Even if it were, under the standards that conservatives and Republicans argued for during Garland's nomination, the court should be balanced. The Republicans invoked the nuclear option to put a conservative justice in place of Scalia, and now replacing the moderate Kennedy is an even more conservative judge. Under these standards, Silence must believe that Kavanaugh's appointment could be dismissed out of hand purely for his political leanings.
Then am I justified in giving every christian I meet shit because there's a rampant problem with sexual abuse within the catholic church?
it has legitimate uses
I swear to god if Booker's posturing killed chances of Brett being rejected.
Booker and Harris clearly want to run for president and this is arguably why they are so visible at the moment. I actually like Harris on many policies, but please remember that Booker voted against a bill to allow cheap drug imports from Canada and it's clear he did this for monetary reasons.
Yeah if you want to not be taken seriously, there's plenty of other words to describe how he was acting.
Watching some of the confirmation live, someone said that Brett has a "fixation" on Antonin Scalia's lone dissent in a case that confirmed that independent counsels are constitutional.
Shame Brett will beconfirmed, I see absolutely no way he isn't.
"Condescendingly explains things to her like she's a mental invalid because she's a woman and he thinks she's thick as pig shit" doesn't quite roll off the tongue as well though.
All words are made up? So what's the point in acting like mansplaining isn't a real word?
don't mansplain and you won't have to hear it
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/09/judge-brett-kavanaugh-should-be-impeached-for-lying-during-his-confirmation-hearings.html?__twitter_impression=true
Newly released emails show that while he was working to move through President George W. Bush’s judicial nominees in the early 2000s, Kavanaugh received confidential memos, letters, and talking points of
Democratic staffers stolen by GOP Senate aide Manuel Miranda. That includes research and talking points Miranda stole from the Senate server after I had written them for the Senate Judiciary Committee as
the chief counsel for nominations for the minority.
Receiving those memos and letters alone is not an impeachable offense.
No, Kavanaugh should be removed because he was repeatedly asked under oath as part of his 2004 and 2006 confirmation hearings for his position on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit about whether
he had received such information from Miranda, and each time he falsely denied it.
For example, in 2004, Sen. Orrin Hatch asked him directly if he received “any documents that appeared to you to have been drafted or prepared by Democratic staff members of the Senate Judiciary Committee.”
Kavanaugh responded, unequivocally, “No.”
In 2006, Sen. Ted Kennedy asked him if he had any regrets about how he treated documents he had received from Miranda that he later learned were stolen. Kavanaugh rejected the premise of the question,
restating that he never even saw one of those documents.
Please be the next Robert Bork please be the next Robert Bork.
I believe the colloquialism is 'grasping at straws'.
Ah yes Mansplain from the latin words...no wait french word...erm oh hang on old english....nope germanic? Where do words come from again?
It's a portmanteau, like Cell phone or Motel or heck Facepunch. It's a combination of two works to create new meaning.
stop so dense about it.
I'm not being dense, if you wan't to you use that word for your arguments you go right ahead, doesn't bother me if no one will take you seriously.
literally just you are complaining
To me it didn't sound like 'because she's a woman' but more because he didn't want to answer "no" directly, so he had to derail and talk about other justices' positions and make sure to mention that declining to comment was because of precedent rather than just not wanting to answer.
It's a sexist term that implies only men are capable of being assholes based on the gender of the person they're interacting with.
It's interesting that such a term originated from a movement that purports to be extremely concerned with language and gendered language; yet this same movement has no issue creating extremely gendered terms to describe negative attributes of men.
Anyone who uses the term "mansplaining" is inherently a sexist and is a social justice advocate.
Mansplaining is just a sexist term invented to replace being condescending as a way to invalidate what was said.
Its called being condescending for fucks sake.
It's not sugarcoated antagonism. It's sexist antagonism.
All rapes are a form of physical and psychological assault; that doesn't make the term 'rape' redundant though.
"mansplaining" is just another word for condescending that adds in an accusation of sexism in a way that can ONLY be used against men and never against women. I really wish that word never existed and that everyone would just stop using it.
Not really, the term asshole still exists. It's just a specific kind of asshole
or womansplaining needs to be in fashion
Thing is, this just invites more divisive bs. If Xsplaining becomes a thing beyond mansplaining, in comes things like blacksplaining, or jewsplaining.
I'm not even going to google to see if those already exist. My faith in humanity couldn't survive the disappointment.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.