The Kavanaugh Fallout


#61

It is superior to the Canadian and European models where there is no confirmation process. Judges are unaccountable in these countries and therefore often much more activist/elitist. They want to legislate from the bench, and it is refreshing to see US Supreme Court justices such as the late Justice Scalia, who was a very strict originalist. You would hardly see such mindsets in 99 percent of European judges.


#62

Well times change . And they are changing faster and faster.
The American constitution has had to change over the years if you haven’t noticed, often for the better !

The small number of justices means they can be lobbied and you can gerrymander the court with just a couple of appointments. Then everybody gets really hot and bothered instead of a system where there was fairly constant turnover.

Now it could be argued from other perspectives I’m sure.


#63

America could use some elitism these days. We are all about the lowest common denominator. We’d rather have a beer with some rapist instead of hire someone capable. Our leader is a reality TV brat who holds bi-monthly pep rallies.


#64

The new ‘elite’ judge raved about the Clintons and the Left and Search and Destroy.
To me it sounded like he was off his rocker !


#65

Its odd, he goes into an interview for a job demanding impartiality and he goes off on an Alex Jones level rant rife with conspiracy and partisanship. he loses his cool, snivels like a rat and lectures everyone. USA USA USA!


#66

I agree. I’m a big fan of the originalist approach. That does not mean the Constitution can’t be amended or changed, and the process for doing so is laid out clearly in it.

I wonder how many know the history of the battles FDR had with conservatives over SCOTUS. FDR ended up winning, but he was unsuccessful in packing the court to win quickly. Instead in four terms he managed to put 8 justices on the bench, and changed it that way. Just took patience.

Conservatives lost that battle, and in 1974 FDR’s liberals ruled on Roe v Wade. That was the last straw for conservatives and defined movement conservatism. Republicans would talk about Roe and their plans to put a majority on the bench to literally anyone who would listen to them, and hopefully write about their goals and why they were trying to gain a majority. Conservatives worked very hard to explain their position very clearly.

Finally this summer Anthony Kennedy retired. Obviously he chose a time that would support movement conservatism and would guarantee that he would be replaced by a Justice of strictly Republican choice. Last Saturday the work of more than 45 years came to fruition.

It was never a secret, and Democrats loved to mock the GOP for it. Right up until their gnashing of teeth, that is.


#67

What a ridiculous insult. We rather hold our values that a person is innocent until proven guilty and everyone has the right to due process.

We elected a president democratically. You wouldn’t be complaining if who you wanted won.


#68

bit snowflakey there fella. He wasn’t the best man for the job, he botched the interview, guilty or not, proved to be biased and lacked judgement. Still got the job though.


#69

I’m not sure how a four day fbi investigation where they apparently ignored some witnesses is due process.


#70

Typical, can’t argue so let’s jusr say he’s a snowflake.

Stop acting like a sore loser.

Either you

A. Did not even vote, therefore you share the responsibility of electing someone you think isn’t fit

B. You did vote and engaged in our electoral process. And is now being a sore loser like a 5 year old who lost the game.

The best person for this position is elected, you knew that. So therefore refer back to A and B again.


#71

That’s such a lame argument. If they found something in 4 days you’d be all over it. If they found nothing they must be corrupt. If you have credible evidence the FBI did not do their jobs properly please share.


#72

Absolutely, which is why the Libs fought Kavanaugh at the gutter/sewer level. To them, the ghosts of Hugo Black, Earl Warren (a RINO), William O. Douglas, etc. are turning over in their grave.

I, on the other hand, see a return to the Four Horseman style of restraint, which is a good thing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_(Supreme_Court)


#73

not a sore loser. but keep projecting,

He is ONLY in because he wrote in the past of not allowing sitting presidents to be indicted.

THAT’S THE ONLY REASON HE WAS BEING BACKED SO VIGOROUSLY.

Better judges out there. Cleaner pasts, less conspiratorial (see his prepared speech the other day) less biased (see his Clinton and left rant in his prepared speech the other day).


#74

Kavanaugh was the best man for the job?

you know that is horseshit.

Prerequisites: unbiased, impartial.

Kavanaugh’s PREPARED statement: The Clinton’s…the left…smear campaign…conspiracy… I love beer…lets boof…

Congrats Sir, you got the job…

the fuck with that, lets just admit he won’t indict a sitting prez, that was the deal, and be on with it.


#75

I know those on the left like to speculate, but that’s all that is. Brett Kavanaugh was on the short list back in 2012 when Romney was running, about the same time Dr. Ford had her couples therapy session to settle some dispute about 2 doors, which apparently had already been put in, long before 2012 according to planning records.


#76

That doesn’t even make sense, maybe understand a term before you throw it out there.

Ok so if we’re not being sore losers here, Then go out next term and vote. Justices can be impeached. That’s how a democracy works.


#77

This is classic sore loser speak.


#78

Kavanaugh was on a shortlist when Romney was running?

That is a good lead in to take a shot at Dr Ford, but without links or facts, or referencing someone in a position to actually nominate someone for the SCOTUS it is complete posterior pontification.

Sure the Forumosa Proud Boys will lap it up though. Looks like some already have.


#79

That’s a serious allegation. Any evidence? Didn’t think so.

Since when have those been prerequisites? Anybody who’s been nominated by either side is, by definition, biased. To think otherwise is naive to the extreme.


#80

why am I a sore loser.

This Trumpian win/lose stance you think the whole world adopts is part of what leads to your sadly myopic world view. Politics is at its best a game of compromise. Winner takes all is the domain of tyrants.

But then again

your side find safety in the comfort of a warm wet diaper, doesn’t matter to what level the shit rises as long as you can bask in the warmth of it its fine by you. Chickens do come home to roost, you reap what you sow and that shit will eventually cool.