• 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!

Federal Panel Of Judges Dismisses All 83 Ethics Complaints Against Brett Kavanaugh

So make a bona fide, concrete case, examining his judicial record, of being a "****ty judge" and which shows him being "unfit for the bench." There's an ample record to choose from, so this shouldn't be a problem.

Show your work. Explain in full. Your simply declaring him such doesn't suffice.

His explosive emotionalism, confrontational nature, self-entitlement and laughably hyperbolic dishonest ("MY FAMILY HAS BEEN DESTROYED!!!!!!") is all I need to come to that conclusion, coupled with his decades long career of being a partisan republican political operative. He wasn't confirmed to the bench for three years due to concerns about that.

My opinion suffices for this discussion.

Don't like it? That's just too bad.
 
His explosive emotionalism, confrontational nature, self-entitlement and laughably hyperbolic dishonest ("MY FAMILY HAS BEEN DESTROYED!!!!!!") is all I need to come to that conclusion, coupled with his decades long career of being a partisan republican political operative. He wasn't confirmed to the bench for three years due to concerns about that.

My opinion suffices for this discussion.

Don't like it? That's just too bad.

So, you can't actually point a thing in his 12-year record on the federal bench which indicates he's a "****ty judge," in order to have an informed opinion on the matter.

Got it.
 
So, you can't actually point a thing in his 12-year record on the federal bench which indicates he's a "****ty judge," in order to have an informed opinion on the matter.

Got it.

And? Now that he's in the highest (and unassailable) position, and had over 80 ethics complaints about him essentially be disappeared, he's free to act as he pleases.

Anyone with the characteristics that I described is going to make a ****ty judge. He even promised payback in his testimony. That should have automatically invalidated him right then and there.

You can deny reality all you'd like, as per your usual. It's no skin off my teeth.
 
And? Now that he's in the highest (and unassailable) position, and had over 80 ethics complaints about him essentially be disappeared, he's free to act as he pleases.

Anyone with the characteristics that I described is going to make a ****ty judge. He even promised payback in his testimony. That should have automatically invalidated him right then and there.

You can deny reality all you'd like, as per your usual. It's no skin off my teeth.

Then you should be able to demonstrate, from his 12-year record AS a judge, with over 300 cases heard, exactly how he IS a ****ty judge.

But you can't.
 
Then you should be able to demonstrate, from his 12-year record AS a judge, with over 300 cases heard, exactly how he IS a ****ty judge.

But you can't.

Unnecessary given the man's lack of character. Oh, sure, there's his love of the unitary executive, his attempt to legally force a teenager to carry a pregnancy to term, his laughable adherence to the myth of 'originalism', his love of corporate power, etc... but they're quite irrelevant to his lack of character.

By all means, keep whining and demanding something that's irrelevant if it makes you feel any better.
 
Unnecessary given the man's lack of character. Oh, sure, there's his love of the unitary executive, his attempt to legally force a teenager to carry a pregnancy to term, his laughable adherence to the myth of 'originalism', his love of corporate power, etc... but they're quite irrelevant to his lack of character.

By all means, keep whining and demanding something that's irrelevant if it makes you feel any better.

There is nothing MORE relevant to the charge that he's a "****ty judge" than his record as a judge. It, however, seems to be the ONLY thing you don't want to talk about.

Oh, well. You tried. Poorly. Ta.
 
There is nothing MORE relevant to the charge that he's a "****ty judge" than his record as a judge. It, however, seems to be the ONLY thing you don't want to talk about.

Oh, well. You tried. Poorly. Ta.

It's OK that you have to whistle past the graveyard of his emotional unfitness and utter lack of character.

Have fun playing by yourself and pretending you've won some magical point, as you always do.
 
You keep bragging about a record that is spotty at best. He had many of his decisions overturned by the SC and was especially bad with corporate cases and pollution control. Now that he is on the SC all eyes are on him and that seems to help with his thinking. He knows he's on thin ice and the only threat to his job is being a blind partisan.



https://www.forbes.com/sites/ucenergy/2018/09/06/what-would-a-justice-kavanaugh-mean-for-environmental-law/#7a62ad1f63cb

Sorry, but pointing out his long track record of judicial opinions that was basically ignored by the Democrats is hardly bragging. An opinion piece written by someone who finds issue with a couple of decisions is far from "spotty".
 
Sorry, but pointing out his long track record of judicial opinions that was basically ignored by the Democrats is hardly bragging. An opinion piece written by someone who finds issue with a couple of decisions is far from "spotty".

The number of his decisions that were overturned is certainly troubling especially if you look at his bias towards corporate interests. It appears that he has cleaned up his act so far on the SC. Perhaps he is not feeling so beholding to his masters anymore or he could be spooked by the prospect of further inquiries into his questionable past behaviors. Either way I will take another Roberts over another Gorsuch any day.
 
The number of his decisions that were overturned is certainly troubling especially if you look at his bias towards corporate interests. It appears that he has cleaned up his act so far on the SC. Perhaps he is not feeling so beholding to his masters anymore or he could be spooked by the prospect of further inquiries into his questionable past behaviors. Either way I will take another Roberts over another Gorsuch any day.

How many were overturned, and why is that number troubling?
 
Back
Top Bottom