User Controls
Enough has been said about Kavanaugh to disqualify his appointment
-
2018-10-16 at 12:54 AM UTC
Originally posted by Jυicebox I consider myself an experienced degenerate and I don't know what a devil's triangle is
Are you saying we should disqualify someone for a job because they drank heavily in college? Because everybody does that.
Well no, that would be an excessively reductionist view, as you are destined to hold. The big picture painted for Kavanaugh is of a man of poor moral character.As for boofing, who knows whether he was telling the truth or not? Maybe they called it something else?
Lol. He didn't say "this is what I thought at the time", he literally asserted that that is what he now specifically believed it meant that then.He himself said "Roe vs. Wade" is the law. I don't think it could be overturned even if he wanted to. I guess they could effectively overturn it by passing a law that says "no abortions past 2 weeks" or whatever
Roe v Wade is an SCJ decision, not a law. If the decision is overturned, it is no longer a precedent. It also stands on somewhat tenuous legal ground as a constitutional judgment. In some ways, even liberals might want to overturn Roe v Wade (so there can be a stronger and better founded law or ruling that focuses on bodily autonomy rather than Roe v Wade, which ultimately came down to whether or not the state can tell a doctor how to practice).The rape accusations should not even be considered. The opposing side always accuses anyone they don't like of sexual assault (which is a real shame because by the time this is over, nobody will believe anyone claiming to have been sexually assaulted whether they're telling the truth or not)
Again, not a criminal case and a much stronger case than simply "he said she said". Although it is definitely squirrelly, but there is at least partial truth to elements of the accusation.That said, I don't want a PATRIOT act supporter on the supreme court but I'm clearly the only one on the planet that gives a fuck about that, and, well, we're at the "lesser of two evils" crossroads again
I definitely worry about the future of privacy in the USA but I wouldn't even care if his appointment wasn't utterly and completely, singlemindedly politically motivated towards a singular goal. The entire criteria for the shortlist he was on was "who will probably overturn Roe v Wade?" -
2018-10-16 at 1:07 AM UTC
Originally posted by infinityshock then some obscure whore can make up any accusations she wants to derail such a significant appointment.
no.
Yeah 6 years ago, during the reign of Barack "Prog Negus" Obama, she already launched this 6000 IQ xanatos gambit for when he would be nominated in the future.
There were 25 names on the shortlist, including a woman who was at the top of the list, all of whom were hand picked by the republican party and were so evenly matched for the appointment that the person in charge of drafting the list said "you could throw a dart at it". CBF's allegation also came when Kavanaugh was shortlisted and not nominated. Why this particular guy? Would the dems have thrown lesbian rape allegations at them if the Reps nominated Amy Coney Barrett or Allison Eve were nominated?think about it. high school. high school is irrelevant to anything. even evoking high school should be grounds for dismissal of any accusations. after all that bullshit i literally would still vote for his appointment if one of the pound-me-too whores claimed he fisted her asshole like a juicy sock puppet.
I don't know if you believe in god or some kind of magical human spirit that acausally makes your decisions, but who he used to be is very much a part of who he is, and throughout the course of the hearing (whether you care about CBF or not) has proven himself to be a dumb asshole. -
2018-10-16 at 1:15 AM UTCThe K is on the bench, you lost. Why keep bitching about it? GTFO
-
2018-10-16 at 1:42 AM UTC
-
2018-10-16 at 1:48 AM UTCAnd you are crying for the right reasons? WTF?
-
2018-10-16 at 1:57 AM UTC
Originally posted by Anal Turing Yeah 6 years ago, during the reign of Barack "Prog Negus" Obama, she already launched this 6000 IQ xanatos gambit for when he would be nominated in the future.
There were 25 names on the shortlist, including a woman who was at the top of the list, all of whom were hand picked by the republican party and were so evenly matched for the appointment that the person in charge of drafting the list said "you could throw a dart at it". CBF's allegation also came when Kavanaugh was shortlisted and not nominated. Why this particular guy? Would the dems have thrown lesbian rape allegations at them if the Reps nominated Amy Coney Barrett or Allison Eve were nominated?
I don't know if you believe in god or some kind of magical human spirit that acausally makes your decisions, but who he used to be is very much a part of who he is, and throughout the course of the hearing (whether you care about CBF or not) has proven himself to be a dumb asshole.
you are literally babbling nonsensically. that entire paragraph was completely irrelevant.
regardless...HS lifestyle is essentially irrelevant to 35 years later. -
2018-10-16 at 2:14 AM UTCWe have an indignant man as our president, would you expect any less from his SCOTUS nomination? Sad huh?
All this proved as that “the good ole boys” are still in charge. They’ll die off soon enough👍🏻 -
2018-10-16 at 2:18 AM UTCOT
Even if you throw out the accusations of sexual assault, throw out the drinking (which I think I could overlook); he does not have the temperament or dignity to be a SCOTUS.
But who cares, like Sudo said, the US is going down the shitter, SMDH. -
2018-10-16 at 2:28 AM UTC
Originally posted by Technologist OT
Even if you throw out the accusations of sexual assault, throw out the drinking (which I think I could overlook); he does not have the temperament or dignity to be a SCOTUS.
But who cares, like Sudo said, the US is going down the shitter, SMDH.
Well you are a retard so your words are shit anyway. -
2018-10-16 at 2:31 AM UTC
-
2018-10-16 at 2:40 AM UTCI explained once, not going to 'splain again. Especially not for a meth head.
-
2018-10-16 at 2:41 AM UTCMeth head, bwahahahaha!
Pot head yes👍🏻 -
2018-10-16 at 2:43 AM UTCYou admitted to using meth, NO?
-
2018-10-16 at 2:56 AM UTCWhen on God’s green earth did I say that???? I’ve never even seen the stuff in my life you freak. But hey, you find that post and prove it. You accused it, you find it.
You really are a drunken slob like I’ve heard so many other times.
Hey, you’re an indignant drunk, wanna be SCOTUS? -
2018-10-16 at 3 AM UTCOne of these niggas was threatening to kill himself and you came in like the white knight that you think you are and you spilled your guts, you were hooked on something, meth fits.
-
2018-10-16 at 3:04 AM UTCHe isn't fit because he's not worthy, not for some silly circumstances in his young life. Cuz he is too proud to be honest. A judge of the Highest order has to believe in Honesty, in every single Respect. It's not ever taken, it's given.
He isn't a bad man, is he worthy No. -
2018-10-16 at 3:10 AM UTCWell let’s see, it was in my early 20s when I was addicted, 30 some years ago, so how does that fit with meth? You didn’t know me. Hell you don’t know me now.
I came into this thread and discussed my opinions and the topic. What did you do, call names? All you do in political debates is call names and never EVER rebut anything anyone says.
Can’t even put this in initials, gotta spell it out.........GET THE FUCK OUTTA HERE. -
2018-10-16 at 4:07 AM UTC
Originally posted by Technologist OT
Even if you throw out the accusations of sexual assault, throw out the drinking (which I think I could overlook); he does not have the temperament or dignity to be a SCOTUS.
But who cares, like Sudo said, the US is going down the shitter, SMDH.
hes emotional and act like a woman,
feminists and pro females rights should be proud of having him as their SCJ. -
2018-10-16 at 3:33 PM UTCI wonder what Dr. Ford is up to on this lovely Tuesday lol
-
2018-10-16 at 3:39 PM UTC
