Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 91 to 120 of 161

Thread: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

  1. #91
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    4,936

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    Quote Originally Posted by Mojouw View Post
    In case you don't already know, this sweet beautiful gentleman (Styxhexenhammer666) has held the following beliefs:
    That is what we call an Ad Hominem; you're attacking the guy rather than the message. I don't care what his opinions are on other matters, but he's saying all the things I have to say on this issue but am too lazy to type.

    If you think what he's saying here is incorrect, then by all means raise your objections and we'll discuss them.

    The high points:
    -Antifa and the SJWs are the only people out there committing political violence
    -They believe they are justified in doing so because they are "fighting fascism and stopping the spread of hate"
    -The Dem politicians (Hillary, Holder, Waters, and Booker) are out there actively agitating for more of it
    -They are doing so for purely political gain; they don't truly believe in the sjw cause... Well, except for perhaps Maxine Waters.
    -The Dems are doing this because they have alienated the rust belt voters and can't get them back
    -The far left SJWs will prove a disappointment as a voting bloc and will have to be abandoned
    -There isn't enough room under a single tent for both the corporatist neoliberals *and* the far left SJWs.
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

  2. #92
    Senior Member Array title="Mojouw has a reputation beyond repute"> Mojouw's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Gender
    Posts
    7,808

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27 View Post
    That is what we call an Ad Hominem; you're attacking the guy rather than the message. I don't care what his opinions are on other matters, but he's saying all the things I have to say on this issue but am too lazy to type.

    If you think what he's saying here is incorrect, then by all means raise your objections and we'll discuss them.

    The high points:
    -Antifa and the SJWs are the only people out there committing political violence
    -They believe they are justified in doing so because they are "fighting fascism and stopping the spread of hate"
    -The Dem politicians (Hillary, Holder, Waters, and Booker) are out there actively agitating for more of it
    -They are doing so for purely political gain; they don't truly believe in the sjw cause... Well, except for perhaps Maxine Waters.
    -The Dems are doing this because they have alienated the rust belt voters and can't get them back
    -The far left SJWs will prove a disappointment as a voting bloc and will have to be abandoned
    -There isn't enough room under a single tent for both the corporatist neoliberals *and* the far left SJWs.
    I'm only attacking the guy in that he makes a series of very powerful and fairly large claims and offers little evidence other than his opinion and thoughts to back it up. So he is attempting to make an argument from authority. If that is the case, well he has then opened up a line of questioning regarding his authority. He sets himself up as a subject matter expert. So I attempted to learn more about what the breadth and depth of his expertise is. In doing so I found multiple viewpoints that he holds that run counter to reams of established evidence and facts as well as appear to be partially based on ideologies of hate. I also found no backing to his seemingly self-appointed position as an expert on the inner workings of politics. He claims to have insight into the thought processes and motivations of multiple individuals. How? From what sources does his knowledge and insight stem?

    I see a guy who has only opinions. A deeply thought about opinion and well articulated. But, like all opinions, from a biased set of original assumptions. I thought he might have some pretty prevalent "alt-right" points of view, and that turned out to be indeed the case. I have a hard time taking a self identified biased observer as the final word on the motivations, viewpoints, and actions of the very blocs of people he dislikes. That would be like me trying to claim I know everything about the inner workings of being a Ravens fan.

    I mean Charlottesville was a highly visible data point that it is not just Antifa and SJW's out in the streets doing violence.

    Is it any coincidence that the politcos he identifies by name are mostly African-american? I don't know, but it certainly raises an eyebrow.

    His characterization of SJW's as a unified and coherent movement is more than a little suspect. There is no organized network or group behind that term. the term "SJW" itself was coined by those in opposition to a variety of social protest movements and attitudes as a convenient catch-all term.

    As for "Antifa" - fuck those dudes. I don't claim those assholes anymore than I assume most conservatives claim white supremacy groups.

    In terms of politicians callously manipulating the emotions and beliefs of the populace for their own selfish gains - I would like to welcome you to American politics for about the last 225 years or so. I mean as the man said on Reading Rainbow - take a look its in a book!

    I do think that the DEMS have lost a generation or more of voters in the Rust Belt. That is what happens when you fail to have a plan that people will accept. As for SJW's not being a reliable voting bloc, that is a fairly obvious and silly point. SJWs are typically young people and young people are never reliable voters. Wasn't like hippies swept a ton of folks into power on a consistent basis.

    As for who is conducting political violence, here is what some more reputable sources of information have to say:

    https://qz.com/1182778/the-far-right...lings-in-2017/
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.f07bb417600a

    "their numbers are tiny in relation to the mainstream political left. And, say experts, it's misleading for right-wing groups to suggest that the Antifa are more violent than right-wing extremists." - https://www.npr.org/2017/06/16/53325...iolence-rising

    https://www.thenation.com/article/wh...ical-violence/

    Facts, figures, charts, graphs, interviews with people who study and track this stuff for a living all reach a near universal conclusion - All political violence is wrong. The left side of the American political spectrum engages in less of it.

    But we do have this Youtube hero making sure we all aren't red-pilled to death or whatever. Is this where I post the frog meme?

  3. #93
    Senior Member Array title="AtlantaDan has a reputation beyond repute"> AtlantaDan's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Gender
    Posts
    3,240

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27 View Post

    If you think what he's saying here is incorrect, then by all means raise your objections and we'll discuss them.

    -The Dems are doing this because they have alienated the rust belt voters and can't get them back.
    Glad to post in this thread on an issue other than debating the merits of whether only the left has engaged in deplorable conduct

    The polls missed Trump carrying Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin in 2016

    Trump won those states by 0.2, 0.7 and 0.8 percentage points, respectively — and by 10,704, 46,765 and 22,177 votes. Those three wins gave him 46 electoral votes; if Clinton had done one point better in each state, she'd have won the electoral vote, too.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.7d0ab7aea748

    The polls may be wrong again - but for the upcoming election the Rust Belt does not appear to be the equivalent for the Dems of Mississippi and Louisiana only with a lot more snow


  4. #94
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    4,936

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    https://www.politico.com/story/2017/...nce-fbi-242235

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/20343...017-frank-camp

    https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine...t-left/534192/

    https://www.cnn.com/2017/08/18/us/un...eft/index.html

    If you are unaware of the level of political violence and intimidation is going on right now, I'd strongly suggest getting out more. The electorate is aware of the problem, which is why the Dems have lost all hope of regaining the Senate and are on their way to losing the House as well.

    On the point of the far right being more violent than the far left, I agree with you there. They are *much* more violent. They are also much *less* prevalent and have zero backing/ cover from the press and politicians. Nobody on the right is actively inciting the skinheads and neo-nazis (all 12 of them) to violence. The same cannot be said for Antifa. They're not likely to kill you (like the skinheads), but they are *FAR* more likely to beat you bloody if you dare speak out of turn or attend a public speech where something is being said that they disagree with. They are also *FAR* more likely to go out seeking confrontations in order to silence their opposition and dissuade people from attending speaking events. And they are being encouraged to do so.

    And yeah, you say "I don't claim those assholes" and that's all well and good... but they are nevertheless associated with your cause and are being incited and protected by prominent figures on the left and members of the press. That is a major problem for you whether you personally claim them or not.

    Best,
    -Slashy
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

  5. #95
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    4,936

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    Quote Originally Posted by AtlantaDan View Post
    perhaps we should wait and see what happens next month before concluding Rust Belt voters who voted for Obama but could not stand Hillary in 2016 are a long term lost cause for the Dems
    I'm comfortable saying they are. Not because of the economy, but because the left has been personally insulting them for years as "racist, homophobes, xenophobes, misogynists", etc. The Democrats have actively driven away the very people they needed in order to remain relevant. It didn't help that the economy didn't work for the rust belt voters under Obama and it has improved under Trump and the Republicans, but that's not the main problem. The main problem is that they feel insulted and even hated by the Democrats, and they just plain won't vote for that.

    Best,
    -Slashy
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

  6. #96
    Senior Member Array title="AtlantaDan has a reputation beyond repute"> AtlantaDan's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Gender
    Posts
    3,240

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27 View Post
    I'm comfortable saying they are. Not because of the economy, but because the left has been personally insulting them for years as "racist, homophobes, xenophobes, misogynists", etc. The Democrats have actively driven away the very people they needed in order to remain relevant. It didn't help that the economy didn't work for the rust belt voters under Obama and it has improved under Trump and the Republicans, but that's not the main problem. The main problem is that they feel insulted and even hated by the Democrats, and they just plain won't vote for that.

    Best,
    -Slashy
    Best to you too

  7. #97
    Senior Member Array title="Mojouw has a reputation beyond repute"> Mojouw's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Gender
    Posts
    7,808

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27 View Post
    https://www.politico.com/story/2017/...nce-fbi-242235

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/20343...017-frank-camp

    https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine...t-left/534192/

    https://www.cnn.com/2017/08/18/us/un...eft/index.html

    If you are unaware of the level of political violence and intimidation is going on right now, I'd strongly suggest getting out more. The electorate is aware of the problem, which is why the Dems have lost all hope of regaining the Senate and are on their way to losing the House as well.

    On the point of the far right being more violent than the far left, I agree with you there. They are *much* more violent. They are also much *less* prevalent and have zero backing/ cover from the press and politicians. Nobody on the right is actively inciting the skinheads and neo-nazis (all 12 of them) to violence. The same cannot be said for Antifa. They're not likely to kill you (like the skinheads), but they are *FAR* more likely to beat you bloody if you dare speak out of turn or attend a public speech where something is being said that they disagree with. They are also *FAR* more likely to go out seeking confrontations in order to silence their opposition and dissuade people from attending speaking events. And they are being encouraged to do so.

    And yeah, you say "I don't claim those assholes" and that's all well and good... but they are nevertheless associated with your cause and are being incited and protected by prominent figures on the left and members of the press. That is a major problem for you whether you personally claim them or not.

    Best,
    -Slashy
    Just so I understand. Liberals need to claim and be responsible for Antifa, but the center-right and the right do not need to be responsible for claiming white supremacy/hate groups? All known studies indicate those extremists are greater in number and far more active than Antifa.

    I mean if we are going to have a honest exchange of thoughts and ideas, we can't keep moving the goalposts and applying different standards to each side. So if Hilary Clinton or whoever is responsible for Antifa violence, then who do we hold responsible for extremists on the right, whose violence causes more death and destruction annually in the United States?

    As to inciting violence by extremists, who the heck do you think political figures are talking to when they allude to "blood and soil"? Further, when liberal politicians encourage people to "resist" and "take the streets" they are repeating the messages and ideas of the civil rights protests, gay rights, and other successful social movements. Since Antifa has little to no interest in these issues, it is fairly unlikely that they are even paying attention to American politicians, let alone taking encouragement or instructions from them.

    Finally, you seem to be painting a picture that Antifa is out there on a daily basis beating the hell out of people for not agreeing with them. That is simply not true. They are a loose global alliance of a hodge-podge of political ideologies that lack identifiable leadership or even goals in a discreet sense. They certainly engage in extremist behavior that crosses the line into violence. But I am far less worried about Antifa visiting violence on my town than I am about the possibility of a swarm of locusts.

    Look, Antifa sucks. White hate groups suck. Nazis suck. Idiot college kids suck. Grown ups that troll idiot college kids for a living suck. There is plenty of suck to go around and no one has the market cornered on it.

  8. #98
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    4,936

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    Quote Originally Posted by Mojouw View Post
    Just so I understand. Liberals need to claim and be responsible for Antifa, but the center-right and the right do not need to be responsible for claiming white supremacy/hate groups?
    No. Liberals need to recognize that the Democrats are actively and directly inciting ANTIFA violence while Republicans are NOT actively and directly inciting white supremacy/ hate group violence. Liberals need to loudly and publicly denounce this behavior not just from ANTIFA, but anyone in their party who encourages or protects it. The Democrats need to evict these ANTIFA and SJW types from their ranks and make it clear that they do not condone this sort of violent extremism.

    Finally, you seem to be painting a picture that Antifa is out there on a daily basis beating the hell out of people for not agreeing with them.
    Not literally every day, but probably about once a week or so. There are also a lot of times where the mere threat of their appearance is enough to keep a speaking engagement from happening. I would also point out that the white supremacists/ hate groups are doing this *never*, are encouraged to do this by Republicans *never* and defended by the media *never*.

    I am far less worried about Antifa visiting violence on my town than I am about the possibility of a swarm of locusts.
    What *you* are worried about or not worried about is of little consequence. The average independent voter and former-Dem-turned-Trumpster see it going on and they are turned off like a light switch. What they worry about most assuredly *does* matter to you.

    Best,
    -Slashy
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

  9. #99
    Senior Member Array title="Mojouw has a reputation beyond repute"> Mojouw's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Gender
    Posts
    7,808

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27 View Post
    No. Liberals need to recognize that the Democrats are actively and directly inciting ANTIFA violence while Republicans are NOT actively and directly inciting white supremacy/ hate group violence. Liberals need to loudly and publicly denounce this behavior not just from ANTIFA, but anyone in their party who encourages or protects it. The Democrats need to evict these ANTIFA and SJW types from their ranks and make it clear that they do not condone this sort of violent extremism.


    Not literally every day, but probably about once a week or so. There are also a lot of times where the mere threat of their appearance is enough to keep a speaking engagement from happening. I would also point out that the white supremacists/ hate groups are doing this *never*, are encouraged to do this by Republicans *never* and defended by the media *never*.


    What *you* are worried about or not worried about is of little consequence. The average independent voter and former-Dem-turned-Trumpster see it going on and they are turned off like a light switch. What they worry about most assuredly *does* matter to you.

    Best,
    -Slashy
    All I can say is stay woke my friend. Clearly you and others have tumbled to the central conspiracy of our time.

    Nothing I or anyone else posts is going to move your thoughts on this on iota. We have moved past facts and figures and into another mode of debate that I have very little interest in engaging in.

    You may want to reread or find something on Youtube to watch about Bannon, Miller, and Spencer (as well as others) that have actively encouraged and reached out to white power groups from within the ranks of the GOP.

    But I couldn't find a video of a shirtless guy in a leather jacket talking about it...

  10. #100
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    4,936

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    Quote Originally Posted by Mojouw View Post
    Nothing I or anyone else posts is going to move your thoughts on this on iota. We have moved past facts and figures and into another mode of debate that I have very little interest in engaging in.
    Likewise and fair 'nuff

    *EDIT* I just caught this part:
    Is it any coincidence that the politcos he identifies by name are mostly African-american? I don't know, but it certainly raises an eyebrow.
    Actually, he only mentioned Clinton and Holder. I personally added Booker and Waters. They are named because they're the ones inciting violence. If my addition of two more "African-americans" to the list raises your eyebrow, raise it all you like. I'm black.

    Best,
    -Slashy
    Last edited by GoSlash27; 10-11-2018 at 08:50 PM.
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

  11. #101
    Senior Member Array title="Dwinsgames has a reputation beyond repute"> Dwinsgames's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    in a cave
    Gender
    Posts
    3,006

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    Quote Originally Posted by Mojouw View Post
    You can't be serious. Like this is some elaborate bait and switch. I watched the whole video waiting for the inevitable shirtless nunchuck display or at least some sick katana moves.

    In case you don't already know, this sweet beautiful gentleman (Styxhexenhammer666) has held the following beliefs:

    1. Doesn't have the balls to just deny the Holocaust so he says it was from famine and disease and Zyklon-B was a delousing agent and not a fatal gas.
    2. Has made multiple remarks about some secret or not so secret (it isn't clear) group of Jews running the world. Then when asked about it, denies it.
    3. Appears to harbor some serious issues with Muslims.
    4. Supported Apartheid and branded Nelson Mandela a terrorist.
    5. His views on human origins and evolution are in direct opposition of all the facts and and highly racist. His views on race in general are repulsive.
    6. His rejection of climate change is simply ignorant.
    7. His views on women aren't so great either.
    8. He denies great swaths of mental illness as some sort of made up fantasy we are all indulging in.
    9. The number of complex and odd conspiracies he believes in are eyebrow raising.

    Does that mean he can't say his piece on the internet or anywhere else? Of course not! He should be able to shout his views from the roof-tops to anyone who will listen. But this cat is a fairly poor choice to buttress great claims with. As someone way smarter than me once said "Fantastic claims require fantastic evidence". We have the claim that liberals are taking violence to the streets in a manner not seen since the brownshirts invaded the beer halls of Munich. I'm going to need to see more empirical evidence from sources of greater veracity than an admittedly biased alt-right Youtube star.

    Because here is an actual news story that says the liberals are being super violent -- http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/o...718-story.html

    Here is another that says much of it could be exaggerated: https://www.sbs.com.au/news/the-feed...olent-liberals

    Those are accounts of actual things that happened filtered through far less layers of bias than the Youtube dude.
    look I am not trying to fight ( and won't ) that said ....

    people are being censored ( ask Alex tinfoil Jones )

    as far as " the news" meh I refuse to watch anymore as they seem to think nobody can get along when the truth is its not nearly as bad as they make it out to be in terms of race etc ... go talk to people in your neighborhood see if they act like or try to kill you ( my money is on they will treat you are good or poorly as you treat them ) unless you live in a gang infested area such as Chicago or LA or ( insert other metropolitan city here ) but MOST places people are people like you and me we OFTEN do not agree but I do not want to punch you out or shoot you ....the media would have us trying to murder one another when all we are doing is having a discussion
    Follow me on Twitter @Dwinsgames

  12. #102
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    4,936

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    MOST places people are people like you and me we OFTEN do not agree but I do not want to punch you out or shoot you ....the media would have us trying to murder one another when all we are doing is having a discussion
    I agree with this although there are some exceptions. The danger is that the mere act of having civil discussions and debate is becoming akin to "giving a platform to fascists" or "enabling hate speech".

    Free speech is a *good* thing, even when we disagree with what's being said. It allows people to talk out their differences and vent social pressures in ways other than violence. It allows people to find common ground and bond, or perhaps maybe learn a new point of view. At the very least, it allows us to identify who the out 'n proud hateful idiots are so we know who to avoid.

    These days, attempting to engage in public discourse is liable to get you assaulted or cost you your job and reputation. And it's a shame, 'cuz most people are decent to one another and don't actually disagree much in general. That willingness to silence differing viewpoints because they're harmful or dangerous? That doesn't come from a place of moral superiority, but rather fear. Fear that you can't convince people that you have a better way, fear that your arguments aren't persuasive enough.

    I am confident enough in my knowledge and reason to welcome anyone to promote whatever view they hold and debate them in a civil manner. I don't feel the need to silence them.

    Best,
    -Slashy
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

  13. #103

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27 View Post
    I'm black.
    Best,
    -Slashy
    Hmm. Well, I learned something today. How long have we been on these forums together?
    Quote Originally Posted by AtlantaDan View Post
    You and I appear to be in agreement that both the Dems and GOP have been playing "hold my beer" with regard to can it get any worse tactics since at least the mid-90s for political disputes other than judicial nominations.

    With regard to the final and complete politicizing of Supreme Court and other federal judicial nominations, that process goes back to at least the Robert Bork hearings in 1987, with stops along the way for the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings, both parties engaging in increased use of the filibuster and cloture to block lower court judicial nominations, Merrick Garland not even receiving a hearing, and now the Kavanaugh fiasco

    I do not even know what the Dems intended to achieve by their last minute outing of Dr Ford that arguably would have been better executed as a hit job if the addled Senator Feinstein had not failed to even tell the other Dem Senators about Dr Ford until late in the hearing process, other than revving up their base for the midterms through Dr. Ford's testimony just as the GOP has energized its base by Kavanaugh becoming the poster Justice for the excesses of the #MeToo movement. There was another equally conservative GOP nominee certified by the Federalist Society in the pipeline who would have been confirmed no later than a lame duck session after the midterms if Kavanaugh would not have made it

    But as far as the complete politicization of the federal judiciary in general and the Supreme Court in particular, that ship sailed before the Kavanaugh hearings, and both parties have hastened it, just as the excesses of both sides have accelerated political acrimony across the board. I am not directing this last comment at you, but blaming only one side for the current situation is nothing more than a partisan talking point.
    Hmm,

    The interesting thing is, Bork, Thomas, and Kavanaugh were all put forward by Republicans and the Democrats politicized it. While I cringed at what happened with Merrick, the GOP didn't go after him and try to discredit him with horrible accusations, and that after playing politics. Moreover, they only played on the filibuster of the democrats who refused to give several hearings to justices of lower courts because they didn't like the fact the justices were conservatives. As for the SC, RBG received only 3 no votes. Breyer received only 9 no votes.

    Now, when Bush was elected, he put forward nominees. Roberts was confirmed with 22 votes against him, and he was probably one of the strongest candidates to stand before the committee in a generation. Then, there was Samuel Alito, whose nomination was filibustered by John Kerry, Barack Obama, Joseph Biden, Hillary Clinton, Charles Schumer, and Harry Reid... in other words, by the leadership of the Democratic party. Alito was confirmed with 42 no votes

    There's the first real politicizing of the process. So, when Obama, who was one of the filibusters for Alito put forward candidates, Sotomayer received 31 no votes, 11 less that Alito, and she had made several comments in several speeches that were deemed racist. Then, there was Kagan, who was confirmed with 37 no votes.

    That brings us back to the here and now. While we had this tit-for-tat in some ways, the Dems turned it into a tire-fire this go-around. Yes, I would say part of it was anger at not having Merrick on the court. But, even that move was simply about the court itself. What the Dems did, IMO, was about using the Supreme court and manipulating what really should be a 6-hour "Does this person have the wherewithal to be on the court" process into a much extended proces for the purpose of rallying their base for midterms.

    In other words, they got in the middle of the actual process and blew it up from the inside for election reasons. That's the new move that really pissed me off on this side of things.

    The other side, which isn't democrats in particular, is the narrative that a woman accusing a man should immediately be believed and the man discredited unless he can prove otherwise. That narrative is being pushed in several places like HuffPost. However, again, that's an aside to our discussion here.


    ------ On the rest of your post about tit-for-tat concerning what the two parties have done through the years, we are definitely in agreement. I just see what happened here as a real upping of the stakes, and in a different field all together than the move the GOP made upping the stakes by taking a Dem move of not giving hearings and elevating it to the SC level until after an election.
    “Life is a series of decisions you make that add up to your reputation. Do the right thing.”
    —Dan Rooney (1932-2017)

  14. #104
    Senior Member Array title="AtlantaDan has a reputation beyond repute"> AtlantaDan's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Gender
    Posts
    3,240

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    Quote Originally Posted by Craic View Post
    Hmm,

    The interesting thing is, Bork, Thomas, and Kavanaugh were all put forward by Republicans and the Democrats politicized it. While I cringed at what happened with Merrick, the GOP didn't go after him and try to discredit him with horrible accusations, and that after playing politics.
    Thanks for the thoughtful post.

    Just wanted to respond briefly on a few points.

    With regard to the Thomas hearings, when Anita Hill came forward regarding her allegations that Justice Thomas had engaged in reprehensible behavior, as a supervisor as an adult rather than in high school, I was referring at least as much to the GOP attack machine going after Ms. Hill to save the nomination as I was to the Dem controlled Senate ultimately voting to confirm after those opposed to the Thomas nomination used Hill's allegations to try to stop it. Where someone comes down on the outcome of the Thomas hearings rests for me on whether you believed Anita Hill or Clarence Thomas, who not only engaged in disqualifying behavior as the head of a federal agency but lied under oath if you believe Ms. Hill. With regard to that assessment, which might be different today with current attitudes on sexual harassment than it was in 1991, political/ideological affiliation obviously is a factor just like making your way through life's experiences as a white guy raised in the suburbs (FWIW I grew up in Upper St Clair in the South Hills of Pittsburgh) as opposed to a woman raised in similar circumstances or a non-white person from a less privileged economic background (such as Justices Thomas and Sotomayor) impacts perspectives on issues.

    As far as the GOP not going after Merrick Garland, you do not have to try to discredit a nominee if you do not even want to run the risk of the nominee getting an opportunity to establish his qualifications at a hearing. That was nothing but an exercise of playing raw power politics to hold a Supreme Court vacancy open in case the GOP won the Presidential election. To confirm what was obvious at the time, Senator McConnell now says the practice of not holding confirmation hearings for a Supreme Court nominee in an election year only applies when the Presidency and the Senate are controlled by opposing parties.


  15. #105
    Senior Member Array title="Mojouw has a reputation beyond repute"> Mojouw's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Gender
    Posts
    7,808

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    Some thoughtful stuff. Wanted to throw one other variable into the equation, because I think it is really important, but gets over-looked. The Supreme Court and judicial appointments in general has been highly politicized for at least a decade, maybe two. But it was happening in a more behind the scenes way prior to a handful of years ago.

    Much of the GOP efforts for some time now has been to control enough things at the state and federal level to appoint the judges they prefer. It has been a central tenet of the overall party strategy. An acknowledgement that much of what their base and donors want done legislatively is certain to be challenged in the courts. Many party observers have remarked that the goal of seating judges, especially Supreme Court justices has been central to blunting "Never Trump" Republicans. Meaning that let's play ball with this guy so we can seat judges. Trump is only 4-8 years, justices are decades. The Dems have been extremely slow to counter this. They seemed to count on winning Presidential and Senate elections as a mode of blunting this dedicated effort at methodically advancing judges. That effort has failed once the Garland seat was held open. I think the Dems are in full realization that they don't have a strategy now and the GOP has "won" the judges "battle".

    For instance, McConnell got a whole grip of judges (like 15 or so confirmed) awhile back because Schumer knew he couldn't keep his caucus in Washington because they all wanted to go home and campaign. It is rumored that McConnell wants to cut another similar deal in advance of the midterms. While I personally can't stand McConnell, I really have to tip my hat to him. He uses Senate process and his small majority to get a great deal done. He held up Garland's appointment. He has gotten more judges approved in a shorter amount of time than most observers thought possible and he has seated two Supreme Court justices. The man is a machine.

    For me, personally, I wish that everyone involved at the political level with these Supreme Court nominations and hearings would simply admit what this is about. It is about Roe v. Wade. Full stop. The Dems are doing math and realizing that Kavanaugh likely means the court has the votes to overturn and the GOP realizes segments of its base (that regularly vote and donate $$) will tolerate a great deal as long as abortion has a shot at being overturned. I might have to disconnect my internet when that case comes before the Court because if you think things are bad know...wait until the Court agrees to touch that third rail...

  16. #106
    Senior Member Array title="AtlantaDan has a reputation beyond repute"> AtlantaDan's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Gender
    Posts
    3,240

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    Quote Originally Posted by Mojouw View Post
    For me, personally, I wish that everyone involved at the political level with these Supreme Court nominations and hearings would simply admit what this is about. It is about Roe v. Wade. Full stop. The Dems are doing math and realizing that Kavanaugh likely means the court has the votes to overturn and the GOP realizes segments of its base (that regularly vote and donate $$) will tolerate a great deal as long as abortion has a shot at being overturned. I might have to disconnect my internet when that case comes before the Court because if you think things are bad know...wait until the Court agrees to touch that third rail...
    I would be surprised if you see a straightforward overturning of Roe v. Wade anytime soon. Just uphold any State law that places restrictions upon access to abortions but does not flat out banning them entirely without reversing Roe.

    This ties into using social issues to energize the base where the real action is in serving the primary interests of your campaign donors (see, e.g., a massive tax cut that is not going to do a hell of a lot for the taxes paid by someone in the Rust Belt making $50K a year). For the GOP that most definitely includes reducing the reach of government regulation, which GOP business community donors hate with the heat of a thousand suns.

    Keep your eye on the Court getting a chance to overrule a 1980s case called Chevron, in which the Supreme Court held "in litigation over federal agency action, the courts will defer to the agency’s own construction of its operating statute, unless that construction is outside the range of reasonableness, usually because the meaning of the statute is clear. The effect is to give the executive branch considerable leeway in determining the scope of its own power."

    https://www.hoover.org/research/kava...evron-doctrine

    Chief Justice Roberts is no fan of "Chevron deference," nor are Justices Thomas or Gorsuch. No surprise now Justice Kavanaugh has not been as well.

    Judge Kavanaugh is a strong critic of the Chevron principle of deference to administrative agencies—both of the foundation of that principle and of the manner in which it is often exercised.


    https://www.nationalreview.com/bench...trative-state/

    Fun fact - that linked National Review article was written by Ed Whelan, the guy who authored a tweet stream suggesting the alleged assault of Dr. Ford might be pinned upon someone else who he identified by name - in the words of Chuck Noll, whatever it takes.

  17. #107
    Senior Member Array title="GBMelBlount has a reputation beyond repute"> GBMelBlount's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Gender
    Posts
    8,545

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    Quote Originally Posted by AtlantaDan View Post
    in the words of Chuck Noll, whatever it takes.
    Damn, I thought Michael Keaton was the Pittsburgher who coined that phrase...

    "With love, with patience, and with Faith
    ....She'll make her way" ~ Natalie Merchant

  18. #108
    Senior Member Array title="Mojouw has a reputation beyond repute"> Mojouw's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Gender
    Posts
    7,808

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    Quote Originally Posted by AtlantaDan View Post
    I would be surprised if you see a straightforward overturning of Roe v. Wade anytime soon. Just uphold any State law that places restrictions upon access to abortions but does not flat out banning them entirely without reversing Roe.

    This ties into using social issues to energize the base where the real action is in serving the primary interests of your campaign donors (see, e.g., a massive tax cut that is not going to do a hell of a lot for the taxes paid by someone in the Rust Belt making $50K a year). For the GOP that most definitely includes reducing the reach of government regulation, which GOP business community donors hate with the heat of a thousand suns.

    Keep your eye on the Court getting a chance to overrule a 1980s case called Chevron, in which the Supreme Court held "in litigation over federal agency action, the courts will defer to the agency’s own construction of its operating statute, unless that construction is outside the range of reasonableness, usually because the meaning of the statute is clear. The effect is to give the executive branch considerable leeway in determining the scope of its own power."

    https://www.hoover.org/research/kava...evron-doctrine

    Chief Justice Roberts is no fan of "Chevron deference," nor are Justices Thomas or Gorsuch. No surprise now Justice Kavanaugh has not been as well.

    Judge Kavanaugh is a strong critic of the Chevron principle of deference to administrative agencies—both of the foundation of that principle and of the manner in which it is often exercised.


    https://www.nationalreview.com/bench...trative-state/

    Fun fact - that linked National Review article was written by Ed Whelan, the guy who authored a tweet stream suggesting the alleged assault of Dr. Ford might be pinned upon someone else who he identified by name - in the words of Chuck Noll, whatever it takes.
    I think that the top GOP brass hopes a straight up Roe challenge doesn’t come before the Court anytime soon. But they’ve started up the machine and I’m not sure that anyone can control it. My gut tells me some organization will construct a case specifically designed to get appealed to the Supreme Court. But that will take years as it moves through the system.

    And your right, regulation is going to be another intense issue.

  19. #109
    Senior Member Array title="AtlantaDan has a reputation beyond repute"> AtlantaDan's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Gender
    Posts
    3,240

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    Quote Originally Posted by GBMelBlount View Post
    Damn, I thought Michael Keaton was the Pittsburgher who coined that phrase...

    Nice catch - good insider joke from Michael Keaton to Steelers fans

  20. #110

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    Quote Originally Posted by AtlantaDan View Post
    I would be surprised if you see a straightforward overturning of Roe v. Wade anytime soon. Just uphold any State law that places restrictions upon access to abortions but does not flat out banning them entirely without reversing Roe.

    This ties into using social issues to energize the base where the real action is in serving the primary interests of your campaign donors (see, e.g., a massive tax cut that is not going to do a hell of a lot for the taxes paid by someone in the Rust Belt making $50K a year). For the GOP that most definitely includes reducing the reach of government regulation, which GOP business community donors hate with the heat of a thousand suns.

    Keep your eye on the Court getting a chance to overrule a 1980s case called Chevron, in which the Supreme Court held "in litigation over federal agency action, the courts will defer to the agency’s own construction of its operating statute, unless that construction is outside the range of reasonableness, usually because the meaning of the statute is clear. The effect is to give the executive branch considerable leeway in determining the scope of its own power."

    https://www.hoover.org/research/kava...evron-doctrine

    Chief Justice Roberts is no fan of "Chevron deference," nor are Justices Thomas or Gorsuch. No surprise now Justice Kavanaugh has not been as well.

    Judge Kavanaugh is a strong critic of the Chevron principle of deference to administrative agencies—both of the foundation of that principle and of the manner in which it is often exercised.


    https://www.nationalreview.com/bench...trative-state/

    Fun fact - that linked National Review article was written by Ed Whelan, the guy who authored a tweet stream suggesting the alleged assault of Dr. Ford might be pinned upon someone else who he identified by name - in the words of Chuck Noll, whatever it takes.
    Yes and no. Chevron defense has already been whittled down, and the move has been to defer to formal agency stands rather than deferring to things such as opinion pieces, internal memos, agency manuals, and inscribes napkins over the water cooler. In that, I'd agree with them. The court doesn't have a right to negate such things if they are official policy and "reasonable" based on the statute being interpreted. However, I'd also agree that non-formal policies and interpretations do not have the force of law and therefore are not a permissible defense in regulation issues.
    ______________-

    As for what this is about, I don't think it's about abortion per se. That ship has sailed. This is as much about 2nd amendment right and regulation/deregulation as abortion.

    Personally, I'd like to see abortion banned except in certain cases because I believe new findings in science since the 1970s place the fetus in the protected class of "human" and therefore must be afforded the same rights. I know that's a controversial statement and don't want to debate abortion here. I'm just stating that what I said above, I believe even though I do not agree with abortion.

    On the Ed Whelan thing. What gets me is two other males came out and said they were the ones involved, and it was pretty much ignored. AND, since this act occurred in Maryland, which has no statute of limitations in Maryland, and they literally confessed to doing it, I doubt it's a case of sending a sheep for the slaughter, but it's not really a slaughter and we'll take care of you on the back end. So, why would they confess, except that they saw an innocent man being condemned. And that's what I think happened. I don't doubt she was raped. I don't doubt it was horrible. I doubt that she remembers her attackers perfectly, and after all these years, have conflated memories.
    “Life is a series of decisions you make that add up to your reputation. Do the right thing.”
    —Dan Rooney (1932-2017)

  21. #111
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    4,936

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    Quote Originally Posted by Craic View Post
    Hmm. Well, I learned something today. How long have we been on these forums together?
    It's gotta be at least a decade by now. And the skin color thing... the topic almost never comes up. My avatar pic is actually me.

    As for what this is about, I don't think it's about abortion per se. That ship has sailed. This is as much about 2nd amendment right and regulation/deregulation as abortion.
    I'm gonna disagree with this somewhat. For the left, it *is* about abortion. It's one of the few wedge issues they have left to fire up their base; "ZOMG They're gonna overturn Roe v. Wade EVERYBODY PANIC". The real battle is about judicial activism vs. original intent, but that's a bit wonky to fit on a bumper sticker.
    As for Roe v. Wade itself, I agree that it is a dead issue. The SCOTUS has the power to decide which cases they will review and which they will simply ignore. Both politically and as a practical matter, it makes a lot of sense for them to ignore challenges to Roe.

    Best,
    -Slashy
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

  22. #112
    Senior Member Array title="AtlantaDan has a reputation beyond repute"> AtlantaDan's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Gender
    Posts
    3,240

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    Quote Originally Posted by Craic View Post
    Yes and no. Chevron defense has already been whittled down, and the move has been to defer to formal agency stands rather than deferring to things such as opinion pieces, internal memos, agency manuals, and inscribes napkins over the water cooler.
    It appears Justice Alito is not a fan of the cutting around the edges means of narrowing Chevron. In a dissent this summer he said either overrule it or apply it in a manner consistent with the 1984 decision.

    https://ogletree.com/shared-content/...vron-deference

    Going after Chevron is not as interesting as the social issues cases on the Court's docket to most folks but it potentially has huge consequences without the risk of anyone taking to the streets if it is overturned.

    On the Ed Whelan thing. What gets me is two other males came out and said they were the ones involved, and it was pretty much ignored. AND, since this act occurred in Maryland, which has no statute of limitations in Maryland, and they literally confessed to doing it, I doubt it's a case of sending a sheep for the slaughter, but it's not really a slaughter and we'll take care of you on the back end. So, why would they confess, except that they saw an innocent man being condemned.
    I recall the story of the two men claiming they were Ford's assailant broke the Wednesday night before the Ford/Kavanaugh hearing.

    Lindsey Graham knocked those claims down pretty quickly the morning of the Ford/Kavanaugh testimony when he was interviewed on the CBS morning show and had his own theories on motivation. After everything that then happened with the testimony that day that sidebar story sunk quickly.

    "One’s crazy as a loon. I don’t believe the other one. I’m not going to play this game," Graham said on "CBS This Morning."

    “You don’t believe either of these men who said they attacked Dr. Ford?” anchor Norah O'Donnell asked.

    "Yes, I don’t believe that," Graham responded.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/...naugh-for-them

    I suppose there could be some sort of liability there for submitting false information to congressional investigators, but doubtful anyone wants to give more publicity to someone who might not only want attention but be mentally disturbed.

    OTOH Ed Whelan is a former Supreme Court clerk and had been respected as a savvy Washington player - tweeting out his half-baked theory was one thing but actually naming the potential perp (some poor guy who is teaching at a middle school in Atlanta) was Michael Avenatti level recklessness for an attorney.

    Thanks for the followup post


  23. #113

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    Quote Originally Posted by AtlantaDan View Post
    It appears Justice Alito is not a fan of the cutting around the edges means of narrowing Chevron. In a dissent this summer he said either overrule it or apply it in a manner consistent with the 1984 decision.

    https://ogletree.com/shared-content/...vron-deference

    Going after Chevron is not as interesting as the social issues cases on the Court's docket to most folks but it potentially has huge consequences without the risk of anyone taking to the streets if it is overturned.
    Alitto is right in one sense. Either take the issue on or don't. However, one person's opinion is still that. Personally, I'd be happy with keeping to those things that have been published as force of law through official means. I think that's a good middle ground between heavy regulation and no regulation.

    As for the other, thanks for the info. I only read a couple of other things on it and neither of them quoted Graham. Of course, I'd also like to hear what some of the others thought as well. One source I read said many on the review committee thought they were at least somewhat credible. But, perhaps I'm not remembering it correctly.
    _______

    You know, it's a real shame the conversations we have here can't be representative of what we have in our nation's capital. Even those who disagree strongly seem to be somewhat gracious with it. Of course, that's probably because the Mods banned those who weren't that way in the politics forums in the early days of this site.
    “Life is a series of decisions you make that add up to your reputation. Do the right thing.”
    —Dan Rooney (1932-2017)

  24. #114
    Senior Member Array title="AtlantaDan has a reputation beyond repute"> AtlantaDan's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Gender
    Posts
    3,240

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    Quote Originally Posted by Craic View Post
    You know, it's a real shame the conversations we have here can't be representative of what we have in our nation's capital. Even those who disagree strongly seem to be somewhat gracious with it. Of course, that's probably because the Mods banned those who weren't that way in the politics forums in the early days of this site.
    Two who were at the pinnacle show the sort of respect for those with opposing political views that the nation's capital needs

    September's funeral for Senator John McCain was a solemn occasion, in which loved ones and colleagues shared all sorts of memories about the late politician.

    But amid the ceremony, former first lady Michelle Obama and former President George W. Bush made headlines for a different kind of sharing, when he handed her a cough drop....

    "President Bush and I, we are forever seatmates because of protocol, and that's how we sit at all the official functions," Obama said during an exclusive interview on TODAY Thursday. "He's my partner in crime at every major thing where all the 'formers' gather. So we're together all the time."

    "I love him to death," she added. "He's a wonderful man, he's a funny man."...

    Meanwhile, a White House logo on the box caught her eye.
    "I will add, they were old cough drops," she said. "I said, 'How long have you had these things?' He said, 'A long time; we've got a lot of these.'"

    https://www.today.com/news/michelle-...mccain-t139519



  25. #115
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    4,936

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    I think we're confusing comity with civility. I don't mind if people in government don't get along with each other, but I *do* mind when there's violence and harassment in the streets and the politicians condone and promote it.


    Best,
    -Slashy
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

  26. #116
    Senior Member Array title="Mojouw has a reputation beyond repute"> Mojouw's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Gender
    Posts
    7,808

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    Additional evidence that this is an issue for groups from both sides of the political spectrum:

    https://www.theroot.com/nypd-under-f...een-1829740088

    And, yes, before anyone rises to point out the gap in this article's coverage - I am aware that is is likely the original protesters that caught the beat down where somehow associated with Antifa.

    I also think it is a sad sign of the times that many of the Proud Boys were caught on video chanting "I like Beer" - a reference to the original topic of this thread.

    Again, my limited point is not to lay the blame for any and all things at the feet of one side or the other but to point out that there are a roughly equivalent number of crappy people all around.

  27. #117
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    4,936

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    Mojouw,

    I agree on the point that there are crappy people on both sides, but I reject the claim that this is an issue for both sides, at least not at present. The instigation and belligerence are 100% unilateral.

    Best,
    -Slashy
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

  28. #118
    Senior Member Array title="Mojouw has a reputation beyond repute"> Mojouw's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Gender
    Posts
    7,808

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27 View Post
    Mojouw,

    I agree on the point that there are crappy people on both sides, but I reject the claim that this is an issue for both sides, at least not at present. The instigation and belligerence are 100% unilateral.

    Best,
    -Slashy
    You have been presented with multiple instances that directly contradict that statement. And have consistently managed to adjust the parameters, redefine the issue, or willfully ignore (relatively) unbiased data in order to advance a point that you have completely failed to support with any evidence other than the highly biased opinion based arguments of a small # of Youtube personalities.

    While you may feel that this is a "straw man" argument or an "ad hominen" attack on these individuals, I would counter that they are making serious and at this point minority claims. That places a great burden on them to demonstrate a variety of lines of evidence to support and validate their arguments. This is just basic to any realm of serious debate and exchange of ideas. I am tired of everyone simply ignoring that in order to appear "balanced" or "unbiased" we are willing to accept perspectives and opinions from almost any corner as being of equal validity and worthy of equivalent consideration.

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/d...mind-on-antifa

    That is the only concrete evidence I can find of Democratic politician indicating support for Antifa, who you have set up as your primary leftist boogeyman. Shortly after Ellison did these, he was roundly criticized and condemned by individuals from all points on the political compass.

    If you are interested here is a brief outline of how Antifa' s policies and goals are often in direct opposition to those of the Democratic part - https://www.quora.com/Is-Antifa-allied-with-Democrats

    But if you still want to make the linkage between the two (Antifa and the Dems) then we can examine the other side of the coin. Far right white nationalist groups and the GOP. Here is a recent article that highlights how openly Nazi and white power candidates are running under the GOP banner -- https://www.vox.com/2018/7/9/1752586...olina-virginia

    Every piece of evidence that I can find that attempts to see both sides of spectrum through the same analytical prism concludes that extremist viewpoints that spark violence is not solely a left or right problem, but something to be excised from the entire political spectrum.

  29. #119
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    4,936

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    Mojouw,
    You have not provided any instances that contradict my statement. There is only one side of the aisle where politicians are exhorting their base for more conflict and confrontation. Ellison is just one of them. You've also got Hillary (there can be no civility with a party that is destroying everything you believe in/ there will only be civility when we win) Maxine Waters (Get out there and get in their faces, tell them they're not welcome here. In gas stations, restaurants...) Eric Holder (when they go low, we kick them in the face) Cory Booker (supporters of Kavanaugh are complicit in evil, get up in their face)

    You attempt to draw an equivalence between people on the right being "linked to" or "reaching out to" far right extremists, but there is not a single example of this dangerous, inflammatory rhetoric from any of them. It has happened in the past, but it's not happening now. So yeah. Unilateral.

    And yeah, there is violence out there at both extremes, but the conflict only happens at right- wing events, never left- wing events. The lefties are actively seeking conflict at right- wing events. The opposite is not true.

    It has gotten out of hand and it is up to the Democrats to ratchet it down.
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

  30. #120
    One bad JuJu Array title="43Hitman has a reputation beyond repute"> 43Hitman's Avatar
    Texas Holdem Poker Champion! Frogger Champion!

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Va
    Gender
    Posts
    6,745

    Re: Kavanaugh Confirmed...

    Didn't Anitfa attack another building last night? I thought I saw something like that flash on my phone this morning, can anyone verify? Yes I'm lazy and don't feel like looking. Hey, at least I'm honest about it.






Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •