Water Dog wrote:Interesting how’s you're trying to ugly shame her though, in a thread where your team supposedly claims the high moral ground on such neanderthal behavior.
I’d have thought that Mak was referring to her propensity to play fast and loose with the truth. Interesting how you assumed anything about ugly shaming. You gave yourself away again on that one. ; )
Water Dog wrote:Interesting how’s you're trying to ugly shame her though, in a thread where your team supposedly claims the high moral ground on such neanderthal behavior.
I’d have thought that Mak was referring to her propensity to play fast and loose with the truth. Interesting how you assumed anything about ugly shaming. You gave yourself away again on that one. ; )
They always do. They gave themselves away on that after the Michelle Wolf correspondence dinner act, too.
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
Last edited by Guest on Fri Oct 05, 2018 6:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”
― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951
Water Dog wrote:I'll take more of this one, though. Lots of respect. Lots.
You didn't post what she wrote in her tweet, of course. Probably didn't read it. Wouldn't care anyway.
"Today I was arrested protesting the Supreme Court nomination of Brett Kavanaugh, a man who has been accused by multiple women of sexual assault. Men who hurt women can no longer be placed in positions of power."
I'm proud of her as a citizen and a human being. You like her tits and ass. There ya go.
Republican Senator Steve Daines said he plans to attend his daughter's wedding in Montana on Saturday, the same day the Senate may vote to confirm nominee Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.
In a statement to The Associated Press, Daines said he will walk his daughter down the aisle for her wedding. He also predicted there would be a new Supreme Court justice. (Daines has supported Kavanaugh throughout the process.)
In an interview with CNN, Daines said GOP leaders may hold open the confirmation vote overnight to allow him to return from Montana to Washington to vote.
"We're taking it a day at a time to see what happens," Daines told CNN.
A procedural vote on Kavanaugh is expected to start Friday at 10:30 a.m. ET. If it passes, the Senate could cast their final vote to confirm Kavanaugh as early as Saturday.
If the GOP is confident enough to let a Senator go to Montana and still hold the vote I think this one is in the tank for Kavanaugh.
Clearly the GOP fears their base more than they fear any sort of grandstanding from the Left. The question now that we have a month before mid-terms is how much this will actually impact the mid-term elections.
- Doc
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.
Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
Res Ipsa wrote:At the same time, he ignores K personally calling around about the Ramirez allegation before it goes public. He’ll have a double standard for that one, too.
More lies, and debunked. Mutual friends called him, not the other way around, letting him know a random person was calling around saying things and asking about him. Kavanaugh had no idea who Ramirez was, or what her allegations were or would develop into, seeing as how she wasn't even clear on that point - yet. And those people have gone on the record. Kavanaugh did not in any way try to influence anyone. Those people explicitly refute this. The apt comparison would be Mark Judge. Who, according to both Kavanaugh, and Judge, they have not spoken or communicated with one another in any way since these allegations came forward.
Not debunked. A writer for the Federalist (a publication with a big stake in the outcome) wrote a piece in which he argued a “plausible explanation.” That’s hardly a debunking. And it doesn’t explain away the statement in the text about K asking TK to speak out on his behalf. A judge should know better.
Has TK said K didn’t call her? Has she said he didn’t ask her to come toward on his behalf?
“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”
― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951
Murkowski is now reportedly saying she "hasn't decided." Funny. So, one of two things. Either she is getting blowback and bending. Or, she planned it this way. I could see her voting No on cloture, arguing that she did this to "allow more time" or whatever, but that her colleagues insisted on going forward with a vote anyway, so she had to make a decision even though she would have preferred more time.
Collins disagrees that Kavanaugh will overturn ACA. Collins disagrees Kavanaugh will protect Trump from bad behavior. Collins disagrees that he'll overturn Obergefell or Roe. This is clearly building up to a Yes. She's going through every liberal fear and calling it rubbish.
Update 2: She's making a better case for Kavanaugh than Kavanaugh did. This is hilarious. You all should listen to the whole thing. She's systematically knocking down every liberal concern.
Update 3: Geez. Listening to Collins, Kavanaugh sounds like a real progressive. I don't want this guy.
Update 4: I thought we got rid of the filibuster.
Update 5: Presumption of innocence is too important and cannot be abandoned for sake of nags
Update 6: If Ford had any credibility, Avenatti destroyed it. I believe Ford is a survivor, but not of Kavanaugh.
