Red Mosquito

--- wrote:
2) I'm sure you were as equally nonplussed when the Republicans employed a "the means justify the ends" approach to keep Merrick Garland off the bench, yeah?

Nice straw man.

2) I'm sure you were as equally nonplussed when the Republicans employed a "the means justify the ends" approach to keep Merrick Garland off the bench, yeah?

If this is an attempt at drawing an equivalency, it’s pretty baseless. Republicans simply refused to allow any consideration of a replacement until such time that it could be their own. They were even openly debating if they could maintain that approach through an entire Clinton presidency.

It shouldn't surprise me that you two have missed the point, but it kind of does.

Great argument.

The black knight always triumphs, I guess

run2death wrote:Great argument.

Well, if you insist.

Strat mentioned that a particular end - "keeping a conservative judge off the court" - is what's of value, and the merit of the means employed in keeping said judge off the court almost certainly matter less (perhaps I've unfairly read too much into his post). It's to this sentiment I was responding.

Nowhere have I equated the particulars of the means involved in each of the two episodes (not least because these kinds of disagreements are boring and full of tired in-group/out-group rancor); Republicans railroading what appeared to be an imminently qualified judge from getting a fair hearing, and Democrats granting dispensation to "believe all victims" instead of "innocent until proven guilty" only because it is in the instant case politically expedient. That these means differ is not something I would deny. The equivalence is in the limiting political calculus that each side seems so unable to move beyond: my team has to win, at all costs. That those costs differ across time, place, and circumstance - and that it's almost impossible for one team to not run up a higher bill, to continue the analogy - is not in dispute.

You both read something into my post that wasn't there.

From a tactical standpoint, the best thing republicans can do is go ahead as normal with the confirmation until some actual evidence appears. Delaying and letting democrats bitch for weeks while pushing emotional #believethewoman bullshit won't do them any favors. Learn to spend your political capital.

BurtReynolds wrote:pushing emotional #believethewoman bullshit

tragabigzanda wrote:Plowing right through is what these guys do best.

It's certainly Kavanaugh's modis operandi.

I can’t help but think that Scalia and Breyer, if given the chance to debate this calmly in front of an audience, might have both at least acknowledged the potential for long term damage this is causing to both parties and the court itself in much the same way that thodoks just illustrated a few posts ago.

B wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:pushing emotional #believethewoman bullshit

BurtReynolds wrote:

B wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:pushing emotional #believethewoman bullshit

#whyIdidntreport

McParadigm wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

B wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:pushing emotional #believethewoman bullshit

#whyIdidntreport

thats a pretty stupid reason.

BurtReynolds wrote:

McParadigm wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

B wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:pushing emotional #believethewoman bullshit

#whyIdidntreport

thats a pretty stupid reason.

#whyIdidntrevealthatIdidntreport

washing machine wrote:I can’t help but think that Scalia and Breyer, if given the chance to debate this calmly in front of an audience, might have both at least acknowledged the potential for long term damage this is causing to both parties and the court itself in much the same way that thodoks just illustrated a few posts ago.

I think Ruth Bader Ginsburg publicly lamented the politicization of the judicial nomination process just the other day.

I mean, justices used to usually just be straight up politicians, so

Who was under the delusion that the supreme court nomination process wasn't political before this?

This seems not awesome. I thought the Republicans were saying they had no idea who this person was until she went public.

So this is an absurd fake claim that came out of nowhere...but also we anticipated the possibility of it like magic?

i just want this thing to be over

it's like watching your team having been down 24-0 at the start of the 4th quarter and you had accepted the loss but then thanks to two quick scores and a pick 6 it's 24-21 and there 2 minutes left but they have the ball and you have no timeouts and you just know it's just over

where's the fumbled snap recovery to save the U.S. judicial system?