Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
At this point, I'm actually going to predict that you're going to see a few Democrats that vote against the party line. It's already a 99% chance or more that he's getting sworn in and there are a couple of tight races that are coming up. I think people are going to be surprised how this vote goes.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
As for how effectual complete transparency of this investigation goes, I can't disagree with you, but in light of how prevalent this story was in the mainstream for the last few weeks, I can't think of a better example of a time where this should start being the norm.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens says Kavanaugh should not serve on Supreme Court. “I feel his performance in the hearings ultimately changed my mind,” Stevens said. Stevens, a lifelong Republican who stepped down from the high court in 2010, said that Kavanaugh’s temperament during the hearing was not suited for the position.

Stevens had praised Kavanaugh and one of his rulings in his 2014 book, “Six Amendments: How and Why We Should Change the Constitution.” He said at the time that he thought Kavanaugh “had the qualifications for the Supreme Court should he be selected.”

“I’ve changed my views for reasons that have no relationship to his intellectual ability,” Stevens said on Thursday, referring to Kavanaugh’s temperament.

Stevens, 98, who was appointed by President Gerald Ford, said he believed that lawmakers should take into account the criticism of Kavanaugh’s testimony.

“I think there’s merit to that criticism,” Stevens said, “and I think the senators should really pay attention to that.”

www.politico.com/story/2018/10/04/kavanaugh-confirmation-former-suprem
e-court-justice-870665

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

methinks you altered your post since I last saw it.

---

If I had, i would have corrected the typo.

Quote:

---

I don't think I've ever seen catholic used like that. And I'm Catholic.

---

Catholic (large "C") here too. Born and raised, anyway. Mentally left the church when I was ten.

But usage of (small "c") catholic is legitimate, altho rare.

"He was catholic in his appreciation of movies."

I like unusual words.

*****

Quote:

---

Are your comments regarding Justice Thomas your own, original? Or merely believed and copied from your linky?

---

Oh, I remember reading that criticism of Thomas many many years ago ... a history of his votes and how closely they mirrored Scalia's, along with an analysis of his written opinions. In fact, at the time of that analysis, I believe he had written ZERO opinions; altho I could be wrong. Over the years, whenever a SC ruling came down, I never found any reason to change that opinion of Thomas. You never hear his opinions quoted, for example.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

methinks you altered your post since I last saw it.

---

If I had, i would have corrected the typo.

Quote:

---

I don't think I've ever seen catholic used like that. And I'm Catholic.

---

Catholic (large "C") here too. Born and raised, anyway. Mentally left the church when I was ten.

But usage of (small "c") catholic is legitimate, altho rare.

"He was catholic in his appreciation of movies."

I like unusual words.

*****

Quote:

---

Are your comments regarding Justice Thomas your own, original? Or merely believed and copied from your linky?

---

Oh, I remember reading that criticism of Thomas many many years ago ... a history of his votes and how closely they mirrored Scalia's, along with an analysis of his written opinions. In fact, at the time of that analysis, I believe he had written ZERO opinions; altho I could be wrong. Over the years, whenever a SC ruling came down, I never found any reason to change that opinion of Thomas. You never hear his opinions quoted, for example.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

My argument with how the narrative has shifted from "He's Guilty!" to "He's not fit to be a judge" is this:

No judge on the Supreme Court has ever been defending his or herself in front of a world-wide audience against alleged crimes that are of a caliber one step below murder itself.

I'm betting that most Americans couldn't name two Supreme Court Justices, let alone all of them. But everybody knows Kavanaugh's name now.

This man is going to be judged for the rest of his life. He knows that, yet he still wants the job. I think that says a lot about his character, or at least puts into question anybody's personal opinions about his "job interview" performance.


Stick with his previous stances on issues as a reason that he shouldn't be sworn in. This is just background noise.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SECOND:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

My argument with how the narrative has shifted from "He's Guilty!" to "He's not fit to be a judge" is this:

No judge on the Supreme Court has ever been defending his or herself in front of a world-wide audience against alleged crimes that are of a caliber one step below murder itself.

I'm betting that most Americans couldn't name two Supreme Court Justices, let alone all of them. But everybody knows Kavanaugh's name now.

This man is going to be judged for the rest of his life. He knows that, yet he still wants the job. I think that says a lot about his character, or at least puts into question anybody's personal opinions about his "job interview" performance.


Stick with his previous stances on issues as a reason that he shouldn't be sworn in. This is just background noise.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

I saw Homer Simpson making a difficult decision as a GOP Senator on an old episode: "There are so many different reasons to do the right thing, but only one reason to do the wrong thing . . . because of party loyalty. Therefore I cast my vote for Kavanaugh! Party rules and Democrats drool! In your face, Nancy Pelosi!"

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/reaganmccarthy/2018/10/04/irony-pelosi-c
alls-kavanaugh-opposition-patriots-of-the-constitution-n2525586

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

Yup. Pretty much.

I think you're starting to see what just happened here, Second.

There is about a 0% chance that Kavanaugh won't be sworn in now. We're going to put a man in that was a supporter of probably every single item in the Patriot Act and seems to have no problem invading the privacy of every American Citizen.

But the message was diluted to the point where nobody focused on that.

And half the country is going to cheer when he is sworn in. And the Republicans are likely going to keep the house and the senate after the mid-terms.



And for a day or two I'm going to have fun rubbing it in RF's face, and there are going to be jokes at T's expense about his "tick tock"... but then there will be the sobering realization that the Patriot Act just got stronger and we've got another two years of a Trump administration with a GOP majority in the other two branches.


I hope the Democrats learn their lesson this time.- SIX

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by reaverfan:

Who's surprised? Is anyone surprised? Siggy? Comrades?

---

Quote:

---

Who's surprised? Is anyone surprised? Siggy? Comrades?- SHIT

Not at all surprised that you're screaming "Russia!!!!" now.
No.- SIX

Point missed, as usual.- SHIT

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
So, what I wonder is ... when will the Dems stop playing games?

They didn't have the votes to defeat Kavanaugh. They probably never WOULD get the votes to defeat Kavanaugh, no matter WHAT they did.

But when you can't get results, you can always take a stand.

So what did the Dems "stand for"? A last-minute smear campaign? Guilty until proven innocent? More "identity politics"?

They COULD have pounded on issues they thought were important ... privacy. Roe v Wade. Individuals over corporations.

When people looked back on the proceedings they might have remembered ... Hey, the Dems stood up for me. They might have failed but at least I can count on them next time.

Instead, I think a lot of people are just left with a bad taste in their mouths, having been (once again) pitted against each other, women against men, when we could all be standing up for fairness.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

If the Dems REALLY stand for the fourth Amendment, why don't they vote against the "Patriot Act" and its various extensions? If the Dems REALLY stand for persons over corporations, why don't they propose a change in law? If the Dems REALLY stand for fairness, why don't they stop dividing up the nation with identity politics? Why do they keep pushing their paranoid pro-war agenda?

---

Quote:

---

^ Your questions are obviously/painfully crafted misconceptions for the gullible, low brow Trump supporter.- GSTRING

---

Quote:

---

To give a very brief history, FISA was enacted in 1978–before the proliferation of the internet–and governed both the physical and electronic surveillance of primarily foreign powers and agents.

The Patriot Act, enacted shortly after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, was essentially an amendment to FISA that expanded surveillance to individuals not directly linked to terrorist groups.

Many of the most controversial parts of the Patriot Act, particularly those dealing with bulk surveillance, expired in 2015 but were renewed in part or whole through the Freedom Act.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Who's surprised? Is anyone surprised? Siggy? Comrades?- SHIT

Not at all surprised that you're screaming "Russia!!!!" now.
No.- SIX

Point missed, as usual.- SHIT

---

You think he "missed" your point??
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
You must be really stupid.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by reaverfan:
You're stupid.

You carry on as if you aren't actually a Russian troll, yet you are.

That's as stupid as the fringe anti-American propaganda you post that no one buys.

Putin is wasting money on you.

---

Quote:

---

Putin is wasting money on you.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Putin is wasting money on you.

---

Yes, I keep telling myself that someday those rubles will be worth something! [jk]

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
But they're too tough for you to answer...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
But they're too tough for you to answer...

---

Wrong again - they're TOO EASY to answer. I'm guessing you got an email directive that said: "our new position is:" Blame the Democrats. "They aren't good enough." That's like blaming a women for being assaulted. "She should have known better to wear that."

Don't hold the GOP responsible.
Don't look at the insurmountable votes available.
Don't look at so many things because why would you do that when you can just shift attention elsewhere?

What's one of the main reasons women are treated like second class citizens and always will be?

Easy! Women like you.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
But they're too tough for you to answer...

---

Wrong again - they're TOO EASY to answer. I'm guessing you got an email directive that said: "our new position is:" Blame the Democrats. "They aren't good enough." That's like blaming a women for being assaulted. "She should have known better to wear that."

Don't hold the GOP responsible.
Don't look at the insurmountable votes available.
Don't look at so many things because why would you do that when you can just shift attention elsewhere?

---

Quote:

---

What's one of the main reasons women are treated like second class citizens and always will be?

Easy! Women like you.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by reaverfan:
Fox News Host Compares Kavanaugh To Christ, Claims Both Were Crucified
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2018/10/fox-ne
ws-host-compares-kavanaugh-to-christ-claims-both-were-crucified/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=BRSS&utm_campaign=Nonreligious&utm_content=367

"Gutfeld is not alone in his willingness to give Kavanaugh a pass for sexually assaulting women as a young man. A recent survey shows that 48% of white evangelicals would support Kavanaugh even if he did sexually assault Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and/or his other accusers.

The poll results are alarming, and demonstrate a profound poverty of both intellect and character in almost half of all white evangelicals. Yet this moral failure is not much of a surprise."

Apparently, Jesus loves a good rape.

The narcissism of the reichwing is disgusting. Such ignorance.

---

Quote:

---

"Blame the Democrats. "They aren't good enough." - GSTRING

---

Quote:

---

Don't hold the GOP responsible.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Supposedly the flurry of last-minute allegations was orchestrated by Feinstein. People are saying that she's toast if this info comes out. I've disliked her ever since I got back a smarmy, patronizing form letter from her on why we should invade Iraq; basically she said I'm on the Senate Intelligence Committee and I know things that you don't.

HA! As it turned out, she knew shit; she ate up phony intelligence like it was caviar because it appealed to her sense of superiority.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The Sen. Joe Manchin III of West Virginia voting to approve Kavanaugh is interesting to me. 538 has him at over an 88% chance of winning his election, so I can see that vote being in hopes to get re-elected like I thought some Democratic Senators would do last minute.

I can't see on 538 what that percentage was yesterday or last week before this vote took place, but I can't imagine with that wide of a margin that he was plotting.



Senator Donnelly in my state just lost my vote because of this. I have said in the past here that I had every intention of voting for him in the mid-terms.

Back when I said I was voting for him, he seemed to have a comfortable lead. He's now listed on RCP and 538 as a toss up, although with an advantage. This may not have been a smart move on his part.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The Sen. Joe Manchin III of West Virginia voting to approve Kavanaugh is interesting to me. 538 has him at over an 88% chance of winning his election, so I can see that vote being in hopes to get re-elected like I thought some Democratic Senators would do last minute.

I can't see on 538 what that percentage was yesterday or last week before this vote took place, but I can't imagine with that wide of a margin that he was plotting.



Senator Donnelly in my state just lost my vote because of this. I have said in the past here that I had every intention of voting for him in the mid-terms.

Back when I said I was voting for him, he seemed to have a comfortable lead. He's now listed on RCP and 538 as a toss up, although with an advantage. This may not have been a smart move on his part.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Basically, it went along party lines, which itself is an interesting result. I think republicans are going to find it costs them overall, because it confirms their party as a machine, rather than a representative body.
If the results had been the same tally, but scattered across party lines, it would have indicated a more dynamic body.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
With RARE exception, the vote went along party lines. That's my meaning. Despite all the possible Republican wildcards - Snow, Flake, Murkowski, Collins - who indicated reservations - only Murkowski who was opposed - voted 'present'. And despite any potential election considerations or concerns over process, only 1 democrat - Manchin - voted yes.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

We can always hope Ginsberg kicks it while Trump is still Preezy.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by reaverfan:
Lisa Murkowski's Facebook Page Flooded with Rape Threats and Accusations After ‘No’ Vote on Kavanaugh
https://www.alternet.org/lisa-murkowskis-facebook-page-flooded-rape-th
reats-and-accusations-after-no-vote-kavanaugh?src=newsletter1096843

Such a civil party...

---