It's a crying shame he'll be on the court for a lifetime. I don't think he's fair minded at all but not many republicans are. They aren't even treating this as a fair process, if he doesn't have anything to hide and he's proud of his work then release all of his records. Release his finances too with an explanation of how his debt was paid off.

One of the dead Parkland student's father tried to talk to him and the judge turned his back on him and wanted him kicked out of the hearings. The father was invited to be there.

Is that a fair representation? I know he is a Trump appointed nomination for the Supreme Court and that makes him persona non-grata. But looking at it dispassionately. The hearing was a "little" more chaotic than previous hearings and there were protests and interruptions and carrying on and to the point his young children were sent out. He was probably on his way out and feeling a little frazzled and confused by the spectacle put on by the Democrats and Liberal protesters and making his way out to see his children.

Suddenly some dude he doesn't know is thrusting his hand out and saying something to him. He doesn't know who he is and what he wants but he is on his way out to see his children and he suspects the guy is making some play at him in line with the various performance of the hearing.

However, if anyone was to wish to confuse a VERY understandable confusion and wish to withdraw from the grueling spectacle without further hold ups then it would be easy to do this. Replace a confused and disagreeable face with a sneer, withdrawing from the court as ignoring people who foisted themselves on him and not comprehending or understanding something thrown at him left field as ignoring a poor Father because he is mean.

I just don't think it is an honest way to look at him.

If you think he is pro-guns, anti-abortion and/or a Constitutional purist, you'd probably be right. I think there is plenty a person could reasonably be unhappy with him about But this? I honestly do not believe he did a damn thing wrong.

I can understand why the left hates him so much, he's not a liberal. That's it and all that needs to be said.

It's not true that everyone on the left (or the right) 'hates' people with whom they fundamentally disagree ideologically or politically. That's a bias-driven false assertion which devalues diversity, discourages healthy debate, and minimizes everyone who doesn't agree with you.

There are plenty of U.S. citizens and some elected representatives who prefer to evaluate people and issues holistically on a case-by-case basis (though that does seem less common these days).

The majority of the country supports Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to choose, including some people who would never elect to have an abortion themselves. The majority of the country also believes that no one is above the law at anytime, including the President.

I think it's important that Kavanaugh's positions and judgments on those key issues are being questioned by the Republican, Democrat and Independent senators in a public forum before voting on whether he'll be sitting on the highest court in the country for life.

Having said that, I suspect that all the Republican senators will vote in favor of Kavanaugh and almost all the Democrat senators will vote against him. The Republicans have the numbers and he'll ultimately be confirmed. But, for me, that doesn't render the pre-vote vetting and debate meaningless.

He does have another thing that makes the left mad and sweaty. Trump nominated him. The very day he did that the left was out to stop the nomination process, not just debate the nomination.

(09-05-2018, 10:43 AM)Maggot Wrote: I can understand why the left hates him so much, he's not a liberal. That's it and all that needs to be said.

Please stop saying that about me. I don't hate him. Have you heard me express that about him? I don't hate people simply because I don't agree with them.

(09-05-2018, 12:13 PM)Maggot Wrote: He does have another thing that makes the left mad and sweaty. Trump nominated him. The very day he did that the left was out to stop the nomination process, not just debate the nomination.

Maggot, 'the right' refused to even consider Obama's nominee to fill Scalia's seat and left it empty for over a year because they wanted to be able to appoint a conservative judge if a Republican was elected President.  

The Republicans had the Senate majority and thus the ability to successfully obstruct the process for political gain.  That obstruction began before Trump was even the Republican nominee for President.

I don't agree that Democrat Senators 'hate' or oppose Kavanaugh because they 'hate' or oppose Trump.  I think they'd be challenging any very conservative judge nominated by any President because the people who elected the Democrat Senators are not very conservative and don't want to see the country headed further in that direction.

However, I do believe that the Democrat Senators are likely more aggressive in their opposition to this conservative nominee than they would have been  in the past because of McConnell's total disrespect and obstruction in regards to considering Obama's rightful pick.

(09-05-2018, 12:26 PM)Duchess Wrote:

(09-05-2018, 10:43 AM)Maggot Wrote: I can understand why the left hates him so much, he's not a liberal. That's it and all that needs to be said.

Please stop saying that about me. I don't hate him. Have you heard me express that about him? I don't hate people simply because I don't agree with them.

Yeah, but I bet you're "mad and sweaty" alright!!!  ')

That was last night when I cut the grass around the pool. I was sweatin' like a horse but today I'm so glad I did because I have a couple days off and I don't want to work at anything, I want to be a slug.  

(09-05-2018, 12:41 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote:

(09-05-2018, 12:26 PM)Duchess Wrote:

(09-05-2018, 10:43 AM)Maggot Wrote: I can understand why the left hates him so much, he's not a liberal. That's it and all that needs to be said.

Please stop saying that about me. I don't hate him. Have you heard me express that about him? I don't hate people simply because I don't agree with them.

Yeah, but I bet you're "mad and sweaty" alright!!!  ')

i did not mean to "weaponize" or "pounce" on the left. 

He doesn't want to answer her, he wants to lie. Cocksucka! Draaaaag him.

I saw that and all I saw was him thinking "I dunno? Did I? Come up with a name and I will confirm it" How the Hell would he know? Honestly I have no idea exactly who I have spoken to about Robert Mueller and I am an Australian.

If she had of said did you speak to X or Y about Mueller's investigation, then that is one thing but if she is saying anyone who works there then he HAS to know who works or did work there at particular moment in time that he spoke with them and if his memory fails him like all of ours do..."Gotcha!"

Screw that! I would have said "Possibly, the only way I will know is to see who has been working there since the investigation. Pass that roster up Senator, unless you are just fishing"

(09-06-2018, 07:34 AM)Fry Guy Wrote: I saw that and all I saw was him thinking "I dunno? Did I? Come up with a name and I will confirm it" How the Hell would he know? Honestly I have no idea exactly who I have spoken to about Robert Mueller and I am an Australian.

If she had of said did you speak to X or Y about Mueller's investigation, then that is one thing but if she is saying anyone who works there then he HAS to know who works or did work there at  particular moment in time that he spoke with them and if his memory fails him like all of ours do..."Gotcha!"

Screw that! I would have said "Possibly, the only way I will know is to see who has been working there since the investigation. Pass that roster up Senator, unless you are just fishing"

  Oh stop.

Kavanaugh refuses to talk to the Senate and American people about his views, yet possibly talked to the president's attorney/s about them. He spent hours talking about things that happened years ago yet expresses confusion about things that have happened in the last year or two.

Not really.

"Did you speak to anyone at X firm?"

"Who is at X firm?"

"Can't tell you, its a secret only I know."

"Well that is fucking stupid then Kamala. I am not going to know who worked at x firm at any point in time over the last years. It would strain credulity for ANYONE to know where all of the people in their profession work over the 2 year period and you know that Senator Harris. However IF you can give me names I can search my mind for any individual conversations I had with selected individuals and THAT is a reasonable question."

"Doesn't matter then. I was just grandstanding. I did not have anyone in particular in mind. I just wanted to ask loaded questions to make you look bad. Let me get right back to interruptions of your hearing"

...but that's not how it went down, FG. He didn't have to recall something that took place years ago, he only had to recall who he had spoken to there since Special Counsel Mueller began the investigation.

No he did not have to "recall who he had spoken to there since Special Counsel Mueller began the investigation", he had to "recall who he had spoken to there since Special Counsel Mueller began the investigation" WHILST also being cognizant of who had worked for a particular company during that time AND be 100% certain in his answer.

What if he remembers fully EVERYONE he said ANYTHING about Mueller to AND EXACTLY what he said to each of them BUT doesn't recognise that a couple of people were or had worked in some capacity at the firm for some period of time?

Would THAT be okay?

Would answering "No" be truthful? Would it be factual? Would it be honest?

Would Senator Harris say "Fair enough, you did not realise so and so worked there.

Is he being shifty, dishonest, obstructionist avoiding that question?

What do you think is reasonable? Again, he may have many reasons to personally dislike him and his policies and not want him confirmed BUT that does not mean that he is being disingenuous in this or he is wrong to not answer definitively.

All "bait" questions. Politicians are good at it and when they get a chance to produce negative press gives them "creed" with the rest of the gang.

Holy shit balls, he did it. Under threat of being ousted from the Senate, Corey Booker just released the confidential documents showing republicans are lying. 

(09-06-2018, 11:10 AM)Duchess Wrote: Holy shit balls, he did it. Under threat of being ousted from the Senate, Corey Booker just released the confidential documents showing republicans are lying. 

"Bring it". 

The Dems sure are putting up a fight, not only in terms of trying to get Kavanaugh to give direct answers on key issues, but also in regards to the unusual 'committee confidential' process used in this case.

There have been some very interesting exchanges during this hearing; wish I could listen to the rest of it.

(09-06-2018, 12:15 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: "Bring it". 

The Dems sure are putting up a fight, not only in terms of trying to get Kavanaugh to give direct answers on key issues, but also in regards to the unusual 'committee confidential' process used in this case.

There have been some very interesting exchanges during this hearing; wish I could listen to the rest of it.

It's been incredible to listen to.

It's about time Democrats have put up a fight. Seriously. They need to make noise to drown out trump's lies and other bullshit, drown out the lying liars who lie for him on a daily basis, be loud and proud. Were you aware that when Democrats had judges up for confirmation they were turning over 99%, 100%, etc. of the nominee's records and yet republicans don't even want to turn over a minute percentage? How is that fair? I'm not asking for anything more than fairness. That's it. And it's too much to ask of the republican party. Such bullshit and plays a big role in why I hold that party in low regard. I don't respect them, not even a little bit. I don't see any of them putting their country before party.