Kavanaugh had a bad steak dinner at Morton’s.

The last adjective I would use to describe the leadership (not the rank and file) of the Republican Party is dumbass. They have done a superb job of manipulating voters to vote against their economic self-interest.

 

McCarthy actually is a dumbass though, not exactly a master strategist (he’s just following the playbook). Guy has also been exposed as a huge self-interested hypocrite. His 1/6 flip flop was awe inspiring. First condemning the former President, then visiting him like a week later and moving on to run interference. It seems the “Southern strategy” is so engrained in the GOP, none of this even matters anymore, he just has to play along with the act and kiss the ring and that’s good enough.

McConnell is a bit more calculating and ruthless than McCarthy so I’d give him more credit as a “strategist” or even possibly as the “brains” of the GOP, except he’s also one corrupt S.O.B.

 

Why should Kavanaugh be harassed? There is no reason to harass any of the judges. The way to change this is actually through the legislative process at this point. I would hope that you realize that perspectives are different in different people. I'm of the opinion that none of the judges should be harassed. I can see a situation where someone is going to do something that is very bad, and it won't end with that one act.

 

This is what they dont get.

 

But, but, but that's different because... Um.. uh... Because.

 

The fact that you cant see the irony in this post...

 

I was referring to the more general strategy of the Republican Party's leadership going back decades specifically focusing on social issues while enacting economic legislation that does little to benefit its rank and file middle and lower middle income voters. I agree regarding McConnell. Mitch is almost entirely responsible for the hardcore conservative majority of the Supreme Court. He wouldn't even allow a hearing on Merrick Garland's nomination on the pretext that opening created by Scalia's passing should be kept open in an election year knowing the Garland would almost certainly be confirmed. He did away with the filibuster for the confirmation of SCOTUS nominees, and pushed through the confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett, following the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg roughly six weeks prior to the 2020 election keeping in mind that he blocked the confirmation of a nominee for an opening on the Court that took place over eight months prior to the 2016 election. Since conservative posters will undoubtedly compare Mitch's decision to end the filibuster for lower court nominees when Obama was president, I should add that the SCOTUS is nothing like the lower courts. Lower court decisions are appealable, SCOTUS decisions are final and the SCOTUS does in fact actually make law unlike lower federal courts which do interpret the law.

 

I agree that no judge should be harassed, but it's equally frustrating that this court has invested a lot of energy trying to make sure they block the democratic accountability process by suppressing voting rights. And keep in mind that out of the six conservative justices, only three were appointed in a term where the President that appointed them had won the popular vote, and two of those were in 43's second term, after he had run as an incumbent not winning the popular vote.

Pretty much the same thing with the Senate, which is again incredibly skewed towards minority representation.

So to simply say to resort to the democratic process to express oneself is accurate in the abstract, but not always available

 

If nothing else comes out of the decision we might be able to give a definition of a woman now!!!!

 

If you think that hatred or animosity towards these groups is what motivates the typical Republican voter, you don’t understand the typical Republican voter at all.

That’s not to say the social issues don’t matter, they seem to now as much as anytime in my lifetime. But it’s not driven by hatred towards these groups, it’s driven by this attempt by the left to deconstruct traditional norms, paint American history in an unfairly poor light to children, paint modern America in a an unfairly poor light to children, confuse children about things like sex and gender, instill secular sexual values in children via the public school system then attempt to block avenues allowing low income parents to send their kids to private schools, then everything into a race/sex issue, then demonize everyone who disagrees with you as racist/sexist/bigoted, as you essentially do in this post.

The most common conflation we see leftists make on social issues is this notion that if you disagree with gay marriage or even if you think that the government shouldn’t teach moral equivalency of gay marriage, then you hate gay people. That’s like saying you disagree with premarital sex, therefore you hate people who engage in it… or you disagree with minors drinking alcohol and using drugs, therefore you hate every minor junkie or binge drinker.

Hating the sin is not the same as hating the sinner. Folks on the left make this intentional conflation all the time to demonize the other side and justify treating them like garbage, like issuing bounties on them to follow them around, release their location, and harass them.

 

“The Southern Strategy” is not mutually exclusive from anything I said. I know about “the Southern Strategy,” I just don’t make the convenient leftist jump from saying “there are racists in the Republican Party, and people who exploit racist sentiments for political gain,” to “the entire Republican Party is racist.”

It’s true that White Supremacists generally now align more closely with the Republican Party than the Democratic Party, but that doesn’t mean there was a flip in racist parties, nor does it mean the Republican Party is racist.

Democrats just went from government sponsored pro-White to government sponsored pro-minority. Republicans generally try not to be “pro-any race (with some exceptions like the Southern Strategy)” so Democrats exploit that, or make a rule out of the exception, and call the entire party racist.

“But But 715, racism is about power dynamics, so only White people can be racist.”

That’s the biggest load of crap, and it’s frankly racist to suggest that statements are only racist depending on the race being demeaned based on arbitrary perceived social racial power dynamics.

 

A crowd gathering because a celebrity, politician, or high profile judge shows up is not the same as people stalking them and harassing them.

I will admit, however that your perception of what exactly happened at the restaurant is largely dependent on what you read about it, and how you imagine things transpired (which leaves plenty to the imagination).

A couple people with signs outside minding their own business, maybe even with a light soft chant is not quite the same as an angry mob with pitchforks and torches. Nevertheless, an irredeemable part of this story is the bounties, that is completely despicable, and if that’s okay now… this country will be worse off, but this will probably not stop at high conservative officials. Be careful what you wish for.

 

Who are you even talking to? You're just flapping your gums and pretending to be outraged to nobody.

 

He does like his strawmen.

 

You can rationalize the nonsense however you want with whatever straw-man or false equivalencies you want to waste your time talking in circles over. Do that to your hearts content. I’ll keep calling the Trump Republican Party what it has become: the Southern Strategy on crack.

 

The problem with all of the "hate the sin, not the sinner" arguments is that we see social media video every day of these culture war voters making it quite clear in their own words that they hate everyone that doesn't look exactly like them.

So feel free to spare us your sanctimony.

 

Wow, what a warped view of life. My condolences. Perhaps, just perhaps, the social media feed you’re watching is not particularly accurate nor healthy. Think about it.

 

i understand the left characterizing vote security as voter suppression. i constantly see the request for data showing voter fraud is a problem and the counter that that vote security is addressing a non existent problem of voter fraud. At the same time, i havent seen any data backing up the claim that more people (specifically minorities ) will stay home and not vote because of these measures. i guess next election we will find out a little more about both claims

 

Wow, you came up with another winner.

No one deserves to be harassed while eating at a restaurant. Just like no one should have to deal with mobs protesting outside their personal homes. But you are good with it until something goes terribly wrong which is bound to happen if this type of thing continues to go on.

 

According to the Supreme Court, it's fair game to harass women trying to get an abortion (and I agree with that opinion). Why shouldn't they be subject to the same free speech as the rest of us?