kavanaugh

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

I'd agree DC has become a good old boy and girl club, where partisan politics rule the day, Flatks comments about him never pulling that for fear of party retribution if he were running again is proof enough. So if he lied and in front of the senate, where he is running for the highest court in the land, you are ok with that series of lies because they all do it. That's a sad commentary on acceptance of what our system has become and being ok with just throwing another lier into the system. Now I'm going to grant you, he has yet to be proven a lyer, but I found her testimony far more believable than his denial.

DC and all other "clubs" are ruled by a dominant or "partisan" faction. Flake has attempted to appear as one not afraid of party retribution by resisting and opposing his own party rulers. He is rumored to be trying to actually head the club and run for President. Beware . . . that Flake is a lean and hungry man.

I'm not OK with any of it. A bunch of liars trying to prove another man a liar is not an attractive scenario to me. Pretending that it is purely about the truth, not about influencing the outcome of the midterms and preventing the possibility of appointing more constitutionalists to the Court is disgusting to me.

I am not going to be tempted to surrender my ultimate goal to a spurious moral argument. Especially not by those whose morality shifts from situation to situation. By those who dismiss their pretended morality when it comes in the way of gaining or maintaining power. Quite frankly, they can shove their phony morality up the dark hole in their lying azz. They've shown that they don't care about either Ford or Kavanaugh. They just care about power, and if it destroys someone in their way, too effin bad.

Those who do not recognize or admit to the depravities that lurk in their own humanity, are not competent to judge others. Those who fervently proclaim that they would not lie to save themselves from destruction are either saints or liars. According to those who wanted the Clinton's to remain in power, Hillary was justified in her lies about her husbands infidelity so that they COULD remain in power.

Unless we are saints, we are all in need of some redemption. Even several saints led dissolute lives before they were canonized. Personally, I would find it nearly impossible to forgive someone who willingly, premeditatively, for selfish reasons, murdered an innocent person. That's up to God, and some politicians.

I do not want to hear from politicians about morality. I even squirm when someone like Pence bathes himself in a halo of moral integrity. I want only one thing from them, and as well from Justices of the Supreme Court. Fidelity to the original text of the Constitution. I certainly don't care what they were like as teenagers, so long as they have abandoned their unacceptable ways and do their constitutional duty.

I'm not going to be cornered or stuffed into a moral box that leads to the destruction of my ultimate goal. I believe that the Founder's Constitution is the most politically moral structure of government ever devised. They did understand the moral depravity that lies somewhere in the depths of human nature. They did understand the extremes of power to which humanity is prone. That is why they constructed a most moderate system of government with its checks and balances and its limitations on government. It is the most equitable dividing line between lawlessness and tyranny.

I refuse to agree to snake in the garden whispers (lies) that say times are better, that people are better, that we can come over to the side that promises the best life if we surrender those supposedly outdated inalienable rights we think we have, to a superior, limitless government that can give us the most usable "rights," that it thinks we require.

You keep trying to persuade me to agree to a selective moral argument which, in my opinion, will further lead to the erosion of freedom. (I would certainly agree to expand my reasoning if you can stand to have that discussion). If you want to try to suck me into agreeing to your version of morality, you can give that a rest now.

[Sea Dangles]

A lot of “what if” going around from the left. Haha
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

A long read by a writer from the Brookings Institute, I would gladly read a considered opinion for why.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...anaugh/571936/

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

A long read by a writer from the Brookings Institute, I would gladly read a considered opinion for why.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...anaugh/571936/

A lot of doubts, uncertainty, and questions there. Sounds like the kind of article you really like. Good for him though. He actually was able to squeak out a decision.

[Pete F.]

Upcoming Supreme Court decision
One precedent at risk concerns the Constitution’s double jeopardy clause, which forbids subsequent prosecutions for the same crimes. The Supreme Court has made one exception, saying that the federal government and the states are independent sovereigns, meaning that the same conduct can be prosecuted separately in state and federal courts.

In 2016, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, called for a fresh look at whether the exception makes sense. “The matter warrants attention in a future case in which a defendant faces successive prosecutions by parts of the whole U.S.A.,” she wrote.

The court will consider the question in Gamble v. United States, No. 17-646.

Its answer may have implications for the legal problems faced by associates of Mr. Trump. Should he pardon them for federal crimes, a Supreme Court ruling narrowing the definition of double jeopardy could complicate attempts by state prosecutors to pursue parallel charges.

[Jim in CT]

big scoop in the new york times today, it’s reported that when in college, Kavanaugh threw ice over someone during a bar fight.

Just how pathetic are these people? What’s next, that he said nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah in kindergarten? is this a joke?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

big scoop in the new york times today, it’s reported that when in college, Kavanaugh threw ice over someone during a bar fight.

Just how pathetic are these people? What’s next, that he said nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah in kindergarten? is this a joke?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I believe what was reported was that he threw ice starting a bar fight.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

big scoop in the new york times today, it’s reported that when in college, Kavanaugh threw ice over someone during a bar fight.

Just how pathetic are these people? What’s next, that he said nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah in kindergarten? is this a joke?

You mean K was actually in a bar fight. And throwing stuff at people. Sounds like the man has some bonifide stones. Respect.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by detbuch

You mean K was actually in a bar fight. And throwing stuff at people. Sounds like the man has some bonifide stones. Respect.

I wish he'd punch Blumenthal in the face.....

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by detbuch

You mean K was actually in a bar fight. And throwing stuff at people. Sounds like the man has some bonifide stones. Respect.

Hiding behind a 6 11, 250 guy? I wouldn't call that having stones.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

Truth be told he was probably a great athlete and in fantastic shape
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Trump mocking Brett Kavanaugh accuser at rally


POTUS character assassination.... where lindsey grahams outrage now?

[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?

[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?"

[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

[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