Page 281 of 281 FirstFirst ... 181231271279280281
Results 11,201 to 11,207 of 11207

Thread: Inauguration Day, Inauguration Hooooooraaay!

  1. #11201
    Quote Originally Posted by Reid View Post
    Actually punishing people for sexual misconduct, regardless of how they use it, means they still actually punish people.
    1. Al Franken was punished because Democrats believe it is important for men to be held accountable for sexual assault, no matter how powerful they are

    2. Al Franken was punished in order to help Doug Jones, a Democrat, beat his Republican challenger, Roy Moore

    3. Al Franken was punished so that Kirsten Gillibrand could establish her populist bona fides in anticipation of her 2020 presidential bid

    I don't know if I buy that what Democrats are doing is particularly noble, or how meaningful it is that Democrats punish their own, given how utterly cynical it is. (And note, because I know you're going to misread me here, Reid: to say that is not to say anything at all about the moral value of their intentions compared to those of Republicans.)
    Last edited by Eversor; 09-17-2018 at 11:04 PM.

  2. #11202
    It's Stuart, Martha Stuart
    Posts
    7,767
    Quote Originally Posted by Reid View Post
    Thing like "interpretation" and "pointing out the obvious difficulties with knowing exactly what people thought hundreds of years ago" are postmodern communist doctrine.
    The law needs a certain degree of interpretation. That's why we have judges in the first place. But that interpretation needs to operate within a reasonable restriction of what the law actually says and what people have historically taken it to mean. You don't, for example, get to say that the second amendment suddenly means something else because technology has changed, or something like that. If there isn't a respect for president, than the law is totally meaningless.

  3. #11203
    Likes Kittens. Eats Fluffies
    Posts
    11,643
    Quote Originally Posted by Obi_Kwiet View Post
    If there isn't a respect for president, than the law is totally meaningless.
    ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

  4. #11204
    Really not sure how I feel about this. Surely she must know that some kind of investigation by the FBI would tie up the nomination for months? Tbh this seems somewhat obstructionist.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/18/u...e-hearing.html

  5. #11205
    Or maybe she's just trying to avoid this:

    Quote Originally Posted by The New York Times
    Republicans, clearly hoping to avoid a repeat of the Hill-Thomas scenario, were considering employing a special counsel or staff member to question Dr. Blasey and Judge Kavanaugh. Democrats accused Republicans of trying to rush through a hearing without a proper investigation of serious charges.

    “She is under no obligation to participate in the Republican efforts to sweep the whole thing under the rug, to continue this nomination on a fast track,” said Senator Patty Murray, Democrat of Washington, who won her Senate seat in 1992. “It’s basically a railroad job. This is what they did to Anita Hill.”

  6. #11206
    Republicans want to give her to give her testimony only a few days from now. I suspect that's not enough time for her to prepare.

    I don't know what's in it for Republicans to compromise here. They probably have the votes already. They don't really get anything out of allowing her to testify.

  7. #11207
    Admiral of Awesome
    Posts
    16,352
    Quote Originally Posted by Eversor View Post
    Republicans want to give her to give her testimony only a few days from now. I suspect that's not enough time for her to prepare.

    I don't know what's in it for Republicans to compromise here. They probably have the votes already. They don't really get anything out of allowing her to testify.
    idk, maybe they want Kavanaugh to keep them company while they all die in prison?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •