Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Captain Cranks

Brett Kavanaugh

Regarding BK's testimony on Thursday  

218 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, KCitons said:

Also, I can relate to this. At my previous position I was responsible for background checks. These ranged in positions from CEO to part time cashier. I felt that Loss Prevention Agents should be held to a higher standard. I was shot down because we needed to be consistent in our hiring practices. Everyone was pass/fail based on predefined criteria. 

Everyone should be expected to tell the truth when under oath. Everyone should be expected to tell the truth all the time. Somehow we moved away from this over time. 

The truth no longer has normative meaning in America in the Donald Trump era.  Winning is all that matters.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, zoonation said:

The truth no longer has normative meaning in America in the Donald Trump era.  Winning is all that matters.  

Maybe you're only 18 years old. (I don't know). But truth eluded Bill Clinton decades ago. Not that Trump is any better, he's just not the first. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, KCitons said:

Maybe you're only 18 years old. (I don't know). But truth eluded Bill Clinton decades ago. Not that Trump is any better, he's just not the first. 

Bill Clinton lied.  about a few things. 

Trump never tells the truth.  He doesn’t even know what it means. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, zoonation said:

Bill Clinton lied.  about a few things. 

Trump never tells the truth.  He doesn’t even know what it means. 

And he was disbarred for lying, correct? Do we want a disbarred SC Justice?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/29/2018 at 7:43 AM, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

Can I get some more context for question #3?  Is the assumption that if the liar got voted down, a different liberal judge would take his place?  Or is there a possibility that vacancy might end up getting filled by a conservative judge?

That’d really be a factor for you??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, adonis said:

Not an HR person, but if a person is lying to me today to avoid questions into his past, even from 36 years ago, especially about heavy drinking and sexual assault, and I had other qualified candidates to choose from, I'd look elsewhere.

If I was certain he committed a crime while trying to get the job I was offering, I'd certainly not hire him.

Judge Kavanaugh clearly knows the definitions of devils triangle and "boof" isn't what he said they were.  He lied.  Under oath.  

So tell me...why is it not disqualifying for a guy to commit a crime while pursuing a job?  Because clearly that's what Kavanaugh did.

Clearly?   You got your goggles on?   Drunk lefty goggles?    Perhaps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, quickhands said:

Clearly?   You got your goggles on?   Drunk lefty goggles?    Perhaps.

Yeah, he’s the one person in the school who forgot what the terms mean. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Ignoramus said:

Is Bill Clinton or Donald Trump a nominee for Supreme Court Justice?

Nope. But it shows a progression of behavior by our public officials. Which is why I said I expect every one of them to lie. Fool me once.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KCitons said:

Nope. But it shows a progression of behavior by our public officials. Which is why I said I expect every one of them to lie. Fool me once.......

I expect integrity and honesty from my Supreme Court Justices. Silly me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Ignoramus said:

I expect integrity and honesty from my Supreme Court Justices. Silly me.

You don't expect it from the POTUS? (be it Clinton or Trump)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, KCitons said:

You don't expect it from the POTUS? (be it Clinton or Trump)

I am sure he does. The thing with the president though, is if he is a giant POS we can vote him/her out of office during next election. No such luck with a supreme court justice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, dawgtrails said:

I am sure he does. The thing with the president though, is if he is a giant POS we can vote him/her out of office during next election. No such luck with a supreme court justice

So if we change the hiring process, then it's okay for a SC justice to lie? The discussion was about integrity and honesty. Our public officials represent a sample of the general population. I wouldn't expect there to be enough people of high character willing to fill those positions. Again, it's just playing the odds. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that he came across as a partisan hack with an ax to grind against the left seems to bother people a lot less than the fact he screamed like a lunatic for an hour. 

Once he’s confirmed (which I fully expect) he will sit on that court withit even the pretense of political ambiguity. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, KCitons said:

You don't expect it from the POTUS? (be it Clinton or Trump)

Well on that point Kavanaugh wrote the book (briefs) on sexual transgressions and honesty as grounds for disqualification for office. Forget our standards, hold Kavanaugh to his own.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Righetti said:

The fact that he came across as a partisan hack with an ax to grind against the left seems to bother people a lot less than the fact he screamed like a lunatic for an hour. 

Once he’s confirmed (which I fully expect) he will sit on that court withit even the pretense of political ambiguity. 

This was the worst thing for me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, butcher boy said:

Every day they will find a new reason to delay.  It's time for the 17th amendment to be repealed.  

Where would they have gotten the idea to delay? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/30/2018 at 4:03 PM, KCitons said:

Everyone should be expected to tell the truth when under oath. Everyone should be expected to tell the truth all the time. Somehow we moved away from this over time. 

 

10 hours ago, KCitons said:

Nope. But it shows a progression of behavior by our public officials. Which is why I said I expect every one of them to lie. Fool me once.......

You yourself have accepted it. I don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, butcher boy said:

Every day they will find a new reason to delay.  It's time for the 17th amendment to be repealed.  

What exactly are you hoping for with the repeal of the 17th?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, dawgtrails said:

What exactly are you hoping for with the repeal of the 17th?

Kanye’s new hot take.  Abolish the 17th after abolishing the 13th

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Ignoramus said:

 

You yourself have accepted it. I don't.

Accept it, don't accept it. What can you really do about it? :shrug:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, dawgtrails said:

What exactly are you hoping for with the repeal of the 17th?

- Each state has an equal number of seats at the table of federal lawmaking when you include lobbyists.  Right now, the states that can afford the most effective lobbyists rule.    

- More voter interest in state elections.

- Legislatively elected senators would work to allow states more room to act on behalf of the people.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hated the Gorsuch nomination because he is an ultra-conservative strict constructionist.  He's a really smart guy with a squeaky clean background.  Fair enough conservatives, you win.

I hate the Kavanaugh appointment because he lacks judicial temperament, integrity, and truthfulness, was allegedly a bit rapey thirty years ago, and was a drunken frat boy bro - In that order.  He has no business being on the bench, let alone the SCOTUS.  It is a purely political appointment, and Trump and most Senate Republicans care little about whether he is qualified to fill this vacancy.   

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Mookie said:

I hated the Gorsuch nomination because he is an ultra-conservative strict constructionist.  He's a really smart guy with a squeaky clean background.  Fair enough conservatives, you win.

I hate the Kavanaugh appointment because he lacks judicial temperament, integrity, and truthfulness, was allegedly a bit rapey thirty years ago, and was a drunken frat boy bro - In that order.  He has no business being on the bench, let alone the SCOTUS.  It is a purely political appointment, and Trump and most Senate Republicans care little about whether he is qualified to fill this vacancy.   

It's basically doing a smash and grab on the seat with Kavanaugh.  They know the clock is ticking, they are just trying to give America one more gut punch before the elections.  I worry about the implications years down the road.  Because this is setting the standard now.  This is the new low.  This is the way it's always going to be moving forward.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank god we have that staunch Democrat Joe Manchin in WV. Man without him this proven liar might be on the Supreme Court for life.

Anybody with a D behind their name. Makes me sick.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, NCCommish said:

Thank god we have that staunch Democrat Joe Manchin in WV. Man without him this proven liar might be on the Supreme Court for life.

Anybody with a D behind their name. Makes me sick.

I miss you NC Commish. Please post more. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But- as much as I dislike Manchin, he needs to win and continue to caucus with the Democrats. There are several issues in which he is on the right side, and the numbers count. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, timschochet said:

But- as much as I dislike Manchin, he needs to win and continue to caucus with the Democrats. There are several issues in which he is on the right side, and the numbers count. 

Hi Tim good to see you. 

He voted with the GOP 60% of the time or so. He is not on the right side enough. You know the occasional bipartisan vote on a good idea I'd have no problem  with. If it's good policy it's good policy. But to often it's not and a lot of his no votes only seem to happen when the Democrats were going to lose anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, timschochet said:

I miss you NC Commish. Please post more. 

Now that we're into the midterm.home stretch I'm feeling the itch. I'll be around.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/1/2018 at 6:40 PM, butcher boy said:

- Each state has an equal number of seats at the table of federal lawmaking when you include lobbyists.  Right now, the states that can afford the most effective lobbyists rule.    

- More voter interest in state elections.

- Legislatively elected senators would work to allow states more room to act on behalf of the people.

 

You do know the reason for the 17th was the rampant corruption involved in how Senators were being appointed right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, NCCommish said:

You do know the reason for the 17th was the rampant corruption involved in how Senators were being appointed right?

Since you haven’t been around you may not be familiar with butcher boys work - he’s a troll.  Please put him on ignore or don’t reply to him.  Thanks and good to see you in here.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/1/2018 at 6:40 PM, butcher boy said:

- Each state has an equal number of seats at the table of federal lawmaking when you include lobbyists.  Right now, the states that can afford the most effective lobbyists rule.    

 

- Legislatively elected senators would work to allow states more room to act on behalf of the people.

 

Why would repealing the 17th Ammendment change how lobbyists work or change how elected Senators worked/voted?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/5/2018 at 11:56 PM, NCCommish said:

Thank god we have that staunch Democrat Joe Manchin in WV. Man without him this proven liar might be on the Supreme Court for life.

Anybody with a D behind their name. Makes me sick.

I've been thinking about this very argument for a couple weeks now and wondered when you'd be back.  Midterms are going to give us a much better idea of who's on the right track between you and TF on this topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The Commish said:

I've been thinking about this very argument for a couple weeks now and wondered when you'd be back.  Midterms are going to give us a much better idea of who's on the right track between you and TF on this topic.

Well to be clear I expect corporate politicians to win many seats. In a lot of places they will be the only choice other than a trumpbot. It will take getting noncorrupted democrats in seats from city council to Congress and them showing the difference to really see a wave of change. I'm in this for the long game not just a cycle. It took decades to make the mess it won't be cleaned up in 2 years or 4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, NCCommish said:

Well to be clear I expect corporate politicians to win many seats. In a lot of places they will be the only choice other than a trumpbot. It will take getting noncorrupted democrats in seats from city council to Congress and them showing the difference to really see a wave of change. I'm in this for the long game not just a cycle. It took decades to make the mess it won't be cleaned up in 2 years or 4.

Agreed...I should have been clearer.  I don't think midterms will fix anything.  I do think they will begin to show us if things are changing for the better, but I also understand it doesn't mean everything will be fixed.  For instance, I REALLY wish someone would have run against Bill Nelson in the Florida primary.  There is NOTHING of value that this guy adds anymore.  He's simply fat that needs to be trimmed to help invoke that change you are talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, The Commish said:

Agreed...I should have been clearer.  I don't think midterms will fix anything.  I do think they will begin to show us if things are changing for the better, but I also understand it doesn't mean everything will be fixed.  For instance, I REALLY wish someone would have run against Bill Nelson in the Florida primary.  There is NOTHING of value that this guy adds anymore.  He's simply fat that needs to be trimmed to help invoke that change you are talking about.

Yeah it was weird and disappointing that no credible challenge was mounted but you can't win them all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While the midterms aren't a fix per se they are a necessary first step.  They must be a building block. A foundation for a buiding of a politics that really cares about policies to lift people up. People I support are gonna win some unlikely victories. They are going to lose as well. But losing one election isn't the end. You have to get the ideas out there. You have to compete.  And when the alternative wins and goes on to screw people over you go back again. And you keep going at it until the better idea wins. You can lose battles and still win the war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/5/2018 at 11:56 PM, NCCommish said:

Thank god we have that staunch Democrat Joe Manchin in WV. Man without him this proven liar might be on the Supreme Court for life.

Anybody with a D behind their name. Makes me sick.

Just spitballin’ here but another way we might’ve kept Kavanaugh off the Supreme Court would have been by electing Hillary.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

Just spitballin’ here but another way we might’ve kept Kavanaugh off the Supreme Court would have been by electing Hillary.

Maybe she should have campaigned in blue states instead of taking them for granted and planning to win with "moderate " Republicans. Maybe her team shouldn't have pushed the candidate she said she could beat in a landslide.  Lastly maybe the Democrats shouldn't have cheated the guy that could've beaten Trump while instead running their least popular candidate ever.  Just spitballin' here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, NCCommish said:

Maybe she should have campaigned in blue states instead of taking them for granted and planning to win with "moderate " Republicans. Maybe her team shouldn't have pushed the candidate she said she could beat in a landslide.  Lastly maybe the Democrats shouldn't have cheated the guy that could've beaten Trump while instead running their least popular candidate ever.  Just spitballin' here.

OK, but also electing Hillary would have worked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

OK, but also electing Hillary would have worked.

To be honest I'm not that sure. Maybe not him but she would've pulled an Obama and tried to put in a judge that appeased the Republicans. Remember Garland was a Republican pick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, NCCommish said:

To be honest I'm not that sure. Maybe not him but she would've pulled an Obama and tried to put in a judge that appeased the Republicans. Remember Garland was a Republican pick.

Garland and Kavanaugh are very different judges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

Garland and Kavanaugh are very different judges.

Well I will posting on why maybe Kavanaugh is not actual end of democracy and may be the best thing to ever happen to reproductive rights. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NCCommish said:

Well I will posting on why maybe Kavanaugh is not actual end of democracy and may be the best thing to ever happen to reproductive rights. 

28th amendment?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   1 member