Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
To be clear, I don't think Dems should actually do all those things.
I’m no more a Democrat than you are a Republican.
Not high school, but the fact that 40 years earlier one candidate worked for an indigent defense office and got an accused rapist a light sentence on a plea deal was.ÂIvanKaramazov said:
Guy doesn't beleive the MSM...but uses random commenter on a site as a source? Ooof.I have no idea what Feinstein is doing with this Kavanaugh mess, but this second story about corruption is utter nonsense and a perfect example of something I've referenced before with you and more broadly with right wing conspiracy theorists- the internet is so full of so many strands of information that if you look hard enough for anything you can find what you're looking for.
Appropriations committees generally don't award money to contractors directly. They appropriate money to agencies (in this case, presumably, DOD) and then the agencies (a completely separate branch of government) choose the contractors. And they do so under a set of very strict guidelines, under close scrutiny. As someone else put it once in response to some previous similar unsubstantiated claim of corruption: "this isn't Nam, this is government contracting. There are rules." And when I went down the rabbit hole a bit on this one, sure enough the only allegation, found in some local Northern California blog linked from her husband's wikipedia page, is that she "lobbied Pentagon officials to support Defense projects she favored."Â
Also FWIW- the link you provided is to a Daily Kos user post ("community")- ie the source isn't even a blogger, it's just some random commenter- and the flawed link in the article is to a former right wing opinion writer for The Hill by the name of David Keene, not a reporter.
More generally, when someone tries to tell you someone has done something in Washington via legislation or regulation and doesn't give you a link, a cite or at least some easy way to find the documents they reference, they're almost always full of ####. Anyone remotely familiar with government or reporting on government knows that you have to do that.
Perhaps you are a real stickler for ethics in government, and you think the immediate family of high-ranking government officials should do no business whatsoever with the federal government or otherwise do anything that might appear to be a benefit from government service. That sounds good to me too. Why even risk the appearance of impropriety, right? But if that's the case I've got some bad news for you about the current President.
I agree that that was a scummy line of argument, and I'm pretty confident that I've said so before. It's not like I've ever been shy about criticizing Hillary Clinton about other stuff.
Hmm.  If you had a more compelling point you wouldn’t be so evasive. Â
The actions of the Dems in confirmation hearings were disgraceful. How anyone could watch that circus & come away with anything other than disdain for the leaders of the Dem party is beyond me. That whole sham was disgraceful. This latest thing by Feinstein is just another layer on a cake that is already a giant hunk of mold. Damn, that whole process was really disappointing. IMO
I don't think there's all that much difference between your #1 and #2. I view Thomas, Alito and Gorsuch as extremists that I wouldn't vote to confirm. Republicans view them as "mainstream."
There is, or at least should be, a distinction between “I disagree with your POV and oppose your nomination” and “You are unqualified and represent a threat to our democracy.”Â
"Why isn't "you are qualified and competent and are a threat to our democracy" a legit reason? Because it should be.
Their opportunity to fight was a couple years ago when all this crap started with Garland....not now.
And THIS is what they need to be focused on IMO. It's not in the news the best I can tell. It's all this other crap their doing instead. Perhaps I have missed the coverage. I've been focused a bit more on my family in NC/SC with the hurricanes and all. The Dem party should be on the shows every day bringing up the lying under oath.
He's no more extreme or conservative than Scalia, certainly, in my opinion. Of course, Scalia seems pretty extreme and conservative to me. Doesn't make him suddenly an unqualified candidate.
Raping somebody. When you float a story along the lines of "I've received news about this candidate that is too sensitive to get into details about, but it involves sexual misconduct and needs to be investigated by the FBI," you are publicly accusing the guy of being a rapist or pedophile or something similarly serious without having the courage to say so forthrightly. That's why innuendo is so scummy -- Feinstein gave people license to imagine the worst when she apparently knew perfectly well that this was nothing.
Did she say it involves sexual misconduct? I've been looking for statements from Feinstein and I didn't see that.
Isn’t this basically the argument that got OJ Simpson acquitted of murder? The jury effectively said, “We don’t care if he’s guilty or innocent; the LAPD have mistreated blacks for so long that we’re going to send a message the other way.”Â
Heh - those giants have been shouted down by ignorance. Playing fair and nice and taking the high road doesn't work in the current political climate. If you think it works - you have been living in a bubble the past 20 years. All you high road people are like a pacifist that wouldn't fight the WWII because killing and wars are bad. There is what is necessary and there is what is "right" and they aren't always the same.
No.
I mentioned the same things. Ivan's insistent that she smeared him, though.
Well said.  The Republican Party stopped fighting a battle of ideas at least a decade ago and switched their tactics to fight using procedures.  Don’t like the outcomes of elections?  Let’s take over state legislatures so we can redraw the district maps and pass voter suppression legislation.  Courts don’t like our laws?  Let’s block a bunch of judicial nominations by the other party and fast track as many as possible when we’re in charge so the courts will change to like our laws instead of having to changing laws to please the courts.  And while we’re doing this, let’s loot the place so our wealthiest corporations and families who happen to be our donors get a higher concentration of the nation’s wealth and make it more difficult for working people to get by, much less elevate their economic and social class.  (There’s also the matter of looking the other way while the President commits impeachable actions almost daily, and might have receive illegal help from hostile foreign actors to take office, but that’s a more recent development.)
Many good people have expressed this to me before, and I am guessing they will do so again.
Nope.
I do though, especially in this case. I wrote a week ago that I found Brett Kavanaugh extremely likeable, a very good guy. Either that is totally wrong or he is being falsely accused of a terrible crime. Either way it’s awful.Â
