Politics
Politics
Out of context: Reply #29988
- Started
- Last post
- 33,468 Responses
- Ramanisky21
The first 10 min alone ... JFC!!!!!!!
Only the best people ... amirite????- fucking ridiculousBluejam
- are they all on acid?Fax_Benson
- harris is an idiot. I've watched the entire thing so far and kavanaugh has pretty much killed each lame attempt to trap him.Gnash
- No she isn’t.monospaced
- here, she is. so desperate to try and "catch" him. it's pathetic.Gnash
- her delusion that it should be up to the judiciary to correct the failings of congress is telling.Gnash
- no, she isn'tmonospaced
- the fact that congress failed doesn't mean she's an idiot for pointing out this man is a fucking piece of shit scumbag and liarmonospaced
- +1 monofadein11
- +2 monoRamanisky2
- nobody should praise this CLINT for getting away with this shit, simply because he can't answer a question honestlymonospaced
- Everything is a hypothetical with this fucktard.Ramanisky2
- where the fuck is he lying? they are grasping at straws. in each case they had a problem with his court decisions, it's been a flawed law -- congress's problemGnash
- I've watched all the testimony so far and I've yet to see the dems bring up any of his previous rulings that weren't correct to the law.Gnash
- it's these elected fuckwits that need to make/change/update the laws. they can't criticize his judgments so they try and "catch" him in a lie.Gnash
- and I'm not 'praising' him, the dems are fucked here and their theatre is just thatGnash
- ^ https://media.giphy.…Ramanisky2
- +1 Gnashchukkaphob
- Kamala is a vicious & rude CLINT. Holy crap. "with all due respect.." and then is bitchy AF! And yes, desperate. Haha!chukkaphob
- -10 ChukkaRamanisky2
- how can you people be so fucking dense? Obviously, from the documents the (D) received, they know he met with Trump's personal lawyer...hobgoblin
- ... to discuss the Mueller investigation. This is a clear conflict of interest and this alone should be enough for him to acknowledge and step away. except,hobgoblin
- he won't, because this whole fucking thing is rigged, and he's being put in proactively so he can pardon Trump. Fucking hell. If Obama did even a tenthhobgoblin
- of the shit trump and his administration is (treason, then, nominate a judge to pardon you in the future) your simple minded brains would have exploded.hobgoblin
- the fucking fact that you dismiss it as "omg she was so bitchy amirite?!" is a travesty in of itself.hobgoblin
- @hobgoblin dude, calm yoour tits. I agree w/ the challenge and what's being brought to light. Her attitude & approach, however, is bitchy, disrespectful &nasty.chukkaphob
- +100 hobgoblin
-100 chukkaRamanisky2 - bullshit. if the dems had any, any, documents showing that Kav. was colluding in any way they'd have slammed them down. no questionGnash
- like the documents the Kooker released to day "illegally" (what a hero)? Trying to show Kav. was a racist, when in fact they showed the opposite.Gnash
- Trump may very well think (and pray) that Kav. will have his back but no way Kav will cook any judgment that's outside the law.Gnash
- and "fixed" -- are you kidding? every dem has nominated a dem, and every rep has done the same.Gnash
- -744 Ramanisky2
+1000 chukkachukkaphob - Bitchy and disrespectful, first of all, aren't the same as stupid. They are also warranted compared to Kavanaugh's despicable levels of contempt.monospaced
- x infinity hobgoblinmonospaced
- who said bitchy and disrespectful are the same as stupid? huh??chukkaphob
- He called her stupid. We said she wasn’t. Then you said he was right, she was bitchy. They aren’t the same.monospaced
- you gave him a +1 for it evenmonospaced
- @mono huh?? where did he call her stupid?? dude.chukkaphob
- I called her an idiot.Gnash
- Right, Goes to show Mono hears what he wants to hear and not what others say. Fact.chukkaphob
- I thought she was pretty good...especially pushing on the Kasowitz Benson Torres question. Not bitchy at all.see_thru
- https://www.youtube.…see_thru
- She’s just setting a trap for that hypothetical CLINT.Ramanisky2
- Kasowitz Benson Torres has stated that they have never met with KavGnash
- https://media1.tenor…Ramanisky2
- where? Literally his first comment "Harris is an idiot"monospaced
- maybe it's you with the issues reading, chukkamonospaced
- pathetic attempt to call me out though, since it totally backfired on youmonospaced
- and yes, "idiot" implies "stupid," so don't even bother with any petty symantecs shit here ... I don't "hear what I want."monospaced
- and that isn't one of my characteristics either, so what the fuck are you on about?monospaced
- She's not an idiot, she's not stupid, and she is 100% justified in being a bitch to this lying piece of shit, who is clearly a crooked fuck and deserves itmonospaced
- trump is stupid, idiot is different. I don't think she's stupid. Why the hate for this guy? I've watched all the testimony and he seems quite reasonableGnash
- I sure hope he doesn't contribute to overturning Roe, but he's no ideologue, thank goodnessGnash
- And there's no evidence he's been lyingGnash
- LOL @monochukkaphob
- Gnash, they all sound reasonable in the hearings. But of course the whole reason this guy is being nominated is because he's a reliable vote for conservatives.yuekit
- So "why all the hate"... basically because his nomination is going to shift the entire society to the right in terms of abortion rights, workers rights, etc.yuekit
- At this point the court has a majority of these hard right people like Kavanaugh, in spite of GOP only winning the popular vote once in the past 20 years.yuekit
- then congress needs to change the laws rather than rely on appointing like-minded people to the judiciary.Gnash
- It's not quite that simple though is it? For instance when the Supreme Court decided that donating unlimited money in American elections is equivalent to freeyuekit
- speech, that's not something that can be overruled with a law. And there are plenty of other examples like that.yuekit
- it's not the judiciary's job to be an 'unelected' secondary government. they are not supposed to make policyGnash
- By saying "the government can never fix or address this issue", they are effectively making policy. That's how the conservative block of the U.S. Supreme Courtyuekit
- has operated with decisions like Citizens United and many others. So it's a little disingenuous to say "just write better laws" when many of their decisionsyuekit
- prevent the legislature from doing exactly that. That's more of what you'll get with Kavanaugh.yuekit
- all the judiciary can do is interpret the law, not change it. none of their decisions blocks legislators from amending and changing laws.Gnash
- I get what you're saying, though. senate is so useless that they can't seem to agree on how wet water is.Gnash
- Not sure how familiar you are with the U.S. Supreme Court but the past couple decades it has been moving in a very conservative direction, issuing sweepingyuekit
- decisions that take the power away from the legislature. So for instance: you can't regulate campaign donations, you can't regulate guns, unions can't organizeyuekit
- their members etc. That DOES actually block legislature from making laws, because now you can't have an effective campaign finance law for instance.yuekit
- With Kavanaugh in there, reproductive rights could be next, maybe environmental laws, etc. I get that the GOP/ Fox News spin is that "he's just like an umpire"yuekit
- but that's a very naive view.yuekit
- it may hinder, but it doesn't block them. If the decision is based on a law that Congress has passed, Congress can actually change that lawGnash
- If congress thinks that the court has interpreted a law incorrectly, congress can then amend the law to make it clearerGnash
- if a decision is based on the constitution, then that constitution can be amended. Obviously easier said than done.Gnash
- they are unelected - the judiciary should not be making policy, or appear to be making policyGnash
- that's not the "fox news" viewpoint, that's what the founders had intended.Gnash
- I hope Roe isn't overturned but if it is then congress needs to find a way to correct that.Gnash
- Well as a practical matter the Constitution isn't going to be amended. Just isn't going to happen. So the real-world impact of a right-wing Supreme Courtyuekit
- deciding that it's "unconstitutional" for Congress to legislate on something is that it does indeed take it out of their control.yuekit
- As far as what the founders intended, who knows what they intended on most issues. Take the Second Amendment for instance, is it an unlimited right to own anyyuekit
- weapon, or intended more for militias? That's why the interpretation is so important.yuekit
- Someone like Kavanaugh, who is pretty much a George Bush style Republican, is probably going to rule to give the government a lot of power over nationalyuekit
- security (he was in favor of the NSA surveillance program for instance), but much less power when it comes to regulating business. Apparently he sidedyuekit
- with corporations in disputes against workers something like 80% of the time as a judge.yuekit
- You're not wrong in that the interpretation of constitution can have wide outcomes. but I do think the founders were very clear on the role of the judiciary.Gnash