Kavanaugh Confirmation

[utvolpj]

on the first point - why put up all this "vindictiveness" nonsense if your real beef is his judicial philosophy. that's what drove me most crazy about this process is how many people fundamentally disagreed with his JP but used personal destruction tactics to argue against him instead of arguing JP. Attack the judging; not the person.

Souter, O'Connor, Kennedy, Roberts, Stephens all disappointed the party that nominated them. I'm quite sure there are examples where "left" judges did the same to those that nominated them.

I mentioned 2 points and only one was keyed in on by this forum. I know why since the other doesn't work if you're on the celebrating team. You all choose to blow it up, not me.

 

[Orange_Crush]

Not sure. The college roommate claims to have heard him and his friends use the terms. The meaning within the context used in the yearbook should be clear to all, but it can't be proven so lets play dumb. The time for debating this whole thing is over. What's done is done. Some think today was great. Some (including me) think today was a travesty. Let the great divide widen. I'm going to go pop some corn from the jar.

The time for calling someone "known perjurer" while saying "but it can't be proven" never was.

 

[RavinDave]

The government sets up a system of expectations of its citizens, some of which are moral behaviors. I wouldn't necessarily call it a belief system, though you could fault me for splitting hairs there.

As to the question of human life, you mentioned heart beat. Is that the definition? What about conception? It takes a few weeks for the heartbeat. Is a heartbeat sufficient, though? We aren't far away from being able to biologically engineer organs. If a heart is created in a lab and a beat generated, is that a human life? Their are opinions, yes, but the question is far from answered.

As to my beliefs, I've not described them here. You've assumed, based on what I've laid out. I have my own thoughts on when life begins and on the mortality of abortion. I've said I'm not an advocate for abortion, and I've also explained that I'm for respecting the rights of individuals to choose. I don't think my morality or that of another should infringe upon that.

Similarly, I'm for religious freedom. It's possible to hold one belief while respecting another.

I’d say the mortality of abortion is pert-near 100%.

 

[Orange_Crush]

Are you saying there is something wrong with being a liar? Just say 3 Hail Mary's and cut my taxes.

I seriously hope there are extenuating circumstances to that reply, because you're making no sense.

 

[utvolpj]

but these are judicial philosophy - not vindictiveness or you thinking he lied about boofing.

why not lead with your real problems with the nominee?

I did. It's in my initial post

 

[luthervol]

Does anyone on here think that Romney, McCain, or either Bush would have had the spine to stick with Kavanaugh instead of asking him to bow out? Maybe Trump will show Republicans how to play hardball.

Spine? That's what you call it? I'm going to need to get a Redhat to English Translation dictionary.
Boof - fart
Devil's triangle - drinking game
Spine - a$$hole
Corn in a jar - popcorn

 

[volinbham]

I mentioned 2 points and only one was keyed in on by this forum. I know why since the other doesn't work if you're on the celebrating team. You all choose to blow it up, not me.

you led with vindictive and stood by it.

you trolled with "team" and continue to.

you could have stated your objection to his confirmation but instead you chose to take a shot at people who are glad he was confirmed.

 

[Weezer]

Not sure. The college roommate claims to have heard him and his friends use the terms. The meaning within the context used in the yearbook should be clear to all, but it can't be proven so lets play dumb. The time for debating this whole thing is over. What's done is done. Some think today was great. Some (including me) think today was a travesty. Let the great divide widen. I'm going to go pop some corn from the jar.

Forgive me, but I'm not buying the context argument. Neither you nor I were there 35 years ago to truly understand the context in which things were written. As for the college roommate, he was admittedly not really part of K's group of friends, and, from my understanding, they had a somewhat contentious relationship. If these terms truly had such devious meanings, where are the HS classmates? Why are they not coming forward to challenge his definitions? His HS peers would be the ones to go to for the definitions, would they not? It is their yearbook.

An honest question, do you realize when the left creates these kinds of circuses, they are pushing those of us in the middle toward supporting the right? This may play to their base, but it doesn't play to those in the middle.

 

[volinbham]

Spine? That's what you call it? I'm going to need to get a Redhat to English Translation dictionary.
Boof - fart
Devil's triangle - drinking game
Spine - a$$hole
Corn in a jar - popcorn

As for the 2 relevant ones to this situation: Boof has been shown to be word used for fart and 2 witnesses swore under threat of perjury that DT was indeed a drinking game.

 

[Orange_Crush]

As for the 2 relevant ones to this situation: Boof has been shown to be word used for fart and 2 witnesses swore under threat of perjury that DT was indeed a drinking game.

"...hail mary and lower the taxes..."

(I suspect Luther is playing Devil's Triangle tonight because he's obviously drunk.)

 

[Weezer]

Yes I do since I was alive then and in school. I've spoken with others who agree with the interpretation.

I don't need to be careful with anything.

What year did you graduate?

 

[0nelilreb]

Spine? That's what you call it? I'm going to need to get a Redhat to English Translation dictionary.
Boof - fart
Devil's triangle - drinking game
Spine - a$$hole
Corn in a jar - popcorn

Here maybe these will help , it’s over because there’s no proof and he’s one of the most qualified judges to hold that position . Job interview is over , the employers gave him the job .

 

[Vol_Doc]

You haven't offended me at all. I've merely pointed out that you've argued from the absurd with religious zeal. It's quite obvious, yet not offensive. It makes for a waste of time in discussion, but isn't offensive.

As a doctor, I'm sure you know the generally accepted definition of differing cell types. That a zygote is neither sperm nor egg, thus it is a completely new, genetically specific, and genetically human cell. The fact that the zygote goes through internal changes that prevent other sperm from entering--these internal changes prove that it's a living cell. Thus, we have a genetically specific, genetically human, living cell. A separate, genetically human life has begun. It's not a scientific question at all. It could be a religiously zealous denial. But it's a scientifically settled matter.

I'm sure, as a doctor, you understand the accepted definitions and distinctions between cells and organisms. In lay speak, its a living system of interrelated and subordinate properties working together for a predefined purpose. Since there is no factory in the mother/host producing organs, limbs, etc for the embryo, and all of these are developed from the zygote forward, it is scientifically defined that as far back as the zygote, a genetically specific, genetically human organism, which was alive since the single celled level, and is alive to be orchestrating the system of its own development, has formed.

Thus, as early as the zygote level, the genetic and scientific definition of a living human organism has been established.

To say, "people disagree so we really shouldn't set a line on this" is ridiculous logic, by the way.

Good evening doc.

Lol yeah, I know all that, and I am actually a doctor. I was purposely pushing the extremes to make my point. I get the feeling you didn't really read everything I wrote or maybe read it selectively, though. I know this is a touchy subject, so I'll just drop it. I like philosophical debates, but sometimes I get a little carried away.

 

[utvolpj]

you led with vindictive and stood by it.

you trolled with "team" and continue to.

you could have stated your objection to his confirmation but instead you chose to take a shot at people who are glad he was confirmed.

I replied to the vindictive part since it was all that got quoted. I know why and so do you if you're being honest here

You read this forum daily and consider "team" to be trolling? Seriously? The people who are glad he was confirmed simply because he was Trump's choice deserve all shots taken at them since they're likely hypocrites

 

[DancingOutlaw]

Next time I go home I’m finding my yearbooks and seeing what idiotic **** people wrote in them.

And then I’m burning them all.

 

[volinbham]

I replied to the vindictive party since it was all that got quoted. I know why and so do you if you're being honest here

You read this forum daily and consider "team" to be trolling? The people who are glad he was confirmed simply because he was Trump's choice deserve all shots taken at them since they're likely hypocrites

your last sentence confirms your post was trolling. since you read it daily you know what happens when you troll.

 

[SLICKYINC]

I replied to the vindictive part since it was all that got quoted. I know why and so do you if you're being honest here

You read this forum daily and consider "team" to be trolling? Seriously? The people who are glad he was confirmed simply because he was Trump's choice deserve all shots taken at them since they're likely hypocrites

Wut? Actually he wasn't really Trumps pick or so we're told....

 

[utvolpj]

Next time I go home I’m finding my yearbooks and seeing what idiotic **** people wrote in them.

And then I’m burning them all.

You won't have issues as long as you answer honestly

 

[utvolpj]

your last sentence confirms your post was trolling. since you read it daily you know what happens when you troll.

It's not trolling, it's honest. All the screeching about the Constitution under the last admin had suddenly become silent. It's clearly hypocritical and this thread is a great example

 

[volinbham]

It's not trolling, it's honest. All the screeching about the Constitution under the last admin had suddenly become silent. It's clearly hypocritical

sounds kinda vindictive if you ask me

 

[Orange_Crush]

It's not trolling, it's honest. All the screeching about the Constitution under the last admin had suddenly become silent. It's clearly hypocritical and this thread is a great example

Which part of the Constitution wasn't followed? (Except for the fact that stalling through the midterms with unsupported sexual assault charges isn't in it?)

 

[1972 Grad]

I heard that Trump wanted Kavanaugh because Kav wants to overturn the 2 term max for the President, and make it a lifetime appointment , with the children grandfathered in. This means that the Trumps can turn it over to Ivanka, and then on down to Barron.

 

[SLICKYINC]

It's not trolling, it's honest. All the screeching about the Constitution under the last admin had suddenly become silent. It's clearly hypocritical and this thread is a great example

I'm not buying it..

 

[utvolpj]

sounds kinda vindictive if you ask me

If I was vindictive I would have deleted hog's weak insults earlier in the thread.

 

[utvolpj]

Which part of the Constitution wasn't followed? (Except for the fact that stalling through the midterms with unsupported sexual assault charges isn't in it?)

We're still in the Kavanaugh thread right? I posted it already