Why the Kavanaugh nomination circus should scare the sh*t out of each and every one of you

[EyeBRollin]

I prefer reason and presumption of innocence regardless of histrionics from the extreme left.

So you would hire someone who walked into your business for an interview, and their references revealed they may currently have a drinking problem and have had some sexual misdeeds in their past ?

 

[EyeBRollin]

I can't wait for the crying when RGB goes.

You're excited to see someone die? Wow.

 

[Spaz]

Dismissing some of the obvious partisan rhetoric, @Bible_Belt , you're starting to make some good arguments.

@Danger what's your take on it? Don't start feigning ignorance now.

Just so you know I completely enjoyed Trump trumping those feminazi's.

 

[EyeBRollin]

Just so you know I completely enjoyed Trump trumping those feminazi's.

What do you think about his 17 sexual assault allegations? The grab em by the ***** tape?

 

[Spaz]

What do you think about his 17 sexual assault allegations? The grab em by the ***** tape?

Can I feign ignorance like @Danger ? Lmao

Let's stick to the topic at hand and not get sidetracked. If you'd like you can always open another thread on Trump, there's a lot of positive things I could say about him.

 

[EyeBRollin]

I would check their criminal records and their credit.

So the standard for working for you is so low... as in... not be criminally convicted... but merely accused of rape?

Can I feign ignorance like @Danger ? Lmao

Let's stick to the topic at hand and not get sidetracked. If you'd like you can always open another thread on Trump, there's a lot of positive things I could say about him.

I didn't ask about positive things you can say about Trump. I'll ask again. What do you think of his grab them by the ***** tape and his seventeen sexual assault allegations?

 

[Who Dares Win]

eyebrollin lol kinda missed your nonsense, btw any change to have jayleen to join you to convince us how "i dont remember the place, the time and the fact" costitutes such a strong evidence to jail a man?

 

[EyeBRollin]

eyebrollin lol kinda missed your nonsense, btw any change to have jayleen to join you to convince us how "i dont remember the place, the time and the fact" costitutes such a strong evidence to jail a man?

Strawman argument

 

[EyeBRollin]

But just some accusation? Not good enough reason to deny employment.

Employment is not a right, sorry. You aren't entitled to it.

 

[Who Dares Win]

Strawman argument

Did u understand the meaning of those lines or you just got a hint from ms ford assistant?

 

[Spaz]

I would check their criminal records and their credit.

That's the standard that everyone should apply.

Anything else is pure nonsensical emotional consideration.

I'm surprised @Danger , you do seem to have some level of coherent intelligence.

Impressive!

How abt you use that intelligence and engage me in the Russian thread or you'd still prefer on feigning ignorance on the chemical attack that took place ?

 

[Bible_Belt]

Guess what? I would hire him.

Guess what else? So would America

The last poll I saw put support for Kavanaugh at 35 percent, and 45 percent of Americans believe his accuser.

 

[EyeBRollin]

Some polls said Hilary had a 98% chance of winning.

You should consider finding better sources.

The most credible analysis had were with a 7/10 chance of winning the election, and winning the popular vote by 3%. The analysis was accurate.

You know what else is accurate? Trump's 40% approval - 52% disapproval, the Republican Party one month away from getting romped in the midterm elections, and the Republican Party base shrinking to basically just non-college educated whites and old people.

 

[Billtx49]

Well, it’s a all a moot political point now after the final vote today, and a time for radicals, mainstream liberals, and conservatives to move on…
You win some, lose some, and some get rained out.

 

[Bible_Belt]

Speaking of Republicans who are going to lose an election, Susan Collins, the supposedly moderate Repub, is commiting political suicide by being the swing vote for Kavanaugh. Millions of dollars poured in overnight to fund her next opponent, despite no one knowing who that person will be.

Let's also remember that the Republicans recently changed some very old rules and killed the filibuster, the most powerful tool of the party holding the Senate minority. As soon as they are that minority, then those rule changes are going to seem like a collosally bad idea. The current group of geriatric Republican buffoons are fvcking their own party just as much as they are the rest of the country.

 

[Deep Dish]

Chris Hardwick and Norm MacDonald

Chris Hardwick was hit with #MeToo. His ex-girlfriend accused him of sexual assault. Chris was deleted from the website of his own company he founded while AMC did an investigation. He was exonerated from the charges, the ex wouldn’t even cooperate with investigators. Nothing she said was out of the ordinary of things which happen in a relationship and no evidence was ever provided.

Norm MacDonald was cancelled from an appearance on The Tonight Show for saying,

“It used to be ‘One hundred women can’t be lying.’ And then it became, ‘One woman can’t lie.’ And that became, ‘I believe all women.’ And then you’re like, ‘What?’ Like, that Chris Hardwick guy I really thought got the blunt end of the stick there.”

So here we have an INNOCENT man who is EXONERATED from charges, but that’s not enough.

You can’t come to the defense of an innocent man.

 

[Billtx49]

And you will need to provide a link on that filibuster rule, my recollection is that the Democrats changed that one.

Correct, I believe they introduced that during the Last administration about 2013 with GOP opposition …
It was called the Nuclear option. Facts matter.

 

[Billtx49]

I expect the usual response. Absolute silence and nothing to support their claims.

And then weeks later they come back with some other fake news and never seem to learn their lesson on trustworthy sources.

Yes. It’s the usual radical gameplan…
They run only on their emotions and omit or intentionally misrepresent the facts. It does seem to effect females more though.

 

[Bible_Belt]

Correct, I believe they introduced that during the Last administration about 2013 with GOP opposition …
It was called the Nuclear option. Facts matter.

The Democrats did amend it, but allowed filibuster for judicial candidates. The Repubs are the ones who eliminated it for judicial candidates, so they could cram through Gorsuch, the other right wing shill, after refusing to hold hearings for any Obama nominee, in clear and direct defiance of the Constitution...treason to their country, basically, but Obama wouldn't fight back and just appoint a judge. That was one of the greatest failures of his presidency.

 

[Bible_Belt]

Wrong again.

You really need to work on your facts and sources. It may explain the irrational statements and arguments you constantly put forth.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_option

"In November 2013, Senate Democrats used the nuclear option to eliminate the 60-vote rule on executive branch nominations and federal judicial appointments."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster_in_the_United_States_Senate

"In 2015, Republicans took control of the I and kept the 2013 rules in place.[59]Finally, on April 6, 2017, the Senate eliminated the sole remaining exception to the 2013 change by invoking the "nuclear option" for Supreme Court nominees. This was done in order to allow a simple majority to confirm Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court. The vote to change the rules was 52 to 48 along party lines.[60]"