• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Democratic presidential candidates want Kavanaugh impeached after newly surfaced sexual misconduct a

Where there is smoke.....

Kavanaugh doesn't belong on the supreme court.

Any more than Trump belongs in the White House

These guys are as deplorable as the ones who elected them

It is a sad.state of affairs for America. Gutter rats in high office
 
Scarab said:
It wouldn't be a very strong argument. He was confirmed because we live in an age of debilitating partisanship and because he was nominated by a president of the same political party that controls the Senate. He could have skipped the hearings, gone to the spa in his hotel, and he still would have been confirmed. He had a right to defend himself. He also had an option to defend himself in a manner reflective of the high and solemn position he sought or to melt down like Tupperware forgotten in a preheating oven. He chose.
Click to expand...

that's one opinion.

Which speech sounded more credible to you? both facing accusations of sexual misconduct

Billy Clinton "I did not have sexual relations with that women"

or

“This confirmation process has become a national disgrace,” Kavanaugh said. “The Constitution gives the Senate an important role in the confirmation process, but you have replaced advice and consent with search and destroy.”
 
Scarab said:
It wouldn't be a very strong argument. He was confirmed because we live in an age of debilitating partisanship and because he was nominated by a president of the same political party that controls the Senate. He could have skipped the hearings, gone to the spa in his hotel, and he still would have been confirmed. He had a right to defend himself. He also had an option to defend himself in a manner reflective of the high and solemn position he sought or to melt down like Tupperware forgotten in a preheating oven. He chose.
Click to expand...
The case against Kavanaugn had more holes in it than a Tupperware colander Kavanaugh was dragged through the mud and his integrity was impugned. I do not blame him in the slightest for emotionally refuting his false accusers. It was totally understandable.
 
rtfm2.jpg

Democrats again try to put complex machinery together without reading the manual.
 
Trump said:
that's one opinion.

Which speech sounded more credible to you? both facing accusations of sexual misconduct

Billy Clinton "I did not have sexual relations with that women"

or

“This confirmation process has become a national disgrace,” Kavanaugh said. “The Constitution gives the Senate an important role in the confirmation process, but you have replaced advice and consent with search and destroy.”
Click to expand...

I mean, if you can imagine some value in comparing those two quotes, good on you. I find it an utterly brainless exercise.
 
SLC said:
The case against Kavanaugn had more holes in it than a Tupperware colander Kavanaugh was dragged through the mud and his integrity was impugned. I do not blame him in the slightest for emotionally refuting his false accusers. It was totally understandable.
Click to expand...

Color me surprised. What I knew before joining DP that has been reinforced since joining DP is that the most partisan people will defend their side no matter what and criticize the other side no matter what. If I distorted Kavanaugh's voice and withheld the visual and presented his performance to six Republicans and six Democrats, I bet (I hope) that all or most of them would call it disturbing, embarrassing, and disqualifying. Seriously, imagine someone on a job interview behaving that way to the interviewer. As soon as we reveal which party he belongs to, though, the same old people retreat to their same comfortable corners.
 
Scarab said:
Color me surprised. What I knew before joining DP that has been reinforced since joining DP is that the most partisan people will defend their side no matter what and criticize the other side no matter what. If I distorted Kavanaugh's voice and withheld the visual and presented his performance to six Republicans and six Democrats, I bet (I hope) that all or most of them would call it disturbing, embarrassing, and disqualifying. Seriously, imagine someone on a job interview behaving that way to the interviewer. As soon as we reveal which party he belongs to, though, the same old people retreat to their same comfortable corners.
Click to expand...
As I recall Clarence Thomas got a similar treatment and responded with an impassioned defense. Only liberals would shot a man in the leg and blame him for limping. :roll:
 
SLC said:
As I recall Clarence Thomas got a similar treatment and responded with an impassioned defense. Only liberals would shot a man in the leg and blame him for limping. :roll:
Click to expand...




I guess they're similar. Thomas's language is forceful, but his delivery is calmer and more dignified than Kavanaugh's. Kavanaugh made some memorable soundbites, but it was his demeanor and attitude throughout the hearing that surprised me most. Admittedly, I did not watch all of the Thomas confirmation as I did the Kavanaugh confirmation. I can only imagine the stress and pressure he was feeling at the time. I just think he choked and worry that if he gets a case that provokes an equally strong emotional reaction that his judgment might be weakened.
 
Scarab said:
Color me surprised. What I knew before joining DP that has been reinforced since joining DP is that the most partisan people will defend their side no matter what and criticize the other side no matter what. If I distorted Kavanaugh's voice and withheld the visual and presented his performance to six Republicans and six Democrats, I bet (I hope) that all or most of them would call it disturbing, embarrassing, and disqualifying. Seriously, imagine someone on a job interview behaving that way to the interviewer. As soon as we reveal which party he belongs to, though, the same old people retreat to their same comfortable corners.
Click to expand...

You don’t find the accusations thrown at him disturbing? Color me surprised. [emoji6]
 
Aberration said:
You don’t find the accusations thrown at him disturbing? Color me surprised. [emoji6]
Click to expand...

Disturbing from what standpoint?

Disturbing because they might be true? It would be problematic for a SC justice; and if he inflicted pain on someone by doing it, yes, I would be disturbed. Personally, it wouldn't faze me much because I saw a lot more than that in college.

Disturbing because they might not be true? That would disturb me as far as the story makers' role. This was sloppy reporting on the NYT's part, but I don't think they were out of line for carrying the story.

I don't really see this going anywhere, but it really has gotten some people riled up.
 
Scarab said:
Um, no. No, it does not. You remind me of another poster who recently said that in today's climate, having a penis is illegal on college campuses. You're both exaggerating for transparent reasons.
Click to expand...

Then you haven't been paying attention to the current climate. I didn't say I agree with it, but that is the world we live in now, or at least you do.
 
Moon said:
I don’t think she’s saying that at all. She’s said his past behavior (real or not) wasn’t what drove her opposition to Kavanaugh, it was his closing statement when he lambasted the committee.
Click to expand...

So his last statement proved to her that he could sexually assault this person?
 
Scarab said:
Disturbing from what standpoint?

Disturbing because they might be true? It would be problematic for a SC justice; and if he inflicted pain on someone by doing it, yes, I would be disturbed. Personally, it wouldn't faze me much because I saw a lot more than that in college.

Disturbing because they might not be true? That would disturb me as far as the story makers' role. This was sloppy reporting on the NYT's part, but I don't think they were out of line for carrying the story.

I don't really see this going anywhere, but it really has gotten some people riled up.
Click to expand...

Disturbing because they were even entertained at that level. There are a whole lot lower levels to vet the claims before making a public spectacle of them.

It was done for no other reason than political purposes and I applaud Kavanuagh for taking them to task over it.
 
Chomsky said:
Yep, exactly. His opening tirade, along with his disrespect for members of the committee during further questioning, and his propagating Clinton conspiracies during the hearing, fully disqualified him beyond the slightest doubt.

Do you see this exchange, below?

Senator: Do you have a drinking problem?

Nominee: Do you?

What??? That performance would not get him past an interview at McDonalds! So how was it possible to pass the Committee for a lifetime appointment to the highest court of the land?

To think this man is deciding the future of our country, is an epic heretic travesty! Travesty beyond belief!
Click to expand...

In 2019, it's not beyond belief. It is typical for Washington DC
 
Thoreau72 said:
It's not a criminal trial, it's appointment to federal office.

Kavanaugh is unfit for the bench.
Click to expand...

Hmmm... what makes him unfit? His response to disgusting, unfounded accusations made for political purposes only, in an attempt to destroy him? The Times even had to correct their slime piece because they could not get anyone, anyone at all to corroborate this old story.


Sent from my iPhone XX Turbo using Tapacrap
 
Scarab said:
Color me surprised. What I knew before joining DP that has been reinforced since joining DP is that the most partisan people will defend their side no matter what and criticize the other side no matter what. If I distorted Kavanaugh's voice and withheld the visual and presented his performance to six Republicans and six Democrats, I bet (I hope) that all or most of them would call it disturbing, embarrassing, and disqualifying. Seriously, imagine someone on a job interview behaving that way to the interviewer. As soon as we reveal which party he belongs to, though, the same old people retreat to their same comfortable corners.
Click to expand...

so literally he is supposed to sit on his hands, and let democrats and this story ruin his life, his reputation, and his chance at the appointment?

not a chance in hell

i wouldnt, he didnt, and you wouldnt

we ALL fight for what is right...and he was fighting for his life on that occasion

you may not like it....but damn if i wouldnt have been as animated as he was
 
Scarab said:
No, I never did. I still am surprised that anyone subjects themselves to national public scrutiny. To put it another way, I definitely inhaled.
Click to expand...

Me as well, repeatedly...
 
tres borrachos said:
You are correct. In fact, I've said that repeatedly dating all the way back to the Kavanaugh hearings. I don't know what happened in 1984, and quite frankly, I don't care. He may have done what they said, or maybe he didn't. It was 35 years ago. I am the same age as Kavanaugh and did things in 1984 that were stupid when I was drinking. I wouldn't want them tossed at me. I'm not a hypocrite and believe they also shouldn't be used against him.
Click to expand...


I agree with your assessment, however if that were the case he should not have lied about them

Just like Nixon the cover up is more damning than the crime...
 
Scarab said:



I guess they're similar. Thomas's language is forceful, but his delivery is calmer and more dignified than Kavanaugh's. Kavanaugh made some memorable soundbites, but it was his demeanor and attitude throughout the hearing that surprised me most. Admittedly, I did not watch all of the Thomas confirmation as I did the Kavanaugh confirmation. I can only imagine the stress and pressure he was feeling at the time. I just think he choked and worry that if he gets a case that provokes an equally strong emotional reaction that his judgment might be weakened.
Click to expand...
That's HIGHLY unlikely he was being personally attack and his character was being assassinated by a woman who's former best friend and own father don't believe her. His response was totally reasonable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom