Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

Clarence Thomas should never have been confirmed. It's not "dirty politics" to let women speak out about their sexual abuse and harrassment at the hands of powerful men trying to get on the highest court in the land. Fuck you.

i think one of the most ironic things graham said after her testimony was "the democrats better watch out for their judicial nominees. this always happens to us, it never happens to them."

um, lindsay, buddy, your party has already had a terrible day. you're making it worse. how about you stop nominating guys with checkered sexual pasts? is it that hard? and if something comes up, you might want to pull the rip cord next time instead of crashing into the ground 9.8m/s^2

Posted
1 minute ago, GSU&UT said:

Wait, his vote is scheduled for tomorrow?

Currently, but very likely will be at minimum pushed back as they won't have the votes... too many lean votes that might have gone along if Ford was not credible are no longer going to do that based on her performance

Posted
4 minutes ago, MixtyMotions said:

Dirty politics to stop Robert Bork worked.

Dirty politics to stop Clarence Thomas almost worked.

Dirty politics to stop Merrick Garland worked.

Dirty politics to stop Brett Kavanaugh might work.

Expect more dirty politics.

On another note:

Assume for a moment that Brett Kavanaugh goes down, and Amy Coney Barrett gets confirmed.  Did the nation win?  I think both GOP and Dem interests lose.

 

Noticed a lot of talk about Bork being wronged on conservative channels lately.  Is this really a thing now?

Posted (edited)

My guess is that the Republican Senators will initially act pissed off at Kavanaugh and that his youthful partying and potential illegal acts have wasted the time of the US Senate.  Then they will let him convince them over a few hours that he is completely innocent and that Dr. Ford owes him an apology.   the world's a stage.

Edited by Nice Guy Eddie
Posted
Dirty politics to stop Robert Bork worked. Dirty politics to stop Clarence Thomas almost worked.

Dirty politics to stop Merrick Garland worked.

Dirty politics to stop Brett Kavanaugh might work.

Expect more dirty politics.

On another note:

Assume for a moment that Brett Kavanaugh goes down, and Amy Coney Barrett gets confirmed.  Did the nation win?  I think both GOP and Dem interests lose.

 

 

Robert motherfucking Bork, at the moment of the biggest decision he ever fucking made, and having the example of two people making the correct fucking choice, still chose the wrong fucking answer. He's not qualified to judge a dispute as to who should get the last donut in North Bumblefuck, Alabama., But no, it's "he was only sunk due to dirty politics." Fuck you Tahoe. 

 

 

  • Like 5
Posted
Dirty politics to stop Robert Bork worked.
Dirty politics to stop Clarence Thomas almost worked.
Dirty politics to stop Merrick Garland worked.
Dirty politics to stop Brett Kavanaugh might work.
Expect more dirty politics.
On another note:
Assume for a moment that Brett Kavanaugh goes down, and Amy Coney Barrett gets confirmed.  Did the nation win?  I think both GOP and Dem interests lose.
 


I don’t know anything about Barrett, but assuming she’s not an attempted rapist, yes the nation clearly won. How is this even a question?
  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

That's the real Lindsey. The occasional sane, rational Lindsey is the exception to the rule. 

Is that the Lindsey Graham that was awarded a Bronze Star a few years ago?

Posted
4 minutes ago, MixtyMotions said:

Assume for a moment that Brett Kavanaugh goes down, and Amy Coney Barrett gets confirmed.  Did the nation win?  I think both GOP and Dem interests lose.

 

The women of the nation won by believing they are not powerless in the face of sexual assault, and by not having to stare at 2 men credibly accused of sexual assault every time they see the justices. 

GOP still wins as Barrett will be nearly identical in Kavanaugh in her opinions. Roe V. Wade will be neutered, corporations will be extolled, the executive branch power will go unchecked, etc. etc. If the GOP is lucky they might even roll back rights for those gays. 

All in all, I'd say it's a win win or a lose lose depending on how you view that half empty/full glass.  

  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, Nice Guy Eddie said:

My guess is that the Republican Senators will initially be pissed at Kavanaugh and that his youthful partying and potential illegal acts have wasted the time of the US Senate.  Then they will let him convince him over a few hours that he is completely innocent and that Dr. Ford owes him an apology.   the world's a stage.

From a purely political standpoint, a vote either way on Brett Kavanaugh is going to end the careers of some of these Republican senators.

  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

My guess is that the Republican Senators will initially be pissed at Kavanaugh and that his youthful partying and potential illegal acts have wasted the time of the US Senate. 

He should begin and end his speech with, "sorry for partying".

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, MixtyMotions said:

Dirty politics to stop Robert Bork worked.

Dirty politics to stop Clarence Thomas almost worked.

Dirty politics to stop Merrick Garland worked.

Dirty politics to stop Brett Kavanaugh might work.

Expect more dirty politics.

On another note:

Assume for a moment that Brett Kavanaugh goes down, and Amy Coney Barrett gets confirmed.  Did the nation win?  I think both GOP and Dem interests lose.

 

Take off the sock, donut boy. 

  • Like 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, Horn Dog said:

Noticed a lot of talk about Bork being wronged on conservative channels lately.  Is this really a thing now?

it's a weird hill to die on. it was a weird hill in 1987. this is the guy that helped orchestrate the saturday night massacre for richard fucking nixon. why on earth di they nominate his ass to the supreme court?

Posted
Just now, hayden_horn said:

it's a weird hill to die on. it was a weird hill in 1987. this is the guy that helped orchestrate the saturday night massacre for richard fucking nixon. why on earth di they nominate his ass to the supreme court?

He also got a vote.

He lost.

Posted
3 minutes ago, Horn Dog said:

Noticed a lot of talk about Bork being wronged on conservative channels lately.  Is this really a thing now?

I felt like Bork did get wronged.  What does that have to do with this?  (Whataboutism)

Posted
20 minutes ago, Lagunamadre said:

If, after witnessing all of that, all you've got is "who paid for the polygraph", which is like $500, then you are drawing at fucking straws. ESPECIALLY after her summa cum laude Harvard lawyer said he paid for it and does not need reimbursement. 

Lindsey Graham might be losing it quicker than Trump, and that is saying something. 

70e4b8919d5814a583b95b821285942e.gif

 

Posted
2 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

it's a weird hill to die on. it was a weird hill in 1987. this is the guy that helped orchestrate the saturday night massacre for richard fucking nixon. why on earth di they nominate his ass to the supreme court?

Because Nixon was not as much of a bad guy in the late 80s. 

Posted
5 minutes ago, Woodrow Call said:

When is Lindsey Graham coming out of the closet? 

Just realized who Graham reminded me of jsut now,, Beverly Leslie from Will & Grace.

cace70ebcb3170dc74ac9d62e7179b13623f4ab8

  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)

Am I the only one reading between the lines when listening to GOP politicians and conservative commentators and picking up the veiled threats that sexual assault allegations are going to be brought against any future dem nominee?

Like, wouldnt you want to keep that to yourself?

Edited by Foosters
Posted
1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

It has to be young conservatives. Can't have been politically conscious in '87 to feel bad for Bork.

Never can tell.  You were politically conscious during the fall of the Soviet Union, yet you think socialism works.

  • Haha 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, DDD Dad said:

I felt like Bork did get wronged.  What does that have to do with this?  (Whataboutism)

Tahoe...I mean Mixty, said Bork being wronged by “dirty politics” is just like BK being wronged.  

I know I will regret this but, out of curiosity, why do you think he was wronged?

Posted
1 minute ago, Horn Dog said:

Tahoe...I mean Mixty, said Bork being wronged by “dirty politics” is just like BK being wronged.  

I know I will regret this but, out of curiosity, why do you think he was wronged?

Bork was qualified for the Court.

But his participation in the Saturday Night Massacre was unforgivable.  I'm perfectly fine, in retrospect, with it not having been forgiven.

  • Like 2
Posted
1 minute ago, Horn Dog said:

Tahoe...I mean Mixty, said Bork being wronged by “dirty politics” is just like BK being wronged.  

I know I will regret this but, out of curiosity, why do you think he was wronged?

Because I felt that at the time he was qualified as a jurist based on the expectations of qualifications for the court at the time.

He was rejected for his substantive views on hot button issues.  It is essentially the sea change that has generally changed the nature of advice and consent on the supreme court in most of our lifetimes.  

Posted
5 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

 

Excellent. No more rep to give today.

On the polygraph questions, somebody on TV snorted and said, "I guess they're saying she's in this for a free polygraph test."

Posted
5 minutes ago, Foosters said:

Am I the only one reading between the lines when listening to GOP politicians and conservative commentators and picking up the veiled threats that sexual assault allegations are going to be brought against any future dem nominee?

Like, wouldnt you want to keep that to yourself?

Threats don’t work if the people you’re threatening don’t realize it. 

Posted
4 minutes ago, Horn Dog said:

Tahoe...I mean Mixty, said Bork being wronged by “dirty politics” is just like BK being wronged.  

I know I will regret this but, out of curiosity, why do you think he was wronged?

 

1 minute ago, Ghost of LL said:

Bork was qualified for the Court.

But his participation in the Saturday Night Massacre was unforgivable.  I'm perfectly fine, in retrospect, with it not having been forgiven.

 

1 minute ago, DDD Dad said:

Because I felt that at the time he was qualified as a jurist based on the expectations of qualifications for the court at the time.

He was rejected for his substantive views on hot button issues.  It is essentially the sea change that has generally changed the nature of advice and consent on the supreme court in most of our lifetimes.  

um, didn't bork support a poll tax?

Posted
1 minute ago, hayden_horn said:

it's a weird hill to die on. it was a weird hill in 1987. this is the guy that helped orchestrate the saturday night massacre for richard fucking nixon. why on earth di they nominate his ass to the supreme court?

He also published an article defending the right to discriminate in 1963 not long after firehoses were turned on children in Birmingham, AL.  A pretty disgusting read where Bork called protesters “a mob”. But, sure, let’s talk about how he was some unfortunate martyr and definitely *not* too racist for the Supreme Court 

 

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Horn Dog said:

Noticed a lot of talk about Bork being wronged on conservative channels lately.  Is this really a thing now?

This is an age old conservative meme that is untrue.  Bork was too conservative for the senate at the time of his nomination (he'd be fine now). TReagan was told well ahead of the nomination that Bork was unacceptable, to nominate somebody less incendiary.   He was given a full hearing and defeated in committee in a process that most people described as fair.  He insisted on a floor vote, the Reagan WH largely abandoned him, and he was defeated in a full floor vote 58-42. 

Although the GOP still complains about it, the general voting public largely agreed with the move and it faded out of the national conscious rather quickly.

Edited by Bateshorn
Posted
7 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

It has to be young conservatives. Can't have been politically conscious in '87 to feel bad for Bork.

I wasn’t politically conscious in 1987. I wasn’t even born. Even a rudimentary understanding of the history of Robert Bork would show how uniquely unqualified he was for the Supreme Court

Posted
Just now, hobbes2702 said:

I wasn’t politically conscious in 1987. I wasn’t even born. Even a rudimentary understanding of the history of Robert Bork would show how uniquely unqualified he was for the Supreme Court

This. He was rightly rejected. Reagan was an idiot for nominating him.

  • Like 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, Foosters said:

Am I the only one reading between the lines when listening to GOP politicians and conservative commentators and picking up the veiled threats that sexual assault allegations are going to be brought against any future dem nominee?

Like, wouldnt you want to keep that to yourself?

Lindsey Graham said it. Explicitly. It wasn’t veiled. 

Posted
1 minute ago, Bateshorn said:

This is an age old conservative meme that is untrue.  Bork was too conservative for the senate at the time of his nomination (he'd be fine now). TReagan was told well ahead of the nomination that Bork was unacceptable, to nominate somebody less incendiary.   He was given a full hearing and defeated in committee in a process that most people described as fair.  He insisted on a floor vote, the Reagan WH largely abandoned him, and he was defeated in a full floor vote 58-42. 

6 Republicans voted no.



×
×
  • Create New...