How old is he?
Brett Kavanaugh Senate Kabuki Theater
- Thread starter rdinatal
- Start date
- Replies 1,454
- Views 67,971
How old is he?
Yep. Don't read em, link em or talk about them. As long as we keep giving Facebook, Twitter and all the big digital media business they'll be around to 'educate' and support our enemies.
About 150. But I read this week his son is taking over the empire.
Old enough that his kid, who is further left than him, is the real threat to the Republic.
drypowder
Les Deplorables
Nope. Only countries founded by Europeans of Christian ancestry.
Soros is behind a lot of things including gun control. In fact, as far as I know, the two largest financiers of gun control in the US are Soros and Bloomberg.
He's gotten plenty in the US - peoples of European Christian ancestry are already a minority in the under 20 demographic, and will be a minority overall in a couple of decades.
You got to call it like you see it. Now that is REAL TRANSPARENCY.Sen John Kennedy just gave a funny thought on Pelosi ... “billy goat brain mockingbird mouth”. That man can turn a phrase ...
georgel
Behind Every Blade of Grass
Charter Member
Benefactor
Supporting Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
I won't celebrate until Notso Feinstein is investigated and held accountable for her withholding information and or making Ford a reluctant player in the fiasco. (If she was.) And I hope Cory "Spartacus" is held accountable for his intentional and blatent disregard for the rules, even though the information was actually already cleared. And Kamala Harris, well, just because.
Last edited:
I'd like to think that US Senators are honorable people, but as zealous at the Dem's have been to abort this confirmation; I would NOT be taking any chances if I was Mitch McConnell. Why temp Mr. Murphy to show up univited.
Murkowski reveals she will abstain from voting against Kavanaugh tomorrow so Yes voter Steve Daines can stay at his daughter's wedding
- But in tomorrow's confirmation vote will be listed as 'present' so that Montana Rep. Sen. Steve Daines can remain at his daughter's wedding
- Friday evening Daines announced he was willing to jet to DC to vote if needed
- Speaking at a press conference late Friday, Murkowski said the Judge 'is a good man but not the right man for the court'
- She stressed being listed as 'present' will not change the outcome of the vote
- As of Friday there were 51 confirmed votes for Kavanaugh and 49 against
- On Thursday Senator Daines said he would vote in support of Kavanaugh
- A final vote is expected to take place Saturday afternoon
- Republicans cannot delay the vote officially without all 100 Senators' agreement - an unlikely outcome given the fervent anticipation surrounding the process
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...EAVE-daughters-wedding-vote-Kavanaugh-to.html
Last edited:
drypowder
Les Deplorables
Something I'm not clear on - why is Murkowski against Kavanaugh's confirmation? Was she against it before the last minute allegations? And if her opposition surfaced only after the allegations, exactly what part of the allegations does she deem credible and how does she square the allegation with all the evidence against it?
Or is she simply being bribed or blackmailed?
Last edited:
or bullied. I don't have the answer, but here she is addressing the Senate this evening:
Last edited:
drypowder
Les Deplorables
I didn't listen to the entire thing, but there's a bit in the middle where it sounds like Kavanaugh's reaction to the allegations made her decide he didn't have the demeanor for the court. I hope her son is falsely accused of rape and let's she if she can maintain a senatorial demeanor.
Republicans like her need to be booted out of Congress - after everything the Dems did along with their propaganda arm, the media, she's still blathering on about civility. How civil was Feinstein's behavior in holding this accusation in her pocket for weeks so she could spring it at the last minute? How civil was it for Senate Judiciary Dems to keep Ford in the dark about her option to testify at home in private? How about their media arm omitting or underplaying relevant details re: Ford's perjury re: lie detection test, Michell's report, the gang-rape accuser's ex-boyfriend's statements, etc.? Or in publishing and breathlessly pushing scandalous claims that couldn't stand up to even the slightest bit of fact checking?
Have any of the Dems apologized for their behavior? Has the media acknowledged their ridiculously biased coverage? Of course not. So only a friggin MORON would expect better behavior the next time around.
We need more Republican politicians who understand the enemy within this country and are committed to fighting it.
Last edited:
richardlc
Happy to be here
It's long past time the court actually represented America. Currently there is one nominal WASP on the court, Gorsuch. The rest are Catholics and Jews, with the notable exception of the truly honorable Clarence Thomas.
Murkowski is a useless legacy/career politician who is only interested in keeping the family political business going.
Her father was a Senator from Alaska. After graduating from law school, she went back to Alaska to establish some local credentials. After entering politics, she shot to the top of the Alaskan House's leadership in 4 years. Then dear old dad was elected governor and he got to appoint his little girl to his former seat in the U.S. Senate. Murkowski lost in the 2010 primary to a real conservative, but she mounted a write-in campaign that was successful with huge help from Democrats (they had no real prospect for their candidate to win, so they elected Murkowski).
Did I mention that she votes like a liberal on many issues - pro-choice, same-sex marriage, LGBT issues, immigration, Obamacare.
It would be nice after the November election if the Republicans could afford to expel her from their caucus.
Last edited:
What do you base that on?
I'm Catholic and I certainly don't know any Marxists in my parish.
True
But I am a bit conflicted on that one.
While it is a personal choice to do what you will with your body, Im not a fan of it, but I also do believe that folks should have their right to choose
So, yeah, the problem with the R's, well, one of the problems, is that they take these hard stances on things like gay marriage etc and alienate so many voters. They are taking hard stances on things that really dont affect ANYONE except homosexuals.
Two dudes want to get married - GO FOR IT!
Two ladies want to wear a lot of plaid and get married - COOL, DOESNT AFFECT ANYONE BUT THOSE TWO LADIES!
Republicans need to get our of the people's business
Last edited:
The Pope. That is an elected position that represents Church right? They elected a Marxist. So I am guessing worldwide there's a lot of Marxists in the Church.
My only problem with the pro choice stuff revolves around my tax money paying for their abortion. That kind of bothers me some in the respect that if you make a “mistake” and get knocked up then we the people get put on the hook to pay for it.
The problem is that these issues are not addressed in the Constitution and should be State issues. The SC should never have been involved. But the wacko lefties can't get thei agenda passed legislatively so they have used the courts. Even in CA they can't get these things passed. Another reason why this week was so politically over the top. If women want to kill babies and degenerates want to have sex with each other that is fine. If a State has laws formalizing all that. Some states may decide not to allow everything other states do.
Edit- Democrats passed the biggest get in your business law ever. The ACA. IMO your comment should have been the Federal Gov needs to get out of the people's business.
Last edited:
He's not in my parish, as I said, and I'm not sure who the "they" is in your assertion.
You paint with a very broad (and therefore inaccurate) brush.
Whoever elected the Pope. That would be 'they'.
Hey your Church might be great. I have no clue. Every Catholic lick Church in 1000 miles may be great. But their worldwide spokesperson and leader is a Commie. And it isn't just the Catholic Church. Lots of religious leaders are far left these days.
You're implying Scalia didn't "represent America" and wasn't "truly honorable", based solely on his religious beliefs?
Agreed. The fat lady needs to sing this afternoon....
Well now you just went for the nut shot. That's just mean. You have a valid point, but I didn't want to go mud wrestling this morning.
drypowder
Les Deplorables
If that is your only problem with abortion, then consider the alternative - instead of paying for someone's abortion via your tax dollars, you pay to raise someone else's child. I've written much more about this in other posts, but paying for abortion is MUCH cheaper than paying for intergenerational welfare, not to mention the greater crime associated with unwanted children. Or how those generations will vote against your children to siphon ever increasing amounts of their tax dollars away.
So if it's simply an economic issue for you, the choice is very clear.
Last edited:
I certainly have other thoughts on it that are not appropriate for an online forum, but that starts the tip of the iceberg. I have read your other comments on it previously and tend to agree with most of the comments.
Last edited:
If the SCOTUS seat remains vacant, 4-4 decisions, then the Ninth Circus would be calling the shots as they would have the last word.
You found a buddy for the mud puddle you created. Have fun!
DrPhudd
Joe thinks I'm clever
Abortion is murder. There is just no rational argument against that.
I agree that a woman has the right to choose... and generally they do, at conception. An infant, born or unborn is not something that accidentally happens.
I agree that a woman has the right to choose... and generally they do, at conception. An infant, born or unborn is not something that accidentally happens.
My view on this is we can pay a little now or we can pay a to later on this. In the end its a wise investment