Kavanaugh

PJ_Soul · September 2018

pjhawks said:

PJ_Soul said:

pjhawks said:

PJ_Soul said:

rgambs said:

Can someone give me a quick summary of the yearbook thing?
My data signal is weak and if I navigate away from here I won't make much progress.

Here are a few paragraphs from the NYT story about it. I think this part pretty much tells the story of what it's about:

"Brett Kavanaugh’s page in his high school yearbook offers a glimpse of the teenage years of the man who is now President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee: lots of football, plenty of drinking, parties at the beach. Among the reminiscences about sports and booze is a mysterious entry: “Renate Alumnius.”
The word “Renate” appears at least 14 times in Georgetown Preparatory School’s 1983 yearbook, on individuals’ pages and in a group photo of nine football players, including Judge Kavanaugh, who were described as the “Renate Alumni.” It is a reference to Renate Schroeder (now Renate Schroeder Dolphin), then a student at a nearby Catholic girls’ school.
Two of Judge Kavanaugh’s classmates say the mentions of Renate were part of the football players’ unsubstantiated boasting about their conquests.
“They were very disrespectful, at least verbally, with Renate,” said Sean Hagan, a Georgetown Prep student at the time, referring to Judge Kavanaugh and his teammates. “I can’t express how disgusted I am with them, then and now.”.............
.........When Ms. Dolphin signed the Sept. 14 letter, she wasn’t aware of the “Renate” yearbook references on the pages of Judge Kavanaugh and his football teammates.
“I learned about these yearbook pages only a few days ago,” Ms. Dolphin said in a statement to The New York Times. “I don’t know what ‘Renate Alumnus’ actually means. I can’t begin to comprehend what goes through the minds of 17-year-old boys who write such things, but the insinuation is horrible, hurtful and simply untrue. I pray their daughters are never treated this way. I will have no further comment.”

but that was just a joke wasn't it? i thought comedy didn't upset you? I don't find it funny of course.

Kay, this is getting boring, but to clarify, I never once said that no jokes upset or offend me. I also never said, obviously, that all jokes are funny.
must have been hacked

I beg your pardon? Are you trying to claim that I did say that? Read again. I did not. I said it is irrelevant if people get offended by a joke. That includes me, if I find a joke offensive and inappropriate. And of course I didn't say all jokes are funny.

Look, I know you're having trouble with the nuances of my opinion on this (and comedy in general). I forgive you for not being able to understand fully.

rgambs · September 2018

pjhawks said:

PJ_Soul said:

pjhawks said:

PJ_Soul said:

rgambs said:

Can someone give me a quick summary of the yearbook thing?
My data signal is weak and if I navigate away from here I won't make much progress.

Here are a few paragraphs from the NYT story about it. I think this part pretty much tells the story of what it's about:

"Brett Kavanaugh’s page in his high school yearbook offers a glimpse of the teenage years of the man who is now President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee: lots of football, plenty of drinking, parties at the beach. Among the reminiscences about sports and booze is a mysterious entry: “Renate Alumnius.”
The word “Renate” appears at least 14 times in Georgetown Preparatory School’s 1983 yearbook, on individuals’ pages and in a group photo of nine football players, including Judge Kavanaugh, who were described as the “Renate Alumni.” It is a reference to Renate Schroeder (now Renate Schroeder Dolphin), then a student at a nearby Catholic girls’ school.
Two of Judge Kavanaugh’s classmates say the mentions of Renate were part of the football players’ unsubstantiated boasting about their conquests.
“They were very disrespectful, at least verbally, with Renate,” said Sean Hagan, a Georgetown Prep student at the time, referring to Judge Kavanaugh and his teammates. “I can’t express how disgusted I am with them, then and now.”.............
.........When Ms. Dolphin signed the Sept. 14 letter, she wasn’t aware of the “Renate” yearbook references on the pages of Judge Kavanaugh and his football teammates.
“I learned about these yearbook pages only a few days ago,” Ms. Dolphin said in a statement to The New York Times. “I don’t know what ‘Renate Alumnus’ actually means. I can’t begin to comprehend what goes through the minds of 17-year-old boys who write such things, but the insinuation is horrible, hurtful and simply untrue. I pray their daughters are never treated this way. I will have no further comment.”

but that was just a joke wasn't it? i thought comedy didn't upset you? I don't find it funny of course.

Kay, this is getting boring, but to clarify, I never once said that no jokes upset or offend me. I also never said, obviously, that all jokes are funny.
must have been hacked

Pearl Jam, Stadio San Siro, Milan 2014

The tag on Betterman. Put it on repeat for a bit and let it sink in.

josevolution · September 2018

RoleModelsinBlood31 said:

Look, I just hope you guys are as aggressive about getting to the bottom of Keith Ellison’s situation as you are with Kavanaugh. If you care about the women, which you all claim, then it shouldn’t matter the position/party of the man involved. Flowers, Broderick, Monahan, Lewinski, Ford- all of them are victims in one way or another. Seems like people here were silent last month when news broke of his violence towards Monahan, yet not the same reaction with regards to Kavanaugh.

funny you forgot one name the Orange baffoon himself why ?

Halifax2TheMax · September 2018

RoleModelsinBlood31 said:

Look, I just hope you guys are as aggressive about getting to the bottom of Keith Ellison’s situation as you are with Kavanaugh. If you care about the women, which you all claim, then it shouldn’t matter the position/party of the man involved. Flowers, Broderick, Monahan, Lewinski, Ford- all of them are victims in one way or another. Seems like people here were silent last month when news broke of his violence towards Monahan, yet not the same reaction with regards to Kavanaugh.

Feel free to start a Keith Ellison thread that I won’t read and expect others to summarize for me.

mickeyrat · September 2018

hope one of the senators on that committee asks him if he's comfortable sending one of his daughters to a party with boys will be boys like he was.

tbergs · September 2018

Well, they're voting Friday either way. Can't believe a vote is needed at this point. I'm not sure where I place this on the Roy Moore spectrum of moral ineptitude?

mfc2006 · September 2018

I have a feeling he will withdraw. No idea why...just a gut feeling.

PJ_Soul · September 2018

I wonder what will happen if they actually elect him??

rgambs · September 2018

PJ_Soul said:

I wonder what will happen if they actually elect him??

Nothing at all. Life goes on another step down the road to Idiocracy.

PJ_Soul · September 2018

rgambs said:

PJ_Soul said:

I wonder what will happen if they actually elect him??

Nothing at all. Life goes on another step down the road to Idiocracy.

Well lifetime SCOTUS judges actually can be impeached, so.....

Halifax2TheMax · September 2018

PJ_Soul said:

I wonder what will happen if they actually elect him??

They’ll confirm him and he’ll gladly give paid speeches to the Heritage Foundation and at other conservative retreats and talk about how evil those libs are but now Team Trump Treason is safe so we can bring about the second coming.

jeffbr · September 2018

Keep in mind this is a vote of the Senate Judiciary Committee which will happen at 9:30 on Friday. If the nomination is approved by the committee it will be brought to the full senate for the actual confirmation vote. They must feel like they have the votes to do this, but we'll see how they feel after Thursday's hearing, and the possibility (probability?) of additional information being made public which could affect the votes.

PJ_Soul · September 2018

Halifax2TheMax said:

PJ_Soul said:

I wonder what will happen if they actually elect him??

They’ll confirm him and he’ll gladly give paid speeches to the Heritage Foundation and at other conservative retreats and talk about how evil those libs are but now Team Trump Treason is safe so we can bring about the second coming.

Are the SCOTUS judges allowed to partake in partisan activities??

The SCOTUS is really weird to me in general. A good number of those judges are clearly not at all doing the job they are supposed to be doing. If they all were doing their jobs properly, there wouldn't be so many split decisions. The fact that this nomination/confirmation process is so partisan further proves that the SCOTUS is completely broken. It's pretty scary. These judges are supposed to be the highest judges in the world, but seem to be some of the least impartial judges I ever heard of. It's so fucked up.

Halifax2TheMax · September 2018

PJ_Soul said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

PJ_Soul said:

I wonder what will happen if they actually elect him??

They’ll confirm him and he’ll gladly give paid speeches to the Heritage Foundation and at other conservative retreats and talk about how evil those libs are but now Team Trump Treason is safe so we can bring about the second coming.

Are the SCOTUS judges allowed to partake in partisan activities??
The SCOTUS is really weird to me in general. A good number of those judges are clearly not at all doing the job they are supposed to be doing. If they all were doing their jobs properly, there wouldn't be so many split decisions. The fact that this nomination/confirmation process is so partisan further proves that the SCOTUS is completely broken. It's pretty scary. These judges are supposed to be the highest judges in the world, but seem to be some of the least impartial judges I ever heard of. It's so fucked up.

See Thomas, Clarence; wife of same. See also Scalia, Antonin. The religious right has demanded a stacked court in an effort to overturn roe v Wade and other social issues they see as threatening the sweet baby Jesus and mankind. Seriously, listen, watch or read Senator Whitehouse’s opening statement. 73-0, the Roberts 5.

PJ_Soul · September 2018

Halifax2TheMax said:

PJ_Soul said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

PJ_Soul said:

I wonder what will happen if they actually elect him??

They’ll confirm him and he’ll gladly give paid speeches to the Heritage Foundation and at other conservative retreats and talk about how evil those libs are but now Team Trump Treason is safe so we can bring about the second coming.

Are the SCOTUS judges allowed to partake in partisan activities??
The SCOTUS is really weird to me in general. A good number of those judges are clearly not at all doing the job they are supposed to be doing. If they all were doing their jobs properly, there wouldn't be so many split decisions. The fact that this nomination/confirmation process is so partisan further proves that the SCOTUS is completely broken. It's pretty scary. These judges are supposed to be the highest judges in the world, but seem to be some of the least impartial judges I ever heard of. It's so fucked up.

See Thomas, Clarence; wife of same. See also Scalia, Antonin. The religious right has demanded a stacked court in an effort to overturn roe v Wade and other social issues they see as threatening the sweet baby Jesus and mankind. Seriously, listen, watch or read Senator Whitehouse’s opening statement. 73-0, the Roberts 5.

Yeah, I'm fully aware of all that. That's why I think it's fucked. I did not know, however, that they were allowed to go around making partisan speeches like you suggested.

PJ_Soul · September 2018

Funny!! Right pjhawks?

Image: https://us.v-cdn.net/5021252/uploads/editor/g6/u9itq7s0xyng.jpg

Halifax2TheMax · September 2018

PJ_Soul said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

PJ_Soul said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

PJ_Soul said:

I wonder what will happen if they actually elect him??

They’ll confirm him and he’ll gladly give paid speeches to the Heritage Foundation and at other conservative retreats and talk about how evil those libs are but now Team Trump Treason is safe so we can bring about the second coming.

Are the SCOTUS judges allowed to partake in partisan activities??
The SCOTUS is really weird to me in general. A good number of those judges are clearly not at all doing the job they are supposed to be doing. If they all were doing their jobs properly, there wouldn't be so many split decisions. The fact that this nomination/confirmation process is so partisan further proves that the SCOTUS is completely broken. It's pretty scary. These judges are supposed to be the highest judges in the world, but seem to be some of the least impartial judges I ever heard of. It's so fucked up.

See Thomas, Clarence; wife of same. See also Scalia, Antonin. The religious right has demanded a stacked court in an effort to overturn roe v Wade and other social issues they see as threatening the sweet baby Jesus and mankind. Seriously, listen, watch or read Senator Whitehouse’s opening statement. 73-0, the Roberts 5.

Yeah, I'm fully aware of all that. That's why I think it's fucked. I did not know, however, that they were allowed to go around making partisan speeches like you suggested.

It didn’t used to be that way. SC justices used to keep a very low profile and respectful of their role as a check/balance of power. Staying above the fray so to speak. Not so much anymore.

Jason P · September 2018

oftenreading · September 2018

RoleModelsinBlood31 said:

tbergs said:

Anyone that ignorant is either living in a silo or just troooooooooooooolling.

Call me any names you choose to, that’s the modern way to discuss things right?

For your sake, I hope you're trolling, because otherwise your logic is so faulty it's hard to see how you get through the day

mickeyrat · September 2018

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2018/09/25/ea5e50d4-c0eb-11e8-9005-5104e9616c21_story.html?utm_term=.92510602919b

On Monday night, Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh said in a nationally televised interview that in his younger years, he was focused on sports, academics and “service projects.” But it was his comments about drinking that rankled some Yale University classmates, prompting them to speak out for the first time.

Liz Swisher, who described herself as a friend of Kavanaugh in college, said she was shocked that — in an interview focused largely on his high school years and allegations of sexual misconduct — he strongly denied drinking to the point of blacking out.

“Brett was a sloppy drunk, and I know because I drank with him. I watched him drink more than a lot of people. He’d end up slurring his words, stumbling,” said Swisher, a Democrat and chief of the gynecologic oncology division at the University of Washington School of Medicine. “There’s no medical way I can say that he was blacked out. . . . But it’s not credible for him to say that he has had no memory lapses in the nights that he drank to excess.”

Lynne Brookes, who like Swisher was a college roommate of one of the two women now accusing Kavanaugh of misconduct, said the nominee’s comments on Fox did not match the classmate she remembered.

“He’s trying to paint himself as some kind of choir boy,” said Brookes, a Republican and former pharmaceutical executive who recalled an encounter with a drunken Kavanaugh at a fraternity event. “You can’t lie your way onto the Supreme Court, and with that statement out, he’s gone too far. It’s about the integrity of that institution.”

continues

Kavanaugh

Comments

Categories