Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

    Originally posted by Brenthoven View Post
    You can be second in line behind Scoobs, then, in the blind loyalty. No, not the right side of the lot where Flaggy is, the left side.

    I want nothing to do with the whole lot of you. It's amazing that few can actually see the middle ground and discuss. For God's sake, FTLT and I are just about on common ground. That would get us killed on the D1 side.
    Sorry Brent but that isnt what they said. You are looking at it backwards. You think by saying "treat everyone the same" that means you are being "fair" and in a logic sense you are. If Person A is treated like dirt and Person B is treated like dirt technically that is equality. The problem is that if Person A has the means to deal with that and Person B doesnt it is inherently not fair. If you have the opportunity to help out Person B so their situation doesnt destroy them you should do that. By doing so you arent saying they arent capable, you are just evening the playing field because Person A already doesnt need that help. Helping out Person B isnt tipping the scales in any way, it is just giving Person B the same fighting chance Person A has.

    Think about the handicapped. Many of them dont require us to help them yet we make concessions for them all the time. Are the healthy being discriminated against because the Handicapped are given extra help? Of course not. Its the same thing here.
    Last edited by Handyman; 10-02-2018, 04:15 AM.
    "It's as if the Drumpf Administration is made up of the worst and unfunny parts of the Cleveland Browns, Washington Generals, and the alien Mon-Stars from Space Jam."
    -aparch

    "Scenes in "Empire Strikes Back" that take place on the tundra planet Hoth were shot on the present-day site of Ralph Engelstad Arena."
    -INCH

    Of course I'm a fan of the Vikings. A sick and demented Masochist of a fan, but a fan none the less.
    -ScoobyDoo 12/17/2007

    Comment


    • Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

      So if Kav is turned down, will he get to keep his current job ?

      Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
      I swear there ain't no heaven but I pray there ain't no hell.

      Maine Hockey Love it or Leave it

      Comment


      • Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

        Do we want Kavanaugh confirmed or not? He's definitely a problem in many ways. But any other replacement would be bad - and probably special consideration would be given towards finding a super radical Clarence Thomas-extremist based on how this went (Kanye?).

        Strictly for the purposes of the midterms, I would guess a Kavanaugh confirmation with Jeff Flake voting against him would be ideal.
        Go Gophers!

        Comment


        • Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

          Originally posted by 5mn_Major View Post
          Do we want Kavanaugh confirmed or not? He's definitely a problem in many ways. But any other replacement would be bad - and probably special consideration would be given towards finding a super radical Clarence Thomas-extremist based on how this went (Kanye?).

          Strictly for the purposes of the midterms, I would guess a Kavanaugh confirmation with Jeff Flake voting against him would be ideal.
          If you are looking for what will most benefit the Dem's for the mid-terms, then I agree a Kavanaugh confirmation would help the most. I'm not sure how Flake votes matters... although perhaps seeing him and perhaps Murkowski or Collins vote no would help pull over some right leaning moderates who are not Trump fans.

          Comment


          • Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

            Originally posted by walrus View Post
            So if Kav is turned down, will he get to keep his current job ?

            Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
            I'd think so. There won't ever be 67 votes to remove him from office from the DC Court of Appeals, assuming anyone would want to take the time to do so.
            "I went over the facts in my head, and admired how much uglier the situation had just become. Over the years I've learned that ignorance is more than just bliss. It's freaking orgasmic ecstasy".- Harry Dresden, Blood Rites


            Western Michigan Bronco Hockey- 2012 Mason Cup Champions

            Comment


            • Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

              Originally posted by dxmnkd316 View Post
              The thing a lot of righties seem to forget is this is a job interview.
              About that ..

              Aren't there a lot of "no go" questioning areas (marital status, kids, religion, etc) during a job interview? If this was a job interview weren't some of those areas crossed? Naughty-naughty.
              The preceding post may contain trigger words and is not safe-space approved. <-- Virtue signaling.

              North Dakota Hockey:

              Comment


              • Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

                Like I said yesterday at about this time, if it can be proven that Kavanaugh willfully lied to the SJC that's disqualifying. And frankly it should trigger a review of his position on the DC Circuit.
                The preceding post may contain trigger words and is not safe-space approved. <-- Virtue signaling.

                North Dakota Hockey:

                Comment


                • Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

                  Number 2. https://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...ne-doe-in-car/

                  Comment


                  • Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

                    Let me help Brent out, seeing as I'm bisexual and trans and I got the right to marry my partner in 2015:

                    2 years ago, Brent... Republicans were all of a sudden concerned about sexual crimes in bathrooms by my people. The LGBT community... we've been labeled pedophiles, rapists, sick, criminals, and before Stonewall, we went to jail for being LGBT. In the 50s and 60s, we went to psychiatric hospitals and received electric shock therapy from people hoping to "cure" us. There's been a rash of trans people getting murdered, and then the murderers can claim "trans panic," and get off. Then I get labeled "intolerant" because I refuse to stand for this bull****.

                    All we're asking is for people to stand with us and fight against this stuff. Instead, I read through a few pages of "minorities want the world on a nice platter."
                    Facebook: bcowles920 Instagram: missthundercat01
                    "One word frees us from the weight and pain of this life. That word is love."- Socrates
                    Patreon for exclusive writing content
                    Adventures With Amber Marie

                    Comment


                    • Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

                      Originally posted by jerphisch View Post
                      He never said anyone deserves MORE privilege, he said some people need more EFFORT to get the same privileges. Those are two very different things.
                      It's the equality vs equity conversation best summarized by this image.
                      http://i2.wp.com/interactioninstitut...size=730%2C547
                      The preceding post may contain trigger words and is not safe-space approved. <-- Virtue signaling.

                      North Dakota Hockey:

                      Comment


                      • Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

                        Originally posted by The Sicatoka View Post
                        About that ..

                        Aren't there a lot of "no go" questioning areas (marital status, kids, religion, etc) during a job interview? If this was a job interview weren't some of those areas crossed? Naughty-naughty.
                        I don't remember anyone asking him about marital status, kids, or religion

                        Comment


                        • Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

                          Originally posted by The Sicatoka View Post
                          It's the equality vs equity conversation best summarized by this image.
                          http://i2.wp.com/interactioninstitut...size=730%2C547

                          And then Brent would say the tall person is discriminating against the little kid because he gave him his box

                          Comment


                          • Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

                            Originally posted by BassAle View Post
                            I don't remember anyone asking him about marital status, kids, or religion
                            I do not know the full list of "no gos", so please don't consider that list inclusive, and don't claim to know everything he was asked. But if it was an interview were the appropriate laws regarding queries followed?
                            The preceding post may contain trigger words and is not safe-space approved. <-- Virtue signaling.

                            North Dakota Hockey:

                            Comment


                            • Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

                              Originally posted by BassAle View Post
                              And then Brent would say the tall person is discriminating against the little kid because he gave him his box
                              I didn't understand the "equity v equality" conversation until someone showed me that image.
                              The preceding post may contain trigger words and is not safe-space approved. <-- Virtue signaling.

                              North Dakota Hockey:

                              Comment


                              • Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

                                Originally posted by BassAle View Post
                                I don't remember anyone asking him about marital status, kids, or religion
                                In Minnesota it is a no-no to ask job applicants about their alcohol consumption, assuming it takes place during non-work hours and off premises.

                                https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/181.938
                                That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X