WWTBAM Bored

American Bar Association reopens Kavanaugh evaluation

PBS.org wrote:WASHINGTON — The nation’s largest legal organization is reopening its evaluation of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh based on his performance during a Senate hearing last week.

The American Bar Association’s Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary said Friday it’s revisiting its evaluation based on “new information of a material nature regarding temperament.” It said it was unlikely the process will conclude before the Senate votes on Kavanaugh’s nomination.

Kavanaugh touted his “well-qualified” rating from the ABA committee during angry, emotional testimony last week, in which he denied sexual misconduct allegations.

Democrats have questioned whether he has the temperament for a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court.

The ABA was among the organizations that had called for an FBI investigation of allegations against Kavanaugh. That probe was completed this week.

Friday’s letter says the original “well-qualified” rating stands, for now.

Senator Collins is making it obvious that she has always supported Kavanaugh. She's using her announcement just to grandstand an endorsement for him.

Bob Juch wrote:Senator Collins is making it obvious that she has always supported Kavanaugh. She's using her announcement just to grandstand an endorsement for him.

You don't have the temperament to be a rational human being.

Bob Juch wrote:Senator Collins is making it obvious that she has always supported Kavanaugh. She's using her announcement just to grandstand an endorsement for him.

I can see why she needed time to announce her decision. She had the White House speechwriters working overtime putting her thoughts together for her.

silverscreenselect wrote:

Bob Juch wrote:Senator Collins is making it obvious that she has always supported Kavanaugh. She's using her announcement just to grandstand an endorsement for him.

I can see why she needed time to announce her decision. She had the White House speechwriters working overtime putting her thoughts together for her.

You do not have the temperament to even represent a rational, reasonable human being. Of course, it all comes back to trump. It is soooooo fucking old.

Manchin is a yes, so he will most likely be confirmed.
Tried to listen to what Manchin had to say, but some 8 year olds decided shouting 'SHAME' was a good idea.

Can't wait to see what stunts, stupid or violent, the resistance will put on. And the sour grapes from bob-tel and aSSShole.

flockofseagulls104 wrote:Manchin is a yes, so he will most likely be confirmed.
Tried to listen to what Manchin had to say, but some 8 year olds decided shouting 'SHAME' was a good idea.

Can't wait to see what stunts, stupid or violent, the resistance will put on. And the sour grapes from bob-tel and aSSShole.

Quel dommage. C'est la vie, n'est-ce pas?

Beebs52 wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:Manchin is a yes, so he will most likely be confirmed.
Tried to listen to what Manchin had to say, but some 8 year olds decided shouting 'SHAME' was a good idea.

Can't wait to see what stunts, stupid or violent, the resistance will put on. And the sour grapes from bob-tel and aSSShole.

Quel dommage. C'est la vie, n'est-ce pas?

Oui, les ignorants abondent.

THE BATPHONE IS RINGING!!!!!!!!

My prediction:

If the Senate turns out to be 50/50, Lisa Murkowski will announce she's an Independent again (she won as an independent once before) and caucus with Democratic party.

silverscreenselect wrote:My prediction:

If the Senate turns out to be 50/50, Lisa Murkowski will announce she's an Independent again (she won as an independent once before) and caucus with Democratic party.

Seems like she found the lost Republican Senator' balls, but Collins removed them again.

Ya'll are a hoot. Truly.

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:The Denver Post is reporting that Cory Gardner is saying he hasn't made up his mind to vote for Kavanaugh. --Bob

A bunch of us have been working very hard on this, including telephoning and demonstrating outside his local office last night and tonight. We'll probably demonstrate Friday night also.

However, it will astonish me if he votes no. He has been a most excellent little minion for Trump.

I don't think you would do it. But are any of your bunch going to do your civic duty and get in his face and yell at him and his family when he's at a restaurant? Maybe follow him home and throw tomatoes at his house?

This is incomprehensible to me, Flock. How is it someone's civic duty to yell at her senator and his family at a restaurant? Even more incomprehensible, how is it someone's civic duty to follow someone home and throw tomatoes at his house?

SportsFan68 wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote:
A bunch of us have been working very hard on this, including telephoning and demonstrating outside his local office last night and tonight. We'll probably demonstrate Friday night also.

However, it will astonish me if he votes no. He has been a most excellent little minion for Trump.

I don't think you would do it. But are any of your bunch going to do your civic duty and get in his face and yell at him and his family when he's at a restaurant? Maybe follow him home and throw tomatoes at his house?

This is incomprehensible to me, Flock. How is it someone's civic duty to yell at her senator and his family at a restaurant? Even more incomprehensible, how is it someone's civic duty to follow someone home and throw tomatoes at his house?

Me neither. Ask Maxine Waters and Corey Booker. Then ask why anyone would vote for people who advocate that.

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:
I don't think you would do it. But are any of your bunch going to do your civic duty and get in his face and yell at him and his family when he's at a restaurant? Maybe follow him home and throw tomatoes at his house?

This is incomprehensible to me, Flock. How is it someone's civic duty to yell at her senator and his family at a restaurant? Even more incomprehensible, how is it someone's civic duty to follow someone home and throw tomatoes at his house?

Me neither. Ask Maxine Waters and Corey Booker. Then ask why anyone would vote for people who advocate that.

You said stuff, Flock, but you didn't answer the questions: How is it someone's civic duty to yell at her senator and his family at a restaurant? Even more incomprehensible, how is it someone's civic duty to follow someone home and throw tomatoes at his house?

The 51 Senators who voted "Yes" represent 143.2 million Americans.
The 49 Senators who voted "No" represent 181.8 million Americans.

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:
I don't think you would do it. But are any of your bunch going to do your civic duty and get in his face and yell at him and his family when he's at a restaurant? Maybe follow him home and throw tomatoes at his house?

This is incomprehensible to me, Flock. How is it someone's civic duty to yell at her senator and his family at a restaurant? Even more incomprehensible, how is it someone's civic duty to follow someone home and throw tomatoes at his house?

Me neither. Ask Maxine Waters and Corey Booker and Donald Trump
. Then ask why anyone would vote for people who advocate that.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/donal ... -violence/

fixed that for you

SportsFan68 wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote:
This is incomprehensible to me, Flock. How is it someone's civic duty to yell at her senator and his family at a restaurant? Even more incomprehensible, how is it someone's civic duty to follow someone home and throw tomatoes at his house?

Me neither. Ask Maxine Waters and Corey Booker. Then ask why anyone would vote for people who advocate that.

You said stuff, Flock, but you didn't answer the questions: How is it someone's civic duty to yell at her senator and his family at a restaurant? Even more incomprehensible, how is it someone's civic duty to follow someone home and throw tomatoes at his house?

I guess I have to be literal.

It is not someone's civic duty to yell at anyone at a restaurant or anywhere else. It is not anyone's civic duty to throw tomatoes at anyone's house because they don't agree with their politics. It is not anyone's civic duty to get in a politician's face and scream expletives at them. In actuality, it is ignorant, rude and destructive behavior, and is not in any way to be equated to civil disobedience. It is totally disrespectful to disrupt public hearings.
Yet there are many, and they seem to be mostly on the left, that seem to think that it is a noble endeavor to do so. And some of those people have been voted into positions of power and urge their constituents to do so. I give you Ms. Waters and Mr. Booker among others.
Since you mentioned that you were part of a 'protest', I wondered if any of your bunch were of that persuasion, or were urged to do something like that by someone who thinks it is a noble endeavor.

I think you know what I meant.

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Me neither. Ask Maxine Waters and Corey Booker. Then ask why anyone would vote for people who advocate that.

You said stuff, Flock, but you didn't answer the questions: How is it someone's civic duty to yell at her senator and his family at a restaurant? Even more incomprehensible, how is it someone's civic duty to follow someone home and throw tomatoes at his house?

I guess I have to be literal.

It is not someone's civic duty to yell at anyone at a restaurant or anywhere else. It is not anyone's civic duty to throw tomatoes at anyone's house because they don't agree with their politics. It is not anyone's civic duty to get in a politician's face and scream expletives at them. In actuality, it is ignorant, rude and destructive behavior, and is not in any way to be equated to civil disobedience. It is totally disrespectful to disrupt public hearings.
Yet there are many, and they seem to be mostly on the left, that seem to think that it is a noble endeavor to do so. And some of those people have been voted into positions of power and urge their constituents to do so. I give you Ms. Waters and Mr. Booker among others.
Since you mentioned that you were part of a 'protest', I wondered if any of your bunch were of that persuasion, or were urged to do something like that by someone who thinks it is a noble endeavor.

I think you know what I meant.

I'm hoping they bring back tarring and feathering.

Bob Juch wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote:
You said stuff, Flock, but you didn't answer the questions: How is it someone's civic duty to yell at her senator and his family at a restaurant? Even more incomprehensible, how is it someone's civic duty to follow someone home and throw tomatoes at his house?

I guess I have to be literal.

It is not someone's civic duty to yell at anyone at a restaurant or anywhere else. It is not anyone's civic duty to throw tomatoes at anyone's house because they don't agree with their politics. It is not anyone's civic duty to get in a politician's face and scream expletives at them. In actuality, it is ignorant, rude and destructive behavior, and is not in any way to be equated to civil disobedience. It is totally disrespectful to disrupt public hearings.
Yet there are many, and they seem to be mostly on the left, that seem to think that it is a noble endeavor to do so. And some of those people have been voted into positions of power and urge their constituents to do so. I give you Ms. Waters and Mr. Booker among others.
Since you mentioned that you were part of a 'protest', I wondered if any of your bunch were of that persuasion, or were urged to do something like that by someone who thinks it is a noble endeavor.

I think you know what I meant.

I'm hoping they bring back tarring and feathering.

I will pray for you.

Bob Juch wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote:You said stuff, Flock, but you didn't answer the questions: How is it someone's civic duty to yell at her senator and his family at a restaurant? Even more incomprehensible, how is it someone's civic duty to follow someone home and throw tomatoes at his house?

I guess I have to be literal.

It is not someone's civic duty to yell at anyone at a restaurant or anywhere else. It is not anyone's civic duty to throw tomatoes at anyone's house because they don't agree with their politics. It is not anyone's civic duty to get in a politician's face and scream expletives at them. In actuality, it is ignorant, rude and destructive behavior, and is not in any way to be equated to civil disobedience. It is totally disrespectful to disrupt public hearings.
Yet there are many, and they seem to be mostly on the left, that seem to think that it is a noble endeavor to do so. And some of those people have been voted into positions of power and urge their constituents to do so. I give you Ms. Waters and Mr. Booker among others.
Since you mentioned that you were part of a 'protest', I wondered if any of your bunch were of that persuasion, or were urged to do something like that by someone who thinks it is a noble endeavor.

I think you know what I meant.

I'm hoping they bring back tarring and feathering.

You'd better Google how to get it off before you wish for that.

a1mamacat wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote:This is incomprehensible to me, Flock. How is it someone's civic duty to yell at her senator and his family at a restaurant? Even more incomprehensible, how is it someone's civic duty to follow someone home and throw tomatoes at his house?

Me neither. Ask Maxine Waters and Corey Booker and Donald Trump
. Then ask why anyone would vote for people who advocate that.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/donal ... -violence/

fixed that for you

Your list doesn't include a single instance where Trump incited violence. In one of the eight "examples," he suggested that, if people see someone preparing an assault, they might "knock the crap out of them." That's defensive.

None of the others have anything to do with inciting future violence. One of the sections even cuts the actual quote short, removing where he specifically says, "DON'T."

silverscreenselect wrote:I haven't heard anyone complain about how Gorsuch has acted.

Yet all but 3 Democrats voted against his nomination.

Estonut wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:I haven't heard anyone complain about how Gorsuch has acted.

Yet all but 3 Democrats voted against his nomination.

And for all practical purposes, every Republican in the Senate voted against Merrick Garland before ever hearing from him. Gorsuch's decisions have pretty much been what Democrats thought they would, which is why the Democrats voted against him. The Constitution doesn't say "advise and consent only to the extent of determining whether someone is morally fit for office." The Democrats feared that his decisions wouldn't be in the mainstream of current judicial philosophy and they are arguably correct in that.

They didn't bring any allegations of sexual assault or things of that nature because Gorsuch, unlike Kavanaugh, did not have anything of that nature in his background.

Estonut wrote: Your list doesn't include a single instance where Trump incited violence. In one of the eight "examples," he suggested that, if people see someone preparing an assault, they might "knock the crap out of them." That's defensive.

None of the others have anything to do with inciting future violence. One of the sections even cuts the actual quote short, removing where he specifically says, "DON'T."

Trump often, but not always, semi-sort-of-kind-of walks back his statements at a later point, usually in a tone of voice or accompanied by gestures that indicate to everyone what his real feelings are. That gives literalist commentators the cover they need to say that Trump really wasn't advocating violence while stirring up his followers in exactly the way he intends. The similarities between Trump's rallies and Hitler's early rally speeches are startling.

I would think you had the intelligence to realize this. So, either you're one of Trump's rubes or you're cynical enough not to care.