing? You sound like a bro again. "Damn those hysterical women! Can't they just take a beating without makin' such a fuss? Is that too much to ask?!?"- GSTRING
IF THE DEMOCRATS REALLY HAD A CONCERN THAT KAVANAUGH WAS A SEXUAL ABUSER. THEY WOULD HAVE HANDLED THIS MUCH DIFFERENTLY.
They would have brought up these allegations when then FIRST came to light, not sprung them -literally- at the very last moment. They would have pressed for a long, thorough investigation. They would have provided the SENATE COMMITTEE with COPIES of the therapy notes and COPIES of the polygraph exam ... as they had been asked THREE TIMES by Grassley ... which might have opened up new avenues of investigation, or allowed Senate delegates to visit Ford in CA as the committee offered instead of stalling and stalling and stalling and obfuscating.
Clearly, this was an orchestrated attempt to demean Kavanaugh's reputation with (as far as I can tell) a flurry of last-minute, totally unverifiable accusations. You keep asking What else could they have done?, which certainly implies that EVEN YOU recognize that this was a underhanded attempt by the Dems.
Quote:
The Dems have STILL not learned their lesson: Instead of dividing America into smaller and smaller slivers of self-identified victims groups (does a nonwhite older civilian female have more rights than a transsexual in the military?) they should get back to representing ALL Americans. Yanno, when Hillary called nearly half of the voting public "deplorables", that was emblematic of everything wrong with the Democratic Party. They paid the price when they lost that election, and if they keep up with that, they'll continue to pay the price. - SIGNY
Oh ok, so what should they have done to keep Kavanaugh from the SC? Undo MATH? They tried with what they had, which should have been enough, but, yanno, there's that whole math thing and the fact that those Republicans clearly did not care who they put on the bench as long as he was a republican.
What could they have done?- GSTRING
NOTHING. There was NOTHING the Dems could have done to keep Kavanaugh from the SC.
So, what did they do? Instead of taking a principled stand and focusing on THE ISSUES, they trot out a woman with (phony?) accusations of sexual abuse, so that other women can sympathize with her, and then attempt to use Kavanaugh's inevitable appointment as a wedge issue in November.
It's like RUSSIA!!RUSSIA!!RUSSIA!! ... completely unverifiable accusations designed to activate people's emotions. A desperate orchestrated attempt to garner votes, the likes of which have, so far, worked oppositely for the DNC.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND
America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
ETA
Just in case any of our resident trolls are going to claim that I've 'suddenly' become motivated by 'somebody' to blame democrats:
I'd like to point out that I've been harping at the so-called 'democratic' party, their decades-long unswerving march into political irrelevance, their failed victim-hood identity politics, their back-room business as usual dealings, and their corrupted presidential candidate since well before the 2016 presidential election.
tic tac
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Quote:WHO DID THIS, JO?
Trump haz been destroying & degrading the goverment all along, so Kavenough wuz the perfect choise. Putin iz a master puppeteer. He haz widened the divide between rite & left, now this will divide men & wimin.
TRUMP??
Allegations which SHOULD have been brought forward the week that they were received, so that they could get a thorough investigation and measured discussion, instead of sitting in someone's office for months??
Allegations that were whipped into a froth of last-minute hysteria?
The party that did this was the Dems.
They had no interest in finding out if any of this was true.
Ford only wished to inform the senate and spesificly asked for her story to be kept private. This wuz BEFOR Kav wuz the nominee.
You are yoozing the standard GoP 'accuze your opponent uv your crime' tactic. Grassly & McConnel did their level best to rush Kav thru with no questionz asked. I'm sure they considered plunking hiz ass into a catapult & launching him thru the roof uv the court, but sumwun realized he mite die.
I woct the entire hearing, all 9 owrz. Partymiester Kav sed "I like beer" about 2 duzen timez, az if he wuz trying to ingratiate himself with Joe 6pak. Clearly a stratejy cooked up by Trump & hiz gang.
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early
http://www.7532020.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Ford only wished to inform the senate and spesificly asked for her story to be kept private. This wuz BEFOR Kav wuz the nominee.- JO
Here is a timeline of all of Ford's repeated contacts with the Democratic Party, as well as the Washington Post. It's not like she just sent an letter and then let the process work, she REPEATEDLY called Eshoo, Feinstein, and WaPo.
Her letter was delivered to Feinstein July 30.
Quote:All of August and half of September goes by before Feinstein gives the FBI a copy of the letter. She NEVER gives a copy to her own Committee.
Grassly & McConnel did their level best to rush Kav thru with no questionz asked.
The Committee follows up with Kavanaugh Sept 17, Feinstein refuses to participate
Feinstein, to this date, has NEVER given a copy of the letter, nor of the polygraph exam, to the Committee, whose duty it is to evaluate Kavanaugh.
I find her activity obstructive in the extreme, but she's not the only bad actor. Ford's own attorneys apparently didn't even inform Ford of the Senate's offer to interview her in California, and Chuck Schumer has been implicated as well.
Ford was used as a political football, and IMHO she was victimized by Democrats.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/09/must-see-updated-timeline-of-
christine-blasey-fords-contacts-with-democrats/
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND
America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Just reading this, I gotta' say JO, it makes no sense. Why would Blasey-Ford send a letter about Kavanaugh BEFORE he was nominated? Is she psychic?
Originally posted by JO753:
Ford only wished to inform the senate and spesificly asked for her story to be kept private. This wuz BEFOR Kav wuz the nominee.
As for the lack of timeliness, Signy addressed this quite a while ago - laying the blame on Feinstein for not being upfront with Blasey-Ford that this was going to end up a public part of the proceedings. When it comes to Feinsteins claim of confidentiality, it was conditional on Ford's part "As a constituent, I expect that you will maintain this as confidential until we have further opportunity to speak."
Of the three women who accused Kavanaugh, neither Blasey-Ford, Ramirez, nor Swetnick had good corroborating evidence. You'd think however, that their claims would merit at least some continuing investigation.
But what I blame democrats for is not having a case of merit, or fairness, or justice, to bring to the proceedings. The confirmation hearings began September 4, 2018. Ford's claims were made public September 16, 2018. Did democrats have NOTHING to say in intervening ~2 weeks?
To me, that speaks volumes.
tic tac
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The offer to interview Ford wuz bogus. Grassleyz interest wuz purely to discredit her.
Wut shoud raiz questionz for you, Kiki, iz why Kav wuz not screaming for the FBI to investigate to clear hiz good name. To hell with the committee! MY reputation iz being trashed!
Its going to bakfire anyway. Cristine Blasey Ford and the 2 otherz arent going to just fade away. And Avenatti iz going to make az much noize az possible, including digging up more accuzerz, witnessez & evidens.
Fair chans I rekon, that Kav will bekum the 1st Supreme Court Justis evr impeached and removed. And ritefully imprizoned if the word 'perjury' meanz anything.
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early
http://www.7532020.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Just reading this, I gotta' say JO, it makes no sense. Why would Blasey-Ford send a letter about Kavanaugh BEFORE he was nominated? Is she psychic?
She saw the list uv nominee segjestionz provided by The Heritaj Foundation. Seeing that fratboy assclownz name on it outrajed her.
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early
http://www.7532020.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
How do you post links with a fone? I wanted to show the Heritaj Foundation paje 'meet the 6 stellar jujez' on Trumps short list.
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early
http://www.7532020.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hey Kiki,
As I read your response to Jo a few things came to mind:
As I remember it, the timing of the letter that Jo is referring to has to be when Ford first heard Kavanaugh's name mentioned on the short list of nominees
being considered by Trump. (of course, this is all moot now).
Feinstein did handle it poorly.
As far as corroborating evidence and witnesses, the GOP JC members had no intention of presenting, or allowing to be presented, any of it. There was
the polygraph (and the expert), The notes from her therapist (and her therapist), her husband. Mark Judge should have been subpoenaed (a letter
saying "I know nothing" is bullshit. There's nothing that beats having a
witness in person testifying as to what he knows about the case).
And as for Ramirez, she had witnesses coming forward but the JC and the FBI refused to deal with them. The other accuser I know little of, so I offer
up nothing regarding her accusations. Under normal circumstances surrounding the vetting of a SCOTUS nominee, I dare say that the JC would call for a
thorough investigation. But this circus, perpetrated by the republicans, was
far from normal procedure.
The hearing and vetting process was a sham from start to finish. First the document "musical chairs" that the Repugs played prior to the hearing. For example: delivering thousands of documents in the wee hours of the morning
of the interview, the president "classifying" certain documents that
Kavanaugh worked on while serving in the Bush Administration, and so on.
A total fucking farce. The stolen emails he received from a RNC plant within
the DNC office. Like I said, all this is moot.
As I think more on it, Kavanaugh's lies to the committee under oath should have been sufficient to disqualify him for the position.
I'm going to stop here, I'm feeling a little ill.
SGG
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:Quote:Just reading this, I gotta' say JO, it makes no sense. Why would Blasey-Ford send a letter about Kavanaugh BEFORE he was nominated? Is she psychic?
Originally posted by JO753:
Ford only wished to inform the senate and spesificly asked for her story to be kept private. This wuz BEFOR Kav wuz the nominee.
As for the lack of timeliness, Signy addressed this quite a while ago - laying the blame on Feinstein for not being upfront with Blasey-Ford that this was going to end up a public part of the proceedings. When it comes to Feinsteins claim of confidentiality, it was conditional on Ford's part "As a constituent, I expect that you will maintain this as confidential until we have further opportunity to speak."
Of the three women who accused Kavanaugh, neither Blasey-Ford, Ramirez, nor Swetnick had good corroborating evidence. You'd think however, that their claims would merit at least some continuing investigation.
But what I blame democrats for is not having a case of merit, or fairness, or justice, to bring to the proceedings. The confirmation hearings began September 4, 2018. Ford's claims were made public September 16, 2018. Did democrats have NOTHING to say in intervening ~2 weeks?
To me, that speaks volumes.
tic tac
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hello to you both.
I've indicated that I think there should be continued investigation. Wrongdoing should be ferreted out, OR Kavanaugh should be definitively cleared. All applicable questions that can be answered should be answered. That said, there will be people for whom even a thorough investigation won't be enough, if it doesn't get the right answer.
Setting that aside, I still think the democrats failed in their basic political duty: to formulate a position of fairness and opportunity for all, and to represent their commitment to that position, and Kavanaugh's antithetical position to it.
The political reality is that democrats weren't going to change the outcome. But they had the opportunity to show us that they're on our side. And I don't mean just women or Hispanics, or African Americans or Native Americans, or ... I mean everybody.
I've brought this up before. And I have to ask, how hard could it be to say 'we're here to help make a country where everybody has the same fair shot at a good life'?
What is so difficult about that concept? How hard could it be to agree to that?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by JO753:
The offer to interview Ford wuz bogus. Grassleyz interest wuz purely to discredit her.
Wut shoud raiz questionz for you, Kiki, iz why Kav wuz not screaming for the FBI to investigate to clear hiz good name. To hell with the committee! MY reputation iz being trashed!
Its going to bakfire anyway. Cristine Blasey Ford and the 2 otherz arent going to just fade away. And Avenatti iz going to make az much noize az possible, including digging up more accuzerz, witnessez & evidens.
Fair chans I rekon, that Kav will bekum the 1st Supreme Court Justis evr impeached and removed. And ritefully imprizoned if the word 'perjury' meanz anything.
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early
http://www.7532020.com
You seem far to intelligent to go by guilty until proven innocent, J0.
What's your deal here?
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
No, I blame them for not learning lessons from the past.
Learning how to change math? Again you just lob up nothing comments like they mean something.
Why don't you want to change the Republicans?
Why don't you mention the lies Kavanaugh told? I agree with Jo and many others who respect the rule of actual Law, that he should be he should be tried for perjury.
Why don't you mention how he showed himself to be unfit character-wise for being a SC judge, as was noted by judges and ex-SC judge and many law professionals?
Why don't you mention how he couldn't answer the question about wanting an FBI investigation or not when - if he was innocent - it would have proven he was telling the truth?
Why don't you mention anything about the limited FBI investigation that didn't even interview the main characters or 20+ other witnesses?
As even Kiki noted, there was no way the Dems could have done ANYTHING against MATH.
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Is it POSSIBLE, do you suppose, for you not being a complete ass?
Is it POSSIBLE, do you suppose, for you not being a complete fabricator? Witness:
SIGGY: IF THE DEMOCRATS REALLY HAD A CONCERN THAT KAVANAUGH WAS A SEXUAL ABUSER. THEY WOULD HAVE HANDLED THIS MUCH DIFFERENTLY.
Uh-huh. You being legal & political theory scholar you know all about how this should have gone?
SIGGY: They would have brought up these allegations when then FIRST came to light, not sprung them -literally- at the very last moment.
CC: Not even close to "the last moment."
SIGGY: They would have pressed for a long, thorough investigation.
CC: They did and The Republicans shot it down.
SIGGY: They would have provided the SENATE COMMITTEE with COPIES of the therapy notes and COPIES of the polygraph exam ... as they had been asked THREE TIMES by Grassley ... which might have opened up new avenues of investigation, or allowed Senate delegates to visit Ford in CA as the committee offered instead of stalling and stalling and stalling and obfuscating.
CC: They made a point of revealing thse items so they weren't hiding them. The Republicans played just as many file withholding tactics.
SIGGY: Clearly, this was an orchestrated attempt to demean Kavanaugh's reputation with (as far as I can tell) a flurry of last-minute, totally unverifiable accusations.
CC: Kavanaugh demeaned his own reputation MANY times. Sometimes in the past and sometimes right in front of the Nation on live tv.
SIGGY: You keep asking What else could they have done?, which certainly implies that EVEN YOU recognize that this was a underhanded attempt by the Dems.
CC: That's so stupid it's funny
It implies that you can't answer a simple question and all you do is dodge and lie.Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:The Dems have STILL not learned their lesson: Instead of dividing America into smaller and smaller slivers of self-identified victims groups (does a nonwhite older civilian female have more rights than a transsexual in the military?) they should get back to representing ALL Americans. Yanno, when Hillary called nearly half of the voting public "deplorables", that was emblematic of everything wrong with the Democratic Party. They paid the price when they lost that election, and if they keep up with that, they'll continue to pay the price.
What does any of that have to do with us having a new SC justice who lies and is unfit to be a Supreme?
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
So, what did they do? Instead of taking a principled stand and focusing on THE ISSUES, they trot out a woman with (phony?) accusations of sexual abuse, so that other women can sympathize with her, and then attempt to use Kavanaugh's inevitable appointment as a wedge issue in November.
Which THE ISSUES did they not focus on with respect to Kavanaugh? You're fine with having a SC justice who lies,
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Originally posted by JO753:
The offer to interview Ford wuz bogus. Grassleyz interest wuz purely to discredit her.
Wut shoud raiz questionz for you, Kiki, iz why Kav wuz not screaming for the FBI to investigate to clear hiz good name. To hell with the committee! MY reputation iz being trashed!
Its going to bakfire anyway. Cristine Blasey Ford and the 2 otherz arent going to just fade away. And Avenatti iz going to make az much noize az possible, including digging up more accuzerz, witnessez & evidens.
Fair chans I rekon, that Kav will bekum the 1st Supreme Court Justis evr impeached and removed. And ritefully imprizoned if the word 'perjury' meanz anything.
----------------------------
6IXSTRINGJACK: You seem far to intelligent to go by guilty until proven innocent, J0.
What's your deal here?
Jo's deal is he is that intelligent.
https://www.gq.com/story/all-of-brett-kavanaughs-lies
An attempt to catalog the various lies told by the embattled Supreme Court nominee—including while under oath.
It is not that often that four of a judicial nominee's high school and college classmates go on the record to question his honesty. But so it goes with Brett Kavanaugh, Donald Trump's post-truth Supreme Court nominee.
Last Thursday, Kavanaugh testified to the Senate Judiciary Committee in a hearing, which was heavily rigged in his favor because Republicans limited senators to five minutes of questioning and disallowed any other witnesses, on Christine Blasey Ford's allegations of sexual assault against him. As in previous interviews and testimony, his statements were riddled with misrepresentations, diversions, and outright lies, so much so that The New York Times posted a fact-check, Vox made a chart of every time Kavanaugh dodged a question, and Current Affairs' Nathan Robinson dissected the testimony in an exhaustive 10,000-word refutation, "How We Know Kavanaugh Is Lying."
After the hearing, Kavanaugh's Georgetown Prep classmate Sean Hagan posted on Facebook: "So angry. So disgusted. So sad. Integrity? Character? Honesty?" Yale classmate Chad Ludington, a professor at North Carolina State University, issued a statement saying that he was "deeply troubled" by Kavanaugh's "blatant mischaracterization" and "cringed" while watching his testimony under oath. "I can unequivocally say that in denying the possibility that he ever blacked out from drinking, and in downplaying the degree and frequency of his drinking, Brett has not told the truth," wrote Ludington.
Two more Yale classmates granted interviews to CNN. "There were a lot of texts flying around that night about how he was lying to the Senate Judiciary Committee," Lynne Brookes, a college friend and registered Republican, told Chris Cuomo. Another college friend, Liz Swisher, a Democrat and professor of gynecologic oncology, was equally outraged by Kavanaugh's dissembling performance. "To lie under oath. To blur…the difference between truth and lies, that's just terrible," said Swisher in a different interview with Cuomo. "It's not about women versus men. It's not about Democrats versus Republicans. It's about the integrity of the Supreme Court."
Others:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/28/us/politics/brett-kavanaugh-fact-ch
eck.html
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/9/28/17914308/kavanaugh-f
ord-question-dodge-hearing-chart
https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/09/how-we-know-kavanaugh-is-lying
And I'm sure there are plenty more.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Don't you just love the "both sides are the same" fallacies Russian trolls always use?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by JO753:
The offer to interview Ford wuz bogus. Grassleyz interest wuz purely to discredit her.
Wut shoud raiz questionz for you, Kiki, iz why Kav wuz not screaming for the FBI to investigate to clear hiz good name. To hell with the committee! MY reputation iz being trashed!
Its going to bakfire anyway. Cristine Blasey Ford and the 2 otherz arent going to just fade away. And Avenatti iz going to make az much noize az possible, including digging up more accuzerz, witnessez & evidens.
Fair chans I rekon, that Kav will bekum the 1st Supreme Court Justis evr impeached and removed. And ritefully imprizoned if the word 'perjury' meanz anything.
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early
http://www.7532020.com
If I were falsely accused of a crime, I'd calmly answer questions, not lie, not act like a whiny little entitled bitch, and DEMAND a thorough investigation to clear my name.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I've already posted, many times, what I think they should have learned from the past. Are you incapable of reading? Learning?
No, I blame them for not learning lessons from the past.- SIGNY
Learning how to change math? Again you just lob up nothing comments like they mean something.- GSTRING
Quote:I DO want to cahnge republicans. I have criticized Republicans often, so this is just a repeat of your previous lie.
Why don't you want to change the Republicans? - GSTRING
Quote:I have heard that Kavanaugh's testimony can be characterized as "lies of omission", which means he was evasive and didn't answer some questions fully. According to the part I heard, I would say that he was strictly truthful but not complete.
Why don't you mention the lies Kavanaugh told? I agree with Jo and many others who respect the rule of actual Law, that he should be he should be tried for perjury.- GSTRING
Quote:A billion flies eat shit.
Why don't you mention how he showed himself to be unfit character-wise for being a SC judge, as was noted by judges and ex-SC judge and many law professionals?
Quote:I already addressed that the day that it happened.
Why don't you mention how he couldn't answer the question about wanting an FBI investigation or not when - if he was innocent - it would have proven he was telling the truth?
Quote:As I understand FBI "investigations" they would have simply conducted yet another interview of Ford and Kavanaugh. It's not a criminal investigation where they "sweat" the suspect.
Why don't you mention anything about the limited FBI investigation that didn't even interview the main characters or 20+ other witnesses?
Quote:And I said the same, if you had bothered to read with comprehension. Does that mean that they have license to play dirty?
As even Kiki noted, there was no way the Dems could have done ANYTHING against MATH.
Quote:YES.
Is it POSSIBLE, do you suppose, for you not being a complete ass?- SIGNY
Is it POSSIBLE, do you suppose, for you not being a complete fabricator? Witness:
SIGGY: IF THE DEMOCRATS REALLY HAD A CONCERN THAT KAVANAUGH WAS A SEXUAL ABUSER. THEY WOULD HAVE HANDLED THIS MUCH DIFFERENTLY.
Uh-huh. You being legal & political theory scholar you know all about how this should have gone?- GSTRING
For ONE thing, they would NOT have held back their information to the last possible moment.
Quote:The last moment. Check timelines.
SIGGY: They would have brought up these allegations when then FIRST came to light, not sprung them -literally- at the very last moment.
CC: Not even close to "the last moment."
Quote:Because they presented these accusations at the last possible moment. AFTER the Committee had already interviewed Kavanaugh.
SIGGY: They would have pressed for a long, thorough investigation.
CC: They did and The Republicans shot it down.
Quote:AT the last possible moment
SIGGY: They would have provided the SENATE COMMITTEE with COPIES of the therapy notes and COPIES of the polygraph exam ... as they had been asked THREE TIMES by Grassley ... which might have opened up new avenues of investigation, or allowed Senate delegates to visit Ford in CA as the committee offered instead of stalling and stalling and stalling and obfuscating.
CC: They made a point of revealing thse items
Quote:According to legal scholar which you claim to be so in awe of, those files belong to GWB.
so they weren't hiding them. The Republicans played just as many file withholding tactics.
Quote:Oh yeah? LINKS PLEASE [
SIGGY: Clearly, this was an orchestrated attempt to demean Kavanaugh's reputation with (as far as I can tell) a flurry of last-minute, totally unverifiable accusations.
CC: Kavanaugh demeaned his own reputation MANY times.
Quote:
SIGGY: You keep asking What else could they have done?, which certainly implies that ENOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by reaverfan:Quote:
Originally posted by JO753:
The offer to interview Ford wuz bogus. Grassleyz interest wuz purely to discredit her.
Wut shoud raiz questionz for you, Kiki, iz why Kav wuz not screaming for the FBI to investigate to clear hiz good name. To hell with the committee! MY reputation iz being trashed!
Its going to bakfire anyway. Cristine Blasey Ford and the 2 otherz arent going to just fade away. And Avenatti iz going to make az much noize az possible, including digging up more accuzerz, witnessez & evidens.
Fair chans I rekon, that Kav will bekum the 1st Supreme Court Justis evr impeached and removed. And ritefully imprizoned if the word 'perjury' meanz anything.
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early
http://www.7532020.com
If I were falsely accused of a crime, I'd calmly answer questions, not lie, not act like a whiny little entitled bitch, and DEMAND a thorough investigation to clear my name.
lol. You don't even know the definition of the word calm. You're a lunatic and all you do all day is act like a whiny entitled bitch and make demands.
You're a never ending source of amusement.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by captaincrunch:
Jo's deal is he is that intelligent.
(Followed by a bunch of stuff nobody read)
J0 can answer for himself. He certainly doesn't need the likes of you answering for him.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by reaverfan:
Don't you just love the "both sides are the same" fallacies Russian trolls always use?
Too funny - literally just last night I went out to dinner with some people I had not seen in a couple years and that was one of the things on the list of "the stupid sh*t pro-Trumpers want you to believe" that we shared.
"They never talk about Republicans." That was popular too.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Originally posted by captaincrunch:
Jo's deal is he is that intelligent.
(Followed by a bunch of stuff nobody read)
J0 can answer for himself. He certainly doesn't need the likes of you answering for him.
Of course he can. You had an opinion about Jo and so did I. You want to limit my free speech?
Sorry about all those sentences!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by captaincrunch:Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Originally posted by captaincrunch:
Jo's deal is he is that intelligent.
(Followed by a bunch of stuff nobody read)
J0 can answer for himself. He certainly doesn't need the likes of you answering for him.
Of course he can. You had an opinion about Jo and so did I. You want to limit my free speech?
Sorry about all those sentences!
You're free to say whatever you want to.
J0 doesn't need you to give your opinions and apply them to his own.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
SIGGY: I've already posted, many times, what I think they should have learned from the past. Are you incapable of reading? Learning?
CC: Yeah, I read it and it had nothng practical to do with this hearing. You through out a bunch of spoke bombs, "Identitiy politics," *cough* etc etc.
SIGGY: I DO want to cahnge republicans. I have criticized Republicans often, so this is just a repeat of your previous lie.
CC: My previous statement was correct: you haven't said one thing about the fake outrage from Graham and the other 11 rep on the committee and the rush job and the worthless extra week FBI background check that was limited into nothing.
SIGGY: I have heard that Kavanaugh's testimony can be characterized as "lies of omission", which means he was evasive and didn't answer some questions fully.
CC: "Lies of omission" - popular these days. Here, since I know you like text so much, here's 10,000 words on how we know he lied:
https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/09/how-we-know-kavanaugh-is-lying
SIGGY: A billion flies eat shit.
CC: That is so telling - getting tired running out of misdirection? It must be emotionally draining keeping up the pretense.
SIGGY: As I understand FBI "investigations" they would have simply conducted yet another interview of Ford and Kavanaugh. It's not a criminal investigation where they "sweat" the suspect.
CC: They didn't even talk to them though. Are you suggesting it wasn't limited? They even had until Friday and wrapped it Wed.
SIGGY: And I said the same, if you had bothered to read with comprehension. Does that mean that they have license to play dirty?
CC: No, you said what they should have done was learn from the past. Play dirty? There is so much coming out now from Kavanaugh's past on top of what Ford had happen to her it's way past Dems playing dirty.
SIGGY: IF THE DEMOCRATS REALLY HAD A CONCERN THAT KAVANAUGH WAS A SEXUAL ABUSER. THEY WOULD HAVE HANDLED THIS MUCH DIFFERENTLY.
For ONE thing, they would NOT have held back their information to the last possible moment.
CC: why does that suggest they didn't care if he was a sexual abuser? They played it quite well timing-wise if you ask me. They bought a lot of time which they used to expose the GOP on the committee as self-serving, past it old white dudes who have lost their minds, and they exposed Kavanuagh himself as bought and paid for made man of the Right.
SIGGY: They would have brought up these allegations when then FIRST came to light, not sprung them -literally- at the very last moment.
CC: Ok, just checked and you were right and I was wrong - it was last minute. As you would imagine, I still don't see why that is a problem - well played even. They are under no obligation to do so sooner. What would you do if you were out gunned?
SIGGY: Clearly, this was an orchestrated attempt to demean Kavanaugh's reputation with (as far as I can tell) a flurry of last-minute, totally unverifiable accusations.
CC: The old non-committal way to shovel propoganda, "As far as I can tell..." I got one, "as far as I can tell Russia paid off all the Republicans to pass Kavanaugh."
SIGGY: (CC: Kavanaugh demeaned his own reputation MANY times.) Oh yeah? LINKS PLEASE
CC: did you watch any of the coverage of his testimony? Asking a senator if she ever had too much to drink? It was like he was drunk himself.
SIGGY: I just told you. You just posted "What else" they could have done. In terms of keeping Kavanauhg off teh bench, I will tell you again: NOTHING.
CC: 2 steps forward!
SIGGY: OTOH, they COULD have been a lot more fair to Ford and brought these allegations up much earlier.
CC: 5 steps back! Yeah, those Dems were so awful the way they treated her helping her have a voice to address her attacker! *spew* You owe me another keyboard!
SIGGY: MANY legal scholars supported Kavanaugh and gave him their highest rating. YOU seem to think that theirs are a significant
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Those 10,000 words that you linked?
90% bullshit.
I'm not going to pick apart every single line by an author who is determined to find fault with every single word that Kavanaugh spoke. Instead, I'll give you my impression of what I heard.
There were a few related lines of questioning that I found significant:
The first line of questioning had to do with whether or not Kavanuagh attacked Ford. He denied that accusation unequivocally, and since there is absolutely no corroborating testimony of the assault ... or even that a party with those attendees ever took place ... this is probably a dead issue.
The issue of Kavanaugh's drinking, and whether or not he ever blacked out, was approached. He was asked, explicitly, whether he had ever woken up in a place where he didn't know how he got there, or with his clothes in such a condition that he couldn't recall how it happened, and he also denied this unequivocally.
However, when asked about he much he drank, he answered "we drank beer", which isn't an answer. There was also an entry in some book somewhere about a university baseball outing where he stumbled off the bus and had to "piece things together" and so he was questioned whether he couldn't remember what happened and he answered "I know what happened". But it's not clear whether he knew what happened from his OWN memories, or whether he had to piece together fragmentary memories into some kind of narrative ("I know that must have happened in the 7th inning because...") or whether he had to rely on what other people told him. So he was evasive about how much he drank overall.
*****
There was an UNRELATED line of questioning about military tribunals versus civilian jury trials which is directly related to Trump's Executive Order. I'm surprised that you didn't notice it.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND
America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yeah. Answering "we drank beer" is not an actual answer. I can vouch for that.
I'm not going to say that I never drank hard liquor. I know there was a time there where I had tried switching over because my beer intake was making me really fat. I didn't like it though, and I would get drunk far too quickly, so I don't think I did it very long.
Most of my drunken posts here back when I was drinking were anywhere from 5 beers in to about 40 beers in. I had a lot more free time than most people do though, so the tail end of my binge sessions could have been up to 36 hours after I started drinking.
I think that to most people specifying beer over hard liquor would mean that you're not a serious drinker. In some cases this is just not true.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I think the reason why some people focused so heavily on Kavanaugh's drinking was because that would make Ford's allegation more "plausible". However, the question isn't whether or not Kavanaugh was a heavy drinker, or whether or not Ford's allegation is "plausible" but whether or not it actually happened. We can only go back to the people that Ford said were there, none of whom can corroborate what she said.
There are two other allegations. It's not uncommon for women to come forward only after OTHER women have come forward, so that "pile on" effect is common; I don't see any "conspiracy" behind this. I think Ramirez' allegations were investigated, Swetnick's were not. Again, it's too bad that Feinstein sat on Ford's accusations for so long because these other allegations would have had more time.
But investigations can be continued, so let the lawyers continue.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND
America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hope y'all don't think I forgot … 
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Yep - Trump's good at taking care of himself! I'm surpised there's any money left in the Treasury. Wait, there isn't. Ha! Joke's on us!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by captaincrunch:
Yep - Trump's good at taking care of himself! I'm surpised there's any money left in the Treasury. Wait, there isn't. Ha! Joke's on us!
Obama doubles the national debt... no big deal. Trump keeps yet another campaign promise, a foundational reason for his running, to turn the court conservative, and wut ?? OMG ! Spending is out of control!!
( Which, to be fair, it is, but hell, it's not like he's not grown the economy too, so there's that. Yes, he and the GOP need to work on cutting more, but for now, in year 2, ya gotta give the man his due )
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Those 10,000 words that you linked?
90% bullshit.
Those 10,000 posts you made?
99% bullsh*t.
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I'm not going to pick apart every single line by an author who is determined to find fault with every single word that Kavanaugh spoke.
Yep - there's a ton of Kavanaugh lying to pick through.
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:The first line of questioning had to do with whether or not Kavanuagh attacked Ford. He denied that accusation unequivocally, and since there is absolutely no corroborating testimony of the assault ... or even that a party with those attendees ever took place ... this is probably a dead issue.
Why? She's guilty of lying until proven innocent? Shame we didn't have an FBI investigation. Hey, who was it that limited it so it couldn't find anything? Republicans.
Also, there's an entry on his calendar that supports that party and those attendees.
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
The issue of Kavanaugh's drinking, and whether or not he ever blacked out, was approached. He was asked, explicitly, whether he had ever woken up in a place where he didn't know how he got there, or with his clothes in such a condition that he couldn't recall how it happened, and he also denied this unequivocally.
He said sometimes he drank too much. He equivocated actually - that's where he tried to flip it on Klobuchar and he embarrassed himself and his great name (and his family).
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
There was an UNRELATED line of questioning about military tribunals versus civilian jury trials which is directly related to Trump's Executive Order. I'm surprised that you didn't notice it.
No idea - that reminds me though about other Dem problems with Brewski: It was well established early on that he was a Trump top choice because of his views on basically not being able to legally touch a sitting president, and that's why Trump picked him. Why an innocent man would need a get-out-of-jail free judge on the SC is hard to answer.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:And yet, you've never been able to refute a single one.
Those 10,000 words that you linked?
90% bullshit.- SIGNY
Those 10,000 posts you made?
99% bullsh*t.-GSTRING
Quote:You appear to be TOTALLY unfamiliar with the USA system of justice. Are you sure you're not a Russian troll??
The first line of questioning had to do with whether or not Kavanuagh attacked Ford. He denied that accusation unequivocally, and since there is absolutely no corroborating testimony of the assault ... or even that a party with those attendees ever took place ... this is probably a dead issue. - SIGNY
Why? She's guilty of lying until proven innocent? - GSTRING
First of all, there is no verdict called "innocent". Think back, son; what do juries find??
It's not guilty. There are different approaches to hypothesis testing, and the Founding Fathers, being logicians, realized that you can never prove a negative. (In other words, you can never prove that a person did NOT commit a crime) However, you can FAIL TO PROVE that s/he committed the crime. They believed that it was better to let potentially guilty person go than convict an innocent person.
Second, who said Ford is LYING?? I have posted OVER AND OVER AGAIN that she might be MISTAKEN. Old, incomplete memories are fragile. In an effort to reconstruct them, there may be some "construction" going on. It's a common phenomenon, it even has a name: false memory.
Quote:Again, you seem to be terribly confused about what the FBI does. This is not a CRIMINAL investigation, it's a background check. They would simply have re-interviewed Ford and/or Kavanaugh if they thought it was necessary.
Shame we didn't have an FBI investigation.
Quote:Prove it.
Hey, who was it that limited it so it couldn't find anything? Republicans.
Quote:No, there is an entry that supports A party and SOME of the attendees. None of whom remember being at a party with Ford.
Also, there's an entry on his calendar that supports that party and those attendees.
Quote:It was awkward.
The issue of Kavanaugh's drinking, and whether or not he ever blacked out, was approached. He was asked, explicitly, whether he had ever woken up in a place where he didn't know how he got there, or with his clothes in such a condition that he couldn't recall how it happened, and he also denied this unequivocally.- SIGNY
He said sometimes he drank too much. He equivocated actually - that's where he tried to flip it on Klobuchar and he embarrassed himself and his great name (and his family).
Quote:Not the point. Alt media claims that Trump signed an executive order in order to round up those of the deep state who could be convicted of sedition, and that they could be tried before a military tribunal. Now, they have been saying this for a long time ... looong before the Kavanaugh hearing. This line of questioning, which appeared to be almost random and out-of-the-blue, seems to support the alt media's contention. Military tribunals in the future??? It's as possible as Trump being "untouchable".
There was an UNRELATED line of questioning about military tribunals versus civilian jury trials which is directly related to Trump's Executive Order. I'm surprised that you didn't notice it.- SIGNY
No idea - that reminds me though about other Dem problems with Brewski: It was well established early on that he was a Trump top choice because of his views on basically not being able to legally touch a sitting president, and that's why Trump picked him. Why an innocent man would need a get-out-of-jail free judge on the SC is hard to answer.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND
Am
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
And now, a word from someone far more hostile than me
Quote:
I believe her!”
Really? Why should anyone believe her?
Senator Collins of Maine said she believed that Dr. Christine Blasey Ford experienced somethingtraumatic, just not at the hands of Mr. Kavanaugh. I believe Senator Collins said that to placate the #Metoo mob, not because she actually believed it. I believe Christine Blasey Ford was lying, through and through, in her injured little girl voice, like a bad imitation of Truman Capote.
I believe that the Christine Blasey Ford gambit was an extension of the sinister activities underway since early 2016 in the Department of Justice and the FBI to un-do the last presidential election, and that the real and truthful story about these seditious monkeyshines is going to blow wide open.
It turns out that the Deep State is a small world.
Did you know that the lawyer sitting next to Dr. Ford in the Senate hearings, one Michael Bromwich, is also an attorney for Andrew McCabe, the former FBI Deputy Director fired for lying to investigators from his own agency and currently singing to a grand jury?
What a coincidence. Out of all the lawyers in the most lawyer-infested corner of the USA, she just happened to hook up with him.
It’s a matter of record that Dr. Ford traveled to Rehobeth Beach Delaware on July 26, where her Best Friend Forever and former room-mate, Monica McLean, lives, and that she spent the next four days there before sending a letter July 30 to Senator Diane Feinstein that kicked off the “sexual assault” circus. Did you know that Monica McClean was a retired FBI special agent, and that she worked in the US Attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York under Preet Bharara, who had earlier worked for Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer?
Could Monica McLean have spent those four days in July helping Christine Blasey Ford compose her letter to Mrs. Feinstein? Did you know that Monica McClean’s lawyer, one David Laufman is a former DOJ top lawyer who assisted former FBI counter-intel chief Peter Strozk on both the Clinton and Russia investigations before resigning in February this year — in fact, he sat in on the notorious “unsworn” interview with Hillary in 2016. Wow! What a really small swamp Washington is!
Did you know that Ms. Leland Keyser, Dr. Ford’s previous BFF from back in the Holton Arms prep school, told the final round of FBI investigators in the Kavanaugh hearing last week — as reported by the The Wall Street Journal — that she “felt pressured” by Monica McLean and her representatives to change her story — that she knew nothing about the alleged sexual assault, or the alleged party where it allegedly happened, or that she ever knew Mr. Kavanaugh. I think that’s called suborning perjury.
None of this is trivial and the matter can’t possibly rest there. Too much of it has been unraveled by what remains of the news media. And meanwhile, of course, there is at least one grand jury listening to testimony from the whole cast-of-characters behind the botched Hillary investigation and Robert Mueller’s ever more dubious-looking Russian collusion inquiry: the aforementioned Strozk, Lisa Page, James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Bill Priestap, et. al. I have a feeling that these matters are now approaching critical mass with the parallel unraveling of the Christine Blasey Ford “story.”
The Democratic Party has its fingerprints all over this, as it does with the shenanigans over the Russia investigation. Not only do I not believe Dr. Ford’s story; I also don’t believe she acted on her own in this shady business. What’s happening with all these FBI and DOJ associated lawyers is an obvious circling of the wagons. They’ve generated too much animus in the process and they’re going to get nailed. These matters are far from over and a major battle is looming in the countdown to the midterm elections. In fact, op-ed writer Charles M. Blow sounded the trumpet Monday morning in his idiotic column titled: Liberals, This is War. Like I’ve been saying: Civil War Two.[NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
And now, a word from someone far more hostile than meQuote:
I believe her!”
Really? Why should anyone believe her?
Senator Collins of Maine said she believed that Dr. Christine Blasey Ford experienced somethingtraumatic, just not at the hands of Mr. Kavanaugh. I believe Senator Collins said that to placate the #Metoo mob, not because she actually believed it. I believe Christine Blasey Ford was lying, through and through, in her injured little girl voice, like a bad imitation of Truman Capote.
I believe that the Christine Blasey Ford gambit was an extension of the sinister activities underway since early 2016 in the Department of Justice and the FBI to un-do the last presidential election, and that the real and truthful story about these seditious monkeyshines is going to blow wide open.
It turns out that the Deep State is a small world.
Did you know that the lawyer sitting next to Dr. Ford in the Senate hearings, one Michael Bromwich, is also an attorney for Andrew McCabe, the former FBI Deputy Director fired for lying to investigators from his own agency and currently singing to a grand jury?
What a coincidence. Out of all the lawyers in the most lawyer-infested corner of the USA, she just happened to hook up with him.
It’s a matter of record that Dr. Ford traveled to Rehobeth Beach Delaware on July 26, where her Best Friend Forever and former room-mate, Monica McLean, lives, and that she spent the next four days there before sending a letter July 30 to Senator Diane Feinstein that kicked off the “sexual assault” circus. Did you know that Monica McClean was a retired FBI special agent, and that she worked in the US Attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York under Preet Bharara, who had earlier worked for Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer?
Could Monica McLean have spent those four days in July helping Christine Blasey Ford compose her letter to Mrs. Feinstein? Did you know that Monica McClean’s lawyer, one David Laufman is a former DOJ top lawyer who assisted former FBI counter-intel chief Peter Strozk on both the Clinton and Russia investigations before resigning in February this year — in fact, he sat in on the notorious “unsworn” interview with Hillary in 2016. Wow! What a really small swamp Washington is!
Did you know that Ms. Leland Keyser, Dr. Ford’s previous BFF from back in the Holton Arms prep school, told the final round of FBI investigators in the Kavanaugh hearing last week — as reported by the The Wall Street Journal — that she “felt pressured” by Monica McLean and her representatives to change her story — that she knew nothing about the alleged sexual assault, or the alleged party where it allegedly happened, or that she ever knew Mr. Kavanaugh. I think that’s called suborning perjury.
None of this is trivial and the matter can’t possibly rest there. Too much of it has been unraveled by what remains of the news media. And meanwhile, of course, there is at least one grand jury listening to testimony from the whole cast-of-characters behind the botched Hillary investigation and Robert Mueller’s ever more dubious-looking Russian collusion inquiry: the aforementioned Strozk, Lisa Page, James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Bill Priestap, et. al. I have a feeling that these matters are now approaching critical mass with the parallel unraveling of the Christine Blasey Ford “story.”
The Democratic Party has its fingerprints all over this, as it does with the shenanigans over the Russia investigation. Not only do I not believe Dr. Ford’s story; I also don’t believe she acted on her own in this shady business. What’s happening with all these FBI and DOJ associated lawyers is an obvious circling of the wagons. They’ve generated too much animus in the process and they’re going to get nailed. These matters are far from over and a major battle is looming in the countdown to the midterm elections. In fact, op-ed writer Charles M. Blow sounded the trumpet Monday morning in his idiotic column titled: Liberals, This is War.NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Good to have you back again. Not sure if you recognize the Gang.
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Hope y'all don't think I forgot …
6ix is sober now, not much endless posts of video.
SGG uses the same name, even if it might be a different poster.
T used to be Thg, and Thuggri, and maybe JJ, maybe others.
CC used to be G-String, and pizmobeach, and maybe JJ.
I think the rest are the same.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well, part of you taking back your life is admitting to your drunkeness. That starts the healing process, you recognized the problem and you conquered your
demons.
I applaud you for that. Seriously, no shit. You faced up to responsibility.
You manned up.
With this scumbag Kavanaugh, he never has. All his life has been a lark, a romp through the woods to grandma's house. He never had to work for anything,
privilege has its rewards - or does it? Everything has been handed to him
including, and especially, the judgeship on the Federal level. Does he know the law? Who's to say for sure. Blackout drunks tend to miss whole chunks of
their waking life.
But let's look at this like Keeks and Siggy do. Let's say he was the angel he claims to be. Let's say he's completely innocent, of everything - no collusion. Then why not allow the FBI a full investigation? You know, to
clear his innocence. Because he was being handed this position on a silver platter. McConnell was not about to allow to be made a fool of (whoops, too late).
He said so. "We are plowing him through."
McConnell and company (I really don't think Trump had much to say on this matter, this was all McConnell) carefully orchestrated the FBI "investigation"
and limited the scope. Pure and simple. Then he and Trump "gaslight" everyone
not in agreement. They point a finger at the Dems and shout out "mob rule"
"conspiracy" "no corroboration" "witch hunt."
And while everyone is looking at what the "left hand" is doing, the "right hand" is busy "palming the deck." It's all slight of hand, smoke and mirrors.
Grassley orders that the hearing will be limited to Ford and Kavanaugh; he limits the questions to 5 minutes apiece; he has a female prosecutor ask the
questions instead of the "old white guys" (a shrewd move, but one that everyone sees as manipulative). With no one else testifying it reduces the chances that something or someone might slip through and open up a can of
worms. Then he (Grassley) quietly asks Ford's lawyers to submit to the
committee Ford's psychologist and the polygraph report. Again, why not
question the experts; the psychologist and the former FBI agent who conducted
the polygraph. Have them testify. An innocent man would.
Limitng the minutes of questioning, limits the exposure to Kavanaugh (Senator Kamala Harris had him sweating bullets as she slowly and methodically painted him into a corner during the initial hearing). He couldn't, or wouldn't, give a straight answer to anything other than his name. Not on anything - not Rule of Law or, as to the school yearbook, not the Devil's Triangle, not the 4 Fs, not Renate, nothing. This guy lied more than once to the committee, which means he lied to Congress...under oath. Then he rudely shot back a question
to Senator Klobuchar (one of the nicest senators on the circuit) about "blackout drinking." That's why I call him a SCUMBAG! (Plus he has the face
of a little rat sneaking around the house in the dark). He's a greasy little weasel. Even his wife was making agonizing faces during his testimony, as if to say: "he really didn't just say." She knew. Fucking liar!
But because the Repugs were in charge, those stodgy old farts, pulled the
old "we're in charge and you can't do shit about it" card, especially that
retarded old fuck Grassley. He's fucking 80, and senile. Hatch was complaining about the protesters. Another old fart scumbag (I really had no idea until these hearings that he was THAT bad). Stupid fuck forgets that this country
was built on protesters - they named a movement after them - Tea Party.
The Boston Tea Party was a protest against the British.....
Quote:
On this date, December 16, 1773, members of the Sons of Liberty disguised as Mohawk Indians dumped crates of tea into Boston harbor as a PROTEST against
the Tea Act and it&NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by reaverfan:
If I were falsely accused of a crime, I'd calmly answer questions, not lie, not act like a whiny little entitled bitch, and DEMAND a thorough investigation to clear my name.
Kav not only came off az a spaz, he made it painfully obvious that the GoP senatorz and Trump were conducting a sham confirmation hearing clearly for their Trump Chump audiens.
Trump iz now uzing it in hiz rallyz, going so far az to mok Christine Blazy Ford.
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early
http://www.7532020.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by captaincrunch:Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Originally posted by captaincrunch:
Jo's deal is he is that intelligent.
(Followed by a bunch of stuff nobody read)
J0 can answer for himself. He certainly doesn't need the likes of you answering for him.
Of course he can. You had an opinion about Jo and so did I. You want to limit my free speech?
Sorry about all those sentences!
You can ansr for me any time, CC. Save me the drujery uv typing on this dinky fone tuchscreen.
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early
http://www.7532020.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Well, part of you taking back your life is admitting to your drunkeness. That starts the healing process, you recognized the problem and you conquered your
demons.
I applaud you for that. Seriously, no shit. You faced up to responsibility.
You manned up.
Well, thanks.
At the end of the day, this is all that matters.
None of this political bullshit we post about really does. The 1%'ers are just going to keep doing whatever the hell they want to do and they don't give a damn about your or me. It doesn't really matter much who's "winning"... at the end of the day it's all the same.
I've made a lot of improvements in my life in the last few years. Just like I take full responsibility for all of my bad choices and the years I lost to my addictions, I take full responsibility for how well I'm doing now in comparison.
Take some time out of your days to improve yourself and to do something for the people you care about. When all is said and done, that's all that really matters. All of this political bullshit is completely out of our control.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
But because the Repugs were in charge, those stodgy old farts, pulled the old "we're in charge and you can't do shit about it" card, especially that retarded old fuck Grassley. - SGG
Kav not only came off az a spaz, he made it painfully obvious that the GoP senatorz and Trump were conducting a sham confirmation hearing clearly for their Trump Chump audiens.- JO
And in response, the Dems orchestrated a sham accusation, none of which was really designed to go anywhere except the November elections.
Instead of heaving your heads blow off because Repubs play dirty politics, and so do the Dems, why not just stick with what would move this nation forward? I heard an interesting segment on NPR yesterday: It seems (according to the polls) that middle-of-the-roaders and no-party-affiliates are being completely turned off by hyper-partisanship.
I could be wrong (because I don't follow Twitter) but it seems to me that altho Trump frequently criticizes Democrats, he doesn't use the term "Democrats" or "Democratic" very often. Whereas, the Dems refer "Republicans" quite often. I think the Dems constant reference to party is generating a cringe reaction among people who aren't registered with any party, and those are exactly the people that the Dem party needs to win over. Because, obviously, the DNC already has its base sewn up.
In other words, instead of trying to appeal to slivers of people ... Democrats, women, gays, blacks ... they should be crafting a message with the broadest possible appeal.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND
America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Well, part of you taking back your life is admitting to your drunkeness. That starts the healing process, you recognized the problem and you conquered your
demons.
I applaud you for that. Seriously, no shit. You faced up to responsibility.
You manned up.
With this scumbag Kavanaugh, he never has. All his life has been a lark, a romp through the woods to grandma's house. He never had to work for anything,
privilege has its rewards - or does it? Everything has been handed to him
including, and especially, the judgeship on the Federal level. Does he know the law? Who's to say for sure. Blackout drunks tend to miss whole chunks of
their waking life.
But let's look at this like Keeks and Siggy do. Let's say he was the angel he claims to be. Let's say he's completely innocent, of everything - no collusion. Then why not allow the FBI a full investigation? You know, to
clear his innocence. Because he was being handed this position on a silver platter. McConnell was not about to allow to be made a fool of (whoops, too late).
He said so. "We are plowing him through."
McConnell and company (I really don't think Trump had much to say on this matter, this was all McConnell) carefully orchestrated the FBI "investigation"
and limited the scope. Pure and simple. Then he and Trump "gaslight" everyone
not in agreement. They point a finger at the Dems and shout out "mob rule"
"conspiracy" "no corroboration" "witch hunt."
And while everyone is looking at what the "left hand" is doing, the "right hand" is busy "palming the deck." It's all slight of hand, smoke and mirrors.
Grassley orders that the hearing will be limited to Ford and Kavanaugh; he limits the questions to 5 minutes apiece; he has a female prosecutor ask the
questions instead of the "old white guys" (a shrewd move, but one that everyone sees as manipulative). With no one else testifying it reduces the chances that something or someone might slip through and open up a can of
worms. Then he (Grassley) quietly asks Ford's lawyers to submit to the
committee Ford's psychologist and the polygraph report. Again, why not
question the experts; the psychologist and the former FBI agent who conducted
the polygraph. Have them testify. An innocent man would.
Limitng the minutes of questioning, limits the exposure to Kavanaugh (Senator Kamala Harris had him sweating bullets as she slowly and methodically painted him into a corner during the initial hearing). He couldn't, or wouldn't, give a straight answer to anything other than his name. Not on anything - not Rule of Law or, as to the school yearbook, not the Devil's Triangle, not the 4 Fs, not Renate, nothing. This guy lied more than once to the committee, which means he lied to Congress...under oath. Then he rudely shot back a question
to Senator Klobuchar (one of the nicest senators on the circuit) about "blackout drinking." That's why I call him a SCUMBAG! (Plus he has the face
of a little rat sneaking around the house in the dark). He's a greasy little weasel. Even his wife was making agonizing faces during his testimony, as if to say: "he really didn't just say." She knew. Fucking liar!
But because the Repugs were in charge, those stodgy old farts, pulled the
old "we're in charge and you can't do shit about it" card, especially that
retarded old fuck Grassley. He's fucking 80, and senile. Hatch was complaining about the protesters. Another old fart scumbag (I really had no idea until these hearings that he was THAT bad). Stupid fuck forgets that this country
was built on protesters - they named a movement after them - Tea Party.
The Boston Tea Party was a protest against the British.....
You know what happened after that, right? The British overreacted and soon after the American Revolution was born. So Hatch and the reNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
And in response, the Dems orchestrated a sham accusation, none of which was really designed to go anywhere except the November elections.
How do you know it was a sham? The same way you "know" it's a "witch hunt?" Fox news?
No, it was designed to show Kavanaugh as unfit to be a SC justice, which was made even more apparent by his behavior under testimony. If it weren't for Math and a selfish, evil Republican led committee he would have had the hook taken out of his mouth and been thrown back in.
You're getting close to being a complete joke - do better.
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I could be wrong (because I don't follow Twitter)
Right, he prefers infantile slurs.
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Whereas, the Dems refer "Republicans" quite often. I think the Dems constant reference to party is generating a cringe reaction among people who aren't registered with any party, and those are exactly the people that the Dem party needs to win over. Because, obviously, the DNC already has its base sewn up.
It's actually a great idea - they're running against... wait for it... Republicans. They are the target, they are the enemy to defeat. It's good to be focused.
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
In other words, instead of trying to appeal to slivers of people ... Democrats, women, gays, blacks ... they should be crafting a message with the broadest possible appeal.
Yeah, I do follow Twitter, so I know more than you
and I still haven't seen this "appeal to slivers" you mention - cites? Sounds like another republican tactic to me.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:AS IF women, nonwhites, and Dems were NEVER responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of foreigners.
GOP/Old White Male boys club that were and still are responsible for those kinds of acts
Again, to remind you: here is Madeline Albright on killing 500,000 Iraq children
Here is Hillary Clinton, on the death of Kaddafi, which unleashed the destruction of Libya (which is still going on today)
Obama on the use of drones
Seriously, you think that old white male GOPers are the only possible war-mongers?
It seems to me that those who break the glass ceiling, no matter what color, sex, age, or political party, become enfolded in the warmongering bureaucracy that is the deep state and wind up doing its bidding, no matter what they promised on the campaign trail.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND
America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I know it was a sham because of the way it was TIMED.
And in response, the Dems orchestrated a sham accusation, none of which was really designed to go anywhere except the November elections. - SIGNY
How do you know it was a sham? - GSTRING
Quote:But not designed to get to the truth of whether or not he actually assaulted anyone. You DO realize that you just admitted the accusation was a sham, don't you?
It was designed to show Kavanaugh as unfit to be a SC justice
SHAM:
1) Something false or empty that is purported to be genuine; a spurious imitation. (An accusation that is a pretense, not brought to reach a resolution on the accusation itself but for political effect)
2) The quality of deceitfulness; empty pretense.
Quote:So what? I will grant you all day long that Republicans rammed his nomination thru, and also blocked Garland's on pure pretense. But it's not as if the Dems are angels either.
If it weren't for Math and a selfish, evil Republican led committee he would have had the hook taken out of his mouth and been thrown back in.
This pretense that Republicans are devils and Democrats are angels is counterfactual. You're getting close to being a complete joke - do better.
Quote:So, you agree with me.
I could be wrong (because I don't follow Twitter) but it seems to me that altho Trump frequently criticizes Democrats, he doesn't use the term "Democrats" or "Democratic" very often. - SIGNY
Right, he prefers infantile slurs.- GSTRING
Quote:
Whereas, the Dems refer "Republicans" quite often. I think the Dems constant reference to party is generating a cringe reaction among people who aren't registered with any party, and those are exactly the people that the Dem party needs to win over. Because, obviously, the DNC already has its base sewn up. - SIGNY
It's actually a great idea - they're running against... wait for it... Republicans. They are the target, they are the enemy to defeat.-GSTRING
If THAT'S what Democrats are running on, it explains a lot of their problems.
I THOUGHT they were running because they have better ideas on how to run the nation in a way that benefits the most people? Are you telling me that they are so impoverished of ideas that they have to run on hate and hot air?
Quote:Not according to the polls that NPR was talking about.
It's good to be focused.- GSTRING
Quote:You've got to be kidding, right?
In other words, instead of trying to appeal to slivers of people ... Democrats, women, gays, blacks ... they should be crafting a message with the broadest possible appeal. - SIGNY
Yeah, I do follow Twitter, so I know more than you
You just dissed an entire segment of the population ... old, white, male ... based on age, race, and sex.
NPR spent an entire segment yesterday trying to stoke women's "rage" (their term, not mine) against men. I can grab coverage from any liberal-leaning M$M outlet (which is most of them) any day of the week and find prominent references to the sex, age, and color of the candidates; and THEIR prominent references to the sex, age, and race of their constituents.
I know that plays well with YOU ... you're a dyed-in-the-wool racist/sexist/ageist liberal for whom race, sex, and age don't matter ... until they do* ... but what about people who identify with the categories that you exclude? They probably represent 30% of the USA population. Don't you think Dems ... "the party of inclusion" ... need to include them too?
*And we have PLENTY of examples of the racism, ageism, and sexism that you've splattered across this board
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
"The
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Quote:AS IF women, nonwhites, and Dems were NEVER responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of foreigners.
GOP/Old White Male boys club that were and still are responsible for those kinds of acts
Seriously, you think that old white male GOPers are the only possible war-mongers?
It seems to me that those who break the glass ceiling, no matter what color, sex, age, or political party, become enfolded in the warmongering bureaucracy that is the deep state and wind up doing its bidding, no matter what they promised on the campaign trail.
-----------
F*cksake, SIGGY - talk about old and tired - not those stupid clips again. You think short sound bytes without context means anything? Is proof? Do you get some kind of royalty every time you post those? They don't work. They show you as desperate and simple and disengenuous.
Look! RF told you Trump was a Nazi! Here's proof!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
SIGGY: I know it was a sham because of the way it was TIMED.
CC: Geezus, you’re not even trying to make sense. Typical Trumpster. Timing has nothing to do with whether it happened or not.
SIGGY: But not designed to get to the truth of whether or not he actually assaulted anyone.
CC: An FBI investigation would have though, right? So who stopped it? Republicans. Aren’t you frustrated your wish wasn’t filled?
SIGGY: SHAM:
1) Something false or empty that is purported to be genuine; a spurious imitation. (An accusation that is a pretense, not brought to reach a resolution on the accusation itself but for political effect)
2) The quality of deceitfulness; empty pretense.
CC: Ha! Where did you dig that up? You made up the underlined part didn’t you? You’re a desperate puppy these days. Further: so it wasn’t that then, thanks.
SIGGY: So what? I will grant you all day long that Republicans rammed his nomination thru, and also blocked Garland's on pure pretense. But it's not as if the Dems are angels either.
CC: A welcomed grain of truth from you. Of course Dems aren’t. They aren’t the despicalble deplorable evil f*cks that most Republican politicians are, though.
SIGGY: This pretense that Republicans are devils and Democrats are angels is counterfactual. You're getting close to being a complete joke - do better.
CC: Never said Dems are angels. IN fact, how many times have I told you I hated Hillary? 20? Just stupid or lying? That’s another tired pro-Trump bullsh*t line, trying to equate the 2 as equally bad.
CC: Right, he prefers infantile slurs.
SIGGY - So, you agree with me.
CC: Yes! He’s an infantile piece of sh*t.
SIGGY: I THOUGHT they were running because they have better ideas on how to run the nation in a way that benefits the most people? Are you telling me that they are so impoverished of ideas that they have to run on hate and hot air?
CC: Nope.
Hey! You just completely dodged this:
SIGGY: Yeah, I do follow Twitter, so I know more than you and I still haven't seen this "appeal to slivers" you mention - cites? Sounds like another republican tactic to me.
SIGGY: You just dissed an entire segment of the population ... old, white, male ... based on age, race, and sex.
CC: Sorry you’re so confused - I dissed the group of old white male US Republican politicians. You think that’s wrong? Then convince me I’m wrong - who are the old, white, male US Republican politicians you feel good about? Try and not take too long. 
SIGGY: NPR spent an entire segment yesterday trying to stoke women's "rage" (their term, not mine) against men. I can grab coverage from any liberal-leaning M$M outlet (which is most of them) any day of the week and find prominent references to the sex, age, and color of the candidates; and THEIR prominent references to the sex, age, and race of their constituents.
CC: Sounds more like they reported on an actual, real thing. A lot of women are tired of the way the feel they have been ignored and mistreated. I still can’t believe you have so little outrage about the Grabber-In-Chief. There must be something you consider more important that Women's Rights that you're willing to trade them for.
SIGGY: you're a dyed-in-the-wool racist/sexist/ageist liberal for whom race, sex, and age don't matter ... until they do* ... but what about people who identify with the categories that you exclude? They probably represent 30% of the USA population. Don't you think Dems ... "the party of inclusion" ... *And we have PLENTY of examples of the racism, ageism, and sexism that you've splattered across this board
CC:
Go soak your head, it’s over heating.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
This is just a small sampling from the 'democratic' party platform. I'd like to point out that the only reason income, economy, and the middle class made it in the list was because of the Sanders threat. That said, I can't find a more desperate attempt to find every last possible victim group to appeal to anywhere. Races? Immigrants? Women? Lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgenders? The disabled? The religious? The rural? Dems got them cut out from the herd and targeted! But wait! There's more!
Why can't the democrats just get behind fair access to good opportunities for everyone? Or is fairness only for some, but not for others?
The other thing missing are some very specific paths to get there, like, oh, getting out of 'free' trade agreements, increasing basic manufacturing, and so on.
VICTIMS ONLY !
have we got a candyland of promises for YOU!
deplorables need not apply
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/papers_pdf/117717.pdf
Raise Incomes and Restore Economic Security for the Middle Class
Ending Systemic Racism
Closing the Racial Wealth Gap
Reforming our Criminal Justice System
Fixing our Broken Immigration System
Guaranteeing Civil Rights
Guaranteeing Women’s Rights
Guaranteeing Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Rights
Guaranteeing Rights for People with Disabilities
Respecting Faith and Service
Investing in Rural America
Ending Poverty and Investing in Communities Left Behind
Building Strong Cities and Metro Areas
Promoting Arts and Culture
Honoring Indigenous Tribal Nations
Fighting for the People of Puerto Rico
Honoring the People of the Territories
tic tac
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
And now, a word from someone far more hostile than meQuote:
I believe her!”
Really? Why should anyone believe her?
Senator Collins of Maine said she believed that Dr. Christine Blasey Ford experienced somethingtraumatic, just not at the hands of Mr. Kavanaugh. I believe Senator Collins said that to placate the #Metoo mob, not because she actually believed it. I believe Christine Blasey Ford was lying, through and through, in her injured little girl voice, like a bad imitation of Truman Capote.
I believe that the Christine Blasey Ford gambit was an extension of the sinister activities underway since early 2016 in the Department of Justice and the FBI to un-do the last presidential election, and that the real and truthful story about these seditious monkeyshines is going to blow wide open.
It turns out that the Deep State is a small world.
Did you know that the lawyer sitting next to Dr. Ford in the Senate hearings, one Michael Bromwich, is also an attorney for Andrew McCabe, the former FBI Deputy Director fired for lying to investigators from his own agency and currently singing to a grand jury?
What a coincidence. Out of all the lawyers in the most lawyer-infested corner of the USA, she just happened to hook up with him.
It’s a matter of record that Dr. Ford traveled to Rehobeth Beach Delaware on July 26, where her Best Friend Forever and former room-mate, Monica McLean, lives, and that she spent the next four days there before sending a letter July 30 to Senator Diane Feinstein that kicked off the “sexual assault” circus. Did you know that Monica McClean was a retired FBI special agent, and that she worked in the US Attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York under Preet Bharara, who had earlier worked for Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer?
Could Monica McLean have spent those four days in July helping Christine Blasey Ford compose her letter to Mrs. Feinstein? Did you know that Monica McClean’s lawyer, one David Laufman is a former DOJ top lawyer who assisted former FBI counter-intel chief Peter Strozk on both the Clinton and Russia investigations before resigning in February this year — in fact, he sat in on the notorious “unsworn” interview with Hillary in 2016. Wow! What a really small swamp Washington is!
Did you know that Ms. Leland Keyser, Dr. Ford’s previous BFF from back in the Holton Arms prep school, told the final round of FBI investigators in the Kavanaugh hearing last week — as reported by the The Wall Street Journal — that she “felt pressured” by Monica McLean and her representatives to change her story — that she knew nothing about the alleged sexual assault, or the alleged party where it allegedly happened, or that she ever knew Mr. Kavanaugh. I think that’s called suborning perjury.
None of this is trivial and the matter can’t possibly rest there. Too much of it has been unraveled by what remains of the news media. And meanwhile, of course, there is at least one grand jury listening to testimony from the whole cast-of-characters behind the botched Hillary investigation and Robert Mueller’s ever more dubious-looking Russian collusion inquiry: the aforementioned Strozk, Lisa Page, James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Bill Priestap, et. al. I have a feeling that these matters are now approaching critical mass with the parallel unraveling of the Christine Blasey Ford “story.”
The Democratic Party has its fingerprints all over this, as it does with the shenanigans over the Russia investigation. Not only do I not believe Dr. Ford’s story; I also don’t believe she acted on her own in this shady business. What’s happening with all these FBI and DOJ associated lawyers is an obvious circling of the wagons. They’ve generated too much animus in the process and they’re going to get nailed. These matters are far from over and a major battle is looming in the countdown to the midterm elections. In fact, op-ed writer Charles M. Blow sounded the trumpet Monday morning in hiNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Well, part of you taking back your life is admitting to your drunkeness. That starts the healing process, you recognized the problem and you conquered your
demons.
I applaud you for that. Seriously, no shit. You faced up to responsibility.
You manned up.
With this scumbag Kavanaugh, he never has. All his life has been a lark, a romp through the woods to grandma's house. He never had to work for anything,
privilege has its rewards - or does it? Everything has been handed to him
including, and especially, the judgeship on the Federal level. Does he know the law? Who's to say for sure. Blackout drunks tend to miss whole chunks of
their waking life.
But let's look at this like Keeks and Siggy do. Let's say he was the angel he claims to be. Let's say he's completely innocent, of everything - no collusion. Then why not allow the FBI a full investigation? You know, to
clear his innocence. Because he was being handed this position on a silver platter. McConnell was not about to allow to be made a fool of (whoops, too late).
He said so. "We are plowing him through."
McConnell and company (I really don't think Trump had much to say on this matter, this was all McConnell) carefully orchestrated the FBI "investigation"
and limited the scope. Pure and simple. Then he and Trump "gaslight" everyone
not in agreement. They point a finger at the Dems and shout out "mob rule"
"conspiracy" "no corroboration" "witch hunt."
And while everyone is looking at what the "left hand" is doing, the "right hand" is busy "palming the deck." It's all slight of hand, smoke and mirrors.
Grassley orders that the hearing will be limited to Ford and Kavanaugh; he limits the questions to 5 minutes apiece; he has a female prosecutor ask the
questions instead of the "old white guys" (a shrewd move, but one that everyone sees as manipulative). With no one else testifying it reduces the chances that something or someone might slip through and open up a can of
worms. Then he (Grassley) quietly asks Ford's lawyers to submit to the
committee Ford's psychologist and the polygraph report. Again, why not
question the experts; the psychologist and the former FBI agent who conducted
the polygraph. Have them testify. An innocent man would.
Limitng the minutes of questioning, limits the exposure to Kavanaugh (Senator Kamala Harris had him sweating bullets as she slowly and methodically painted him into a corner during the initial hearing). He couldn't, or wouldn't, give a straight answer to anything other than his name. Not on anything - not Rule of Law or, as to the school yearbook, not the Devil's Triangle, not the 4 Fs, not Renate, nothing. This guy lied more than once to the committee, which means he lied to Congress...under oath. Then he rudely shot back a question
to Senator Klobuchar (one of the nicest senators on the circuit) about "blackout drinking." That's why I call him a SCUMBAG! (Plus he has the face
of a little rat sneaking around the house in the dark). He's a greasy little weasel. Even his wife was making agonizing faces during his testimony, as if to say: "he really didn't just say." She knew. Fucking liar!
But because the Repugs were in charge, those stodgy old farts, pulled the
old "we're in charge and you can't do shit about it" card, especially that
retarded old fuck Grassley. He's fucking 80, and senile. Hatch was complaining about the protesters. Another old fart scumbag (I really had no idea until these hearings that he was THAT bad). Stupid fuck forgets that this country
was built on protesters - they named a movement after them - Tea Party.
The Boston Tea Party was a protest against the British.....Quote:
On this date, December 16, 1773, members of the Sons of Liberty disguised as Mohawk Indians dumped crates of tea into Boston harbNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Siggy,
I understand you might ignore this, and your choice is shorter and easier, but please consider using "gender" in place of "sex" when it applies and is the true and accurate meaning of what you say. I suppose "sexist" is an adequate exception.
Thanks for your consideration of this matter.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Not sure if this got buried.
Why is it that Democrats and other Socialist/Communists/Liberals are outraged that a woman be allowed in the Senate Chamber? A Professional, a proven competent Prosecutor, not unless she is a Token, like Democrats view women and minorities? I did not see it, but heard excellent clips and summaries - was she too attractive for Democrats to be placated? Were all the fugly Democrap Senators jealous of her?
Why is it that Democrats hate women, while Conservatives openly and repeatedly give women a chance, support women, encourage women, give them a tough and demanding stage to display their talents and skills?
Well, of course, we already knew Democrats hate women. That's why they keep releasing Serial Rapists and pedophiles ASAP at every opportunity.
Plus supporting BJ Clinton for raping women in the White House.
Hey Jewels,
Your response is both typical and hilarious; but you have the "gaslighting" thing down to a science.
SGG
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:Quote:
Not sure if this got buried.
Why is it that Democrats and other Socialist/Communists/Liberals are outraged that a woman be allowed in the Senate Chamber? A Professional, a proven competent Prosecutor, not unless she is a Token, like Democrats view women and minorities? I did not see it, but heard excellent clips and summaries - was she too attractive for Democrats to be placated? Were all the fugly Democrap Senators jealous of her?
Why is it that Democrats hate women, while Conservatives openly and repeatedly give women a chance, support women, encourage women, give them a tough and demanding stage to display their talents and skills?
Well, of course, we already knew Democrats hate women. That's why they keep releasing Serial Rapists and pedophiles ASAP at every opportunity.
Plus supporting BJ Clinton for raping women in the White House.
Hey Jewels,
Your response is both typical and hilarious; but you have the "gaslighting" thing down to a science.
SGG
Aye, the "Democrats hate women" thing is hilarious. One can only have one's head up one's bum most of the day to think that. Or listen to Rush and/or watch Fox. The rest is comedy gold.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Right you are Captain.
I did what I could to get the gist of my thoughts across (I normally write these responses by the seat of my pants, with a modicum of editing and corrections. Although I do respond on a emotional level sometimes).
I was very interested in the hearings cause I wanted a glimpse into the
mindset of Kavanaugh and Ford. During the initial hearings I got the impression that Kavanaugh was evasive, dodgy and somewhat arrogant. It was
like in my junior high school days when we would play Dodgeball. Some folk
are real good at it. This was Kavanaugh, full stop.
Hypocrisy and hubris should be added to any description of the Repugs
psyche. Oh and gaslighting. Is it any wonder, you have the king of the
narcissists leading the way. This promotion handed to Kavanaugh does have
the orange one giddy as a little school girl, which will only prove to
further inflate his ego.
What's astounding to me is that we have people actually falling for this
load of crap. It is amazing the lengths the Repugs will go to "pull a fast
one" past the general public and how easily they are distracted. So yeah,
astounding is a good word for all this nonsense. And I'm on board with the
notion of how their enablers feed into the whole narrative. The misdirections,
the deflections and "black humor" - the false claims of "Mob Rule" - give me
a fucking break. Imagine, protest as mob rule. You have to hand it to Trump
and the Repugs, that was quite a clever and catchy label. But that shows how desperate they've become.
That Blue Wave scares the shit out of them; hence the rush job with the
Kavanaugh debacle. I could have presented a better case, but I was writing
in sort of stream of consciousness mode and that lends itself to small gaps
of information. Were I to be writing for a magazine or newspaper, I would
have taken notes during both hearings and written several drafts. Be that as
it may, you have a solid discerning mind. You know the gist of the story.
Even without corroborating testimony as to Dr. Ford's allegations, this douchebag was lying through his teeth to the Committee that, in addition to the Repugs on the JC totally throttling the documents and witnesses, there was no way the Dems had a snowball's chance in hell to stop this nomination from going through.
P.S. I don't think the Dems on the JC handled the Ford letter and her allegations very well. But that too has been oversimplified by the Repugs.
The Dems could have had video of Kavanaugh holding the smoking gun....
well, you know the rest.
SGG
Thanks
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
This is just a small sampling from the 'democratic' party platform.
You said it, just a sampling. I'll leave it to anyone interested in what the whole thing says to visit your link rather than cut and paste everything here.
Whatever - most of us - including you Kiki - know that platforms are easy, just writing. People can write anything. Yes, I would agree that in both the cliche of the Democrats and in their practice they care more about "the little people." It's easy to see how aligning themselves with that position is genuine and not political for Dems. The "less than," the "Races? Immigrants? Women? Lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgenders? The disabled? The religious? The rural?" they are notoriously the worst group of citizens to get out and vote.
Meanwhile, Trump Republicans have figured out Hate works wonders. They crank up the hate on those very groups and basically taunt anyone who is not a member (largely white males) and say, "are you going to let them have it better than you? Democrats don't care about you! We do! Look at us , we're your brothers!"
Kind of like you just did Kiki.
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Why can't the democrats just get behind fair access to good opportunities for everyone? Or is fairness only for some, but not for others?
Because they feel that these groups are the groups being treated most unfairly?
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
The other thing missing are some very specific paths to get there, like, oh, getting out of 'free' trade agreements, increasing basic manufacturing, and so on.
Can't speak to fair trade but increasing manufacturing is going to be tough as Jack explained - MONEY. Cost of production is so much cheaper overseas that you would have to increase tariffs and thereby CoGs and then uh-oh, profits drop. No party can untangle that but some can lie about it *cough* Republicans *cough.*
Massive tax breaks for local manufacturers might be a start but do those ever get to the shop floor or mid level worker?
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
VICTIMS ONLY !
have we got a candyland of promises for YOU!
deplorables need not apply
Sorry Kiks, your complaints don't match your list. There's plenty here that effects everyone:
Raise Incomes and Restore Economic Security for the Middle Class
Ending Systemic Racism
Closing the Racial Wealth Gap
Reforming our Criminal Justice System
Fixing our Broken Immigration System
Guaranteeing Civil Rights
Guaranteeing Women’s Rights
Guaranteeing Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Rights
Guaranteeing Rights for People with Disabilities
Respecting Faith and Service
Investing in Rural America
Ending Poverty and Investing in Communities Left Behind
Building Strong Cities and Metro Areas
Promoting Arts and Culture
Honoring Indigenous Tribal Nations
Fighting for the People of Puerto Rico
Honoring the People of the Territories
There's a more balanced, honest and complete list here:
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/papers_pdf/117717.pdf
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:A potpourri of promises!
This is just a small sampling from the 'democratic' party platform. - KIKI
You said it, just a sampling.
Quote:Not true. Obama didn't bail out "the people", he bailed out the banks. All you have to do is look at the wealth gap ... which accelerated under Obama's reign ... to realize that Dems may be better at FOOLING "the little people" but they don't represent them any better.
Whatever - most of us - including you Kiki - know that platforms are easy, just writing. People can write anything. Yes, I would agree that in both the cliche of the Democrats and in their practice they care more about "the little people."
Quote:Um ... that argues that it IS political for Dems.
It's easy to see how aligning themselves with that position is genuine and not political for Dems. The "less than," the "Races? Immigrants? Women? Lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgenders? The disabled? The religious? The rural?" they are notoriously the worst group of citizens to get out and vote.
Quote:The hate seems to be coming mostly from Dems. YOU talk about "enemies". I don't see equivalent talk from Repubs. Face it, Trump created a inclusive slogan:
Meanwhile, Trump Republicans have figured out Hate works wonders. They crank up the hate on those very groups and basically taunt anyone who is not a member (largely white males) and say, "are you going to let them have it better than you? Democrats don't care about you! We do! Look at us , we're your brothers!"
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
It applies to everyone who considers themselves American. The Dems have to come up with something just as good, if not better.
Quote:FAIRNESS and EQUALITY are two things that nobody can have "more" of. If someone has "more" equality, that's not equality, that's privilege. This is being framed ... by Democrats... as a form of "taking away" privilege from someone to give privilege to someone else. Why can't they stick to the basic message of fairness for everyone?
Why can't the democrats just get behind fair access to good opportunities for everyone? Or is fairness only for some, but not for others- KIKI
Because they feel that these groups are the groups being treated most unfairly? - GSTRING
Quote:Oh, so the Dems DON'T, or CAN'T, focus on "the little people" because they worry more about business profits?
The other thing missing are some very specific paths to get there, like, oh, getting out of 'free' trade agreements, increasing basic manufacturing, and so on.- KIKI
Can't speak to fair trade but increasing manufacturing is going to be tough as Jack explained - MONEY. Cost of production is so much cheaper overseas that you would have to increase tariffs and thereby CoGs and then uh-oh, profits drop. No party can untangle that but some can lie about it *cough* Republicans *cough.*
Quote:Actually, I think whichever party is in power needs to worry more about banks and financial institutions.
Massive tax breaks for local manufacturers might be a start but do those ever get to the shop floor or mid level worker?
Quote:Affects the middle class. Why not just say: Improve the economy and increase good jobs?
VICTIMS ONLY !
have we got a candyland of promises for YOU!
deplorables need not apply - KIKI
Sorry Kiks, your complaints don't match your list. There's plenty here that effects everyone:
Raise Incomes and Restore Economic Security for the Middle Class
Quote:Why not just ... ensure a system of fairness and a meritocracy for all?
Ending Systemic Racism
Closing the Racial Wealth Gap
Reforming our Criminal Justice System
Guaranteeing Civil Rights
Guaranteeing Women’s Rights
Guaranteeing Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Rights
Guaranteeing Rights for People with Disabilities
Quote:
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You seem to be struggling a bit... some of your replies are almost incoherent.
SIGGY: Not true. Obama didn't bail out "the people", he bailed out the banks. All you have to do is look at the wealth gap ... which accelerated under Obama's reign ... to realize that Dems may be better at FOOLING "the little people" but they don't represent them any better.
CC: You make no sense. Kiki just whined about it, and you have also stated that they're all about identity politics and then listed all of the little people groups they want to protect. You're contradicting yourself.
Of course we know Republicans make no bones about looking down on "the little people."
SIGGY: Um ... that argues that it IS political for Dems.
CC: Must be a rough day for you. Nooo... if it was politics they go after citizens they could trust to go out and vote, not the ones who historically stay home.
Now Republicans are kings at using hate and bigotry and wealth gap to motivate their base - with remarkable success
SIGGY: The hate seems to be coming mostly from Dems. YOU talk about "enemies". I don't see equivalent talk from Repubs. Face it, Trump created a inclusive slogan:
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
CC: Clearly, still waiting to get your prescription filled. Make America Great Again and then he threatened to deport how many 100s of thousands of people who do consider themselves Americans? Not to mention making enemies of the rest of the world, even our allies. Seriously, you're just typing without any regard to truth or facts.
Republicans of course, have only made themselves even wealthier again - thanks Donnie!
SIGGY: FAIRNESS and EQUALITY are two things that nobody can have "more" of. If someone has "more" equality, that's not equality, that's privilege. This is being framed ... by Democrats... as a form of "taking away" privilege from someone to give privilege to someone else. Why can't they stick to the basic message of fairness for everyone?
CC: Huh? Yes they can - people can be treated more fairly or less fairly than others. Is that not in the phrase book?
SIGGY: Oh, so the Dems DON'T, or CAN'T, focus on "the little people" because they worry more about business profits?
CC: perhaps the laziest, flimsiest strawman I've ever heard.
I'm totally ignoring the rest - essentially you just bitch and moan because you think you could write better sentences or you just strawman after strawman. "Why don they say they like kittens AND puppies??!"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
FBI Director Wray Confirms That White House Limited Kavanaugh Probe
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/wray-confirms-that-white-house-limi
ted-kavanaugh-probe
I'm shocked! Shocked, I say!
An illegitimate investigation ordered by an illegitimate president of a nominee who perjured himself, repeatedly, on national television, but gets confirmed anyway.
Welcome to the Fascist States of America.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Why don't you go put on your mask with your friends and go out and beat up another Trump supporter and show the world just how anti-fascist you are?
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:How? The Dems try to win votes by claiming to represent victim subgroups, but in reality then NEVER challenge TPTB in any significant way, and so they wind up not representing any of the "little people" (except in the most trivial of ways).
You seem to be struggling a bit... some of your replies are almost incoherent.
SIGGY: Not true. Obama didn't bail out "the people", he bailed out the banks. All you have to do is look at the wealth gap ... which accelerated under Obama's reign ... to realize that Dems may be better at FOOLING "the little people" but they don't represent them any better.
CC: You make no sense. Kiki just whined about it, and you have also stated that they're all about identity politics and then listed all of the little people groups they want to protect. You're contradicting yourself.- GSTRING
Quote:huh. And I thought it was a Democrat who called roughly half of the voting public "deplorables"!
Of course we know Republicans make no bones about looking down on "the little people.- CC
Quote:IF it was NOT politics they would go after everyone equally.
SIGGY: Um ... that argues that it IS political for Dems.
CC: Must be a rough day for you. Nooo... if it was politics they go after citizens they could trust to go out and vote, not the ones who historically stay home.
Quote:There are MILLIONS of illegal immigrants who do NOT consider themselves "Americans". How do I know this? Because they don't bother to learn English.
Now Republicans are kings at using hate and bigotry and wealth gap to motivate their base - with remarkable success- CC
SIGGY: The hate seems to be coming mostly from Dems. YOU talk about "enemies". I don't see equivalent talk from Repubs. Face it, Trump created a inclusive slogan:
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
The Dems need to come up with something just as good, or better.
CC: Clearly, still waiting to get your prescription filled. Make America Great Again and then he threatened to deport how many 100s of thousands of people who do consider themselves Americans?
Quote:Last I checked, GSTRING, the President of the United States is the President of the United States, not president of the world. So, frankly, if it's in America's interests to piss off the rest of the world, that's what he or she should do.
Not to mention making enemies of the rest of the world, even our allies. Seriously, you're just typing without any regard to truth or facts.
Quote:No, THE WEALTHY have made themselves wealthier again, both Dems and Repubs and you can blame OBAMA for a good portion of that.
Republicans of course, have only made themselves even wealthier again - thanks Donnie!
Do you not ever look at wealth-gap charts? Or are they just a little too reality-based for you?
Quote:Except they don't.
FAIRNESS and EQUALITY are two things that nobody can have "more" of. If someone has "more" equality, that's not equality, that's privilege. This is being framed ... by Democrats... as a form of "taking away" privilege from someone to give privilege to someone else. Why can't they stick to the basic message of fairness for everyone?- SIGNY
CC: Huh? Yes they can
Quote:People can be treated fairly or unfairly. There is no such thing as "more fairly" or "less fairly". The Dems have adopted, without irony, the phrase of Animal Farm ... "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others"
people can be treated more fairly or less fairly than others. Is that not in the phrase book?
And the frustrating things is that liberals read this statement - which was written as a warning - as a sign of progress. But doublespeak leads to doublethink.
Quote:
SIGGY: Oh, so the Dems DON'T, or CAN'T, focus on "the little people" because they woNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by reaverfan:
FBI Director Wray Confirms That White House Limited Kavanaugh Probe
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/wray-confirms-that-white-house-limi
ted-kavanaugh-probe
I'm shocked! Shocked, I say!
An illegitimate investigation ordered by an illegitimate president of a nominee who perjured himself, repeatedly, on national television, but gets confirmed anyway.
Welcome to the Fascist States of America.
And this is what Wray actually said (from your link)
Quote:
“I think I would say that our investigation here, our supplemental update to the previous background investigation, was limited in scope and that that is consistent with the standard process for such investigations going back quite a long ways,” he said.
Basically, they did a supplemental "background check" NOT a criminal investigation. That was, and has been for many decades, their STANDARD scope for vetting nominees. Plus, it was limited to ONE WEEK, which we already knew about.
I expected that's what would happen, based on previous procedure, and even posted so.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND
America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
This is just a small sampling from the 'democratic' party platform.
Quote:Yes, wasn't it nice of me to provide a link? That way people can read the whole thing (not that YOU did, or you'd have something far more specific and relevant to say about it instead of insinuations that I unfairly edited it).
Originally posted by GEEBERS:
You said it, just a sampling. I'll leave it to anyone interested in what the whole thing says to visit your link rather than cut and paste everything here.
Quote:And democrats seemed like they gave it that much thought. Oh, just write anything, they must have told themselves.
Originally posted by GEEBERS:
Whatever - most of us - including you Kiki - know that platforms are easy, just writing. People can write anything.
Quote:Biased much? Are you saying Hillary was aiming at the wrong sort of people?
Originally posted by GEEBERS:
Yes, I would agree that in both the cliche of the Democrats and in their practice they care more about "the little people." It's easy to see how aligning themselves with that position is genuine and not political for Dems. The "less than," the "Races? Immigrants? Women? Lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgenders? The disabled? The religious? The rural?" they are notoriously the worst group of citizens to get out and vote.
Back to reality.
What cost Hillary the election was that, whatever she was selling to the "the little people", they weren't buying it.
Quote:MAYBE someone who had a long history of standing up for "the little people" could have pulled a presidency out of an assemblage of victim groups. But that wasn't Hillary then. And probably not the democratic party now.
4.4 million 2012 Obama voters stayed home in 2016 — more than a ...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/.../4-4-million-2012-obama-voters-staye
d-home-in-20...
Opinion | The Missing Obama Millions - The New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/10/opinion/.../obama-trump-voters-demo
crats.html
Mar 10, 2018 - Trump voters who previously voted for Mr. Obama are the subject of intense ... 9 percent of Obama 2012 voters went for Mr. Trump in 2016, 7 percent — that's .... Obama campaigned for a overt crooked candidate who didn't ...
Registered Voters Who Stayed Home Probably Cost Clinton The ...
https://fivethirtyeight.com/.../registered-voters-who-stayed-home-prob
ably-cost-clinto...
Jan 5, 2017 - Registered voters who didn't vote on Election Day in November were more ... was not the enthusiasm for Clinton's candidacy as there was for Obama's in 2012. ... made up 48 percent of 2016 registered voters who didn't vote,
Quote:I thought I was pretty clear that democrats needed to promote fairness, which - by definition - covers everybody. Like here:
Originally posted by GEEBERS:
Meanwhile, Trump Republicans have figured out Hate works wonders. They crank up the hate on those very groups and basically taunt anyone who is not a member (largely white males) and say, "are you going to let them have it better than you? Democrats don't care about you! We do! Look at us , we're your brothers!"
Kind of like you just did Kiki.
Quote:So, firstly, where did I say democrats needed to appeal to white males only? And secondly, why do you feel the need to constantly lie?
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Why can't the democrats just get behind fair access to good opportunities for everyone? Or is fairness only for some, but not for others?
Quote:DOOOOD. NOBODY is being treated fairly. That's kind of the problem. And focusing on some people rather than the commonality only pits group against group. Kind of like what you're doing.
Originally posted by GEEBERS:
Because they feel that these groups are the groups being treated most unfairly?
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
The other thing missing are some very specific paths to get there, like, oh, getting out ofNOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
This is just a small sampling from the 'democratic' party platform.
Quote:Yes, wasn't it nice of me to provide a link? That way people can read the whole thing (not that YOU did, or you'd have something far more specific and relevant to say about it instead of insinuations that I unfairly edited it).
Originally posted by GEEBERS:
You said it, just a sampling. I'll leave it to anyone interested in what the whole thing says to visit your link rather than cut and paste everything here.
I did read it, that's how I knew what you posted was not the whole story.
Posting a link/cite isn't "nice" - it's mandatory if you want to be believed. You don't get points for doing something so simple.
The rest of what you posted was full of logic gaps and contradictions and I no longer have the interest or time or patience to unravel all that sh*t.
Cheers!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:You no LONGER have an interest? You didn't refute or even address my original posts the first time around! How could you lose an interest you didn't have before?
Originally posted by GEEBERS:
The rest of what you posted was full of logic gaps and contradictions and I no longer have the interest or time or patience to unravel all that sh*t.
And I gotta ask - why do you feel the need ti lie all the time?
tic tac
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:HAHAH! Indeed!
The rest of what you posted was full of logic gaps and contradictions and I no longer have the interest or time or patience to unravel all that sh*t.- GSTRING
You no LONGER have an interest? You didn't refute or even address my original posts the first time around! How could you lose an interest you didn't have before?- KIKI
Quote:That too!
And I gotta ask - why do you feel the need ti lie all the time? - KIKI
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND
America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Not sure how you could be more wrong.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Quote:If I had, i would have corrected the typo.
methinks you altered your post since I last saw it.Quote:Catholic (large "C") here too. Born and raised, anyway. Mentally left the church when I was ten.
I don't think I've ever seen catholic used like that. And I'm Catholic.
But usage of (small "c") catholic is legitimate, altho rare.
"He was catholic in his appreciation of movies."
I like unusual words.
*****Quote:Oh, I remember reading that criticism of Thomas many many years ago ... a history of his votes and how closely they mirrored Scalia's, along with an analysis of his written opinions. In fact, at the time of that analysis, I believe he had written ZERO opinions; altho I could be wrong. Over the years, whenever a SC ruling came down, I never found any reason to change that opinion of Thomas. You never hear his opinions quoted, for example.
Are your comments regarding Justice Thomas your own, original? Or merely believed and copied from your linky?
Whenever I heard respected, successful, intelligent Law Professionals discussing Justice Thomas, it is always reflecting that he has the Greatest Opinions of the History of SCOTUS, the most stable and reasoned.
I am sure you have found a lesser Standard to inform your bias. Pity.
My prior response was lost when the site disconnected during posting.
450 Opinions in 20 terms...is that below average?
After being sworn in mid-October 1991, and not being allowed to hear arguments for a month more, how long do you expect an Opinion to emerge? I keep hearing that Opinions take 5-9 months after Arguments. I notice Thomas wrote an Opinion in mid-January 1992. The clown you read must have really clambered in his clown shoes to whip up a story in those 8 weeks when Thomas "had never written an Opinion" for the Supreme Court.
Or you are just gullible.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
And I gotta ask - why do you feel the need ti lie all the time?
How's it feel ti be stupid all the time?
Lying about lying is Kiki's super power.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:And lying about everything is yours.
Lying about lying is Kiki's super power.
Ya gotta admit: You set yourself up for that one!
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND
America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Actually, I mis-remembered the statistic: Clarence Thomas (almost) never asks questions from the bench
Are your comments regarding Justice Thomas your own, original? Or merely believed and copied from your linky?- JSF
Oh, I remember reading that criticism of Thomas many many years ago ... a history of his votes and how closely they mirrored Scalia's, along with an analysis of his written opinions. In fact, at the time of that analysis, I believe he had written ZERO opinions; altho I could be wrong. Over the years, whenever a SC ruling came down, I never found any reason to change that opinion of Thomas. You never hear his opinions quoted, for example. - SIGNY
Not sure how you could be more wrong.
Whenever I heard respected, successful, intelligent Law Professionals discussing Justice Thomas, it is always reflecting that he has the Greatest Opinions of the History of SCOTUS, the most stable and reasoned. I am sure you have found a lesser Standard to inform your bias. Pity.
Quote:
Justice Clarence Thomas asks questions in court, 1st time in 10 years (2106)
https://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/02/justice_clarence_thoma
s_asks_q.html
I don't know about his written opinions. Maybe if you can post a link to a decent discussion of them it would help.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND
America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Senate Democrats confirm slate of 16 Federal Judges, all hand-picked by Trump.
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/senate-confirms-
new-federal-judges-but-not-st-louis-nominee/article_83bc8240-f28b-5c80-9bb5-66f0808c6aee.html
This Senate has approved 84 Judges for Trump, the most of any Senate in U.S. History.
Dems and other Socialists/Communists are losing like crazy.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Senate confirms slate of 16 Federal Judges, all hand-picked by Trump.
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/senate-confirms-
new-federal-judges-but-not-st-louis-nominee/article_83bc8240-f28b-5c80-9bb5-66f0808c6aee.html
This Senate has approved 84 Judges for Trump, the most of any Senate in U.S. History.
Dems and other Socialists/Communists are losing like crazy.
There needs to be balance.
This seems like a victory at face value, but it is actually the consequences of the extreme illiberal Left having so much prominence in the MSM and social media in the last decade.
The pendulum swings are getting wilder, and this will ultimately not end well.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:You no LONGER have an interest? You didn't refute or even address my original posts the first time around! How could you lose an interest you didn't have before?
Originally posted by GEEBERS:
The rest of what you posted was full of logic gaps and contradictions and I no longer have the interest or time or patience to unravel all that sh*t.
And I gotta ask - why do you feel the need to lie all the time?
tic tac
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I'm sorry. I forgot to point out it was the Democrats in the Senate which grovelled to make a deal to approve these 16 Appointments. GoP was ready to continue, but Democrats just wanted to make a deal. That's alright, their voter base is so clueless they'll never know the Senators caved.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Senate confirms slate of 16 Federal Judges, all hand-picked by Trump.
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/senate-confirms-
new-federal-judges-but-not-st-louis-nominee/article_83bc8240-f28b-5c80-9bb5-66f0808c6aee.html
This Senate has approved 84 Judges for Trump, the most of any Senate in U.S. History.
Dems and other Socialists/Communists are losing like crazy.
There needs to be balance.
This seems like a victory at face value, but it is actually the consequences of the extreme illiberal Left having so much prominence in the MSM and social media in the last decade.
The pendulum swings are getting wilder, and this will ultimately not end well.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:Quote:I'm sorry. I forgot to point out it was the Democrats in the Senate which grovelled to make a deal to approve these 16 Appointments. GoP was ready to continue, but Democrats just wanted to make a deal. That's alright, their voter base is so clueless they'll never know the Senators caved.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Senate confirms slate of 16 Federal Judges, all hand-picked by Trump.
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/senate-confirms-
new-federal-judges-but-not-st-louis-nominee/article_83bc8240-f28b-5c80-9bb5-66f0808c6aee.html
This Senate has approved 84 Judges for Trump, the most of any Senate in U.S. History.
Dems and other Socialists/Communists are losing like crazy.
There needs to be balance.
This seems like a victory at face value, but it is actually the consequences of the extreme illiberal Left having so much prominence in the MSM and social media in the last decade.
The pendulum swings are getting wilder, and this will ultimately not end well.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
Why would they know? They weren't told anything about this by the likes of Maddow. All anybody has talked about was Kavanaugh. Meanwhile, as you said, the senate has approved more high level judges than any other administration in history and it hasn't even been 2 years yet.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The Repubs are in power, so they ram through reichwing fascist judges? Wow!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:Quote:Are your comments regarding Justice Thomas your own, original? Or merely believed and copied from your linky?
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I was none too happy with Clarence Thomas either, and as it turned out he wound up being probably the worst Justice, a "Scalia me too" vote, who apparently never thought for himself but took Scalia's word for everything and hardly ever writes original opinions.
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Quote:Actually, I mis-remembered the statistic: Clarence Thomas (almost) never asks questions from the bench
Are your comments regarding Justice Thomas your own, original? Or merely believed and copied from your linky?- JSF
Oh, I remember reading that criticism of Thomas many many years ago ... a history of his votes and how closely they mirrored Scalia's, along with an analysis of his written opinions. In fact, at the time of that analysis, I believe he had written ZERO opinions; altho I could be wrong. Over the years, whenever a SC ruling came down, I never found any reason to change that opinion of Thomas. You never hear his opinions quoted, for example. - SIGNY
Not sure how you could be more wrong.
Whenever I heard respected, successful, intelligent Law Professionals discussing Justice Thomas, it is always reflecting that he has the Greatest Opinions of the History of SCOTUS, the most stable and reasoned. I am sure you have found a lesser Standard to inform your bias. Pity.Quote:
Justice Clarence Thomas asks questions in court, 1st time in 10 years (2106)
I don't know about his written opinions. Maybe if you can post a link to a decent discussion of them it would help.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Not sure if I made it clear. These Democrat Senators begged to "ram through" Approval of these 16 Judges in the last few days, all after Kavanaugh Confirmation.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:Quote:I'm sorry. I forgot to point out it was the Democrats in the Senate which grovelled to make a deal to approve these 16 Appointments. GoP was ready to continue, but Democrats just wanted to make a deal. That's alright, their voter base is so clueless they'll never know the Senators caved.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Senate confirms slate of 16 Federal Judges, all hand-picked by Trump.
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/senate-confirms-
new-federal-judges-but-not-st-louis-nominee/article_83bc8240-f28b-5c80-9bb5-66f0808c6aee.html
This Senate has approved 84 Judges for Trump, the most of any Senate in U.S. History.
Dems and other Socialists/Communists are losing like crazy.
There needs to be balance.
This seems like a victory at face value, but it is actually the consequences of the extreme illiberal Left having so much prominence in the MSM and social media in the last decade.
The pendulum swings are getting wilder, and this will ultimately not end well.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
Why would they know? They weren't told anything about this by the likes of Maddow. All anybody has talked about was Kavanaugh. Meanwhile, as you said, the senate has approved more high level judges than any other administration in history and it hasn't even been 2 years yet.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
That's the name of the game there RF....they cheat to get in and they cheat to
control the Rule of Law, no matter how racist/counter human rights/anti-democratic/non-constitutional.
That is how it goes. Fascism anyone!
SGG
\
Quote:
Originally posted by reaverfan:
The Repubs are in power, so they ram through reichwing fascist judges? Wow!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Not much good at that reading thing, are we? That is called Illiteracy.
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
That's the name of the game there RF....they cheat to get in and they cheat to
control the Rule of Law, no matter how racist/counter human rights/anti-democratic/non-constitutional.
That is how it goes. Fascism anyone!
SGG
\Quote:
Originally posted:
The Repubs are in power!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Not sure if I made it clear.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:Quote:I'm sorry. I forgot to point out it was the Democrats in the Senate which grovelled to make a deal to approve these 16 Appointments. GoP was ready to continue, but Democrats just wanted to make a deal. That's alright, their voter base is so clueless they'll never know the Senators caved.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Senate confirms slate of 16 Federal Judges, all hand-picked by Trump.
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/senate-confirms-
new-federal-judges-but-not-st-louis-nominee/article_83bc8240-f28b-5c80-9bb5-66f0808c6aee.html
This Senate has approved 84 Judges for Trump, the most of any Senate in U.S. History.
Dems and other Socialists/Communists are losing like crazy.
There needs to be balance.
This seems like a victory at face value, but it is actually the consequences of the extreme illiberal Left having so much prominence in the MSM and social media in the last decade.
The pendulum swings are getting wilder, and this will ultimately not end well.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
Why would they know? They weren't told anything about this by the likes of Maddow. All anybody has talked about was Kavanaugh. Meanwhile, as you said, the senate has approved more high level judges than any other administration in history and it hasn't even been 2 years yet.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
These Democrat Senators begged to "ram through" Approval of these 16 Judges in the last few days, all after Kavanaugh Confirmation.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I'd really like to know when RF uses the word fascist, what exactly he sees happening in this country that justifies the use of the word.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
WTF are you rambling on about?
sgg
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:Quote:Not much good at that reading thing, are we? That is called Illiteracy.
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
That's the name of the game there RF....they cheat to get in and they cheat to
control the Rule of Law, no matter how racist/counter human rights/anti-democratic/non-constitutional.
That is how it goes. Fascism anyone!
SGG
\Quote:
Originally posted:
The Repubs are in power!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
That was a well thought out response. So kudos for that.
As for me doing the right thing. I attempt to do just that on a daily basis
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Well, part of you taking back your life is admitting to your drunkeness. That starts the healing process, you recognized the problem and you conquered your
demons.
I applaud you for that. Seriously, no shit. You faced up to responsibility.
You manned up.
Well, thanks.
At the end of the day, this is all that matters.
None of this political bullshit we post about really does. The 1%'ers are just going to keep doing whatever the hell they want to do and they don't give a damn about your or me. It doesn't really matter much who's "winning"... at the end of the day it's all the same.
I've made a lot of improvements in my life in the last few years. Just like I take full responsibility for all of my bad choices and the years I lost to my addictions, I take full responsibility for how well I'm doing now in comparison.
Take some time out of your days to improve yourself and to do something for the people you care about. When all is said and done, that's all that really matters. All of this political bullshit is completely out of our control.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hey Sigs,
I have to respond to this:
Quote:
And in response, the Dems orchestrated a sham accusation, none of which was really designed to go anywhere except the November elections.
Well, we're at a crossroads regarding "shams" aren't we?
Quote:
Instead of heaving your heads blow off because Repubs play dirty politics, and so do the Dems, why not just stick with what would move this nation forward? I heard an interesting segment on NPR yesterday: It seems (according to the polls) that middle-of-the-roaders and no-party-affiliates are being completely turned off by hyper-partisanship.
Yeah, both parties play their dirty tricks, so I say fuck 'em. Fight fire
with fire, whatever works. But here's the thing...when you fuck people so often, you are gonna get burned. One day this powder keg is gonna blow,
and then you'll see some shit. The people gotta focus their energy in the right direction "Annie Get Yer Gun!"
Quote:
I could be wrong (because I don't follow Twitter) but it seems to me that altho Trump frequently criticizes Democrats, he doesn't use the term "Democrats" or "Democratic" very often.
Have you seen any of his "rally" speeches? YGTBFKM, he calls the Dems "Dims" and he demonizes them by saying that they are a "Mob." He's been doing this for quite some time. I may have my picadillos with MSNBC (and other MSM) for their
wall-to-wall coverage of that asshole Trump, but their uncensored coverage
does expose his hypocrisy and flat out cruelty, racism, etc. Aside from his
repetitive rhetoric, it provides a glimpse into his fascist bias.
Quote:
Whereas, the Dems refer "Republicans" quite often. I think the Dems constant reference to party is generating a cringe reaction among people who aren't registered with any party, and those are exactly the people that the Dem party needs to win over. Because, obviously, the DNC already has its base sewn up.
I don't think the Dems do enough to expose those fucking crooks for what they are and what they are meaning to do with this country. The RNC, or better put, Trump has his base sewn up. I agree, the fight will be for those who
helped elect that SOB and sorry POS in the first place. Bottom line: Did he
produce? Did he keep his word in making America great again? Are they satisfied with his "progress" (whatever that is)? That's the real story.
Quote:
In other words, instead of trying to appeal to slivers of people ... Democrats, women, gays, blacks ... they should be crafting a message with the broadest possible appeal.
Really!? So you think this has been lacking in the Dems side of the street?
And that appealing to a broader base will win the day? Hmmmm, I tend to think
that the RNC needs to address people other than a bunch of old white men desperately trying to hang onto a quickly fading past. This country is changing, fast, these old men cannot stop it from happening. They could slow
it a bit, but it's coming and they can't do shit about it. The Earth will
keep spinning round, and change is coming.
Now these farts will know what the Native Americans felt like when the white man kick them in the ass. Karma is a BITCH (and her skin color is...)
SGG
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
:)
Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
That was a well thought out response. So kudos for that.
As for me doing the right thing. I attempt to do just that on a daily basisQuote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Well, part of you taking back your life is admitting to your drunkeness. That starts the healing process, you recognized the problem and you conquered your
demons.
I applaud you for that. Seriously, no shit. You faced up to responsibility.
You manned up.
Well, thanks.
At the end of the day, this is all that matters.
None of this political bullshit we post about really does. The 1%'ers are just going to keep doing whatever the hell they want to do and they don't give a damn about your or me. It doesn't really matter much who's "winning"... at the end of the day it's all the same.
I've made a lot of improvements in my life in the last few years. Just like I take full responsibility for all of my bad choices and the years I lost to my addictions, I take full responsibility for how well I'm doing now in comparison.
Take some time out of your days to improve yourself and to do something for the people you care about. When all is said and done, that's all that really matters. All of this political bullshit is completely out of our control.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Yes, otherwise I wouldn't have posted so.
Really!? So you think this has been lacking in the Dems side of the street?
Quote:Yes, I think the Dems craft their message as one of vengeance for the victimized, when the formerly downtrodden rise up, and step on the faces of who they THINK are their former oppressors. And, SHINY, if you doubt me, just look at the rest of your post ...
And that appealing to a broader base will win the day?
Quote:prejudiced much?
Hmmmm, I tend to think that the RNC needs to address people other than a bunch of old white men
Quote:Oh yeah, THAT'LL bring Americans together!
desperately trying to hang onto a quickly fading past .... Now these farts will know what the Native Americans felt like when the white man kick them in the ass. Karma is a BITCH (and her skin color is...)
SHINY, all you're doing is pitting people to fight over an ever-shrinking pie. Do you think it's "old white men" who made our economic pie shrink? Or, might it not be - GASP!- the oligarchy, which consists not only of old white men (Bill Clinton, GWB) but also old white women (Hillary), middle-aged black men (Obama), Jews, gays, young white men (Steve Jobs, who sent most of the Apple manufacturing jobs to China) and anyone else wealthy enough to have the power to make you poorer? If you're serious, you exemplify everything wrong with the Dems today.
*****
Why can't they craft a message like this?
America has lost good manufacturing jobs. This is not only an economic burden but a security risk. I vow to bring jobs back, and to withdraw from any free trade agreement which takes away our sovereign rights and puts them in some faraway secret court.
At the same time, we have spent trillions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of lives fighting other people's fights overseas. No more. Since World War II, other nations have risen up to claim their share of the economy; it's time that they claim their share of their own protection and that we claim our peace dividend.
We have the resources and the people willing to make this nation great again. Black or white, woman or man, gay or straight, I promise a meritocracy: That you will rise as high as your talent and hard work will take you. A future of meaningful work, as we rebuild our roads and bridges, restore our environment, heal and teach ourselves; harden our cyber infrastructure; and become again not only that shining city on a hill, but a resilient and durable nation - one that will thrive for as long as we can imagine.
Together, we will be ever-vigilant and strong but no longer carrying our weapons of war abroad unless our vital interests are threatened. Instead, we will do what this great nation needs to do to truly rise up again: Heal, teach, build, restore, and dream, so that we can once again face our future with hope instead of fear, uncertainty, and doubt. We know what needs to be done, let's roll up our sleeves and get to work.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND
America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Quote:Yes, otherwise I wouldn't have posted so.
Really!? So you think this has been lacking in the Dems side of the street?Quote:Yes, I think the Dems craft their message as one of vengeance for the victimized, when the formerly downtrodden rise up, and step on the faces of who they THINK are their former oppressors. And, SHINY, if you doubt me, just look at the rest of your post ...
And that appealing to a broader base will win the day?Quote:prejudiced much?
Hmmmm, I tend to think that the RNC needs to address people other than a bunch of old white menQuote:Oh yeah, THAT'LL bring Americans together!
desperately trying to hang onto a quickly fading past .... Now these farts will know what the Native Americans felt like when the white man kick them in the ass. Karma is a BITCH (and her skin color is...)
SHINY, all you're doing is pitting people to fight over an ever-shrinking pie. Do you think it's "old white men" who made our economic pie shrink? Or, might it not be - GASP!- the oligarchy, which consists not only of old white men (Bill Clinton, GWB) but also old white women (Hillary), middle-aged black men (Obama), Jews, gays, young white men (Steve Jobs, who sent most of the Apple manufacturing jobs to China) and anyone else wealthy enough to have the power to make you poorer? If you're serious, you exemplify everything wrong with the Dems today.
Naw, it's mostly rich mostly old and mostly white males. You say women and then just list Hillary - Fox news' favorite villian... still!
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Why can't they craft a message like this?
America has lost good manufacturing jobs. This is not only an economic burden but a security risk. I vow to bring jobs back, and to withdraw from any free trade agreement which takes away our sovereign rights and puts them in some faraway secret court.
At the same time, we have spent trillions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of lives fighting other people's fights overseas. No more. Since World War II, other nations have risen up to claim their share of the economy; it's time that they claim their share of their own protection and that we claim our peace dividend.
We have the resources and the people willing to make this nation great again. Black or white, woman or man, gay or straight, I promise a meritocracy: That you will rise as high as your talent and hard work will take you. A future of meaningful work, as we rebuild our roads and bridges, restore our environment, heal and teach ourselves; harden our cyber infrastructure; and become again not only that shining city on a hill, but a resilient and durable nation - one that will thrive for as long as we can imagine.
Together, we will be ever-vigilant and strong but no longer carrying our weapons of war abroad. Instead, we will do what this great nation needs to do to truly rise up again: Heal, teach, build, restore, and dream, so that we can once again face our future with hope instead of fear, uncertainty, and doubt. We know what needs to be done, let's roll up our sleeves and get to work.
Because those are just words? Duh? And any words coming out of Trump's or the GOP's - or any politician's - mouth would be lies 9 out of 10 times. Double duh. But... you know that.
So what's the point of posting this? Just to slam Dems and deflect from the Holy Evil that is the Republican party?? Of course - bored now.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME