Kansas Crimson

jeepinjayhawk wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:43 pm I didnt really have a strong feeling either way in regards to confirmation going into this hearing.

As it stands after, my opinion is that he acted exactly, under pressure, the way a guilty person acts.

And please, save me the whiney ass excuse that he was badgered into that behavior.

For me, it's not whether he acted guilty or not. It's that a Supreme Court Justice is supposed to be an unbiased, level headed purveyor of the law even while under extreme pressure as they listen to the most challenging, important and difficult cases in our nation's court system. He failed that test "bigly".

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:10 pm

IllinoisJayhawk wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 6:59 pm Either way, we shouldn't confirm this dude. Maybe it's unfair (maybe not), but he played his hand wrong and said way too much stuff in his hearing. Just find someone else. Pushing him thru just to avoid possible implications from the upcoming election cycle is just as bad as delaying it to possibly benefit from the upcoming elections.

He’s going to be confirmed. The temper tantrum didn’t work; the smoke and mirrors failed; the character assassination withered in the light of the truth. All it really managed to accomplish was to galvanize Republican voters. Game over.

And the "win at all costs" mantra continues. Are there any morals left that you aren't willing to slide your scale on to get what you want?

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 8:01 pm

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 6:07 pm

jeepinjayhawk wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 5:10 pm I am not going to argue this further with you.
It is offensive to me that you make unfounded claims about the professionalism of federal investigative agents based on a story or 2 that you came across.
A big part of the job is remaining objective and impartial as you investigate persons that may have different values, political beliefs, races...etc.

To suggest otherwise is to under value the education, training, and professionalism required to do the work at the federal level.

Peter Strozyk says hello.

If being biased and partisan is such a problem for you then how can you support Kavanaugh? Strozyk sent a private text to his girlfriend; Kavanaugh announced his bias and partisanship live on national television.

Strozyk was promising to sabotage a presidency and thwart the rightful outcome of a legal election while being paid by the same taxpayers he wanted to betray. Kavanaugh promised to interpret the Constitution faithfully rather than reinterpreting it to mean what some people wish it did. The two are hardly equivalent.

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 8:05 pm

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:10 pm

IllinoisJayhawk wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 6:59 pm Either way, we shouldn't confirm this dude. Maybe it's unfair (maybe not), but he played his hand wrong and said way too much stuff in his hearing. Just find someone else. Pushing him thru just to avoid possible implications from the upcoming election cycle is just as bad as delaying it to possibly benefit from the upcoming elections.

He’s going to be confirmed. The temper tantrum didn’t work; the smoke and mirrors failed; the character assassination withered in the light of the truth. All it really managed to accomplish was to galvanize Republican voters. Game over.

And the "win at all costs" mantra continues. Are there any morals left that you aren't willing to slide your scale on to get what you want?

He’s the best candidate for the job, and there are no valid objections to his confirmation. There’s no cost; it’s all gain. I’m sorry you can’t see it that way.

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 8:06 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 8:01 pm

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 6:07 pm

Peter Strozyk says hello.

If being biased and partisan is such a problem for you then how can you support Kavanaugh? Strozyk sent a private text to his girlfriend; Kavanaugh announced his bias and partisanship live on national television.

Strozyk was promising to sabotage a presidency and thwart the rightful outcome of a legal election while being paid by the same taxpayers he wanted to betray. Kavanaugh promised to interpret the Constitution faithfully rather than reinterpreting it to mean what some people wish it did. The two are hardly equivalent.

Well, that's an awful lot of assumption and reading into what those texts actually said. But that kinda seems to be what you do. Hey, your version certainly fits your narrative better so I see why you've adopted those alternative facts as your reality.

If any of you have watched The Circus...early on...there was a dinner meeting of Republican power players scheming to get rid of candidate Trump.

Can we round them up while we are picking up every single FBI agent?

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 8:07 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 8:05 pm

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:10 pm

He’s going to be confirmed. The temper tantrum didn’t work; the smoke and mirrors failed; the character assassination withered in the light of the truth. All it really managed to accomplish was to galvanize Republican voters. Game over.

And the "win at all costs" mantra continues. Are there any morals left that you aren't willing to slide your scale on to get what you want?

He’s the best candidate for the job, and there are no valid objections to his confirmation. There’s no cost; it’s all gain. I’m sorry you can’t see it that way.

Nice to hear a retired Supreme Curt Justice echo my sentiments exactly:

Retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens suggested Thursday he believes Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh should not sit on the nation's highest court.
Stevens said during an event in front of a small crowd that Kavanaugh's performance last week during his testimony in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee caused him to change his mind about Kavanaugh's suitability for the court.
The retired Supreme Court justice said there is "merit" in the criticism that Kavanaugh "has demonstrated a potential bias involving enough potential (litigation) before the court that he would not be able to perform his full responsibilities."
"The senators should really pay attention to it for the good of the court," Stevens said. "It's not healthy to get a new justice that can only do a part-time job."

https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/04/politics ... index.html

John Paul Stevens also said his testimony was disqualifying.

jeepinjayhawk wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 5:10 pm
A big part of the job is remaining objective and impartial as you investigate persons that may have different values, political beliefs, races...etc.

coincidentally this is also a big part of the job of being a scotus judge, and where Kav came up short.

but whatever, I’m sure psych could dig up 2400 law professors who are cool with him anyway.

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:10 pm

IllinoisJayhawk wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 6:59 pm Either way, we shouldn't confirm this dude. Maybe it's unfair (maybe not), but he played his hand wrong and said way too much stuff in his hearing. Just find someone else. Pushing him thru just to avoid possible implications from the upcoming election cycle is just as bad as delaying it to possibly benefit from the upcoming elections.

He’s going to be confirmed. The temper tantrum didn’t work; the smoke and mirrors failed; the character assassination withered in the light of the truth. All it really managed to accomplish was to galvanize Republican voters. Game over.

This has to be among the most frightening part of it all for me.

GOP has weaponized scotus. They courted how many votes from folks who recognized Trump was deplorable, but held their nose and voted anyway cuz they thought they’re gonna overturn Roe v. Wade.

They are repulsed by ending unwanted pregnancies...yet have no problem casting children into holding cells.

Geezer wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 8:23 pm John Paul Stevens also said his testimony was disqualifying.

The same Stevens who wrote glowingly about him in his book a few years ago and is now a senile 91 year-old?

jeepinjayhawk wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 8:42 pm They are repulsed by ending unwanted pregnancies...yet have no problem casting children into holding cells.

Don’t their parents put them there by insisting on coming here illegally - usually multiple times? I’d say it’s more shameful that you care more about cheap produce and manual labor than the well-being of those same children.

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 8:10 pm

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 8:06 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 8:01 pm

If being biased and partisan is such a problem for you then how can you support Kavanaugh? Strozyk sent a private text to his girlfriend; Kavanaugh announced his bias and partisanship live on national television.

Strozyk was promising to sabotage a presidency and thwart the rightful outcome of a legal election while being paid by the same taxpayers he wanted to betray. Kavanaugh promised to interpret the Constitution faithfully rather than reinterpreting it to mean what some people wish it did. The two are hardly equivalent.

Well, that's an awful lot of assumption and reading into what those texts actually said. But that kinda seems to be what you do. Hey, your version certainly fits your narrative better so I see why you've adopted those alternative facts as your reality.

Says the guy who has taken the rantings and lies of a mentally unstable woman being used as a pawn of the Left as gospel. Sigh.

ousdahl wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 8:38 pm

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:10 pm

IllinoisJayhawk wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 6:59 pm Either way, we shouldn't confirm this dude. Maybe it's unfair (maybe not), but he played his hand wrong and said way too much stuff in his hearing. Just find someone else. Pushing him thru just to avoid possible implications from the upcoming election cycle is just as bad as delaying it to possibly benefit from the upcoming elections.

He’s going to be confirmed. The temper tantrum didn’t work; the smoke and mirrors failed; the character assassination withered in the light of the truth. All it really managed to accomplish was to galvanize Republican voters. Game over.

This has to be among the most frightening part of it all for me.

GOP has weaponized scotus. They courted how many votes from folks who recognized Trump was deplorable, but held their nose and voted anyway cuz they thought they’re gonna overturn Roe v. Wade.

Deplorable by your definition. For many of us, he is the hope of saving this country and returning it where it needs to be. I’m sorry that’s frightening for you. Believe it or not, we were frightened by the mess Obama made during his eight years. The good news is, we survived and so will you.

ousdahl wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 9:03 pm

I get it: beer=rape, right?!? Good one!

Why would she lie?
Why would he Lie?

Occam's razor.

Geezer wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 9:36 pm Why would she lie?
Why would he Lie?

Occam's razor.

Some people crave attention and don’t care if it’s good or bad. Some people hate conservatives so much that they’ll go to any lengths to thwart them. If nothing else, the Go Fund Me account balances speak pretty loudly. Take your pick.

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 8:52 pm

jeepinjayhawk wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 8:42 pm They are repulsed by ending unwanted pregnancies...yet have no problem casting children into holding cells.

Don’t their parents put them there by insisting on coming here illegally - usually multiple times? I’d say it’s more shameful that you care more about cheap produce and manual labor than the well-being of those same children.

Where in the fuck did you get that conclusion?