Members DramatistDreamer Posted September 19, 2018 Members Share Posted September 19, 2018 The same party who delayed Merrick Garland's hearing as long as humanly possible (over 400 days) are now chiding Democrats for agreeing that the FBI should investigate before Prof. Blasey Ford testifies because it would delay the vote. How richly hypocritical of the GOP but none of us are surprised, right? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members marceline Posted September 19, 2018 Members Share Posted September 19, 2018 (edited) Going back to Hirono's comment that men should shut up and stand up, I know what she meant but framing this as men vs. women ignores how many men are victims of sexual abuse too. Look at Jim Jordan who turned a blind eye to hundreds of abused men at OSU. When we make this about men vs women we lump male victims in with their victimizers. Edited September 19, 2018 by marceline 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DramatistDreamer Posted September 19, 2018 Members Share Posted September 19, 2018 Anita Hill expresses the hope that the Senate gets things right this time by conducting a more thoughtful hearing and a thorough investigation before testimony is given. Anita Hill: How to Get the Kavanaugh Hearings Right 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khan Posted September 19, 2018 Members Share Posted September 19, 2018 (edited) I know I'm not surprised, lol. Maybe we don't need to delay any further, but I still find the GOP's position galling. My favorite part: Finally, refer to Christine Blasey Ford by her name. She was once anonymous, but no longer is. Dr. Blasey is not simply “Judge Kavanaugh’s accuser.” Dr. Blasey is a human being with a life of her own. She deserves the respect of being addressed and treated as a whole person. Edited September 19, 2018 by Khan 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MichaelGL Posted September 19, 2018 Members Share Posted September 19, 2018 (edited) Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley has officially canceled a committee vote on Brett Kavaunagh's Supreme Court nomination. Please register in order to view this content https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/kavanaugh-sexual-assault-allegation-dle/h_9ad5f54f56191d6c23fc67a01bdced63?utm_term=link&utm_content=2018-09-18T20%3A45%3A32&utm_source=fbCNN&utm_medium=social Edited September 19, 2018 by MichaelGL 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DramatistDreamer Posted September 19, 2018 Members Share Posted September 19, 2018 Hm, not sure how this affects the long term results but it's an intriguing development nonetheless. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vee Posted September 19, 2018 Members Share Posted September 19, 2018 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khan Posted September 19, 2018 Members Share Posted September 19, 2018 I keep fearing this'll end up like some episode of "Law & Order: SVU," with Kavanaugh in tears, saying he was drunk and scared and didn't wanna hurt her like that because he really loved her but all his friends kept teasing him and if he could take back that night he would. (Cue Mariska Hargitay's standard "WTF am I witnessing here?" reaction.) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members juppiter Posted September 20, 2018 Members Share Posted September 20, 2018 (edited) And how exactly are the FBI supposed to investigate an allegation that we don't where when or where it occurred because the accuser can't remember? Also, liberals' sudden love and devotion for the FBI is really weird. It is clearly a political stalling tactic on behalf of the Democrats. Once Ford refused to testify, the tide turned back in Kavanaugh's favor, and that is evident. Garland didn't have the votes to be confirmed, but I always thought McConnell should have given him a hearing. Now I see why he didn't. It was the right move. Edited September 20, 2018 by juppiter 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vee Posted September 20, 2018 Members Share Posted September 20, 2018 Why was it the right move? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ReddFoxx Posted September 20, 2018 Members Share Posted September 20, 2018 Garland had the votes which is why McConnell didn't give him a hearing. As fake moderate as Collins is she would have easily been a vote for Garland, as would have former GOP Senators Kirk and Ayotte (wanting to save their seats). Toomey probably would have as well to keep his seat secure. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members JaneAusten Posted September 20, 2018 Members Share Posted September 20, 2018 Garland was pretty universally praised by the judiciary committee in his last appointment. Orrin Hatch gushed over Garland. He would have been easily confirmed with the 60 vote threshold still in place. No need to change the rules like McConnell did for Gorsuch. Garland is not a liberal. ObAma picked him again as a fair compromise choice so that the people he thought would accept the pick who voted for Garland before, wouldn’t spit in his face like they ended up doing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Roman Posted September 20, 2018 Members Share Posted September 20, 2018 Bye Felicia. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DramatistDreamer Posted September 20, 2018 Members Share Posted September 20, 2018 (edited) Charles Blow speaks eloquently of why someone wouldn't have come forward and also why the FBI is much better equipped at doing an investigation. This is definitely worth your time to watch. Especially to ignorant trolls (if they're still here, I put them on ignore) who ask impertinent questions. This is America. Edited September 20, 2018 by DramatistDreamer 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khan Posted September 20, 2018 Members Share Posted September 20, 2018 (edited) Yet, people would swear up-and-down that it had absolutely nothing at all to do with the color of Obama's skin. I don't blame Obama for "moving beyond the United States," as DD said upthread, and becoming more of a global humanitarian. Don't get me wrong, I believe he still loves this country. However, I think any individual who endures the kind of racist b.s. that Obama endured for eight years -- often, from his own constituents, the people whose interests he had to put before his own -- has to reach a point of thinking, "Well, forget y'all, then!". I think Obama knows he will never attain the level of respect that other, previous presidents have attained in their lifetimes, so he has chosen to move onto making a difference on the global stage. Edited September 20, 2018 by Khan 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.