3 ms·

The ABA actually endorsed him, and that carries a great deal more weight than what a bunch of law professors say. Again, partisans being partisan. Maybe you'v

by jki275 8y ago

The ABA actually endorsed him, and that carries a great deal more weight than what a bunch of law professors say. Again, partisans being partisan. Maybe you've never been accused of something like what Judge Kavanaugh was accused of. In general, his defense was relatively rational and composed for what it was. And the comments about the democrats and the Clintons was probably correct -- he knows where all the bodies are buried on that front having been in the Bush White House. The whole thing has been a democrat hatchet job from the day he was nominated. I'm not a democrat or a republican by the way -- I think in general most of the people in the government from both parties tend to be power hungry narcissists.

scrollaway 8y ago
> The ABA actually endorsed him All I can find on the ABA's position on Kavanaugh is that they called for an investigation, and that they're reevaluating their position on him given his temperament. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/oct/5/american-bar-association-reopen-kavanaughs-evaluat/ https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/oct/5/american-bar... And also this from before: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/american-bar-association-brett-kavanaugh-ratings-aba-2006-temperament-honesty-sexual-misconduct-a8566071.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/american-b... > I'm not a democrat or a republican by the way I got that, and neither am I. But that's neither here nor there. What matters is what type of media you allow in your day to day life. You seem to have allowed some pretty wonky stuff in, if you're calling this "a democrat hatchet job from the day he was nominated". There was little pushback on him until the allegations came up, other than the usual political card "hey, midterms soon, we should wait". It's .. the way you talk. It's unsettling. Cultish. I don't know how to phrase this without sounding condescending, sorry... just imagine the way you feel when someone tells you about how great their cult is, and how everyone else has it wrong. Think like, Multi Level Marketing sort of unsettling.
- jki275 8y ago
  The ABA repudiated that letter, which was written in his personal capacity by the president of the ABA. There was a great deal of pushback on him even before he was nominated. The knives were out for whoever it was going to be -- it wouldn't have mattered who it was, they already had their strategies for all of the ones on the list. And I'm not sure what "cult" you think I'm representing. I like the Constitution and I prefer that Justices appointed to the Supreme Court actually follow it. That's my ideology.
  - scrollaway 8y ago
    Of course there was going to be pushback. Politics is politics and the partisan divide is great right now. But this isn't just pushback. As I said, Gorsuch didn't have anywhere near the level of pushback Kavanaugh has. And Gorsuch was taking a seat which people felt was stolen by stalling tactics. What's craziest to me is that, with some rare exceptions, Supreme Court appointments used to be pretty nonpartisan (https://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/reference/nominations/Nominations.htm https://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/reference/nominations/Nomi...). And now we're talking about a confirmation that will fail/pass by most likely one vote. And this... doesn't raise any eyebrows. It's fine if he gets confirmed, it's fine that the GOP got rid of the 60-vote rule for Gorsuch, everything is fine and dandy. He'll "follow the constitution". > And I'm not sure what "cult" you think I'm representing. I'm saying the way you talk, in other posts, is very cultish. Make of that what you will. Someone told that to me once and it made me seriously rethink the way I talked to people, and what kind of media I was ingesting.
    - pandaman 8y ago
      There had been zero chance to deny Gorsuch since he has been appointed right after elections. The current situation is different: elections are coming and if the confirmation had been delayed past elections and if Democrats took Senate (and they believe they have a chance) then they could have denied Kavanough's confirmation. If these two had been swapped, the same thing would have been happening to Gorsuch now and you would have been wondering how come Kavanough had been confirmed before and why there is no better candidate now?
    - jki275 8y ago
      No, Gorsuch was a conservative jurist replacing the most conservative jurist who has been on the court in recent history with the possible exception of Clarence Thomas. Supreme Court Nominations used to be non partisan, and one might note that there is one party that made them not so. The 60 vote rule was removed by Reid when the democrats had control -- for all other federal appointments. The republicans merely adopted the rule he put in place for SCOTUS appointments as well. I don't have much of a post history here, so not sure where you're coming from.
- jsjohnst 8y ago
  > the way you talk. It's unsettling. Cultish. I couldn’t agree more.

by jki275 8y ago

scrollaway 8y ago

> The ABA actually endorsed him All I can find on the ABA's position on Kavanaugh is that they called for an investigation, and that they're reevaluating their position on him given his temperament. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/oct/5/american-bar-association-reopen-kavanaughs-evaluat/ https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/oct/5/american-bar... And also this from before: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/american-bar-association-brett-kavanaugh-ratings-aba-2006-temperament-honesty-sexual-misconduct-a8566071.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/american-b... > I'm not a democrat or a republican by the way I got that, and neither am I. But that's neither here nor there. What matters is what type of media you allow in your day to day life. You seem to have allowed some pretty wonky stuff in, if you're calling this "a democrat hatchet job from the day he was nominated". There was little pushback on him until the allegations came up, other than the usual political card "hey, midterms soon, we should wait". It's .. the way you talk. It's unsettling. Cultish. I don't know how to phrase this without sounding condescending, sorry... just imagine the way you feel when someone tells you about how great their cult is, and how everyone else has it wrong. Think like, Multi Level Marketing sort of unsettling.

jki275 8y ago
The ABA repudiated that letter, which was written in his personal capacity by the president of the ABA. There was a great deal of pushback on him even before he was nominated. The knives were out for whoever it was going to be -- it wouldn't have mattered who it was, they already had their strategies for all of the ones on the list. And I'm not sure what "cult" you think I'm representing. I like the Constitution and I prefer that Justices appointed to the Supreme Court actually follow it. That's my ideology.
- scrollaway 8y ago
  Of course there was going to be pushback. Politics is politics and the partisan divide is great right now. But this isn't just pushback. As I said, Gorsuch didn't have anywhere near the level of pushback Kavanaugh has. And Gorsuch was taking a seat which people felt was stolen by stalling tactics. What's craziest to me is that, with some rare exceptions, Supreme Court appointments used to be pretty nonpartisan (https://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/reference/nominations/Nominations.htm https://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/reference/nominations/Nomi...). And now we're talking about a confirmation that will fail/pass by most likely one vote. And this... doesn't raise any eyebrows. It's fine if he gets confirmed, it's fine that the GOP got rid of the 60-vote rule for Gorsuch, everything is fine and dandy. He'll "follow the constitution". > And I'm not sure what "cult" you think I'm representing. I'm saying the way you talk, in other posts, is very cultish. Make of that what you will. Someone told that to me once and it made me seriously rethink the way I talked to people, and what kind of media I was ingesting.
  - pandaman 8y ago
    There had been zero chance to deny Gorsuch since he has been appointed right after elections. The current situation is different: elections are coming and if the confirmation had been delayed past elections and if Democrats took Senate (and they believe they have a chance) then they could have denied Kavanough's confirmation. If these two had been swapped, the same thing would have been happening to Gorsuch now and you would have been wondering how come Kavanough had been confirmed before and why there is no better candidate now?
  - jki275 8y ago
    No, Gorsuch was a conservative jurist replacing the most conservative jurist who has been on the court in recent history with the possible exception of Clarence Thomas. Supreme Court Nominations used to be non partisan, and one might note that there is one party that made them not so. The 60 vote rule was removed by Reid when the democrats had control -- for all other federal appointments. The republicans merely adopted the rule he put in place for SCOTUS appointments as well. I don't have much of a post history here, so not sure where you're coming from.
jsjohnst 8y ago
> the way you talk. It's unsettling. Cultish. I couldn’t agree more.