Kavanaugh Confirmation

#3,951
#3,951
05_never_again said:
I'm as cynical as anyone when it comes to politics so I guess I should've seen something like this coming.

We're talking about a SCOTUS seat, and Dems view Republicans to have stolen one. They are in total "the ends justify the means" mode now.
Click to expand...
What do you mean "now"? They think Trump stole the election.
 
#3,952
#3,952
37L1 said:
What do you mean "now"? They think Trump stole the election.
Click to expand...
I meant even more than they have been in the past. Deep down they don't think Trump stole the election; they know Hillary ran an awful campaign and was a really flawed candidate, even relative to Donald, particularly in an anti-establishment election.

They really truly believe Garland was robbed of a SCOTUS seat though.
 
#3,953
#3,953
05_never_again said:
I meant even more than they have been in the past. Deep down they don't think Trump stole the election; they know Hillary ran an awful campaign and was a really flawed candidate, even relative to Donald, particularly in an anti-establishment election.

They really truly believe Garland was robbed of a SCOTUS seat though.
Click to expand...
They are too shallow to have a "deep down."

They can't deal with "losing" and didn't even get a participation trophy for voting. They have been butt hurt since November 2016 and are acting out like the spoiled brats that they are. Elections only have consequences when they win, dontcha know?
 
  • Like
Reactions: BreatheUT and 1972 Grad
#3,954
#3,954
37L1 said:
They are too shallow to have a "deep down."
Click to expand...
I mean they have "a public view and a private view." ;)

Publicly they say Donald stole the election, Russia helped him, etc. Privately they know why they lost. Hillary was a really flawed candidate (particularly in the political climate of the time) and ran a bad campaign. She lost important states like Michigan, Wisconsin, and Colorado in the Democratic primaries, a pretty clear indicator there was disillusionment with her from people within her own party.

It's like the coach of a losing football team blaming refs or external factors for the loss in the press conference after the game, but saying among themselves in meetings "we lost because these guys we recruited just aren't all that good, and we haven't done a good job coaching them."
 
#3,956
#3,956
05_never_again said:
I meant even more than they have been in the past. Deep down they don't think Trump stole the election; they know Hillary ran an awful campaign and was a really flawed candidate, even relative to Donald, particularly in an anti-establishment election.

They really truly believe Garland was robbed of a SCOTUS seat though.
Click to expand...

So Garland was robbed of at least a hearing and vote. However that didn’t just happen. This has been an escalation war starting with Bork. And each round gets more extreme.

I would have supported Garland as a replacement for Ginsberg. After this fiasco no damn way. We need to put the most evangelical most conservative pro life extremist on the bench we can find if we have to go to a rural Alabama district court to find them. 😈
 
#3,957
#3,957
Not sure the democrats would take this route unless they thought they had enough midterm shenanigans in place to control confirmations for the next two years.

Mighty big risk if republicans can still confirm who they want after midterms.
 
#3,958
#3,958
NorthDallas40 said:
So Garland was robbed of at least a hearing and vote. However that didn’t just happen. This has been an escalation war starting with Bork. And each round gets more extreme.

I would have supported Garland as a replacement for Ginsberg. After this fiasco no damn way. We need to put the most evangelical most conservative pro life extremist on the bench we can find if we have to go to a rural Alabama district court to find them. 😈
Click to expand...
You just said it though...Garland was robbed of a hearing and a vote. Bork was denied the seat after a hearing and a vote. He got to make his case and simply just didn't get enough votes, so they see that as being totally fair. That was before my time but I see Bork not getting the seat primarly because of his association with Nixon/Saturday Night Massacre more than his interpretation of the Constitution.

I'm not saying it was incorrect per se to deny Garland a hearing given the circumstances. I don't think Republicans would be out of bounds for doing that even if Bork never happened. But I totally get why they got their panties in a wad over it.
 
#3,960
#3,960
05_never_again said:
I'm as cynical as anyone when it comes to politics so I guess I should've seen something like this coming.

We're talking about a SCOTUS seat, and Dems view Republicans to have stolen one. They are in total "the ends justify the means" mode now.
Click to expand...
They are also worried about the constitutionality of military tribunals being used to try their treasonous a55es.
 
#3,961
#3,961
05_never_again said:
You just said it though...Garland was robbed of a hearing and a vote. Bork was denied the seat after a hearing and a vote. He got to make his case and simply just didn't get enough votes, so they see that as being totally fair. That was before my time but I see Bork not getting the seat primarly because of his association with Nixon/Saturday Night Massacre more than his interpretation of the Constitution.

I'm not saying it was incorrect per se to deny Garland a hearing given the circumstances. I don't think Republicans would be out of bounds for doing that even if Bork never happened. But I totally get why they got their panties in a wad over it.
Click to expand...

DEMs have Ted Kennedy and Joe Biden to blame along with slime bag Harry Reid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 05_never_again
#3,965
#3,965
TennTom said:
Isn't it weird how Gorsuch also had all of these "fabricated" sexual assault allegations lodged against him? Just saying....
Click to expand...
Was Gorsuch characterized as “the fight of our lives” by Democrats immediately upon nomination?
 
#3,968
#3,968
evillawyer said:
Farrow challenging claim that NY Times passed on the story

Click to expand...

Farrow is FOS and is thus far 0-2 on this topic. The Times published their own story stating for the record Ramirez’s allegations could not be corroborated by a single person in what was stated as “dozens of interviews”.

Swing and a miss! Not even a foul tip.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FLVOL69 and AirVol
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top