|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On October 05 2018 05:50 KR_4EVR wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2018 05:47 Doodsmack wrote:On October 05 2018 05:31 KR_4EVR wrote:On October 05 2018 05:14 JimmiC wrote:
To people happy that it looks like BK will be appointed. Why should I be happy with that, what is it about him that will make the supreme court better? I was very underwhelmed with his performance at the senate hearings and would love to hear what is great about him.
Dems please refrain from saying why you think the others are excited. I know why you are not. What is great about Kavanaugh: Typical justice is blind. Kavanaugh Justice is many-eyed and many-eared. Typical justice is about which group you belong to. Kavanaugh Justice grants no privileges or demerits based on your group. Typical justice says little with many words. Kavanaugh Justice keeps things simple yet speaks volumes. Typical justice is womanly, emotional, and weak, based on what is desired rather than what one has to work with. Kavanaugh Justice is strong, rational, and manly, seeing what can be done with what is on the table. Read what he wrote about substantive due process. Some of the best legal theory you will ever see fit for the 21st century. The fact that Kavanaugh rules ideas rather than being ruled by them is what makes him qualified. Unlike most people in the legal profession, he is actually capable of crafting his own ideas and not bent by the winds of every passing trend in cultural norms (Kennedy was ruled by ideas rather than a ruler of ideas). The fact that Kavanaugh is independent makes him qualified also. Kavanaugh will do as he pleases. He will not bow to anyone because he has no reason to. His integrity is his strength. He doesn't need approval from others and so is truly an independent judge. Edit: The best thing about Kavanaugh is that he isn't claiming that he can or could save the world or even solve society's most pressing issues. I walked away from the Democrat party not because I hated their platform but because they kept claiming that if only they had absolute power, they could stall climate change, eliminate income inequality, provide perfect healthcare, etc.etc.etc. They literally think they are gods. In Kavanaugh Justice, the law isn't about getting one's rights but about minimizing wrongs. It is a much better view of the world. Are you sure you didnt leave the Democratic party because its womanly, emotional and weak? Those are certainly three traits that, generally speaking, are related. Kavanaugh, on the other hand, demonstrated at his last hearing that he is NOT emotional. Are you joking? Kavanaugh showed emotion in the extreme at the last hearing. But he was not the judge there; he was the prosecutor and Ford the defendant. Edit: I watched over 13 hours of this junk.
He never stopped being a Judge during that process. He was always a Judge and one that tapped into the politics of grievance when questioned by Democratic Senators. Which is why the legal community is turning on him, because is not how judges are supposed to behave.
|
On October 05 2018 05:24 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2018 05:14 JimmiC wrote:
To people happy that it looks like BK will be appointed. Why should I be happy with that, what is it about him that will make the supreme court better? I was very underwhelmed with his performance at the senate hearings and would love to hear what is great about him.
Dems please refrain from saying why you think the others are excited. I know why you are not. if I remember I'll answer later. but quickly, he wasn't my favorite, but after this smear job he must be confirmed. This garbage cannot be rewarded. so in that sense, I will be very happy. and it seems like many agree, the right hasn't been this united in a while. Now, to keep it that way for the next month.
There is no smear job when there's an unprecedented level of professional resistance (e.g. law professors, judges, former justices) against his confirmation.
You just lack the intellectual integrity to see beyond your own pathetic bias.
|
On October 05 2018 05:53 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2018 05:50 On_Slaught wrote:On October 05 2018 05:14 JimmiC wrote:
To people happy that it looks like BK will be appointed. Why should I be happy with that, what is it about him that will make the supreme court better? I was very underwhelmed with his performance at the senate hearings and would love to hear what is great about him.
Dems please refrain from saying why you think the others are excited. I know why you are not. Why should I be unhappy? This whole mess is ultimately a monumental Democratic victory politically. No doubt the process being this political is bad for our democracy, but the wheels have been turning on that for a while now. I'll have more to say on why this is a big win for Democrats when he is actually confirmed Saturday. Also @Justice Stevens... that is a big deal for him to say that. Feels unprecedented. Wouldn't be surprised if O'Connor agrees. BTW that NYT letter is up to over 2,400 law professors signing it. Also unprecedented. Definitely a big "the emperor has no clothes" moment.
Even if 8 billion people hate you, if you have not done wrong, you don't care. That's their problem, their inner hate.
|
On October 05 2018 05:55 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2018 05:24 Introvert wrote:On October 05 2018 05:14 JimmiC wrote:
To people happy that it looks like BK will be appointed. Why should I be happy with that, what is it about him that will make the supreme court better? I was very underwhelmed with his performance at the senate hearings and would love to hear what is great about him.
Dems please refrain from saying why you think the others are excited. I know why you are not. if I remember I'll answer later. but quickly, he wasn't my favorite, but after this smear job he must be confirmed. This garbage cannot be rewarded. so in that sense, I will be very happy. and it seems like many agree, the right hasn't been this united in a while. Now, to keep it that way for the next month. There is no smear job when there's an unprecedented level of professional resistance (e.g. law professors, judges, former justices) against his confirmation. You just lack the intellectual integrity to see beyond your own pathetic bias.
By your logic the Jews sent to the concentration camps had no right to complain about being abused because the universities had already certified that Jews were an inferior race.
If anything, running against resistance is probably the indicator that you are doing the right thing, swimming against the current. Only dead fish go with the flow.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On October 05 2018 05:56 KR_4EVR wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2018 05:53 farvacola wrote:On October 05 2018 05:50 On_Slaught wrote:On October 05 2018 05:14 JimmiC wrote:
To people happy that it looks like BK will be appointed. Why should I be happy with that, what is it about him that will make the supreme court better? I was very underwhelmed with his performance at the senate hearings and would love to hear what is great about him.
Dems please refrain from saying why you think the others are excited. I know why you are not. Why should I be unhappy? This whole mess is ultimately a monumental Democratic victory politically. No doubt the process being this political is bad for our democracy, but the wheels have been turning on that for a while now. I'll have more to say on why this is a big win for Democrats when he is actually confirmed Saturday. Also @Justice Stevens... that is a big deal for him to say that. Feels unprecedented. Wouldn't be surprised if O'Connor agrees. BTW that NYT letter is up to over 2,400 law professors signing it. Also unprecedented. Definitely a big "the emperor has no clothes" moment. Even if 8 billion people hate you, if you have not done wrong, you don't care. That's their problem, their inner hate.
If 8 billion people hate you, you're probably an asshole
|
|
|
On October 05 2018 05:58 IyMoon wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2018 05:56 KR_4EVR wrote:On October 05 2018 05:53 farvacola wrote:On October 05 2018 05:50 On_Slaught wrote:On October 05 2018 05:14 JimmiC wrote:
To people happy that it looks like BK will be appointed. Why should I be happy with that, what is it about him that will make the supreme court better? I was very underwhelmed with his performance at the senate hearings and would love to hear what is great about him.
Dems please refrain from saying why you think the others are excited. I know why you are not. Why should I be unhappy? This whole mess is ultimately a monumental Democratic victory politically. No doubt the process being this political is bad for our democracy, but the wheels have been turning on that for a while now. I'll have more to say on why this is a big win for Democrats when he is actually confirmed Saturday. Also @Justice Stevens... that is a big deal for him to say that. Feels unprecedented. Wouldn't be surprised if O'Connor agrees. BTW that NYT letter is up to over 2,400 law professors signing it. Also unprecedented. Definitely a big "the emperor has no clothes" moment. Even if 8 billion people hate you, if you have not done wrong, you don't care. That's their problem, their inner hate. If 8 billion people hate you, you're probably an asshole
There is no 'probably'. You either are or aren't. It doesn't matter what you or anyone else thinks, the fact that you are or the fact that you aren't is independent of what people think.
|
On October 05 2018 05:58 KR_4EVR wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2018 05:55 Stratos_speAr wrote:On October 05 2018 05:24 Introvert wrote:On October 05 2018 05:14 JimmiC wrote:
To people happy that it looks like BK will be appointed. Why should I be happy with that, what is it about him that will make the supreme court better? I was very underwhelmed with his performance at the senate hearings and would love to hear what is great about him.
Dems please refrain from saying why you think the others are excited. I know why you are not. if I remember I'll answer later. but quickly, he wasn't my favorite, but after this smear job he must be confirmed. This garbage cannot be rewarded. so in that sense, I will be very happy. and it seems like many agree, the right hasn't been this united in a while. Now, to keep it that way for the next month. There is no smear job when there's an unprecedented level of professional resistance (e.g. law professors, judges, former justices) against his confirmation. You just lack the intellectual integrity to see beyond your own pathetic bias. By your logic the Jews sent to the concentration camps had no right to complain about being abused because the universities had already certified that Jews were an inferior race.
Law professors and former supreme court justices are the Nazi party now? Sure you don’t want to rethink this very bad argument?
|
On October 05 2018 06:01 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2018 05:58 KR_4EVR wrote:On October 05 2018 05:55 Stratos_speAr wrote:On October 05 2018 05:24 Introvert wrote:On October 05 2018 05:14 JimmiC wrote:
To people happy that it looks like BK will be appointed. Why should I be happy with that, what is it about him that will make the supreme court better? I was very underwhelmed with his performance at the senate hearings and would love to hear what is great about him.
Dems please refrain from saying why you think the others are excited. I know why you are not. if I remember I'll answer later. but quickly, he wasn't my favorite, but after this smear job he must be confirmed. This garbage cannot be rewarded. so in that sense, I will be very happy. and it seems like many agree, the right hasn't been this united in a while. Now, to keep it that way for the next month. There is no smear job when there's an unprecedented level of professional resistance (e.g. law professors, judges, former justices) against his confirmation. You just lack the intellectual integrity to see beyond your own pathetic bias. By your logic the Jews sent to the concentration camps had no right to complain about being abused because the universities had already certified that Jews were an inferior race. Law professors and former supreme court justices are the Nazi party now? Sure you don’t want to rethink this very bad argument?
Let me rephrase things so we speak a less charged language. The original claim made was along the lines of: Since party A was maligned by party B AND party C also maligned party A, that absolves party B of maligning party A even if only party C is credible and party A isn't. I'm saying that's bogus. Each allegation needs to be dealt with on its own terms. Two half-credible objections do not add to a credible objection.
|
On October 05 2018 06:04 KR_4EVR wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2018 06:01 Plansix wrote:On October 05 2018 05:58 KR_4EVR wrote:On October 05 2018 05:55 Stratos_speAr wrote:On October 05 2018 05:24 Introvert wrote:On October 05 2018 05:14 JimmiC wrote:
To people happy that it looks like BK will be appointed. Why should I be happy with that, what is it about him that will make the supreme court better? I was very underwhelmed with his performance at the senate hearings and would love to hear what is great about him.
Dems please refrain from saying why you think the others are excited. I know why you are not. if I remember I'll answer later. but quickly, he wasn't my favorite, but after this smear job he must be confirmed. This garbage cannot be rewarded. so in that sense, I will be very happy. and it seems like many agree, the right hasn't been this united in a while. Now, to keep it that way for the next month. There is no smear job when there's an unprecedented level of professional resistance (e.g. law professors, judges, former justices) against his confirmation. You just lack the intellectual integrity to see beyond your own pathetic bias. By your logic the Jews sent to the concentration camps had no right to complain about being abused because the universities had already certified that Jews were an inferior race. Law professors and former supreme court justices are the Nazi party now? Sure you don’t want to rethink this very bad argument? Let me rephrase things so we speak a less charged language. The original claim made was along the lines of: Since party A was maligned by party B AND party C also maligned party A, that absolves party B of maligning party A even if only party C is credible and party A isn't. I'm saying that's bogus. Each allegation needs to be dealt with on its own terms. Two half-credible objections do not add to a credible objection. There is only 1 objection needed and that stands entirely on its own.
Kavanaugh acted unbefitting of a SC judge.
The end.
|
|
|
On October 05 2018 06:06 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2018 06:04 KR_4EVR wrote:On October 05 2018 06:01 Plansix wrote:On October 05 2018 05:58 KR_4EVR wrote:On October 05 2018 05:55 Stratos_speAr wrote:On October 05 2018 05:24 Introvert wrote:On October 05 2018 05:14 JimmiC wrote:
To people happy that it looks like BK will be appointed. Why should I be happy with that, what is it about him that will make the supreme court better? I was very underwhelmed with his performance at the senate hearings and would love to hear what is great about him.
Dems please refrain from saying why you think the others are excited. I know why you are not. if I remember I'll answer later. but quickly, he wasn't my favorite, but after this smear job he must be confirmed. This garbage cannot be rewarded. so in that sense, I will be very happy. and it seems like many agree, the right hasn't been this united in a while. Now, to keep it that way for the next month. There is no smear job when there's an unprecedented level of professional resistance (e.g. law professors, judges, former justices) against his confirmation. You just lack the intellectual integrity to see beyond your own pathetic bias. By your logic the Jews sent to the concentration camps had no right to complain about being abused because the universities had already certified that Jews were an inferior race. Law professors and former supreme court justices are the Nazi party now? Sure you don’t want to rethink this very bad argument? Let me rephrase things so we speak a less charged language. The original claim made was along the lines of: Since party A was maligned by party B AND party C also maligned party A, that absolves party B of maligning party A even if only party C is credible and party A isn't. I'm saying that's bogus. Each allegation needs to be dealt with on its own terms. Two half-credible objections do not add to a credible objection. There is only 1 objection needed and that stands entirely on its own. Kavanaugh acted unbefitting of a SC judge. The end.
Say someone shows up at your job and pours acid on you. You start screaming and make a mess until you have cleaned it up. Is anyone going to fire you just because "regular employees do not behave in such an untidy manner". ? No.
|
On October 05 2018 06:10 KR_4EVR wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2018 06:06 Gorsameth wrote:On October 05 2018 06:04 KR_4EVR wrote:On October 05 2018 06:01 Plansix wrote:On October 05 2018 05:58 KR_4EVR wrote:On October 05 2018 05:55 Stratos_speAr wrote:On October 05 2018 05:24 Introvert wrote:On October 05 2018 05:14 JimmiC wrote:
To people happy that it looks like BK will be appointed. Why should I be happy with that, what is it about him that will make the supreme court better? I was very underwhelmed with his performance at the senate hearings and would love to hear what is great about him.
Dems please refrain from saying why you think the others are excited. I know why you are not. if I remember I'll answer later. but quickly, he wasn't my favorite, but after this smear job he must be confirmed. This garbage cannot be rewarded. so in that sense, I will be very happy. and it seems like many agree, the right hasn't been this united in a while. Now, to keep it that way for the next month. There is no smear job when there's an unprecedented level of professional resistance (e.g. law professors, judges, former justices) against his confirmation. You just lack the intellectual integrity to see beyond your own pathetic bias. By your logic the Jews sent to the concentration camps had no right to complain about being abused because the universities had already certified that Jews were an inferior race. Law professors and former supreme court justices are the Nazi party now? Sure you don’t want to rethink this very bad argument? Let me rephrase things so we speak a less charged language. The original claim made was along the lines of: Since party A was maligned by party B AND party C also maligned party A, that absolves party B of maligning party A even if only party C is credible and party A isn't. I'm saying that's bogus. Each allegation needs to be dealt with on its own terms. Two half-credible objections do not add to a credible objection. There is only 1 objection needed and that stands entirely on its own. Kavanaugh acted unbefitting of a SC judge. The end. Say someone shows up at your job and pours acid on you. You start screaming and make a mess until you have cleaned it up. Is anyone going to fire you just because "regular employees do not behave in such an untidy manner". ? No. Bad example since Kavanaugh was not physically assaulted during the hearing.
Wanne try again?
|
On October 05 2018 06:10 KR_4EVR wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2018 06:06 Gorsameth wrote:On October 05 2018 06:04 KR_4EVR wrote:On October 05 2018 06:01 Plansix wrote:On October 05 2018 05:58 KR_4EVR wrote:On October 05 2018 05:55 Stratos_speAr wrote:On October 05 2018 05:24 Introvert wrote:On October 05 2018 05:14 JimmiC wrote:
To people happy that it looks like BK will be appointed. Why should I be happy with that, what is it about him that will make the supreme court better? I was very underwhelmed with his performance at the senate hearings and would love to hear what is great about him.
Dems please refrain from saying why you think the others are excited. I know why you are not. if I remember I'll answer later. but quickly, he wasn't my favorite, but after this smear job he must be confirmed. This garbage cannot be rewarded. so in that sense, I will be very happy. and it seems like many agree, the right hasn't been this united in a while. Now, to keep it that way for the next month. There is no smear job when there's an unprecedented level of professional resistance (e.g. law professors, judges, former justices) against his confirmation. You just lack the intellectual integrity to see beyond your own pathetic bias. By your logic the Jews sent to the concentration camps had no right to complain about being abused because the universities had already certified that Jews were an inferior race. Law professors and former supreme court justices are the Nazi party now? Sure you don’t want to rethink this very bad argument? Let me rephrase things so we speak a less charged language. The original claim made was along the lines of: Since party A was maligned by party B AND party C also maligned party A, that absolves party B of maligning party A even if only party C is credible and party A isn't. I'm saying that's bogus. Each allegation needs to be dealt with on its own terms. Two half-credible objections do not add to a credible objection. There is only 1 objection needed and that stands entirely on its own. Kavanaugh acted unbefitting of a SC judge. The end. Say someone shows up at your job and pours acid on you. You start screaming and make a mess until you have cleaned it up. Is anyone going to fire you just because "regular employees do not behave in such an untidy manner". ? No.
Is Kavanaugh the acid in this one? Or is the senate the acid? This are all really bad, so its kinda hard to tell what point you are trying to make.
Edit: Ok, fun is over. Nature took its course and the hammer found him as god intended.
|
|
|
On October 05 2018 06:14 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2018 06:10 KR_4EVR wrote:On October 05 2018 06:06 Gorsameth wrote:On October 05 2018 06:04 KR_4EVR wrote:On October 05 2018 06:01 Plansix wrote:On October 05 2018 05:58 KR_4EVR wrote:On October 05 2018 05:55 Stratos_speAr wrote:On October 05 2018 05:24 Introvert wrote:On October 05 2018 05:14 JimmiC wrote:
To people happy that it looks like BK will be appointed. Why should I be happy with that, what is it about him that will make the supreme court better? I was very underwhelmed with his performance at the senate hearings and would love to hear what is great about him.
Dems please refrain from saying why you think the others are excited. I know why you are not. if I remember I'll answer later. but quickly, he wasn't my favorite, but after this smear job he must be confirmed. This garbage cannot be rewarded. so in that sense, I will be very happy. and it seems like many agree, the right hasn't been this united in a while. Now, to keep it that way for the next month. There is no smear job when there's an unprecedented level of professional resistance (e.g. law professors, judges, former justices) against his confirmation. You just lack the intellectual integrity to see beyond your own pathetic bias. By your logic the Jews sent to the concentration camps had no right to complain about being abused because the universities had already certified that Jews were an inferior race. Law professors and former supreme court justices are the Nazi party now? Sure you don’t want to rethink this very bad argument? Let me rephrase things so we speak a less charged language. The original claim made was along the lines of: Since party A was maligned by party B AND party C also maligned party A, that absolves party B of maligning party A even if only party C is credible and party A isn't. I'm saying that's bogus. Each allegation needs to be dealt with on its own terms. Two half-credible objections do not add to a credible objection. There is only 1 objection needed and that stands entirely on its own. Kavanaugh acted unbefitting of a SC judge. The end. Say someone shows up at your job and pours acid on you. You start screaming and make a mess until you have cleaned it up. Is anyone going to fire you just because "regular employees do not behave in such an untidy manner". ? No. Say you work in Customer Service at a Car dealerships and someone comes in and yells at you, you yell back at them and when they ask if you have ever fixed a car before you say "have you ever fixed a car before?" You then snarl and talk down to them. Would you lose your job? Edit: since he got banned I'll answer for him. Yes you would get fired.
I feel like the insane goalpost moving has somehow made this about whether Kav is a convicted rapist, rather than "did his interview go well?"
|
United States44201 Posts
On October 05 2018 01:39 farvacola wrote:
Yeah he's gonna get confirmed, now we just gotta figure out the next step.
Second amendment folks could step up and prevent it, as advised by President Trump as a way to prevent the SCOTUS being packed.
|
|
|
On October 05 2018 04:08 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2018 03:57 Nouar wrote:On October 05 2018 02:04 Mohdoo wrote:On October 05 2018 01:54 farvacola wrote:
Ben Sasse just publicly stated that he urged Trump to choose someone other than Kav, not sure what to make of that. Every single piece of backlash goes down the toilet if they just use Barrett. It is still so bizarre to me that it needs to be Kavanaugh. There has still not been a single person on this forum to explain why it needs to be Kavanaugh. I read somewhere that Kennedy himself only got out with the promise that Kav would be the nominee. Don't remember on which website the article was, since I'm reading from a dozen. It is one of the many mysteries of this nomination process. Like why would they pick a Federal Judge that was never a trial judge, worked with Ken Star and the Bush White House? Of all the judges, why pick the one that is as close to a partisan operative as anyone could find?
I'm not sure if he recanted or refrased his current opinion during the nomination process, but he did say in 2009 that he thinks the president should not be able to be indicted and immune to criminal prosecution and investigations while in office . Given the current situation that could be enticing for certain people.
https://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2018/07/11/brett-kavanaugh-president-indicted-709641
|
The part the bogels the mind is that the Senators think this report is going to remain private or the public will accept it. Especially with the cloud of the White House’s “list of witnesses” hanging over the process. But whatever, if the GOP wants to throw more fuel on the fire, go for it.
Also funny: when party leadership fails to check your calendar before scheduling a critical vote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
