Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[bodiddley]

Stevens led a very interesting charmed life.
His father owned Chicago's fanciest hotel (today the Chicago Hilton), so in the late 20's /early 30's he met folks like Lindbergh, Scott Fitzgerald, etc.  He was at the 1932 World Series game for Babe Ruth's called home run.  Supreme Court justice, etc.

I heard him speak at the University of Chicago back in 1991.
Most memorably he kept referring to "Drug Prohibition"  (harking back to the Alcohol Prohibition he grew up under) and he denounced the way it was distorting the courts, imprisoning so many citizens, empowering criminals, etc.  But he was most concerned about the way it derailed the court system.  And felt it had horrible effects on society.

Stevens was 80 when W Bush took over, and I remember being worried that he wouldn't make it through his term(s).  But he not only made it to Obama, but is still going 8 years after retiring at age 90.
He was originally placed on the federal bench by Nixon and was Ford's appointee to the Supreme Court (replacing William O. Douglass)

[bodiddley]

Gorsuch was a different case because he was replacing the paleo-conservative Scalia, so a bit of a wash.  But Kennedy has been a center-right swing vote.  And replacing him with an partisan arch-conservative changes the balance.

I don't think the Dems would Bork every conservative nominee.  But Kav is quite partisan and has a number of red flags as well (sexual allegations, heavy drinking, misleading and untrue testimony, anger displays, etc).  But sure, the Dems are wary of anyone ready to overturn Roe, side with business and polluters, possibly shield Trump, etc.

[bodiddley]

Take a look at the 1916 electoral map.
Charles Evans Hughes gave a strong challenge to incumbent Woodrow Wilson.


The map is nearly opposite of what we've had during the past 30+ years.  Of course the Solid South was then Dem.  But the Northeast and Midwest all GOP (except Ohio and NH was Dem then).   Note the puny 6 electoral votes that FLorida had.  California a mere 13.
But Wilson won Cali by a mere 3,774 votes and that's what put him over the top: 277 to 254.

[kiiidcarter8]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/we-were-brett-kavanaughs-drinking-buddies-we-dont-think-he-should-be-confirmed/2018/10/04/923cf6ac-c821-11e8-b2b5-79270f9cce17_story.html?utm_term=.1b9706e7a0c7

Not that Redd will care.

Not that Kiid will care.

Not that the GOP Senators will care.

But the truth, as they say, is out there. And that the GOP and President Trump are walking around with hands over their eyes and ears doesn't change it.

And Redd, the perjury has been explained to you repeatedly.

Short form:
Lies about his knowledge concerning Democratic Party documents concerning prior judicial nominees.

Lies about his yearbook and his lifelong "respect" for women. Ralphing is a key example.

Lies about his drinking habits in high school and college.

Lies about the Deborah Ramirez incident.

Lies about when he knew about allegations by Deborah Ramirez.

Yep

Show the lying pattern

---------->  liars can't be on the SC.

You are allllll set.  Forget the other issues.

[barton]

Bo - Hughes would probably have won easily if the Progressive split in 1912 hadn't weakened the GOP.   The GOP recovered by 1920 and wanted Hughes to run.   It was a Biden situation however - his daughter had just died and he refused.   So the country ends up with Warren Harding.   Bit of historical resonance there with more recent times.

(I live in Rapid City,  which is sometimes nicknamed Presidents City.   There's a bronze statue of every US president on downtown street corners, and knowing your presidents is a bit of a civic thing.   Started with that carved cliff 30 minutes south of here.   One amusing custom is that the more bald-pated presidents often find themselves wearing stocking caps on cold winter days...Eisenhauer and John  Q are often so capped.)

[barton]

Yep

Show the lying pattern

---------->  liars can't be on the SC.

Yes,  liars can't be on the SC.   Glad you've grasped that in all its blinding obviousness!

[Itz ME!]

Clancy lied. He's on the SCOTUS.

[facilitatorn]

Clancy lied. He's on the SCOTUS.

He sucks. Let’s get him out too.

[LarryBnDC]

I don't think the Dems would Bork every conservative nominee. 

Stunning how that term has permeated our consciousness.

Folks forget Bork was highly unpopular when nominated in part because he was the trigger man for Nixon’s “Saturday Night Massacre”  and he was a dick. He got a full up or down vote in The Senate and SIX Republicans voted against him, therefore the term Borking is bullshit coked by conservatives to use as a rallying cry whenever they try to seat an asshole on the court.

[LarryBnDC]

If we, as a nation, survive the next two years it will take generations to undo the damage be8ng done to our institutions by the GOP and the Russian marionette in the White House.

[REDSTATEWARD]

http://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/09/kavanaugh-ford-hearing-was-never-about-truth/571729/?utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_content=5bb5709d1adf640001975f2e_ta&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook

This was never about truth.

But we mostly knew that. It was good of the Republicans to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

The truth is there was no charge that could be verified and the  democrats knew that  full well. The “ last minute  Hail Mary” was used only to stall.

[kiidcarter8]

Flake is a YES




(unless "something big happens")


This includes Corey Booker saying "we know where you live" and an overnight visit from the ghost of John McCain.

[bodiddley]

Bo - Hughes would probably have won easily if the Progressive split in 1912 hadn't weakened the GOP.   The GOP recovered by 1920 and wanted Hughes to run. 

The Progressives tried to nominate Teddy R again in 1916, but refused as he was very anti-Wilson by then, thought Wilson was letting Germany and other countries push us around.  Teddy was worried Hughes might be "a Wilson with Whiskers" but supported him strongly, which helped Hughes.  The Progressives started falling apart, nominating a Vice Presidential candidate, but no presidential candidate.  Hughes might have blown the election by not meeting with California's powerful governor during his swing through the state, so he got little assistance there.  And lost by under 4K votes.
Wilson won largely on his record of keeping us out of war (WWI and the Mexican Revolution), which quickly fell apart after his reelection.

1916 trivia:
- Hughes was the last major party presidential candidate with a beard
- it was the last election in which North & South Dakota went for different candidates.
- Wilson won New Hampshire by a mere 46 votes the closest recorded presidential state return (who knows what the real tally was in Florida 2000)

[barton]

Interesting 1916 trivs!  Yes, since then North Dakota has become "South Dakota only more so." 



Anywho, cloture motion passed.  But, as a couple senators pointed out, yes to cloture is not necessarily yes to confirmation.  Was disappointed to see Nebraska Sen. Sasse backpedal so much.  It's going to be tight, especially given that a Montana senator will be at his daughter's wedding on Saturday.  So they may choose to delay the vote until after Columbus Day.


ITSME:  I was using "can't" in the sense of "should not."  Yes, of course, lying shitbags have been confirmed before. 

[bodiddley]

I think Kav disqualified himself with his  2nd Senate appearance.  He actually felt compelled to publicly apologize for his behavior.  He was always a partisan type, having worked closely with Starr and W Bush.  But in the hearing he actually accused the Clintons of ordering these hits on him and echoed Kelly Anne's vast left wing conspiracy.
Naked partisanship and bad temperament = NO

As for the process, don't forget that the GOP dumped 100K off pages right before the first hearings started.  And hid much of Kav's doings in the Bush White House.  One could easily argue that delay was called fro, as the GOP was trying to rush through a political, controversial candidate before the new S.Ct term and the mid-term elections.

In a way, you have to admire Bork.  He went down fighting.  He laid out his constitutional theory and was open about how he viewed the legal and cultural landscape, and paid the price for that.  Sure he was unpleasant to boot.  But the main consequence of the Bork rejection was that now nominees refuse to discuss any past, present or potential future cases.  I believe it's called the Kagan Rule, where she firmly refused to discuss cases or issues that might appear before the court.  Further, they try to avoid anything controversial.  And so Senate hearings shed little light on how they would rule or how they think.