kavanaugh

[The Dad Fisherman]

Senator Lindsey Graham has emerged as the most vocal champion of Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court nomination. But on Wednesday, he suggested that President Donald Trump’s recent attacks on Christine Blasey Ford, the judge’s accuser, aren’t useful—though they could, he noted, “be worse.”

“President Trump went through a factual rendition that I didn’t particularly like,” Graham said. “I would tell him, ‘Knock it off. You’re not helping.’”

[spence]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Senator Lindsey Graham has emerged as the most vocal champion of Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court nomination. But on Wednesday, he suggested that President Donald Trump’s recent attacks on Christine Blasey Ford, the judge’s accuser, aren’t useful—though they could, he noted, “be worse.”

“President Trump went through a factual rendition that I didn’t particularly like,” Graham said. “I would tell him, ‘Knock it off. You’re not helping.’”

Never in my life or from what I know of history has this country ever seen a president so depraved.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

Never in my life or from what I know of history has this country ever seen a president so depraved.

You're version of history is very short.

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

You're version of history is very short.

I was going back a few hundred years.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

Never in my life or from what I know of history has this country ever seen a president so depraved.

and yet he cannot stoop low enough to match the depravity of elected democrats...we're really in a pickle

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

Never in my life or from what I know of history has this country ever seen a president so depraved.

The thing is, you didn't say "a man so depraved," you said "a President so depraved."

It's even very questionable to say that Trump is the most depraved man who then became President. But how is Trump the most depraved President actually while being President?

[Sea Dangles]

Not to split hairs,but Jeff has an opinion and to him it is valid and meaningful. Personally, the Clinton years make this look like scout camp.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Ian]

Originally Posted by detbuch

The thing is, you didn't say "a man so depraved," you said "a President so depraved."

It's even very questionable to say that Trump is the most depraved man who then became President. But how is Trump the most depraved President actually while being President?

Maybe he meant “a president who is such an outright #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&”

Edit: I mean “butt hole”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Ian

Maybe he meant “a president who is such an outright #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&”

Edit: I mean “butt hole”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That's possible . . . I'd rather not make an accusation without corroboration.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Ian

Maybe he meant “a president who is such an outright #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&”

Edit: I mean “butt hole”

Spence did say "depraved." How's this for a President being depraved, or even a butt hole including when in office:

(From http://www.cracked.com/article_18945...t-mention.html)

Lyndon Johnson Was a Dong-Waving Sex Machine

Lyndon Johnson took over as president after the assassination of John F. Kennedy, and today most people know him as the president who made Vietnam happen (he being the one who really escalated the conflict). He wasn't terribly popular and had his share of scandals.

That drink in his hand is pretty much straight Everclear.
But at the time, he did have a reputation for getting things done. When he wanted something passed, he'd badger the #^&#^&#^&#^& out of everybody to get it, so much so that people came to call his relentless lobbying "the Johnson Treatment." We bring that up because after reading this, you're going to picture something else entirely anytime someone threatens you with "the Johnson Treatment." Something much worse.

Johnson was a sexual beast, and also fond of (literally) waving his #^&#^&#^&#^& around.

He would often use language like "Ford's economics are the worst thing that's happened to this country since pantyhose ruined finger-#^&#^&#^&#^& [fu...king]"

While other unfaithful presidents were satisfied with little affairs here and there, Johnson's bevy of babes was referred to by his male aides as a harem (he was said to be jealous of Kennedy's womanizing ways and wanted to top him). Johnson would make passes at secretaries, and it was known that any who accepted would be promoted to private secretary, two words that in this context should probably have air quotes around them anytime they are uttered. By the time he was done, virtually all of his secretaries, plus his two mistresses, got the Johnson Treatment.

He then tasked the Secret Service with keeping his philandering from his wife, but it obviously did not do a good job at that. His wife had full knowledge of everything and sometimes even supported it. At parties, he would make obvious passes at girls right in front of his wife. One of the girls who stayed over at his place got awakened in the middle of the night by Johnson holding a flashlight and saying, "Move over. This is your president."

Which goes down in history as the second-greatest pickup line ever, losing just barely to, "Hello, I'm an astronaut."
As for waving around his cock (a little extension of him that he had affectionately nicknamed "Jumbo"), he was said to piss in public whenever he felt like it, and if anyone dared confront him, he would whip his #^&#^&#^&#^& around and challenge the poor sap with, "Have you seen anything bigger than this?"

[Ian]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Spence did say "depraved." How's this for a President being depraved, or even a butt hole including when in office:

(From http://www.cracked.com/article_18945...t-mention.html)

Lyndon Johnson Was a Dong-Waving Sex Machine

Lyndon Johnson took over as president after the assassination of John F. Kennedy, and today most people know him as the president who made Vietnam happen (he being the one who really escalated the conflict). He wasn't terribly popular and had his share of scandals.

That drink in his hand is pretty much straight Everclear.
But at the time, he did have a reputation for getting things done. When he wanted something passed, he'd badger the #^&#^&#^&#^& out of everybody to get it, so much so that people came to call his relentless lobbying "the Johnson Treatment." We bring that up because after reading this, you're going to picture something else entirely anytime someone threatens you with "the Johnson Treatment." Something much worse.

Johnson was a sexual beast, and also fond of (literally) waving his #^&#^&#^&#^& around.

He would often use language like "Ford's economics are the worst thing that's happened to this country since pantyhose ruined finger-#^&#^&#^&#^& [fu...king]"

While other unfaithful presidents were satisfied with little affairs here and there, Johnson's bevy of babes was referred to by his male aides as a harem (he was said to be jealous of Kennedy's womanizing ways and wanted to top him). Johnson would make passes at secretaries, and it was known that any who accepted would be promoted to private secretary, two words that in this context should probably have air quotes around them anytime they are uttered. By the time he was done, virtually all of his secretaries, plus his two mistresses, got the Johnson Treatment.

He then tasked the Secret Service with keeping his philandering from his wife, but it obviously did not do a good job at that. His wife had full knowledge of everything and sometimes even supported it. At parties, he would make obvious passes at girls right in front of his wife. One of the girls who stayed over at his place got awakened in the middle of the night by Johnson holding a flashlight and saying, "Move over. This is your president."

Which goes down in history as the second-greatest pickup line ever, losing just barely to, "Hello, I'm an astronaut."
As for waving around his cock (a little extension of him that he had affectionately nicknamed "Jumbo"), he was said to piss in public whenever he felt like it, and if anyone dared confront him, he would whip his #^&#^&#^&#^& around and challenge the poor sap with, "Have you seen anything bigger than this?"

Is this where calling a penis a Johnson came from?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Ian

Is this where calling a penis a Johnson came from?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

I think it's been close to 50 years since I've seen Cracked magazine, perhaps we should check with that other esteemed source, Alfred E. Neuman

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

I think it's been close to 50 years since I've seen Cracked magazine, perhaps we should check with that other esteemed source, Alfred E. Neuman

If you can't refute the message, kill the messenger. Cracked did not invent those things, they were fairly well known and noted in several other sources.

But anything said about Trump in really solid (sarc) "esteemed" sources like Salon must be believed. Or any uncorroborated accusation about Trump or Trump's associates must be believed.

"Esteemed" is in the eye of the beholder. Much of what is "esteemed" turns out to be bullchit.

Nice to see that you refer to Alfred E. Neuman as an esteemed source. Hey, Mad Magazine is deemed by many to be esteemed.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

If you can't refute the message, kill the messenger. Cracked did not invent those things, they were fairly well known and noted in several other sources.

But anything said about Trump in really solid (sarc) "esteemed" sources like Salon must be believed. Or any uncorroborated accusation about Trump or Trump's associates must be believed.

"Esteemed" is in the eye of the beholder. Much of what is "esteemed" turns out to be bullchit.

Nice to see that you refer to Alfred E. Neuman as an esteemed source. Hey, Mad Magazine is deemed by many to be esteemed.

Did I say it was not true?
I grew up with Mad and Cracked magazines, it was always the big decision of which to buy when we went to town from camp to do laundry.
I thought your source was and is funny, it had nothing to do with Don the Con.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Did I say it was not true?
I grew up with Mad and Cracked magazines, it was always the big decision of which to buy when we went to town from camp to do laundry.
I thought your source was and is funny, it had nothing to do with Don the Con.

Cool. Mad mag was great stuff. For me, it was about Don the Con since the point of my post, to which you replied, was to point out that Spence's view that Trump was the most depraved is highly suspect. There's a bunch of depraved, racist, war-mongering, sexist, phobists of all sorts, Presidents that topped what is said about Trump.

[Ian]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Cool. Mad mag was great stuff. For me, it was about Don the Con since the point of my post, to which you replied, was to point out that Spence's view that Trump was the most depraved is highly suspect. There's a bunch of depraved, racist, war-mongering, sexist, phobists of all sorts, Presidents that topped what is said about Trump.

It is tough to imagine someone in the 20s not being at least the same if not more sexist/racist/misogynistic... but it should be noted that using US history as a moral barometer might not be the best tool for the job...

I do wonder how Spence’s comment would hold up if he referred to the temperament of the person in office compared to popular culture of that time (think of what everyone is saying about Kavanaugh and the 80s right now.) I’m sure Trump, as a fairly obvious outlier in today’s public society, might win a “most” award there.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Interested to see who spent millions?
Conservatives ahead in spending 2-1 on advertising for Kavanaugh, hours of ad time are close though
https://adage.com/article/campaign-t...tv-ads/315160/

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Interested to see who spent millions?
Conservatives ahead in spending 2-1 on advertising for Kavanaugh, hours of ad time are close though
https://adage.com/article/campaign-t...tv-ads/315160/

Maybe those ads influenced the FBI.

[Sea Dangles]

They were tuned in.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Ian

It is tough to imagine someone in the 20s not being at least the same if not more sexist/racist/misogynistic... but it should be noted that using US history as a moral barometer might not be the best tool for the job...

That is a more thoughtful approach for making comparisons. Certainly so in our time when relativity is preferred over absolutes.


I do wonder how Spence’s comment would hold up if he referred to the temperament of the person in office compared to popular culture of that time (think of what everyone is saying about Kavanaugh and the 80s right now.) I’m sure Trump, as a fairly obvious outlier in today’s public society, might win a “most” award there.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

My answer, though, was to Spence's comment as he phrased it. He did frame it as "Never in my life or from what I know of history," and he did say "I was going back a few hundred years." And it seemed that he was passionate about it and that it was a really important thing to consider and comment on.

Your approach is more astute and interesting. And worth a discussion rather than a snide or sarcastic retort.

As for Trump's temperament compared to the popular culture of our time, I'd say that Trump fits the temperament of our popular culture very well. That may be one of the major reasons he got elected. We live in a brash, in your face time. Check out our current popular music compared to that of the 18th and 19th century or even that of the first 60 years of the 20th century.

How about sports. There used to be something called sportsmanship and modesty of one's talent. Athletes up to the mid to latter twentieth century would be astonished to see the self congratulatory hijinks on the field of today's athletes. And how many are guilty of drug abuse and abuse of women.

Our movies and videos are filled with gratuitous violence and casual sex and semi to full nudity, among other things, that pre-1960 movies mostly shunned. Our reality entertainment scene is full of Jerry Springer types. Actually, Trump's reality TV show, The Apprentice (I admit that I found it boring), was a relief from the unstructured and biased hit job shows such as The View.

Our politics is one constant attack on opponents, filled with smears, lies; the mainstream media has gone beyond old-fashioned slanting and become outright advocates and arms of a political party; our divorce rates, unwed births, abortions, destruction of history and its relics, student violence and suppression of speech and diversity on college campuses, etc., etc., etc., etc.

And all that stuff is acceptable to half of the public, or so we are told, by the mainstream media that supports much of it.


If Trump is an outlier of todays contemporary scene, its because he is a reaction against it. "Conservatives" were tired of weak, mealy mouthed Republicans who caved, conceded, and were afraid of negative press. They saw who was winning. They decided to throw a pit bull into the arena. And most are now happy they did.

Trump is certainly no old-fashioned "conservative" model. But I find that most of the claims of him being misogynous, racist, anti-Semitic, stupid, mean, lacking direction, in short--a mess, are either exaggerated or untrue. The left which once loved him as one of their own have turned loose every means at their command to bring him down. Because, in my opinion, he is an existential threat, if he succeeds, to who they are, what they have politically built, and what they are/were on the verge of establishing as their version of, to use one of their favorite phrases, "who we are."

Comparing, say, LBJ relative to his time to Trump relative to our time, I would say that LBJ was far more the outlier of the culture of his time than Trump is. And LBJ was a far more crass, sexist, racist, depraved war monger than Trump ever was, even before Trump became President.

And we could probably go throughout U.S. history using your method of comparison and find many Presidents to be far more outliers of the popular culture of their time regarding corruption, morality or depravity, or coarseness and vulgarity than Trump is. But our current Press is far more interested in exposing every nook and cranny of Trump's life that has a taint of some sort of corruption. Probably because it has far more to lose than the media's hey day of the mid to late twentieth century when it was far more influential and was in bed with the Progressive movement, protecting the privacy of their like minded Presidents, that was again sweeping across this country.

That mainstream, Progressive media, is on the verge of becoming an outlier if Trump and his supporters succeed.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

My answer, though, was to Spence's comment as he phrased it. He did frame it as "Never in my life or from what I know of history," and he did say "I was going back a few hundred years." And it seemed that he was passionate about it and that it was a really important thing to consider and comment on.

Your approach is more astute and interesting. And worth a discussion rather than a snide or sarcastic retort.

As for Trump's temperament compared to the popular culture of our time, I'd say that Trump fits the temperament of our popular culture very well. That may be one of the major reasons he got elected. We live in a brash, in your face time. Check out our current popular music compared to that of the 18th and 19th century or even that of the first 60 years of the 20th century.

How about sports. There used to be something called sportsmanship and modesty of one's talent. Athletes up to the mid to latter twentieth century would be astonished to see the self congratulatory hijinks on the field of today's athletes. And how many are guilty of drug abuse and abuse of women.

Our movies and videos are filled with gratuitous violence and casual sex and semi to full nudity, among other things, that pre-1960 movies mostly shunned. Our reality entertainment scene is full of Jerry Springer types. Actually, Trump's reality TV show, The Apprentice (I admit that I found it boring), was a relief from the unstructured and biased hit job shows such as The View.

Our politics is one constant attack on opponents, filled with smears, lies; the mainstream media has gone beyond old-fashioned slanting and become outright advocates and arms of a political party; our divorce rates, unwed births, abortions, destruction of history and its relics, student violence and suppression of speech and diversity on college campuses, etc., etc., etc., etc.

And all that stuff is acceptable to half of the public, or so we are told, by the mainstream media that supports much of it.


If Trump is an outlier of todays contemporary scene, its because he is a reaction against it. "Conservatives" were tired of weak, mealy mouthed Republicans who caved, conceded, and were afraid of negative press. They saw who was winning. They decided to throw a pit bull into the arena. And most are now happy they did.

Trump is certainly no old-fashioned "conservative" model. But I find that most of the claims of him being misogynous, racist, anti-Semitic, stupid, mean, lacking direction, in short--a mess, are either exaggerated or untrue. The left which once loved him as one of their own have turned loose every means at their command to bring him down. Because, in my opinion, he is an existential threat, if he succeeds, to who they are, what they have politically built, and what they are/were on the verge of establishing as their version of, to use one of their favorite phrases, "who we are."

Comparing, say, LBJ relative to his time to Trump relative to our time, I would say that LBJ was far more the outlier of the culture of his time than Trump is. And LBJ was a far more crass, sexist, racist, depraved war monger than Trump ever was, even before Trump became President.

And we could probably go throughout U.S. history using your method of comparison and find many Presidents to be far more outliers of the popular culture of their time regarding corruption, morality or depravity, or coarseness and vulgarity than Trump is. But our current Press is far more interested in exposing every nook and cranny of Trump's life that has a taint of some sort of corruption. Probably because it has far more to lose than the media's hey day of the mid to twentieth century when it was far more influential and was in bed with the Progressive movement, protecting the privacy of their like minded Presidents, that was again sweeping across this country.

That mainstream, Progressive media, is on the verge of becoming an outlier if Trump and his supporters succeed.

Keep believing, many people thought Bernie Madoff was telling the truth also, for twenty years he kept it going.
A small loan of a million dollars in Brooklyn yadayadayada
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Keep believing, many people thought Bernie Madoff was telling the truth also, for twenty years he kept it going.
A small loan of a million dollars in Brooklyn yadayadayada
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Believing in what? That Trump hasn't done some corrupt things in his past BEFORE HE BECAME PRESIDENT unlike so many others who continued their depraved ways after becoming President, even escalating them? Never said that Trump didn't do some despicable things in his life. How does that make him the most depraved President in Spence's lifetime or in the past couple of hundred years. And most of your yadayadayada has not been proven to be true. And he has not been a depraved President, but a hard working one who has accomplished a lot, been keeping his promises, and says stupid stuff.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Believing in what? That Trump hasn't done some corrupt things in his past BEFORE HE BECAME PRESIDENT unlike so many others who continued their depraved ways after becoming President, even escalating them? Never said that Trump didn't due some despicable things in his life. How does that make him the most depraved President in Spence's lifetime or in the past couple of hundred years. And most of your yadayadayada has not been proven to be true. And he has not been a depraved President, but a hard working one who has accomplished a lot, been keeping his promises, and says stupid stuff.

Succession of the north, mid eastern and western states may change your attitude.
If you only care about your “base”
You might lose your funding
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Succession of the north, mid eastern and western states may change your attitude.
If you only care about your “base”
You might lose your funding
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Are we talking about the same thing here?

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Are we talking about the same thing here?

Look at his “rallys” and where they occur, who does he claim as his “base”
Can the flyover states survive without the “evil” Democrats on the coasts?
This is the split that is coming
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Look at his “rallys” and where they occur, who does he claim as his “base”
Can the flyover states survive without the “evil” Democrats on the coasts?
This is the split that is coming
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It feels like you've shifted into hyperdrive and landed in another thread.

[Sea Dangles]

Pete hinges his hopes on conspiracies and any possible divide.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

this seems to have fallen on deaf ears

Justice Stevens said he came to the conclusion reluctantly, changing his mind about Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination after the second round of the judge’s confirmation hearings last week. Judge Kavanaugh’s statements at those hearings, Justice Stevens said, revealed prejudices that would make it impossible for him to do the court’s work, a point he said had been made by prominent commentators.

“They suggest that he has demonstrated a potential bias involving enough potential litigants before the court that he would not be able to perform his full responsibilities,”

I said i never thought what may have happened in highschool should define him and his life's work

But his opening statement clearly exposed what was hidden behind the facade

yet those who complain about “Legislating from the Bench” Judicial activism' have or will seat a justice who will forever be tainted will a partistan Halo he himself revealed to the country and placed proudly on his own head.. go figure

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

this seems to have fallen on deaf ears

No it hasn't. It was very well publicized. Anyone paying attention to mainstream news or other sources is aware of what Stevens said. Which already had been, and was being, said by others before Stevens. The fact he served on the Court does not give him the authority or credentials to say who is fit to serve. That is left up to Congress to decide. He can have his say, but it is just an opinion which repeats that of others. And there are many others who disagree with him.

Justice Stevens said he came to the conclusion reluctantly, changing his mind about Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination after the second round of the judge’s confirmation hearings last week. Judge Kavanaugh’s statements at those hearings, Justice Stevens said, revealed prejudices that would make it impossible for him to do the court’s work, a point he said had been made by prominent commentators.

“They suggest that he has demonstrated a potential bias involving enough potential litigants before the court that he would not be able to perform his full responsibilities,”

I said i never thought what may have happened in highschool should define him and his life's work

But his opening statement clearly exposed what was hidden behind the facade

So he agrees that the BS which the hearing was about should not define K and his life's work. And he had thought that K's life work up till the hearing qualified him to serve.

But he "interpreted" K's opening statement as contradicting his previous life's work, and as the real clue that would define him as a judge. Why K's 12 years of decisions as a Judge on the D.C. Circuit Court does not reveal his "biases," but an accurate statement about what the Dems were doing to him, reveals a bias that never showed itself in his decisions, nor how truth is a bias, is strange.

Now you may quibble as to the veracity of K's opening remarks. But then you may be going against your notion of personal interpretations being a legitimate means of making judicial decisions.

Somehow, you assume that once becoming a judge, it's perfectly fine to interpret what is truth. But for the rest of us, we must depend on an ex judge to tell us what we must think about the veracity of K's remarks. Many of us, including prominent members of the Senate committee, believe that what K said is true. There certainly are no corroborating facts to disprove our belief. The facts mostly favor our opinion. So forgive us for not being persuaded by Stevens' opinion.

yet those who complain about “Legislating from the Bench” Judicial activism' have or will seat a justice who will forever be tainted will a partistan Halo he himself revealed to the country and placed proudly on his own head.. go figure

Negative comments about legislating from the bench by a judge who did his fair share of judicial activism and who has recently called for the repeal of the Second Amendment are not to be taken seriously. Kavanaugh's judicial record and his statements about what a judge is do not foreshadow the kind of Progressive jurisprudence that has existed on the Court for years and is exemplified by the three women and Breyer who are now serving, and who all show a strong bias toward judicial activism. Has Stevens spoken about their fitness for being a SCOTUS Justice? I suspect K will be less partisan than them. I may be wrong, but that is my opinion--regardless of your opinion that Stevens' remarks seem to have fallen on deaf ears.