Hope the President does a good job for USA

[JPie]

And of course the Dem Senators should ask him questions ... but when they turn a legitimate process into a pathetic portrayal of Romper Room, they - and those who support/cheer them on - lose my respect entirely ... even more so when they defer & deflect the behaviors & actions of those IN the room onto someone who is NOT in the room.

It stopped being a legitimate process when Republicans refused to release all relevant documents and then dumped 45,000 pages on the Democrats in the 11th hour. If the roles were reversed, you and Red would be screaming bloody murder instead of demanding that they vote already.

 

[the_mother_thing]

It stopped being a legitimate process when Republicans refused to release all relevant documents and then dumped 45,000 pages on the Democrats in the 11th hour. If the roles were reversed, you and Red would be screaming bloody murder instead of demanding that they vote already.

Dems didn't have a problem dropping a few thousand pages of Obamacare Law in the middle of the night and expecting an immediate vote on it with no opportunity to digest it.

Apparently precedent (and elections) have consequences.

No, I don't believe 'two wrongs make a right', but I don't manage Congress aside from casting my vote.

 

[redwood66]

I don't give a hang about the documents for a nominee, neither do the dem senators. There are plenty of people smarter than any PSers that know his record and his rating is out there, plus his approval to the bench on which he currently sits. If the dems or repubs have enough votes to confirm for any nominee then get on with it.

 

[soxfan]

I've watched every single second of this Judicial hearing. Kavanaugh has successfully avoided answering ANY question. And if you really really really came to the conclusion that he won't be the vote to reverse Roe vs. Wade and we are all hysterical, you haven't been watching. Roe vs. Wade is VERY much in danger.

I don't understand the bizarre fixation that old white men have about controlling women's bodies. I just don't.

 

[soxfan]

I don't give a hang about the documents for a nominee, neither do the dem senators. There are plenty of people smarter than any PSers that know his record and his rating is out there, plus his approval to the bench on which he currently sits. If the dems or repubs have enough votes to confirm for any nominee then get on with it.

Not true: Merrick Garland.

 

[redwood66]

I don't see women's bodies being an issue for the federal government to weigh in on period, with an opinion or with funding.

 

[redwood66]

Not true: Merrick Garland.

What about him? The party in control had the call. Some day the dems will be in the same position. That's how it works.

 

[soxfan]

What about him? The party in control had the call. Some day the dems will be in the same position. That's how it works.

Just to refresh your memory.....

 

[redwood66]

Just to refresh your memory.....

Which is what I said. The party in control. Of the Senate that is.

 

[the_mother_thing]

I've watched every single second of this Judicial hearing. Kavanaugh has successfully avoided answering ANY question. And if you really really really came to the conclusion that he won't be the vote to reverse Roe vs. Wade and we are all hysterical, you haven't been watching. Roe vs. Wade is VERY much in danger.

I don't understand the bizarre fixation that old white men have about controlling women's bodies. I just don't.

He's answered a LOT of the hypothetical questions they way most nominees have in the past - by deferring answering some questions because of the likelihood a similar case will come before him, and he - like his predecessors - aim to remain impartial. I respect that, as I did for his predecessors. Do you want a biased judge?

I'll say it - I do think more women have hysteria & delusions about "old white men having control of" their bodies than that scenario actually exists or will exist. No, I simply do not buy the fearmongering being served up by the left, and that is exactly what I think it is - period.

Can you cite ONE case where Kavanaugh ruled in favor of his personal views in a manner that was contradictory to the law? And I'm speaking 'factually' contradictory to the law; not what you 'feel' is contradictory to the law.

 

[soxfan]

The last 3 days all I have heard is obstruction obstruction obstruction. Slamming dems for not giving Kavanaugh a chance when he is SO well-qualified. SO hypocritical of republicans.

 

[soxfan]

Can you cite ONE case where Kavanaugh ruled in favor of his personal views in a manner that was contradictory to the law? And I'm speaking 'factually' contradictory to the law; not what you 'feel' is contradictory to the law.

Nope. Because they did NOT RELEASE all of the documents so they could be read before this hearing took place.

 

[redwood66]

His opinions have been public record since written.

 

[the_mother_thing]

Nope. Because they did NOT RELEASE all of the documents so they could be read before this hearing took place.

I'm pretty, pretty, pretty sure his rulings as a judge are a matter of public record.

 

[redwood66]

I'm pretty, pretty, pretty sure his rulings as a judge are a matter of public record.

Which makes this documents thing more BS. Trump's list of judges has been out there what? Two years?

 

[the_mother_thing]

Which makes this documents thing more BS. Trump's list of judges has been out there what? Two years?

Yes, but to be fair, Kavanaugh was not on the original list, IIRC. I suspect he filled the vacancy on 'the list' when Gorsuch was nominated but I don't know for certain ... and I don't really care about 'the list'. It was a gesture that was not required.

 

[redwood66]

You're right, he was added in November 2017. Even so the opinions are public record and have been. They have had time, but it's not about that anyway.

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archi...rumps-original-lists-and-why-he-was-added.php

 

[the_mother_thing]

You're right, he was added in November 2017. Even so the opinions are public record and have been. They have had time, but it's not about that anyway.

Agreed. Anyone who really cared (for the last year) could have been reviewing his opinions and every other potential nominee's opinions vs regurgitating talking points.

 

[AGBF]

Just to refresh your memory.....

I hate Mike McConnell; he is truly sleazy. Just a slick politician with no conscience or sense of morality. He is as amoral as trump. And Paul Ryan is cold hearted and two-faced. We have the worst House and Senate majority leaders ever.

I really find Republicans loathsome. I am finding it hard to follow John McCain's advice, much as I held him in high esteem, and to embrace all people as fellow Americans. Not when I see this behavior over and over again. But I will continue to see if any Republicans redeem themselves. For my approval, they will have to fight Trump openly to gain redemption.

AGBF

 

[redwood66]

Deb both Rs and Ds work for their constituents, so your approval is irrelevant. As is mine in your district. If the constituents are unhappy they can vote him or her out.

 

[AGBF]

Agreed. Anyone who really cared (for the last year) could have been reviewing his opinions and every other potential nominee's opinions vs regurgitating talking points.

Not so. We know who he is. He is not fit.

 

[AGBF]

Deb both Rs and Ds work for their constituents, so your approval is irrelevant. As is mine in your district.

What made you think I live in a Democratic district? My Congresswoman is currently a Republican. We may change that, however.

 

[redwood66]

What made you think I live in a Democratic district? My Congresswoman is currently a Republican. We may change that, however.

I should not have assumed .

 

[the_mother_thing]

Not so. We know who he is. He is not fit.

How do you know who he is and whether or not he is fit if you don't actually review his record?

Is it based on looks? He is an "old white guy" afterall ... maybe that is disqualifying enough these days.

 

[AGBF]

Deb both Rs and Ds work for their constituents, so your approval is irrelevant. As is mine in your district. If the constituents are unhappy they can vote him or her out.

Wait a minute. I think we were talking apples and oranges. I was telling the_mother_thing that I had no need to review Judge Kavanaugh's opinions, which is what Senator Lindsey Graham told Judge Kavanaugh. What does that have to do with Republicans and Democrats working for their
constituents?

 

[redwood66]

How do you know who he is and whether or not he is fit if you don't actually review his record?

Is it based on looks? He is an "old white guy" afterall ... maybe that is disqualifying enough these days.

He's not really very old. Which is a good thing.

 

[AGBF]

How do you know who he is and whether or not he is fit if you don't actually review his record?

Is it based on looks?

.

First of all, he looks like a high school kid to me.

Second of all, how did Lindsey Graham know? Because he has been a federal judge for 11 years! He isn't Yertle the Turtle or some country lawyer from Whoville!

AGBF

 

[redwood66]

Wait a minute. I think we were talking apples and oranges. I was telling the_mother_thing that I had no need to review Judge Kavanaugh's opinions, which is what Senator Lindsey Graham told Judge Kavanaugh. What does that have to do with Republicans and Democrats working for their
constituents?

I responded to your comment about Rs being loathsome et al and what they need to do for your approval. I thought that was pretty clear.

 

[JPie]

No, I don't believe 'two wrongs make a right',

Still, it didn't stop you from throwing that up as an excuse.

Edited to add: neither of us will change our minds on this so I'm not going to try.

 

[AGBF]

I responded to your comment about Rs being loathsome et al and what they need to do for your approval. I thought that was pretty clear.

Nope. I need it spelled out for me. I am slow. But thank you for doing so. Spelling it out, that is.

Your friend,
Deb

 

[redwood66]

Still, it didn't stop you from throwing that up as an excuse.

Edited to add: neither of us will change our minds on this so I'm not going to try.

I don't think anyone wants to or is trying to change anyone else's mind here. But we all have opinions.