Kavanaugh Confirmation

[SpaceCoastVol]

All true, but you left off the total devastation of the environment and the end of public education.

What is pathetic is that you are not being facetious

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

Here's a little perjury from Kavanaugh

You got him now.

 

[evillawyer]

You got him now.

I realize there's nothing the guy could possibly do that would bring about any other response from you and your ilk, other than perhaps saying it'd be a good idea to have a more robust social safety net. Then it'd be all "down with the tyrant!"

 

[NorthDallas40]

I realize there's nothing the guy could possibly do that would bring about any other response from you and your ilk, other than perhaps saying it'd be a good idea to have a more robust social safety net. Then it'd be all "down with the tyrant!"

After the stupid **** show “you and your ilk” pulled yesterday there’s no hope in us topping it on this nomination circus event. Guess we will get another shot when Ruthy vacates her seat.

So are you Spartacus too?

 

[DancingOutlaw]

I realize there's nothing the guy could possibly do that would bring about any other response from you and your ilk, other than perhaps saying it'd be a good idea to have a more robust social safety net. Then it'd be all "down with the tyrant!"

Wtf would a SC justice have to do with entitlements?

This is why the democrats look like idiots. They’re acting as if this guy’s nomination means the court will somehow get to generate abortion and gun rights cases to rule on. They can only opine on what reaches the SC, and even then it can be declined.

 

[0nelilreb]

I realize there's nothing the guy could possibly do that would bring about any other response from you and your ilk, other than perhaps saying it'd be a good idea to have a more robust social safety net. Then it'd be all "down with the tyrant!"

When (I’ll uses we here ) We have politicians clowning in the senate like booker did and I’m sure will again , when we have a whole party saying they will vote no before the person is even selected just to pander to their base , it’s hard to care about the little gotchas anymore they are trying their best to do. They aren’t trying to vet him , they are trying to stop him like their liberal base demands .

 

[TennTom]

Tell me you haven't seen that "crazy in the eyes" look before.

Post your picture to verify. I'm still not convinced.

 

[McDad]

Wtf would a SC justice have to do with entitlements?

This is why the democrats look like idiots. They’re acting as if this guy’s nomination means the court will somehow get to generate abortion and gun rights cases to rule on. They can only opine on what reaches the SC, and even then it can be declined.

The socialists must never give any ground no matter how inconsequential or unlikely. The government is the arbiter of "good". It must be protected at every turn.

 

[0nelilreb]

The socialists must never give any ground no matter how inconsequential or unlikely. The government is the arbiter of "good". It must be protected at every turn.

So you are saying that the socialist are doing the very thing they cry about the NRA doing to protect the 2nd amendment and gun rights ? Never give any ground because of what might happen ? Interesting

 

[volfanhill]

Q? Lol. Not even remotely.

My apologies. I had you confused with someone else.

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

My apologies. I had you confused with someone else.

It's cool.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

I realize there's nothing the guy could possibly do that would bring about any other response from you and your ilk, other than perhaps saying it'd be a good idea to have a more robust social safety net. Then it'd be all "down with the tyrant!"

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

Post your picture to verify. I'm still not convinced.

Seems to be a common theme

 

[GAVol]

I realize there's nothing the guy could possibly do that would bring about any other response from you and your ilk, other than perhaps saying it'd be a good idea to have a more robust social safety net. Then it'd be all "down with the tyrant!"

I think we should strive to use the word "ilk" more. Nothing tools up a statement like throwing like throwing a good "ilk" in there.

 

[TennTom]

I think we should strive to use the word "ilk" more. Nothing tools up a statement like throwing like throwing a good "ilk" in there.

Trump repeats himself all the time, too. And he's a tool. Please don't ban me.

Seems to be a common theme

THIS IS FUN.

 

[volinbham]

I realize there's nothing the guy could possibly do that would bring about any other response from you and your ilk, other than perhaps saying it'd be a good idea to have a more robust social safety net. Then it'd be all "down with the tyrant!"

Seriously? Leahy and Durbin were desperately trying to label him a liar. This is some serious word play to claim K. was lying. I watched Leahy and Durbin both try to "catch" him and fail pretty miserably. They did it over the last two days. It's a cynical ploy to attack the character of a good person simply because you want to keep him off the court.

 

[GAVol]

Seriously? Leahy and Durbin were desperately trying to label him a liar. This is some serious word play to claim K. was lying. I watched Leahy and Durbin both try to "catch" him and fail pretty miserably. They did it over the last two days. It's a cynical ploy to attack the character of a good person simply because you want to keep him off the court.

It really is sad to watch. The US Senate is one of the last bastions of decorum and it's unraveling day by day.

 

[vols4sure]

Fair point

Virtually every legal scholar agrees that Roe v Wade is a poorly written decision. While some agree with the holding, it is almost unanimous that the rationale is very poor.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Seriously? Leahy and Durbin were desperately trying to label him a liar. This is some serious word play to claim K. was lying. I watched Leahy and Durbin both try to "catch" him and fail pretty miserably. They did it over the last two days. It's a cynical ploy to attack the character of a good person simply because you want to keep him off the court.

He got a hearing and will get a vote and likely be confirmed... It's hard to spin that as anything unfair but you will try anyway. The contentiousness we are seeing in the Senate right now will continue until there is retribution for Garland.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

He got a hearing and will get a vote and likely be confirmed... It's hard to spin that as anything unfair but you will try anyway. The contentiousness we are seeing in the Senate right now will continue until there is retribution for Garland.

What will you do if Trump nominates Garland when Ruth Vadar kicks off?

 

[evillawyer]

Virtually every legal scholar agrees that Roe v Wade is a poorly written decision. While some agree with the holding, it is almost unanimous that the rationale is very poor.

I think Mariotti's point here is that Kavanaugh is dodging a direct answer. He either believes that Roe v. Wade was correctly or incorrectly decided. He had no issue opining on the correctness of the decision in Nixon, why not Roe? We all know why. Because he doesn't want to say that he believes Roe v. Wade was incorrectly decided.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

I think Mariotti's point here is that Kavanaugh is dodging a direct answer. He either believes that Roe v. Wade was correctly or incorrectly decided. He had no issue opining on the correctness of the decision in Nixon, why not Roe? We all know why. Because he doesn't want to say that he believes Roe v. Wade was incorrectly decided.

That's YOUR opinion.

 

[LouderVol]

It really is sad to watch. The US Senate is one of the last bastions of decorum and it's unraveling day by day.

what? back in the good ole days they used to beat each other with sticks and duel the president.

 

[LouderVol]

I think Mariotti's point here is that Kavanaugh is dodging a direct answer. He either believes that Roe v. Wade was correctly or incorrectly decided. He had no issue opining on the correctness of the decision in Nixon, why not Roe? We all know why. Because he doesn't want to say that he believes Roe v. Wade was incorrectly decided.

why should he believe they are the same?

 

[0nelilreb]

He got a hearing and will get a vote and likely be confirmed... It's hard to spin that as anything unfair but you will try anyway. The contentiousness we are seeing in the Senate right now will continue until there is retribution for Garland.

You should be thanking Harry Reid , he made quite possibly the biggest mistakes anyone in the senate ever has .