Kavanaugh Confirmation

#13,426
#13,426
RockyTop85 said:
Thanks.

I’m really not a liberal although I sometimes side with them on social issues. Libertarian would probably be most accurate if I have to be labeled. Since I’ve seen it used for Corker, McCain, and Flake, RINO would be the most accurate if one was trying to be pejorative.

In 2007, in a class action suit, Kavanaugh wrote an opinion overruling a District Court injunction against Department of Disability Services. The case was brought by a class of individuals in DDS care who had been deemed by DDS to have “always been incapable of making medical decisions.” Essentially, the government argued that DDS had the ability to force medical care on the plaintiffs without consulting them because they were incapable of understanding what was best for them. -489 F3d 376.

The case does not contain much specific explanation of the plaintiff’s condition, probably because it’s a class action and the class was defined as people who fall within the relevant statutory definition. I disagree with the premise that the government should be allowed to decide what’s best for an individual and also question the capacity of the government to decide who is capable of understanding what’s best for them.

He has also found reasonable suspicion existed to pay down a motorist based on the fact that a driver could not provide proof of ownership or the last name of the owner of a car that had never been reported missing or stolen. 510 F3d 342

He upheld (albeit apologetically), a circuit court’s decision to use conduct for which a man was acquitted to enhance the man’s sentence. 530 F3d 920

In fairness, I did not see a dissenting opinion attached to any of these, so the other two judges on his panel agreed with K on these decisions, none agreed with me.

Again to be fair, the last of those three, on its face, is probably more to his credit in two ways: 1. he recognizes that the practice is unfair and he doesn’t like it. 2. He applies the law as he interpreted it to be at that time, rather than finding a way around it. Some of my concern is that he’s just there as a fallback plan if Trump loses immunity by congressional majority.

I recall a few others where he was the dissenting opinion and I disagreed with his dissent. I didn’t take notes or anything when I looked at this back in October and those were a little more difficult to find I’ll have to look for them and we’re moving this weekend.

Also for what it’s worth, as I recall, the major liberal bitch about Gorsuch was the Hobby Lobby case. It infringed on reproductive rights, I think the argument was. Personally, I don’t have very strong opinions one way or the other about contraception or abortion, but HL is a family owned company. He was basically saying “look, the government can’t tell a family they have to do something that violates their religious beliefs” and his other opinions that received criticism were fairly consistent with that philosophy. If I’m a liberal, I broke rank on that nomination because I thought those were fair and reasonable judgments.

There are also some Kavanaugh cases involving abortion for which liberal legal academics have criticized K and have claimed that at least one of them signals his intentions to overturn Roe v. Wade because he wouldn’t allow a detained illegal immigrant to leave detention to get an abortion. You probably won’t ever see me harping on those.
Click to expand...
 
#13,427
#13,427
Grand Vol said:
lulz

Since when have I been a die hard GOP guy? You forget who you're talking to?

But more to the point, I'd dare say Graham was saying what a whole lot of people, Democrats and Republicans and Independents alike, were thinking. I know I was and someone needed to put a stop to what was going on.
Click to expand...
Haven't seen you post much that wasn't on the right, but I'll stand corrected.

Listen, I picked one recent example. You know there are a bunch of others on both sides. And it's not just tantrums on the floor. It's actions. Blocking for the sake of blocking. Inability to reach any common ground. Acting like a couple of spoiled brats. And don't tell me that's just the Democrats, because that's bull. The two major parties have been at this for years. Whichever party is in the White House tries to ram through as much as possible before they lose Congress. If they don't have Congress, they get blockaded. It becomes more about win-loss than doing what's right for the country. We end up with crappy, poorly thought out legislation most of the time (e.g., Obamacare, Trump's yuge tax cut bill without any significant spending offsets). The whole place is broken, and I'm not seeing any evidence that having Trump in the WH is fixing it. I suspect we'll end up with a Democrat in the WH next, even if Trump goes two terms (politics are cyclical like that), and we'll see more of the same garbage. Pretty sure this isn't what the founding fathers envisioned. It's pathetic.
 
#13,428
#13,428
Grand Vol said:
He did mention the Clintons.

What LG fails to acknowledge is Hillary's PAC led the charge in the early hours of the Kava-no stuff.
Click to expand...
Sorry. I missed that. So, he is disqualified for referencing a "vast left wing conspiracy" that's out to get him? Is that the narrative?
 
#13,431
#13,431
Orange_Crush said:
Sorry. I missed that. So, he is disqualified for referencing a "vast left wing conspiracy" that's out to get him? Is that the narrative?
Click to expand...

the narrative is that the allegations are not convincing so it's time to move onto the next reason to vote no.

I won't be surprised if there's not some pivot off temperament to something else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orange_Crush
#13,432
#13,432
BowlBrother85 said:
He is a nominee for our highest court and should have been able to handle it without losing his composure.
Click to expand...

They are senators ( law makers of the country ) ACT LIKE IT . the whole right hand side of Dems are a bunch of hypocrites questioning and accusing someone without proof of being a drunk that blacks out and assaults women . There’s not a one of them that can ask about lying and high moral character without being a hypocrite . PERIOD
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol and 82_VOL_83
#13,433
#13,433
82_VOL_83 said:
It has been and always will be beyond me how ANYONE can support a political ideology who's basic tenant is to take from people that work hard every day at jobs that they have trained themselves for by either working up through a trade union, going to school and getting a USEFUL degree, or have just put in the years to gain the experience and give to those who do not work. Not because they are unable to work in some way, but simply because they want to party, are lazy, and want to be fruitful and multiply. Those that can't work deserve assistance in this country. However, a large number of those currently unemployed are in that situation because they simply don't care and know that their party will support them. The left has moved so far in the direction of one payer everything that I simply don't understand how anyone that has grown up in this country can support it. This whole joke of a process has been caused by this party simply trying to delay a vote in the hopes that they can impeach a rightfully elected president and load the court with more socialist/activist judges. How can anyone in their right mind support this? Are your lives so secure that you really don't care about your health or your financial independence? I'm not speaking out for the right side of the aisle, just against the left side that has moved so far left that they make JFK look like a right wing nutjob.

Trolls need not answer, you know who you are.
Click to expand...


I read a post in the pub, I think, where a guy posted something about he doesn’t believe in the slave labor practices of going to work everyday and doing a job. He thinks people should be paid based on their intellect or something like that. I’m assuming he has a degree that doesn’t equate to anything that can be used to make a living.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TN-POSSUM and 82_VOL_83
#13,434
#13,434
volinbham said:
LOL - wouldn't you think Senators should be able to handle a hearing without being complete a-holes? I do but they show every damn time they cannot.

This holier than though "temperament" ploy is absurd.
Click to expand...
Klobuchar wasn't being an a-hole. It's not a ploy. He was unnecessarily defensive and caustic to her. It's also not unfair to hold him to a higher standard than that.
 
#13,436
#13,436
BowlBrother85 said:
Klobuchar wasn't being an a-hole. It's not a ploy. He was unnecessarily defensive and caustic to her. It's also not unfair to hold him to a higher standard than that.
Click to expand...

He apologized to her but she was part of the circus.

All I can say is I hope you never find yourself in the position he was in - I'm not going to let his (understandable to me) reactions one day outweigh all the work he's done as a judge; work that not only shows no temperament issues but also includes the highest ratings for temperament. It's absolutely nuts to only look at that day but I guess that's what our world has become.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TN-POSSUM, marcusluvsvols, SpaceCoastVol and 2 others
#13,438
#13,438
0nelilreb said:
They are senators ( law makers of the country ) ACT LIKE IT . the whole right hand side of Dems are a bunch of hypocrites questioning and accusing someone without proof of being a drunk that blacks out and assaults women . There’s not a one of them that can ask about lying and high moral character without being a hypocrite . PERIOD
Click to expand...
They had an accusation to follow up on that is what they were doing. Klobuchar's line of questioning was both relevant to the proceedings and fair. I also disagree that there aren't some Democratic Senators with high moral character... again, I would refer back to Klobuchar and also throw in another female Democratic Senator - Tammy Duckworth, who has sacrificed as much for her country as anyone in the Senate.
 
#13,439
#13,439
volinbham said:
He apologized to her but she was part of the circus.

All I can say is I hope you never find yourself in the position he was in - I'm not going to let his (understandable to me) reactions one day outweigh all the work he's done as a judge; work that not only shows no temperament issues but also includes the highest ratings for temperament. It's absolutely nuts to only look at that day but I guess that's what our world has become.
Click to expand...
I agree that you don't only look at that day but that day is relevant. I also agree that it doesn't outweigh the work he has done as a judge.
 
#13,440
#13,440
BowlBrother85 said:
I would agree with all of that and also point to the way Kavanaugh handled Sen. Klobuchar's line of questioning. He showed a temperamental side. She was asking him pertinent and reasonable questions and he became defensive and testy. He tried to pose the questions back to her when the point of the hearing was to assess his behavior - not hers. However, I don't expect for any of the Republican holdouts to vote against Kavanaugh's confirmation due to any of this. They will simply point to the lack of corroboration of Ford's accusations and say that their vote was based solely on Kavanaugh's credentials. As they do this, they will go out of their way to be respectful of Ford and of women who have been sexually assaulted. That is the smartest political maneuver for all of them and hard to argue with objectively speaking...

Now, having said that, it's possible that Flake doesn't care about politics anymore because his career in public life could be over. If that is the case, then who knows what he might do?
Click to expand...
 
#13,441
#13,441
BowlBrother85 said:
They had an accusation to follow up on that is what they were doing. Klobuchar's line of questioning was both relevant to the proceedings and fair. I also disagree that there aren't some Democratic Senators without high moral character... again, I would refer back to Klobuchar again and also throw in another female Democratic Senator - Tammy Duckworth, who has sacrificed as much for her country as anyone in the Senate.
Click to expand...

So your beef is with how he responded to one Senator one of the many times he was questioned by her all with the context of hours and hours of hearings?

How he spoke to one Senator one time is a better indicator of his judicial temperament than his actual career and ruling history (which has been determined to be outstanding with regard to temperament).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82_VOL_83 and Orange_Crush
#13,442
#13,442
BowlBrother85 said:
They had an accusation to follow up on that is what they were doing. Klobuchar's line of questioning was both relevant to the proceedings and fair. I also disagree that there aren't some Democratic Senators without high moral character... again, I would refer back to Klobuchar again and also throw in another female Democratic Senator - Tammy Duckworth, who has sacrificed as much for her country as anyone in the Senate.
Click to expand...

There’s never been a SC nominee that’s had this Much mud slung at him for the pure purpose of stalling and resisting . Amazing how none of this horrible stuff came up until he was picked but the Dems already said they wouldn’t vote for anyone Trump picked . I can’t wait until AB is picked to watch the donkeys try and go after a woman like they did K.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol
#13,443
#13,443
volinbham said:
So your beef is with how he responded to one Senator one of the many times he was questioned by her all with the context of hours and hours of hearings?

How he spoke to one Senator one time is a better indicator of his judicial temperament than his actual career and ruling history (which has been determined to be outstanding with regard to temperament).
Click to expand...
Where in the hell did I say that? I have said just the opposite.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top