found online by Raymond
From Max’s Dad:
This picture is all I ever needed to know about Brett Kavanaugh. His refusal to shake the hand of Fred Guttenberg, a man whose child was murdered by a 2nd Amendment enthusiast at Parkland School, is all anyone should need to know about Brett Kavanaugh. To be quite blunt, fuck Brett Kavanaugh and the unicorn he rode in on.
But now a woman has come forward to save the nation.
“A woman has come in to save the nation”? I strongly suspect, considering the circumstances and her background, that she is nothing more than a leftist political hack spinning yarns to deny a constitutionalist being placed on the bench. Let me put it more directly, she has a definite agenda.
There are 65 women that have worked with and been associated with Kavanaugh for decades and all of them have unequivocally vouched for his character, professionalism, and qualifications in a signed letter. Two of the women Kavanaugh dated back in high school and in college. They both confirmed that he was always a gentleman and thoughtful.
This is nothing more than lies and “resistance” from the militant left once again. Hell, the left side of the senate already were stating they were against Kavanaugh before we even knew who Trump’s nominee was.
Even Ruth Bader Ginsburg laments the political show that that the nomination process has become. Speaking at the George Washington University Law School on Sept. 12, Ginsburg called the hearings a “highly partisan show” and “wrong.” She noted the vote on her confirmation was 96 to 3, despite her spending “about 10 years of my life litigating cases under the auspices of the ACLU.”
The Democrats in their last ditch efforts to try and scuttle this well-qualified and decent man from rising to the SCOTUS is far more telling about their jadedness, hypocrisy, and lack of character than it does of Kavanaugh’s.
Damn all of these people that care more about partisanship than the constitution and our nation.
It’s a little odd to be damning yourself, but do what you feel is right.
“There are 65 women…”
I don’t know if Kavanaugh is guilty, but this is a poor defense. Do you think that everyone who commits a sexual and/or violent crime does it to everyone he meets, including people who know him well enough to vouch for him? Do you think that such people are incapable of friendship, charm, and compartmentalization? Do you think that people who would not commit a crime while sober are incapable of doing so while drunk?
“the left side of the senate already were stating they were against Kavanaugh”
And the right side under Obama was opposed to anyone he picked. Democrats have more of a reason to oppose Kavanaugh for that reason than Republicans did to oppose Garland. This, along with your inconsistent standards for honesty and goodness with respect to the character of politicians from different parties, is where your partisanship shows.
“Even Ruth Bader Ginsburg laments…”
OK, but you can hardly blame just the Democrats for that. The Kagan and Sotomayor votes, for example, were quite partisan in comparison to that of Ginsburg. It’s fine if you think that you can argue why they shouldn’t have been approved, but Democrats have their own arguments for why others shouldn’t be approved.
Bipartisan SC votes are likely a thing of the past until we look to moderate candidates. Of course, with Republicans insistent that anyone not 100% conservative is 100% liberal (including their own) and many Democrats increasingly insistent on the same, we can’t even agree on what moderate is, so that might be a dream too. If the SC vacancy remains unfilled and Democrats win back power through the midterms, it will be interesting to see how SC negotiations go.
“this well-qualified and decent man”
We don’t know him, so we shouldn’t pretend that we do. It’s quite possible that only Kavanaugh, his friend, and the accuser know what really happened.
Finally, I notice that you didn’t mention that the rules for the SC vote were changed. Yes, I know: Democrats did it first. Except they didn’t do it for this particular process. If you oppose one, you should oppose both. But the party of principles just isn’t what it (supposedly) used to be.
Honestly, it’s strange to me that you bothered to write this nonsense, knowing who would likely read and respond to it. You’ll need more convincing arguments than “I just know he’s a good person” and “Democrats are bad” to change anyone’s mind.
“This is nothing more than lies and “resistance” from the militant left once again.”
Wild-eyed conspiracy is your response to another accusation directed at our drained swamp.
“There are 65 women that have worked with and been associated with Kavanaugh for decades and all of them have unequivocally vouched for his character, professionalism, and qualifications in a signed letter. ”
That was before the accusation came out.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/16/trump-kavanaugh-allegations-response-826069
“Hell, the left side of the senate already were stating they were against Kavanaugh before we even knew who Trump’s nominee was.”
Nope. Nix that. This card can’t be played anymore. The Mana is all tapped out. The right side of the aisle can not use this as a talking point. Not after refusing to perform their Constitutional duties for 10 months following the Garland nomination. Let’s not even talk about the conspiracy theories surrounding Justice Kennedy and President Trump that brought about Kennedy’s retirement.
“Even Ruth Bader Ginsburg laments the political show that that the nomination process has become. ”
And what do you think she meant by her statements? She’s not lamenting the Democrats, not wholly. She’s lamenting the overall politicization of nominations to the Supreme Court. Look at Garland. Look at Sotomayer. Look at Kagan. Alito. Roberts. Gone are the days RBG lamented the loss of. Were RBG nominated today, she would not enjoy the 96 to 3 vote she received in ’93. Sadly.
“The Democrats in their last ditch efforts to try and scuttle this well-qualified and decent man from rising to the SCOTUS is far more telling about their jadedness, hypocrisy, and lack of character than it does of Kavanaugh’s.”
Again. After Garland; This is just Pot to Kettle, TP. But, hey, at least Garland didn’t have anyone coming forward with rape allegations. I look forward to continuing to follow how Kavanaugh’s nomination shakes out and hope that if the allegations against him prove credible that people like you, TP, will change their mind about hypocrisy and decency. We should expect more from the people we install in a life-long place of power. What’s the rush? Republicans stuck it out for 10 months with Garland, afterall.
Mr. Paine condemns the alleged “leftist political hack” in defense of a long time rightist political operative. Figures.
This operative’s history as a “constitutionalist” reflects an ideological vision of said document that may as well begin with “We the corporations”.
Mr. Paine sees no issue with this far Right, Starr Chamber, political operative’s defense of presidential immunity, as the appointing president is under investigation and named under oath as a criminal co-conspirator.
But that nasty woman wants to ruin everything. Never mind she reported his criminal behavior long before he was in the public eye. She must have had it in for the poor “constitutionalist victim” for a long time.
Mr. Paine’s clear-eyed conservative viewpoint sees “efforts to try and scuttle this well-qualified and decent man” as “hypocrisy”. Oh, the outrage! Does he even see his wild projection here? I doubt it.
Mr. Paine once again takes the side of the unwritten law of the land. IOKIYAR. The male witness who wrote of Kavanaugh’s binge drinking is backing away from having to testify under oath. Another “decent man” no doubt.
And pay no attention to those evil uppity bitches. Like the accusers of Trump and Roy Moore, they are all leftists who hate America.
Women better just get used to being second class citizens and surrender their uterus to the government run by a minority of conservative white men. And if they’re raped, they’d better obey God’s will and carry that embryo to term. After all, that’s the reason they were put here.
Just ask any well-qualified and decent constitutionalist.
This is con-servatism.