OOTB's Political Thread . ..

[uncboy10]

You didn't give an analysis. All you did was say what his ruling was on an uncited case. You made no effort to prove that his rulings were based off of some right wing belief. Do what I did and read the case. Put in some effort to form an opinion for yourself instead of just being a parrot. Then let me know why you think it was based on his political beliefs.

Collecting data from a history of rulings and dissents, that indicate a pattern of behavior is a meta-analysis. He repeatedly wrote dissenting opinions that reflect originalist right wing interpretations of the law even when his fellow judges strongly disagreed about his interpretation of the facts of these cases. Maybe that's just a coincidence. But I doubt it.

 

[uncboy10]

You never said anyone had to testify in congress. You said if you were accused, you'd request an investigation. I have accused you.

Any witnesses corroborating the story seem to be hard to come by in the Kavenaugh case - so you'll have to excuse me if I find them unnecessary in your case as well.

Witnesses corroborated that he was at that party where she was assaulted. Multiple women have corroborated the pattern of behavior that he was engaged in at the time. Behavior like drugging women and exposing himself to them.

@FBI please come investigate me. I welcome any investigation into accusations of sexual impropriety because I haven't raped anyone. If I had, then I would just apply for a job with the GOP so they would protect me.

While they're at it... maybe they'll investigate you for libel.

 

[tarheel0910]

Collecting data from a history of rulings and dissents, that indicate a pattern of behavior is a meta-analysis. He repeatedly wrote dissenting opinions that reflect originalist right wing interpretations of the law even when his fellow judges strongly disagreed about his interpretation of the facts of these cases. Maybe that's just a coincidence. But I doubt it.

Have you finished reading those cases for yourself yet? Another question for you. Are you also against left wing interpretations of the law?

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

I hope he doesn't get confirmed.

According to @ticket2ride04 a loss is really a win in this one. I didn't really buy it at first, but after watching the coverage of this hearing - I can absolutely see people getting pissed off at the Left's tired tactic of just slandering anyone and everyone. Could cost them some seats in a few weeks.

Then DT can really shove it up their asses by nominating some neo-nazi. Shoulda taken the normal guy when you had the chance, assholes.

 

[uncboy10]

Have you finished reading those cases for yourself yet? Another question for you. Are you also against left wing interpretations of the law?

Yes I would prefer apolitical judges on the Supreme Court. I would also prefer that the GOP not stall hearings to steal nominations.

Obama's nominee was much more reputable, and clearly more apolitical than Kavanaugh. He certainly didn't shout right wing conspiracy theories during hearings. As far as I'm concerned, we can leave that seat vacant until 2020.

 

[strummingram]

Yes I would prefer apolitical judges on the Supreme Court. I would also prefer that the GOP not stall hearings to steal nominations.

Obama's nominee was much more reputable, and clearly more apolitical than Kavanaugh. He certainly didn't shout right wing conspiracy theories during hearings. As far as I'm concerned, we can leave that seat vacant until 2020.

Was Garland uber-liberal left-wing?

 

[uncboy10]

I hope he doesn't get confirmed.

According to @ticket2ride04 a loss is really a win in this one. I didn't really buy it at first, but after watching the coverage of this hearing - I can absolutely see people getting pissed off at the Left's tired tactic of just slandering anyone and everyone. Could cost them some seats in a few weeks.

Then DT can really shove it up their asses by nominating some neo-nazi. Shoulda taken the normal guy when you had the chance, assholes.

"NEXT WE'LL NOMINATE A NEO-NAZI! THEN WHO'S THE ASSHOLE?"

Yeah... you really got us there.

 

[uncboy10]

We now live in a country where people get a kick out of the idea of putting a neo-nazi on the SC as long as it pisses off the people they disagree with. Just let that sink in for a minute.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

"NEXT WE'LL NOMINATE A NEO-NAZI! THEN WHO'S THE ASSHOLE?"

Yeah... you really got us there.

Ya, I did.

 

[strummingram]

Then DT can really shove it up their asses by nominating some neo-nazi.

Oh, there ya go. That would be awesome.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

Oh, there ya go. That would be awesome.

Wouldn't it though? The theater would be orders of magnitude more entertaining than this Kavenaugh snoozefest has been.

@uncboy10 may actually have an aneurysm.

 

[uncboy10]

Was Garland uber-liberal left-wing?

Garland is a moderate centrist. I've never heard him accused of being left wing by anyone outside of the Fox News bubble

 

[strummingram]

Garland is a moderate centrist. I've never heard him accused of being left wing by anyone outside of the Fox News bubble

What's the possibility that he's tried to rape a few women, or at least impolitely make sexual advancements.

 

[strummingram]

Wouldn't it though? The theater would be orders of magnitude more entertaining than this Kavenaugh snoozefest has been.

@uncboy10 may actually have an aneurysm.

It would be great theater. But it wouldn't be great reality.

 

[uncboy10]

What's the possibility that he's tried to rape a few women, or at least impolitely make sexual advancements.

My bet is that he would have zero objections to a full fledged FBI investigation.

 

[tarheel0910]

Yes I would prefer apolitical judges on the Supreme Court. I would also prefer that the GOP not stall hearings to steal nominations.

I'm assuming you have an issue with Ginsberg then. Let me know when you finish those cases.

 

[uncboy10]

I'm assuming you have an issue with Ginsberg then. Let me know when you finish those cases.

I wish we didn't need someone like Ginsberg to balance out the GOP's shameless politicization of the Supreme Court.

They have made stacking the court to overturn Roe v Wade a part of their platform. Lets not try to establish false equivalencies.

 

[tarheel0910]

What's the possibility that he's tried to rape a few women, or at least impolitely make sexual advancements.

Not sure about rape, but there is a 99% chance he made impolite advancements.

 

[tarheel0910]

I wish we didn't need someone like Ginsberg to balance out the GOP's shameless politicization of the Supreme Court.

So it's ok to have someone who isn't apolitical when it suits your needs.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

Not sure about rape, but there is a 99% chance he made impolite advancements.

Or at least thought about making impolite advancements. Shows he's just as sick.

 

[uncboy10]

So it's ok to have someone who isn't apolitical when it suits your needs.

This is the game that conservatives always try to play. They attempt to politicize the court, or move some issue way to the right, then when the necessary opposition comes forward you just say "see we're all the same."

I don't want liberal judges on the court. I don't want conservative judges on the court. But only one party has made the politicization of the SC a major platform issue

 

[uncboy10]

"Why do you have to be so politically biased about not letting us stack the court with right wing activist judges?..." lololol ok

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

"Why do you have to be so politically biased about not letting us stack the court with right wing activist judges?..." lololol ok

Where's that quote from?

 

[uncboy10]

Where's that quote from?

Its a caricature meant to highlight the ridiculousness of that argument... I'm pretty sure anyone here could have figured that out, assuming they aren't being deliberately obtuse.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

I'm pretty sure anyone here could have figured that out, assuming they aren't being deliberately obtuse.

I'm pretty sure you're right.

 

[BillyL]

The power of the female vote is imminent, that's why the GOP hired and then quickly dismissed Rachel Mitchell from questioning any further in yesterday's hearing . . you are about to feel it. Kavanaugh vote was delayed 1 week because Collins and Murkowski were both 'NO' votes . . I know it sucks, but, the women who vote in the future elections are making their voices heard, and at least a few Senators have been forced to realize such.

 

[strummingram]

I must be naive as hell, because I seriously had no idea that there was such a level of sexual impropriety, assault, whatever, that's been going on for so long. The multitudes of women coming forth is surprising the hell outta me.

Then, I hear these allegations of this Kavanaugh and it blows my mind. I mean, just the thought of someone forcing their hand over some woman's mouth, who is screaming from not wanting to submit to what's happening, while they continue to have sex with her is just totally off the charts for me to even possibly imagine. Is it nature or nurture that allows such behavior to be justified? I just do NOT get it!

 

[tarheel0910]

This is the game that conservatives always try to play. They attempt to politicize the court, or move some issue way to the right, then when the necessary opposition comes forward you just say "see we're all the same."

I'm not playing any games. Just pointing out how hypocritical you are. If you truly cared you would set an example by doing the right thing. Then when the time comes, appoint the right person. Just don't try to act like you're better by doing the same thing the other side is doing. If you're going to play in the mud then own up to it. You finish reading those cases yet?

 

[uncboy10]

I'm not playing any games. Just pointing out how hypocritical you are. If you truly cared you would set an example by doing the right thing. Then when the time comes, appoint the right person. Just don't try to act like you're better by doing the same thing the other side is doing. If you're going to play in the mud then own up to it. You finish reading those cases yet?

Set an example by nominating someone like Merrick Garland? Why don’t I remind you what happened there... The GOP played political games to prevent him from being put on the court so that they could continue politicizing the court to try to overturn roe v Wade.

Opposing the right wing politicization of the court is not “doing the same thing.” This argument is just plain silly.

I would be fine with impeaching the entire court and replacing them with objectively moderate centrist judges. Most liberals would probably support that. Because human rights aren’t left wing positions. But we both know that the GOP would go into full blown theocratic hysterics if they weren’t allowed to keep going after Roe v Wade.

 

[tarheel0910]

Set an example by nominating someone like Merrick Garland? Why don’t I remind you what happened there... The GOP played political games to prevent him from being put on the court so that they could continue politicizing the court to try to overturn roe v Wade.

Garland should have been brought up for a vote. I don't think I've said otherwise.

Opposing the right wing politicization of the court is not “doing the same thing.”

It is when you start trying to politicizing the court yourself.

Finished with those cases yet?

 

[uncboy10]

Garland should have been brought up for a vote. I don't think I've said otherwise.


It is when you start trying to politicizing the court yourself.

Finished with those cases yet?

I literally just said I would support a moderate centrist court. Try to keep up.

 

[nctransplant]

When will the FBI be investigating the DNC vice chairman Ellison for beating the crap out of his girlfriend? Asking for a friend.

I'd also like to see @gunslingerdick show back up. You folks think he's locked up for molesting that stump years ago?

 

[tarheel0910]

I literally just said I would support a moderate centrist court. Try to keep up.

You also said you support putting liberal justices on the court to balance it out. Still working on those cases?

 

[strummingram]

 

[uncboy10]

You also said you support putting liberal justices on the court to balance it out. Still working on those cases?

I said that I don’t want political judges on the court. And pointed out that only one party has made the politicization of the Supreme Court a part of their platform.

I also pointed out the nomination of Merrick Garland who is not a "left wing" judge. So I don't know who the left wing judges are that you claim I support...

 

[tarheel0910]

I said that I don’t want political judges on the court. And pointed out that only one party has made the politicization of the Supreme Court a part of their platform.

I also pointed out the nomination of Merrick Garland who is not a "left wing" judge. So I don't know who the left wing judges are that you claim I support...

Ginsberg would be one or are you saying needing her is not the same as supporting her?

I wish we didn't need someone like Ginsberg

Still waiting on you to read those cases.

 

[uncboy10]

Ginsberg would be one or are you saying needing her is not the same as supporting her?



Still waiting on you to read those cases.

This really isn't that complicated. I don't support the appointment of political judges. But if the GOP is going to appoint political judges, then I hope Ginsberg hangs around long enough for another moderate to be appointed before the GOP can stack the court even more.

If its going to be a politicized court then yeah, I hope its at least balanced, and not some theocratic christian version of a sharia court. That's completely different than politicizing the court to pursue some theocratic end.

Maybe you should go read the cases yourself instead of bragging about how you "haven't been following this very closely." Make sure to "show your work."

 

[tarheel0910]

Maybe you should go read the cases yourself instead of bragging about how you "haven't been following this very closely." Make sure to "show your work."

I've already done that for the two cases that we're provided. I'm asking you to rebut my opinion instead of acting like a parrot.

 

[uncboy10]

I've already done that for the two cases that we're provided. I'm asking you to rebut my opinion instead of acting like a parrot.

I showed a clear pattern of behavior from far more than just two cases. Instead of researching them yourself, you chose to pretend there is no evidence of his right wing originalist bias.

 

[tarheel0910]

I showed a clear pattern of behavior from far more than just two cases. Instead of researching them yourself, you chose to pretend there is no evidence of his right wing originalist bias.

You copied and pasted the verdict from uncited cases. You provided no proof of bias other than the fact the rulings didn't match your agenda. @strummingram provided two cited cases and I reviewed those. I didn't see anything political in those decisions, even the one I disagreed with. You can review those if you want and point out the bias. You can also provide me with the cite for the other cases you didn't review yourself and I'll actually read them unlike yourself.