Brett Kavanaugh Confirmation Thread

[SKJ 1311]

I just don't understand how the republicans, and their followers, think this is a win.

But then again, I've never understood people that want to make enemies. 

Only complete fools enjoy having enemies

[Ragnarok 103]

The good news for the media is they had no real credibility to destroy anyway:

 

[Ragnarok 103]

2 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

What’s fascinating to see is everything I said about Trumpkins - that their sole reason for existence is to revel in inflicting pain on all who dare disagree with them in the slightest - be perfectly validated by the string of posts above.

Couldn’t be much clearer. That’s our country - the winning side in any political battle can’t just win, they must inflict and enjoy pain and suffering. Not of some evil foreign power. Of their fellow Americans. That’s a recipe for a GREAT future for this country. And I know none of y’all care - for y’all, it’s just more “sweet libtears” - which, again, underlines the truth.

 

Stephen Colbert writer:

http://pbs.twimg.com/media/Do3f5z6UUAM7D53.jpg

 

Edited October 7, 2018 by Ragnarok

[GHOSTUSER 361]

6 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

Really?  Dr. Ford had anything to do with Kavanaugh's perjury?

I fucking dare you to step up and be an American.  You're a traitor.  You don't know the meaning of "American" you weasely piece of shit.  Don't be surprised when . . .

LOL you and Brisket should re-read your recent posts. Unhinged, deranged and violent. I had a great day today enjoying my Horns and Astros win. Kavanaugh getting confirmed was the whip cream on top of a tasty sundae. Let me tell you something. Tens of millions of Americans love the direction this country is headed. Based on the results of the economy alone, Trump deserves to be in the 60% approval rating. I don’t think amongst Republican voters has a President had a higher approval rating than Trump. Trump has kept his promises and on the economic front with his tough stance on trade is actually trying hard to improve the lot of average working man. Instead of blue collar voters just siding with the GOP on cultural issues and getting nothing else he is actually giving real meat on the bone to them. Hopefully, he gets another SC justice pick. I couldn’t be happier with Kavanaugh and Gorsuch. Trump didn’t get my vote in 2016. He will in 2020.

 

[ckhorn 208]

2 hours ago, Tom said:

 

And that must have been hell for you.  11 million jobs created, unemployment from double digits down to sub 5%, the actual person behind 9/11 killed, and a stock market that more than doubled and hit new records over 100 times.  Yeah, that must have been rough. Or are you still upset that he likes fancy mustard?  Who are we kidding, it's because he was black. 

Trump will never match Obama's accomplishments and he'll be lucky if he gets out of this with no jail time.  Enjoy your win today.  November won't be fun for you.

Good luck with that.

[jimmyjazz 45903]

6 hours ago, Buzzrock said:

 

Just stating what I’ve read.

https://www.vox.com/2018/9/7/17829320/brett-kavanaugh-supreme-court-hearing-perjury

https://www.vox.com/2018/10/2/17927606/brett-kavanaugh-perjury-lied-congress

 

Jesus Christ.  The man quite literally lied about what he was doing WHILE THE FUCKING HEARINGS WERE HAPPENING.

Stop bending over backwards to excuse him.  He is a serial liar.  He cannot help himself.  He does not follow anything that any one of us would demand of our children as far as a moral compass is concerned.

Damn, man. 

[0xdeadbeef 1649]

30 minutes ago, SKJ said:

I just don't understand how the republicans, and their followers, think this is a win.

 

You don't understand how putting a strong conservative on the supreme court is a win? ?? 

   

[SKJ 1311]

1 minute ago, 0xdeadbeef said:

You don't understand how putting a strong conservative on the supreme court is a win? ?? 

   

I believe that he's probably not even a strong conservative. He's, at best, a great politician. At worst, he's a complete hypocrite.

I really don't understand how everyone sees him as a strong conservative. All of those values you think he holds are just some set of nonsensical ideals that only his supporters believe in, like a televangelist.

Of course, it's most like modern day conservatives and their values... Strong opinions, absolutely no follow through.

Just look at the deficit

 

[0xdeadbeef 1649]

Just catching up with the last few pages of this thread.  ... There are some delusional folks out there.

We have a GOP/conservative majority in the House, the Senate, the Executive office, the supreme court, and most State governors....  But some folks are still claiming that 2/3 of America is liberal and Trump isn't going to win in 2020. If that's what it takes to let you sleep at night, snuggle up with you delusions.

The reality is Trump will be virtually unopposed on the GOP side, and the Dems will put up someone from the very-vocal far left. Trump _is_ going to win.  The Next President will probably get 2 more Supreme Court Nominations.  By 2022, the Supreme Court will very likely be 7-2 Conservative.

 

 

 

[jimmyjazz 45903]

3 hours ago, ckhorn said:

I don't get why you Libs are so mad about this pick. He could of went with someone much more conservative than Kavanaugh.

Part of my anger stems from the fact that K supporters can't form a fucking sentence.

[GHOSTUSER 361]

 

3 hours ago, Michael Knight said:

Funny how all the Surly trumpkins come out of their safe space to brag about some big victory. Congratulations you're all worse than OU fans

I have been here the past several weeks battling the leftists with their lame ass negs

[0xdeadbeef 1649]

2 minutes ago, SKJ said:

I believe that he's probably not even a strong conservative. He's, at best, a great politician. At worst, he's a complete hypocrite.

I really don't understand how everyone sees him as a strong conservative. All of those values you think he holds are just some set of nonsensical ideals that only his supporters believe in, like a televangelist.

Of course, it's most like modern day conservatives and their values... Strong opinions, absolutely no follow through.

Just look at the deficit

 

I think you are getting to much new from Liberal-filtered sources.  He is a conservative, and he is going to vote conservative on the court.  

[Johnny Sack 8397]

4 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Part of my anger stems from the fact that K supporters can't form a fucking sentence.

You say this.  But your posts offer zero.  Just lame platitudes anyone with an 80 IQ could produce.  There are some smart liberals here.  You don’t seem to be one of them. 

[RayDog 682]

It is fascinating that Republicans botched this nomination about as badly as they possibly could and they are happy about it.

[SKJ 1311]

I think it's more likely that the definition of conservative has changed. Sure, he's a republican. I'll give you that.

I really just wish everyone in this country could take a step back and look at it with fresh eyes. 

There's way too many posters here that are actually cheering for a supreme Court appointment. Actually cheering that their team rammed a nominee with glaring flaws through. You are not winning. We, as a country, are not winning. 

It's really not even a game.

[0xdeadbeef 1649]

3 minutes ago, RayDog said:

It is fascinating that Republicans botched this nomination about as badly as they possibly could and they are happy about it.

how exactly did the botch it? 

No matter  what conservative they nominated, the Dems would have done the same type smear tactics to try and derail it.    It really didn't matter who it was nominated. Any conservative would have faced the same thing.   Or do you mean that they botched it by appointing a conservative, and that they really should have appointed a progressive activist judge.  

[Ragnarok 103]

[Fozzz 152]

On 10/5/2018 at 12:03 PM, Iconoclast Texan said:

Spare me with anti-Semitic crap when it comes to Soros. He doesn’t identify as a Jew and his ethnicity is not mentioned by me or anyone else here when discussing one of the most evil men in the world. Plenty of Jews hate him too including my friend greggym.

You might be the dumbest motherfucker on this entire site. 

[RomaVicta 29906]

13 minutes ago, Ragnarok said:

It's amusing to see someone choose a writer for Colbert to characterize whatever he thinks the liberals are and then quote Charlie Daniels to represent general reality. It's not a correctable condition, so I won't bother trying. 

I particularly like the notion that the new democrat party would author a chaotic future as though a future of chaos would be some sort of change from the status quo.

Shine on. At least the last dark years of the republic will be illuminated from time to time with victories over OU.

[SKJ 1311]

13 minutes ago, 0xdeadbeef said:

how exactly did the botch it? 

No matter  what conservative they nominated, the Dems would have done the same type smear tactics to try and derail it.    It really didn't matter who it was nominated. Any conservative would have faced the same thing.   Or do you mean that they botched it by appointing a conservative, and that they really should have appointed a progressive activist judge.  

With this post, you are making several assumptions that we cannot know.

Did the "other side" bring up concerns about a nominee? Yes, but those concerns had to be there to be brought up. You act as if the "other side" manufactured these concerns. 

The nominee lied. A bunch. All throughout his hearing. They also refused to produce a shitload of information. 

As to your assertion that they would have smeared any conservative nominee, well, it's apparent that no one could know. It's a very strange argument. It implies a sort of prescience that I don't possess.

I wish the republicucks would've pulled him and nominated a person without so much baggage so we could have seen if that were correct, but they didn't. They blew that chance.

[RomaVicta 29906]

32 minutes ago, 0xdeadbeef said:

I think you are getting to much new from Liberal-filtered sources.  He is a conservative, and he is going to vote conservative on the court.  

The problem is not that he's conservative. The problem is that he's a partisan liar whom a number of organizations and friends have advised against putting on the court.

Trump's choice was always going to be a conservative. The problem is this specific conservative who was likely chosen for reasons having nothing to do with that particular political orientation.

Carry on with your victory parade. Hillary will never be president. All is well. Sleep is good.

[Michael Knight 12977]

37 minutes ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

 

I have been here the past several weeks battling the leftists with their lame ass negs

you're not a trumpkin you're insane

[jimmyjazz 45903]

46 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

You say this.  But your posts offer zero.  Just lame platitudes anyone with an 80 IQ could produce.  There are some smart liberals here.  You don’t seem to be one of them. 

You seem oddly focused on me.  Sorry I'm in your tiny little head, but you should really refrain from spewing IQ smack, Randall.

[workswithseed 2103]

1 hour ago, jimmyjazz said:

Part of my anger stems from the fact that K supporters can't form a fucking sentence.

Do you have a reading disability?

[ckhorn 208]

1 hour ago, jimmyjazz said:

Part of my anger stems from the fact that K supporters can't form a fucking sentence.

I'm not as much as a Kavanaugh supporter as I like to see you Libs lose your shit. I would have preferred Barrett. Maybe you would have been the one to come out and tell a story about her sexual abusing you at one time. Also, that story about Kavanaugh doing this back fires more everyday. Hopefully, this gets investigated. The trusty FBI is on the case.

You may also tell your Dem buddies to actually come up with some type of platform to run on. I mean the last 8 years was so bad. Trump was elected.

[zork 629]

 

[EuroHorn 3263]

1 hour ago, RayDog said:

It is fascinating that Republicans botched this nomination about as badly as they possibly could and they are happy about it.

Enjoy the next couple of decades 

[jimmyjazz 45903]

10 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

Do you have a reading disability?

"He could of went"

Either write like a UT grad or get the fuck out.

[RayDog 682]

33 minutes ago, EuroHorn said:

Enjoy the next couple of decades 

I will. That is about how long it will take for a Republican to get elected president.

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

What’s fascinating to see is everything I said about Trumpkins - that their sole reason for existence is to revel in inflicting pain on all who dare disagree with them in the slightest - be perfectly validated by the string of posts above.

Couldn’t be much clearer. That’s our country - the winning side in any political battle can’t just win, they must inflict and enjoy pain and suffering. Not of some evil foreign power. Of their fellow Americans. That’s a recipe for a GREAT future for this country. And I know none of y’all care - for y’all, it’s just more “sweet libtears” - which, again, underlines the truth.

The Dems made it "not just about the vote."  If there was an ounce of substance behind the accusations it very likely would have damaged Kavanaugh's candidacy.  Trotting out this trumped up bullshit and throwing it in the face of any and every rational American male and FEMALE, that any guy could have his life ruined by unsubstantiated accusations hit a nerve-  A big one that precipitated the big flip of the finger to the left.

To your point, it should have never come to this, but the Feinsteins of the world couldn't have that.  What they did was not putting up a fight.  It was more of throwing a fit while telling mom and dad that brother hit you in the back of the car, while he is crashed out in the other side of the back seat.

[Jim Tom Pinch 120]

2 hours ago, SKJ said:

With this post, you are making several assumptions that we cannot know.

Did the "other side" bring up concerns about a nominee? Yes, but those concerns had to be there to be brought up. You act as if the "other side" manufactured these concerns. 

The nominee lied. A bunch. All throughout his hearing. They also refused to produce a shitload of information. 

As to your assertion that they would have smeared any conservative nominee, well, it's apparent that no one could know. It's a very strange argument. It implies a sort of prescience that I don't possess.

I wish the republicucks would've pulled him and nominated a person without so much baggage so we could have seen if that were correct, but they didn't. They blew that chance.

The “Other Side” stated it opposed the nominee before anyone had been nominated. To assert the “Other Side” gave a flying fuck about any nominee’s background is ridiculous. 

[SKJ 1311]

1 minute ago, Jim Tom Pinch said:

The “Other Side” stated it opposed the nominee before anyone had been nominated. To assert the “Other Side” gave a flying fuck about any nominee’s background is ridiculous. 

This is not quite accurate.

The "other side" stated that they would not like anyone to be nominated before midterms, an assertion that the republicucks went with regarding Garland. So, in a sense, they just wanted the republicucks to live up to their own bullshit. (Which, of course, was too much to ask...)

Once that was settled, by the republicuck's own actions, then became the questions of character of the nominee... (It's truly funny how hypocritical they have shown themselves to be during this whole process, though not surprising at all...)

I mean, sure, if you can't separate those issues, one might think they are the same, but let's not be disingenuous about the whole deal. They created the precedent with Garland, so one might be led to believe that they would live up to their own standards, but that would be too much to ask.

But to say that they would have "smeared" any nomination because of their own hypocrisy isn't the case, but it makes a good strawman.

If the r-cucks cared anything at all about the quality of their nominee, they obviously wouldn't have jammed this guy through, and would have let the libcucjs prove their hypothesis, and withdrawn, and nominated someone without so much bullshit surrounding them, thereby proving their point.

But alas, we are not a nation of honor after all.

[WhatTheBuck 28777]

6 hours ago, Message Board User said:

"Going for the throat" implies that this was a winnable battle for the Democrats.  It wasn't.  As soon as Kennedy announced his retirement, they knew (or should have known) they were utterly powerless to stop who Trump/GOP wanted to nominate.

I'm a big believe in choosing battles wisely (i.e., only fight battles you know you can win).

Well, we wouldn't know that Brett Kavanaugh is a whiny, crying little bitch otherwise. 

[MaybeACoordinator 8349]

Kavanaugh is the very definition of bitchmade:

 

Bitch Made

Used primarily as a gender-based slur against males that display weakness, softness, fear or girlish, effeminate behaviors. A male that refuses to stand up and take responsibility for his actions like a man. Generally a male that exhibits behaviors not normally associated with strong men such as nagging, whining, pleading, begging, blaming others for his failures or lackings, or not assertively standing his ground and letting others punk him out.

[Guest]

24 minutes ago, SKJ said:

This is not quite accurate.

The "other side" stated that they would not like anyone to be nominated before midterms, an assertion that the republicucks went with regarding Garland. So, in a sense, they just wanted the republicucks to live up to their own bullshit. (Which, of course, was too much to ask...)

 

The minority party doesn't call the shots...LOLz.

[SKJ 1311]

4 minutes ago, slorch said:

The minority party doesn't call the shots...LOLz.

Or, and I'm just spitballin here, they could also be as good as third graders and love up to the standards they learned in kindergarten.

Lulz.

The very definition of hypocrisy kind of speaks directly to this situation. But who are we kidding, right? 

Except I'm a man of honor, and politicians are behaving in such a way that even my kids know is wrong. Of course, who needs standards, right?

I don't expect republicucks to understand, but I hope you never forget, things go the other way, too.

[jimmyjazz 45903]

56 minutes ago, slorch said:

The Dems made it "not just about the vote."  If there was an ounce of substance behind the accusations it very likely would have damaged Kavanaugh's candidacy.  Trotting out this trumped up bullshit and throwing it in the face of any and every rational American male and FEMALE, that any guy could have his life ruined by unsubstantiated accusations hit a nerve-  A big one that precipitated the big flip of the finger to the left.

To your point, it should have never come to this, but the Feinsteins of the world couldn't have that.  What they did was not putting up a fight.  It was more of throwing a fit while telling mom and dad that brother hit you in the back of the car, while he is crashed out in the other side of the back seat.

The Dems literally baited BK into an unseemly freakout on national TV, and he subsequently perjured himself nearly a dozen times.  Had the sexual assault allegations never been brought forward, the freakout almost surely would not have happened, but he definitely would have lied, and more than once.  It's what he does.  He's a shallow, careless, emotional man unsuited for the job.

[WhatTheBuck 28777]

4 hours ago, 0xdeadbeef said:

You don't understand how putting a strong conservative on the supreme court is a win? ?? 

There are a bunch of other conservative judges on the Federalist Society-approved list of candidates. The guy from the FS said none were more or less qualified than the others and that you could throw a dart at the list to choose one. Presumably there's someone on that list who isn't a lyin', cryin', whiny little punkass bitch who lacks the temperament to serve on the highest court in the land. But if you're a Trump supporter then obviously character isn't something you care all that much about. 

[horncyclist 1387]

The fact that we're talking about conservative/liberal judges as if it's the same as political conservative/liberal is all you need to know about what this process has done to the Supreme Court.

[WhatTheBuck 28777]

Kavanaugh isn't a conservative judge. He's a Republican judge. If the question of whether a sitting president can be indicted comes before him while a Republican is president, he'll rule that he cannot be indicted. If it happens while a Democrat is president, he'll rule that he/she can be indicted. Bank on it. 

[Guest]

3 hours ago, SKJ said:

Or, and I'm just spitballin here, they could also be as good as third graders and love up to the standards they learned in kindergarten.

Lulz.

The very definition of hypocrisy kind of speaks directly to this situation. But who are we kidding, right? 

Except I'm a man of honor, and politicians are behaving in such a way that even my kids know is wrong. Of course, who needs standards, right?

I don't expect republicucks to understand, but I hope you never forget, things go the other way, too.

They absolutely go the other way.  Every time. Not dispute at all here.

That’s why you ignore the fuck out of the party out of power saying NOW is the time for being reasonable.  It is NEVER that time any more. It’s been repeatedly demonstrated by the left and the right.

[Guest]

9 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 Laying down and dying is no strategy. 

Take the loss, pussy.

 

not directed at you, but oh so appropriate in both cases Saturday.

[Hammock 104]

12 hours ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

UT win and Kavanaugh confirmed. Let’s make it 3-0 with an Astros win. Winning time

T’was a good day. 

[pepper brooks 580]

Maybe Harry Reid shouldn’t have gotten rid of the filibuster and there would have been a path to block Kavanaugh, but no, they couldn’t think far enough ahead that that might be a terrible idea for the country. It was a power move for party that will have a horrific impact that won’t be fixed. 

[300 blackout 2]

4 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

The Dems literally baited BK into an unseemly freakout on national TV, and he subsequently perjured himself nearly a dozen times.  Had the sexual assault allegations never been brought forward, the freakout almost surely would not have happened, but he definitely would have lied, and more than once.  It's what he does.  He's a shallow, careless, emotional man unsuited for the job.

You keep insenuating he lied or perjured himself. Either you’re the smartest man in the world, or you’re grasping here. 

[Horn Dog 9820]

7 minutes ago, 300 blackout said:

You keep insenuating he lied or perjured himself. Either you’re the smartest man in the world, or you’re grasping here. 

[horncyclist 1387]

I'm not sure I buy the fired up the GOP base argument yet. There was the one poll. It seems more like theyre trying to build up that narrative in hopes that it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecu.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

7 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

You seem oddly focused on me.  Sorry I'm in your tiny little head, but you should really refrain from spewing IQ smack, Randall.

So because I hurt your feelings so much you start doxxing me?   You are such a cunt and should be banned.  Your IQ isn’t in my league anyway.  Your next thoughtful post of substance will be your first.  

But the lefty cabal on here won’t say shit about a conservative being doxxed on this board.  Maybe a mod with some integrity will ban you.  

Edited October 7, 2018 by Johnny Sack

[300 blackout 2]

20 minutes ago, Horn Dog said:

Bless your heart, what a nice little gif you have. No go clean your room, like your mom asked.😂

[Bozo_Casanova 26447]

I believe that he's probably not even a strong conservative. He's, at best, a great politician. At worst, he's a complete hypocrite.
I really don't understand how everyone sees him as a strong conservative. All of those values you think he holds are just some set of nonsensical ideals that only his supporters believe in, like a televangelist.
Of course, it's most like modern day conservatives and their values... Strong opinions, absolutely no follow through.
Just look at the deficit
 

Because for too many Republicans “strong conservative” has come to mean “tribal Republican” and has nothing to do with (and is often opposed to) ideological conservatism.

Edmund Burke and George Washington would look at these guys and see nascent Montagnards.