President Trump is nominating federal appeals court Judge Brett Kavanaugh

[136or142]

It is a massive travesty to American morals to appoint far-right extremist judges such as Brett Kavanaugh to fill the shoes of Anthony Kennedy. If Kavanaugh is confirmed, there will be real-life policy consequences, such as overturning Roe, NFIB v. Sebelius, and possibly Obergefell. He will rule to protect Trump's abuse of power to protect himself from a criminal investigation in the Mueller probe should it reach the highest court. I urge you to contact your Senators to stop the confirmation. #StopKavanaugh!

Agreed about Kavanaugh, but let's not pretend Kennedy wasn't a far right extremist himself

Kennedy at least supported individual rights, at least when they didn't conflict with corporate power.

[Calthrina950]

It is a massive travesty to American morals to appoint far-right extremist judges such as Brett Kavanaugh to fill the shoes of Anthony Kennedy. If Kavanaugh is confirmed, there will be real-life policy consequences, such as overturning Roe, NFIB v. Sebelius, and possibly Obergefell. He will rule to protect Trump's abuse of power to protect himself from a criminal investigation in the Mueller probe should it reach the highest court. I urge you to contact your Senators to stop the confirmation. #StopKavanaugh!

Agreed about Kavanaugh, but let's not pretend Kennedy wasn't a far right extremist himself

I would disagree with this. Kennedy did cast the deciding vote in Obergefell, and he was one of the deciding votes in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Yes, he was a conservative, but there is a reason why he was called "the swing vote" during his tenure.

[Globalise Operation Rising Lion]

It is a massive travesty to American morals to appoint far-right extremist judges such as Brett Kavanaugh to fill the shoes of Anthony Kennedy. If Kavanaugh is confirmed, there will be real-life policy consequences, such as overturning Roe, NFIB v. Sebelius, and possibly Obergefell. He will rule to protect Trump's abuse of power to protect himself from a criminal investigation in the Mueller probe should it reach the highest court. I urge you to contact your Senators to stop the confirmation. #StopKavanaugh!

Agreed about Kavanaugh, but let's not pretend Kennedy wasn't a far right extremist himself

I would disagree with this. Kennedy did cast the deciding vote in Obergefell, and he was one of the deciding votes in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Yes, he was a conservative, but there is a reason why he was called "the swing vote" during his tenure.

I was being a bit hyperbolic, but his 'conservative' decisions far outnumber his liberal ones. He's played a crucial role in the gutting of the voting rights act, union rights, the proliferation of money in politics etc. The point is liberals and progressives really need to realise that Kennedy was no ally and was a solidly right wing justice

[Calthrina950]

It is a massive travesty to American morals to appoint far-right extremist judges such as Brett Kavanaugh to fill the shoes of Anthony Kennedy. If Kavanaugh is confirmed, there will be real-life policy consequences, such as overturning Roe, NFIB v. Sebelius, and possibly Obergefell. He will rule to protect Trump's abuse of power to protect himself from a criminal investigation in the Mueller probe should it reach the highest court. I urge you to contact your Senators to stop the confirmation. #StopKavanaugh!

Agreed about Kavanaugh, but let's not pretend Kennedy wasn't a far right extremist himself

I would disagree with this. Kennedy did cast the deciding vote in Obergefell, and he was one of the deciding votes in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Yes, he was a conservative, but there is a reason why he was called "the swing vote" during his tenure.

I was being a bit hyperbolic, but his 'conservative' decisions far outnumber his liberal ones. He's played a crucial role in the gutting of the voting rights act, union rights, the proliferation of money in politics etc. The point is liberals and progressives really need to realise that Kennedy was no ally and was a solidly right wing justice

I understand that as well. Kennedy was a clear conservative, but he was the member of the Supreme Court who was, in the views of many, closest to the center. And he wasn't a hard-line extremist, as Obergefell and Casey demonstrate. In my view, it is best to have a Justice who sides with you on at least some issues then one who doesn't at all.

[HillGoose]

hell yeah this guy worked for my home boy George W Bush so im sure he'll keep it 💯 guys chill

[|˶˙ᵕ˙ )ﾉﾞ]

Certainly Democrats aren't perfect, but these attitudes are part of the problem. Republicans appoint hyper partisan judges, pass 'right to work' laws that destroy unions, gerrymander, limit voting rights, declare money as speech...

When Democrats take power, they have to work within these limitations, and then Democratic voters get frustrated and blame the Democratic politicians rather than appreciate the limits these Democrats have to work within.

It's true that on paper its better to vote Democrat than Republican but look at which states in America have the highest income inequality: CA and NY are worse than Texas. The reason for this is because cynical Democrats in those states dont actually care about average workers anymore than Republicans in red states. ( so what if CA has paid sick leave when the cost of living is so astronomically high that you'd be better off in TX with no sick pay due to low rent) They've been going along with this charade for decades now and the chickens have come home to roost as average Americans are growing increasingly pissed off at a situation that has no remedy.

Democratic politicians for decades now have been paying lip-service to the constituency that was established back in the New Deal days. They simply think that my vote is owned to them because the other side is so bad and that any policy, no matter how mediocre, is an acceptable substitute to right wing policy. There is seldom anything to get excited about for the left in this country. We are run by weak leaders like Schumer and Pelosi who were behind every garbage piece of legislation that the Democrats are now trying to undo. Seriously, go back and look at things like the 94 Crime Bill, Clinton's SS privatization, Iraq War, etc... and you'll find the Democratic Party's fingerprints over it. They thought that appealing to that mythical center would win them some grand coalition in the long run and look at where were at now...83% of America's 99 state legislatures are run by Republicans.

Until the Democratic Party wakes up, establishes some self-respect and principles for itself, and takes charge using whatever legislative tricks are necessary to pass legislation...things will continue to suck.

[136or142]

Nothing to worry about here, it's not like Kavanaugh is starting to sound like his new ultimate boss or anything.  Oh wait...

https://twitter.com/axios/status/1016490932324175874

[Calthrina950]

Certainly Democrats aren't perfect, but these attitudes are part of the problem. Republicans appoint hyper partisan judges, pass 'right to work' laws that destroy unions, gerrymander, limit voting rights, declare money as speech...

When Democrats take power, they have to work within these limitations, and then Democratic voters get frustrated and blame the Democratic politicians rather than appreciate the limits these Democrats have to work within.

It's true that on paper its better to vote Democrat than Republican but look at which states in America have the highest income inequality: CA and NY are worse than Texas. The reason for this is because cynical Democrats in those states dont actually care about average workers anymore than Republicans in red states. ( so what if CA has paid sick leave when the cost of living is so astronomically high that you'd be better off in TX with no sick pay due to low rent) They've been going along with this charade for decades now and the chickens have come home to roost as average Americans are growing increasingly pissed off at a situation that has no remedy.

Democratic politicians for decades now have been paying lip-service to the constituency that was established back in the New Deal days. They simply think that my vote is owned to them because the other side is so bad and that any policy, no matter how mediocre, is an acceptable substitute to right wing policy. There is seldom anything to get excited about for the left in this country. We are run by weak leaders like Schumer and Pelosi who were behind every garbage piece of legislation that the Democrats are now trying to undo. Seriously, go back and look at things like the 94 Crime Bill, Clinton's SS privatization, Iraq War, etc... and you'll find the Democratic Party's fingerprints over it. They thought that appealing to that mythical center would win them some grand coalition in the long run and look at where were at now...83% of America's 99 state legislatures are run by Republicans.

Until the Democratic Party wakes up, establishes some self-respect and principles for itself, and takes charge using whatever legislative tricks are necessary to pass legislation...things will continue to suck.

This is why I don't identify with either major party, because they each have their own faults, and have contributed to the polarization which now pervades our political environment. It's also why I advocate for the formation of a viable third party that can be an alternative to the two major parties.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

Good but not good enough. Why another Catholic (we wanted a Protestant nominee).

[Hindsight was 2020]

Dems can stop this guy but they have to be smart and make the case about his hypocritical views on how a president can’t be indicted while he previously served on the Ken Starr case

[|˶˙ᵕ˙ )ﾉﾞ]

This is why I don't identify with either major party, because they each have their own faults, and have contributed to the polarization which now pervades our political environment. It's also why I advocate for the formation of a viable third party that can be an alternative to the two major parties.

The GOP has contributed to polarization far more than the Dems but I think part of that lies in large swaths of people unable to seek any meaningful political remedy and thus politically ''acting out'' if you will. The average American puts in long hours for crap pay with crap benefits that seem to disappear the instant you go to collect them. When things go to sh.it...your offered a choice between Republicans who tell you to go seek charity or Democrats who tell you to go more seek job training. If that's the case then expect more average Americans to grow increasingly unhinged.

[Calthrina950]

This is why I don't identify with either major party, because they each have their own faults, and have contributed to the polarization which now pervades our political environment. It's also why I advocate for the formation of a viable third party that can be an alternative to the two major parties.

The GOP has contributed to polarization far more than the Dems but I think part of that lies in large swaths of people unable to seek any meaningful political remedy and thus politically ''acting out'' if you will. The average American puts in long hours for crap pay with crap benefits that seem to disappear the instant you go to collect them. When things go to sh.it...your offered a choice between Republicans who tell you to go seek charity or Democrats who tell you to go more seek job training. If that's the case then expect more average Americans to grow increasingly unhinged.

I agree with most of this. Hopefully, something changes soon, because I don't like the way things are headed. Polarization, carried to its extremes, is not good for this country, and it undermines the stability of our political system.

[Chief Justice PiT]

     I had to delete quite a few posts from this topic. News items of this sort naturally invite flame wars, but if I have to delete posts from this thread again then I will be locking it.

[Calthrina950]

     I had to delete quite a few posts from this topic. News items of this sort naturally invite flame wars, but if I have to delete posts from this thread again then I will be locking it.

This was the proper move to take. I don't like heated arguments, and the thread was being derailed by them.

[Dwarven Dragon]

Not surprising, and he'll be confirmed by about the same margin Gorsuch was. I look forward to the hearing and will announce a position on the nominee afterwards.


----------My Full Politician-Style statement is below:--------------------------------

The president has made his choice, and it is now time for the Senate to begin fair and full hearings and consideration of the nominee. There is no need to drag this out, for it is not a presidential election year, but a full and robust process must take place.

While Kavanaugh is less conservative than some of the other people on the list, and has previously made an encouraging ruling upholding the affordable care act, I still have some concerns. Kavanaugh has made previous statements suggesting one cannot indict a sitting president, and enthusiastically supported the impeachment of President Bill Clinton. He also enthusiastically supported the Supreme Court's partisan and controversial decision in Bush v. Gore. These all create key questions that should be posed to him at the upcoming hearing. One must also discern if he is sufficiently independent of the president, and if he is within the judicial mainstream in terms of the ideology behind his rulings.

I encourage the Senate to take this process seriously, and to cast their votes, be they YES or NO, for well-reasoned rationales based on the record and testimony of the nominee, and not based on partisan games. The #WULFRICPOSITION will be decided and revealed in the weeks to come.

Who would’ve been your choice?

From the list, Stras or Newsom.

[136or142]

     I had to delete quite a few posts from this topic. News items of this sort naturally invite flame wars, but if I have to delete posts from this thread again then I will be locking it.

It's important to maintain civility while The Titanic sinks!

[Chief Justice PiT]

     I had to delete quite a few posts from this topic. News items of this sort naturally invite flame wars, but if I have to delete posts from this thread again then I will be locking it.

It's important to maintain civility while The Titanic sinks!

     It's important to uphold the rules of the forum. If you don't like it, you're welcome to go find another site to engage in personal attacks on.

[136or142]

     I had to delete quite a few posts from this topic. News items of this sort naturally invite flame wars, but if I have to delete posts from this thread again then I will be locking it.

It's important to maintain civility while The Titanic sinks!

     It's important to uphold the rules of the forum. If you don't like it, you're welcome to go find another site to engage in personal attacks on.

Then apply them in an evenhanded manner.

[Chief Justice PiT]

     I had to delete quite a few posts from this topic. News items of this sort naturally invite flame wars, but if I have to delete posts from this thread again then I will be locking it.

It's important to maintain civility while The Titanic sinks!

     It's important to uphold the rules of the forum. If you don't like it, you're welcome to go find another site to engage in personal attacks on.

Then apply them in an evenhanded manner.

     I deleted offending posts from multiple posters. After a certain point I just cleaned out all of the posts in that quote tree, to cut off a line of dialogue that was degenerating into a flame war again. People are welcome to discuss the topic at hand, so long as they do not do so in an insulting or dismissive manner.

[136or142]

    I had to delete quite a few posts from this topic. News items of this sort naturally invite flame wars, but if I have to delete posts from this thread again then I will be locking it.

It's important to maintain civility while The Titanic sinks!

     It's important to uphold the rules of the forum. If you don't like it, you're welcome to go find another site to engage in personal attacks on.

Then apply them in an evenhanded manner.

     I deleted offending posts from multiple posters. After a certain point I just cleaned out all of the posts in that quote tree, to cut off a line of dialogue that was degenerating into a flame war again. People are welcome to discuss the topic at hand, so long as they do not do so in an insulting or dismissive manner.

You took down my posts on the 'muh privilege' sub thread but none of the others.  I think I've made it clear that I don't care about being personally insulted, but the original post in that sub thread was pretty insulting including using the term 'muh privilege' in an obvious attempt to dismiss the well established concept of implicit bias.

Also, in regards to Calthrina950, I don't see any way to not respond to his posts in a personal way that can be sometimes be regarded as insulting since so many of his posts are based on his personal anecdotes or his telling us his feelings of posts/posters.

[Chief Justice PiT]

    I had to delete quite a few posts from this topic. News items of this sort naturally invite flame wars, but if I have to delete posts from this thread again then I will be locking it.

It's important to maintain civility while The Titanic sinks!

     It's important to uphold the rules of the forum. If you don't like it, you're welcome to go find another site to engage in personal attacks on.

Then apply them in an evenhanded manner.

     I deleted offending posts from multiple posters. After a certain point I just cleaned out all of the posts in that quote tree, to cut off a line of dialogue that was degenerating into a flame war again. People are welcome to discuss the topic at hand, so long as they do not do so in an insulting or dismissive manner.

You took down my posts on the 'muh privilege' sub thread but none of the others.  I think I've made it clear that I don't care about being personally insulted, but the original post in that sub thread was pretty insulting including using the term 'muh privilege' in an obvious attempt to dismiss the well established concept of implicit bias.

Also, in regards to Calthrina950, I don't see any way to not respond to his posts in a personal way that can be sometimes be regarded as insulting since so many of his posts are based on his personal anecdotes or his telling us his feelings of posts/posters.

     You used the concept of privilege to dismiss Calthrina's posts citing your impression that he is a white man, which constitutes impermissible discrimination. You are welcome to tell him that you believe his anecdotes or feelings are not relevant or not representative of the matter at issue. Whatever insult you may have perceived from Alabama_Indy10 was not personal in nature and does not violate the TOS.

[136or142]

    I had to delete quite a few posts from this topic. News items of this sort naturally invite flame wars, but if I have to delete posts from this thread again then I will be locking it.

It's important to maintain civility while The Titanic sinks!

     It's important to uphold the rules of the forum. If you don't like it, you're welcome to go find another site to engage in personal attacks on.

Then apply them in an evenhanded manner.

     I deleted offending posts from multiple posters. After a certain point I just cleaned out all of the posts in that quote tree, to cut off a line of dialogue that was degenerating into a flame war again. People are welcome to discuss the topic at hand, so long as they do not do so in an insulting or dismissive manner.

You took down my posts on the 'muh privilege' sub thread but none of the others.  I think I've made it clear that I don't care about being personally insulted, but the original post in that sub thread was pretty insulting including using the term 'muh privilege' in an obvious attempt to dismiss the well established concept of implicit bias.

Also, in regards to Calthrina950, I don't see any way to not respond to his posts in a personal way that can be sometimes be regarded as insulting since so many of his posts are based on his personal anecdotes or his telling us his feelings of posts/posters.

     You used the concept of privilege to dismiss Calthrina's posts citing your impression that he is a white man, which constitutes impermissible discrimination. You are welcome to tell him that you believe his anecdotes or feelings are not relevant or not representative of the matter at issue. Whatever insult you may have perceived from Alabama_Indy10 was not personal in nature and does not violate the TOS.

How does this not violate the TOS?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Chief Justice PiT]

    I had to delete quite a few posts from this topic. News items of this sort naturally invite flame wars, but if I have to delete posts from this thread again then I will be locking it.

It's important to maintain civility while The Titanic sinks!

     It's important to uphold the rules of the forum. If you don't like it, you're welcome to go find another site to engage in personal attacks on.

Then apply them in an evenhanded manner.

     I deleted offending posts from multiple posters. After a certain point I just cleaned out all of the posts in that quote tree, to cut off a line of dialogue that was degenerating into a flame war again. People are welcome to discuss the topic at hand, so long as they do not do so in an insulting or dismissive manner.

You took down my posts on the 'muh privilege' sub thread but none of the others.  I think I've made it clear that I don't care about being personally insulted, but the original post in that sub thread was pretty insulting including using the term 'muh privilege' in an obvious attempt to dismiss the well established concept of implicit bias.

Also, in regards to Calthrina950, I don't see any way to not respond to his posts in a personal way that can be sometimes be regarded as insulting since so many of his posts are based on his personal anecdotes or his telling us his feelings of posts/posters.

     You used the concept of privilege to dismiss Calthrina's posts citing your impression that he is a white man, which constitutes impermissible discrimination. You are welcome to tell him that you believe his anecdotes or feelings are not relevant or not representative of the matter at issue. Whatever insult you may have perceived from Alabama_Indy10 was not personal in nature and does not violate the TOS.

How does this not violate the TOS?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

     Declarative statements are more harshly punished, as are statements about inherent qualities. Especially considering the post that he was responding to, a post of that sort occupies a gray area, as opposed to calling someone "stupid", which is plainly impermissible. Given that I erased the context, I can see the case that that post should go as well, to minimize confusion.

[Chief Justice PiT]

     Reading through the last page, I can see how my moderation decisions could create the perception of bias, seeing as which posts I preserved from an emerging (off-topic) debate. Therefore, I have deleted the remaining posts. If there is still interest from the parties involved in debating the topic of privilege and bias, I encourage them to create a thread for it in Individual Politics or Political Debate and leave this thread for discussing the nomination of Judge Kavanaugh.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Good but not good enough. Why another Catholic (we wanted a Protestant nominee).

Yeah, you guys are really underrepresented in the halls of power. How terrifying for you!