Dave Hounddriver Posted October 4, 2018 Author Posted October 4, 2018 3 hours ago, Reboot said: Anyway, FBI report out. Nothing new. Vote is on Saturday. He will be confirmed. I am happy to hear that. IMHO the lady(ies) raising these old issues (whether correctly remembered or not) are like blackmailers, holding onto damaging information so that the victim will give in to their demands and releasing the info when their demands are not met. Blackmail is illegal, but again that is only MHO. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reboot Posted October 5, 2018 Posted October 5, 2018 (edited) 49 minutes ago, Dave Hounddriver said: I am happy to hear that. IMHO the lady(ies) raising these old issues (whether correctly remembered or not) are like blackmailers, holding onto damaging information so that the victim will give in to their demands and releasing the info when their demands are not met. Blackmail is illegal, but again that is only MHO. It's obvious. And the uproar has been particularly damaging to one party (the one committed to hating normal white males) in the issue and it will make a difference in the election this fall. If the Republicans had any brains they'd let this drag on for at least a week or two more. Edited October 5, 2018 by Reboot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forum Support Mike J Posted October 5, 2018 Forum Support Posted October 5, 2018 We have drifted a little bit of course from what I think was the original intent of the original post. So maybe I can drift some more? My concern about what is happening in Washington DC goes deeper than this hearing. On so many recent occasions and events when senators and representatives vote or hold forth opinion the results are often all to consistent. One hundred percent of each party comes down hard on the opposite of the issue. When two parties can look at the same data and one side sees all black and the other all white, the system is broken. I cannot help but feel both sides are voting for the party and not for the people. I used to think the two party system was the best way to govern. I am beginning to wonder if the parliamentary system where minority parties are forced to compromise and come together to govern might be better in the long run. Not really a rant, rather my concern as an American citizen. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Hounddriver Posted October 5, 2018 Author Posted October 5, 2018 1 hour ago, Mike J said: So maybe I can drift some more? Yes. This forum does not strictly forbid discussion on politics but management (JGF) frowns on any controversial/argumentative posts that just cause dissent. Thus I believe you/we have drifted about as far as we can permit. Unless someone has more to add about memory and it's fallibility we should let this topic sleep. Thank you all for your contributions. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnMyWay Posted October 5, 2018 Posted October 5, 2018 On 10/4/2018 at 8:33 PM, Happyhorn52 said: Obama has admitted to taking illegal drugs during his younger and wilder days, and drinking to excess is a subjective term, so I don't know how this is relevant to the confirmation process. 11 hours ago, Dave Hounddriver said: Unless someone has more to add about memory and it's fallibility we should let this topic sleep. Ok, I am going to push the envelope a bit. How about selective memory on a mass basis? Detractors of the current nominee, knowing that it was unlikely to get anything firm from the Ford charges, started slamming him for high school drinking, etc., etc. Yet our previous president seems to have surpassed the nominee in high school antics. Hardly made the news in 2001 when he talked about it openly. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnMyWay Posted October 5, 2018 Posted October 5, 2018 15 hours ago, Mike J said: On so many recent occasions and events when senators and representatives vote or hold forth opinion the results are often all to consistent. One hundred percent of each party comes down hard on the opposite of the issue. When two parties can look at the same data and one side sees all black and the other all white, the system is broken. As far as Supreme Court nominees, the great divide is rather recent. Here is a list of nominees and the voting. You can sort it by date to have the most recent at the top. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nominations_to_the_Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reboot Posted October 5, 2018 Posted October 5, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, OnMyWay said: As far as Supreme Court nominees, the great divide is rather recent. Here is a list of nominees and the voting. You can sort it by date to have the most recent at the top. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nominations_to_the_Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States Things started changing during the Nixon days, when Congress started having public hearings on SCOTUS nominees. They got broken beyond repair when Ted Kennedy went on the attack against Robert Bork in the Reagan days. "Bork" became a verb, as in "to Bork." It's all been downhill since then. With Justice Thomas and now Kavanaugh as good examples. The problem is that the Supreme Court has too much power. Before the Progressive Era, it basically just interpreted the law. With activist courts exceeding their Constitutional prerogatives since that time, it has turned into the equivalent of a superlegislature. So every nomination is now fought over tooth and nail. Edited October 5, 2018 by Reboot 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy F. Posted October 5, 2018 Posted October 5, 2018 Obama was never accused of sexual assault (drunk or otherwise). He wasn't accused of being an aggressive obnoxious drunk either. So there. Eliminating the influence of money in politics would solve many problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnMyWay Posted October 6, 2018 Posted October 6, 2018 5 hours ago, Guy F. said: Obama was never accused of sexual assault (drunk or otherwise). He wasn't accused of being an aggressive obnoxious drunk either. So there. Eliminating the influence of money in politics would solve many problems. Accused is a key word in your statements. I agree about the money but what is the solution? Obama is a self-admitted high school drunk. You can look it up. Quote Obama: -"I was a thug," a "mischievous child" -"I got into fights." -"I drank and did--and consumed substances that weren't always legal." -"I might have drank a six-pack in an hour before going back to class" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Hounddriver Posted October 6, 2018 Author Posted October 6, 2018 On 10/5/2018 at 9:50 AM, Dave Hounddriver said: This forum does not strictly forbid discussion on politics but management (JGF) frowns on any controversial/argumentative posts that just cause dissent. Thus I believe you/we have drifted about as far as we can permit. It seems that our American members cannot resist a lively discussion about US politics. I agree US politics can affect the entire world, but there comes a time when we have to shut down the discussion before it becomes an argument. I shall refer this one to JGF to see if it is time to put it to bed. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts