BE Advised!

Nerdberg said:
Robo still thinks a hearing is a judicial procedure. just unable to learn. it was not a trial, but a glorified job interview.
Click to expand...

Nerdberg doesn't seem to understand that when charges are made about a candidate for the SCOTUS that there must be verifiable evidence just like a court of law.
 
im-no-sexual.jpg
 
Guille said:
Oh OK, let me dumb it down for you since you apparently can't follow such a simple line of thought.
Click to expand...

All you are doing is expanding the idea of your own asinine ignorance, and lack of reading comprehension.

1. Your assertion that one must be in a political party in order to have an opinion is asinine.
Click to expand...

Never said that so why play the fool?

You think with two major political parties, who cooperate with each other by the way, we're going to have diversity of thought? That's stupid. Not only does it not make sense from a theoretical viewpoint we've had your preferred system in place for over 200 years and know for a fact it doesn't result in what you think it does.
Click to expand...

I believe I said could "work together" which would include cooperation, and it worked for 200 years. Not saying there was no disagreements, that would be for asses like you to conceive. However, they knew how to compromise to get things done. McCain worked with Kennedy. Bush worked with Kennedy. Democrats worked with Republicans, and things actually got done, and problems fixed. I can remember when Zell Miller asked where his party had gone, and thought of becoming a Republican. The animosity between the two parties is relatively new mostly in the past 20-30 years.

Scrape the fringe elements off of each party and look at what's left...do you see diversity of thought there? I don't, they look alike to me.
Click to expand...

Buy some glasses.

2. Not only is your take on this asinine, it's also insulting. Some of the most out-of-the-box thinking we're getting right now is from people who aren't members of those two parties but because the D's and R's legislated themselves as many poll advantages as possible we don't get to see those ideas implemented. You dismiss all of that by saying that people won't have an opinion without a Party. Maybe you won't but that's not on the rest of us, it's on you and only you. Just because you can't think on your own doesn't mean the rest of us can't.
Click to expand...

None of your comments is based on your individual thoughts, and none are new. Been hearing the same bull shit since the early Reagan days. Give an example of a new idea you have had. In fact, your stupidity in regards to what I said only further solidifies your stupidity. Here is what I actually said:

"The system is built on compromise, and differing opinions. And that requires different groups, or parties."

See if you can actually respond to that with some form of intellectual reality.

3. Payola. Centralized Party structures are good for two things and two things only...distributing payola and issuing marching orders.

Keep thinking you've got it all figured out but I think people who think like you are a cancer.
Click to expand...

Well, you certainly are following your marching orders. Now if you could only learn to think for yourself.
 
Robo said:
Why? Because it's based and dependent on Special Interest "BRIBERY" money contributed to the duopoly parties?
Click to expand...

No, because the Constitution is set up to infer party participation, not just individual action. Surely you don't believe that individuals cannot be bribed?
 
Robo said:
I don't post juvenile insults at you. Have you a credible reason to do it at me?



You do agree it was a "criminal prosecution," right?



Actually no, I saw a female prosecutor who's expertise is prosecuting sexual crimes in a over-the-top sensitivity for the feelings of the accuser. The Republican Senators only took over when the Democrats arrogance and vile toward the judge was so appalling that to NOT speak up for the judge would have been watching a pure lynching of his good name and personality.



Even you had to be laughing when you wrote that! If that was "hammering" I'd be interested in your definition what you determine the Democrats were doing to Kavanaugh and Ford. Type that out for me please.



Well friend, we saw two different things. I saw an attempted lynching and outrageous contempt of a judge by a gang of snobbish partisan evil Democrat hypocrites hell bent on delay, delay, delay of the conformation of this judge and all without a smidgen of actual evidence to deny him a seat on the court.
Click to expand...

Laugh like the child you are. However Kavanaugh proved he is not qualified for any court position.. He abused Klobachar in front of millions of people. He cried and wept screaming in anger. That seem judicial temperament to you?
Yes kiddo, they brought in a woman prosecutor to hide behind. Tells a lot about them too and the republican old white mans party.
Kavanaugh came out screaming and spoiling for a fight.That as the tenor he set up. Not the Dems .
Yeah, he is an abusive person. He is c bylearly not a fair minded guy spouting off conspiracy theories. he has always been a conspiracy nut back when he was pushing Vince Foster craziness and working of the Starr Commissions kangaroo court. Now the Clintons are after him. he is a nut.
 
Grumpy et al: this is not a court trial, this is not a court room. None of that applies.

Unless the investigation discovers something egregious and awful, a badly tarnished K will be confirmed.
 
Old Trapper said:
No, because the Constitution is set up to infer party participation, not just individual action. Surely you don't believe that individuals cannot be bribed?
Click to expand...

I'd be very interested in the section or amendments that "infer" parties in the Constitution, please direct me there.
 
Robo said:
Be advised that if you’re thinking about voting in the midterm election, that Democrats have proven beyond any reasonable doubt that they believe that due process of the law isn’t an American principle to be used in every official national government procedure, but it’s only a rule for court of law proceedings Anything goes in congressional hearings, even destroying a man’s reputation, life and family based on zero concurring witnesses or otherwise evidence.

6th Amendment Text |
“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense. “

Take note that the 6th amendment says nothing about the Democrats arguments of a necessity for a “court of law” or “Job interviews.” Simply by and through the Senate discourse between right and left, the Senate confirmation hearing was turned into a “CRIMINAL PROSECUTION.” as identified by the 6th amendment. It was and still is a Kabuki Theater Kangaroo Court proceeding that denied Judge Kavanaugh the right to face his accuser. The basic fundamental principle of “innocent until proven guilty” was not invoked. The Judge was subjected to a court on not a jury of his peers, but rather subjected to a court of “Public Opinion” and a possible vigilante lynch mob.

If Democrats are so concerned about women’s rights and truly believe Judge is a sexual predator, they can still take Dr. Ford to the criminal justice system and law enforcement in the State of Maryland where there is no statute of limitations on sex crimes. Stay tuned for that.
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
Kacper said:
My house seat is leaning GOP and my Senate race will be a blow out for the DNC. I will vote third party if I vote at all. They are equally offensive to me.
Click to expand...

Then you will end up with what you get; the DNC is the worst of the worst. People with some intelligence all agree that Government is a necessary evil of human endeavors. One can minimize that by voting for those at least willing to defend the Constitution and liberty.

You're not much different than those who vote for the Party of the Jackass in my opinion. You do know what will happen if Democrats were to take over the House and/or the Senate right?
 
Nordberg said:
Stay stupid, it suits you and goes along with your posting.Fact is he was given a fair and equal chance to present his case. Did you not see that? He had 11 senators, a majority., suck up and back him. Missed that too, didn't you? they even brought in a prosecutor to hammer Ford. Kavanaugh got everything a person could possibly want. When he went on his drunken tirade, in court, ,he would have been told to sit down and shutup.This was not a criminal prosecution. He got deference that he did not deserve.
Click to expand...

Well there is some irony; a low IQ dullard who cannot think for himself and parrots DNC narratives like a child calling others stupid. :rofl2:
 
NiftyNiblick said:
False equivalency is but another form of stupidity, Kacper.
The idiots who voted for Obama but not Secretary Clinton will get a fascist supreme court for their efforts.
The other fence sitters never had any balls.
People with balls can't straddle a fence. It's too anatomically difficult.

Voting for a non-viable third party with no congressional seats and no state legislature seats is the same as tattooing "I'm Clueless" on one's forehead.
Click to expand...

^ This is why you never argue with lying leftist assholes; they start with a lie and end with a lie.

giphy.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top