Poll of the Day > I am so tired of this Kavanaugh shit.

(+) Yeah! (+)

Something someone did 35+ years ago when they were in high school as a minor should not impact their ability to perform a job, especially in the case where the people who are judging him have done similar to far worse things in their lives.

The fact that this is getting 24-7 news coverage is outratgeous, and a symbol of how fucked our political system is.

That is all.
---

Judgmenl posted...

especially in the case where the people who are judging him have done similar to far worse things in their lives

lol what
---

Something someone was purported to have done despite none of the other parties involved being able to corroborate the accuser's story...
---

i have a butt
---

I pooped my diaper once when I was a baby.

That gross act of incontinence should exclude me from ever getting hired.

Smarkil posted...

i have a butt

i have an apple
---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSED1t1fknk" data-time="

TheWorstPoster posted...

I pooped my diaper once when I was a baby.

That gross act of incontinence should exclude me from ever getting hired.

Is that why you've never had a job

I'm sure Kavanaugh is even more tired of it.

Just one big smear campaign so the Democrats can try and take the seat.

Desperate and pathetic.
---

Then stop watching the news lol nobody is forcing you to partake in this observation. And if it's on social media, you can always remove posts from your feed and the algorithims will eventually pick up on what it is you're avoiding.

Mead posted...

Smarkil posted...

i have a butt

i have an apple

I got lube
---

GreenKnight127 posted...

I'm sure Kavanaugh is even more tired of it.

Just one big smear campaign so the Democrats can try and take the seat.

Desperate and pathetic.

The Republicans dug their heels in when Obama tried to appoint someone to the supreme court 2 years ago or so, since the presidential election was only like 6 months away or something. You are kidding yourself if you think this is all fabricated though, keep dreaming up conspiracies it sure is fun eh :D.]

Cosby just went to jail for sexual assault that happened well over 30 years ago and not many think they should just drop that.
---

People that tried to rape women when they were only teenagers are the true victims
---

But you were ok with dog shit on your floors, speaks a lot on your character, ok?
---

Judgmenl posted...

Something someone did 35+ years ago when they were in high school as a minor should not impact their ability to perform a job, especially in the case where the people who are judging him have done similar to far worse things in their lives.

The fact that this is getting 24-7 news coverage is outratgeous, and a symbol of how fucked our political system is.

That is all.

If that thing is attempt to rape someone, then I don't care when they did it, they shouldn't be on the Supreme Court.
---

GreenKnight127 posted...

Just one big smear campaign so the Democrats can try and take the seat.

Where's your proof of this? You were big on that in the other topic.

Judgmenl posted...

Something someone did 35+ years ago when they were in high school as a minor should not impact their ability to perform a job

I dunno, I'd make an exception to this for attempted rape. I'd say that's kind of a dealbreaker when we're talking about a job as powerful as "Supreme Court Justice".

I know "no rapists on the Supreme Court" might seem like a stretch, but I think it's manageable.

There's also the not insignificant issue that Kavanaugh may have perjured himself in his confirmation hearing on several different issues (for instance, he claimed that the first time he was made aware of the Ramirez allegations was when the New Yorker published her story, but one of his Yale classmates has come forward with texts from before that of him asking her to come to his defence.

That's kind of a problem...

Judgmenl posted...

especially in the case where the people who are judging him have done similar to far worse things in their lives

Are there senators there who have been accused of attempted rape? Because that seems like a pretty important thing. You should definitely talk to the news if that's the case.
---

Magus 10 posted...

Judgmenl posted...

Something someone did 35+ years ago when they were in high school as a minor should not impact their ability to perform a job, especially in the case where the people who are judging him have done similar to far worse things in their lives.

The fact that this is getting 24-7 news coverage is outratgeous, and a symbol of how fucked our political system is.

That is all.

If that thing is attempt to rape someone, then I don't care when they did it, they shouldn't be on the Supreme Court.

You missed the memo, Hillary will be on the Supreme Court and go SSJ4 if Kavanaugh isn't elected, ok?
---

I'm less focused on the accusation itself, or the alleged act being decades ago, and more on the obvious lying and poor temperament coming from this man, as well how the GOP chooses to so adamantly defend him like there's no other, better judge to fill the lifelong position.
---

Hes also perjured himself numerous times while testifying, but sure lets ignore that just like you guys do with sexual assault allegations.
---

kangolcone posted...

Hes also perjured himself numerous times while testifying, but sure lets ignore that just like you guys do with sexual assault allegations.

And the racial injustices!
---

Im so tired of hearing about this thing

Here is another topic about it
---

Judgmenl posted...

Something someone did 35+ years ago when they were in high school as a minor should not impact their ability to perform a job, especially in the case where the people who are judging him have done similar to far worse things in their lives.

The fact that this is getting 24-7 news coverage is outratgeous, and a symbol of how fucked our political system is.

That is all.

Well even if he was nothing more than just a drunkard and a womanizer taking advantage of drunk women (I'm not one that thinks being drunk and having sex you regret the next day is rape) the fact he is somewhat lying about it now shows his character and why he shouldn't be on the supreme court. He was clearly avoiding questions and answering questions purposely vaguely and flat out lied when he tried to tell them that a Devil's triangle was a drinking game, it's a name of a three way (2 men and a woman)

Do you seriously want to put someone who at his current age is lying his ass off.. nominate him to the supreme court for life. This guy is a horrible human being.

They just need to pick someone else.
---

What gets me is that the same people who wail about 'where was Ford 36 years ago' have no problem supporting men who were raped by Catholic priests over 30 years ago going to court with faulty memories. Back to the old double standards for men and women I see.

Monopoman posted...

GreenKnight127 posted...

I'm sure Kavanaugh is even more tired of it.

Just one big smear campaign so the Democrats can try and take the seat.

Desperate and pathetic.

The Republicans dug their heels in when Obama tried to appoint someone to the supreme court 2 years ago or so, since the presidential election was only like 6 months away or something. You are kidding yourself if you think this is all fabricated though, keep dreaming up conspiracies it sure is fun eh :D.]

Cosby just went to jail for sexual assault that happened well over 30 years ago and not many think they should just drop that.

Did Obama's pick have to convince the entire world on live television that he wasn't of a gang rapist based on 35+ year old allegations?

Yeah. Didn't think so.

Try again.
---

I don't like Kavanaugh/Trump yet I can wholeheartedly say that this entire ordeal is a farce. The accuser is the definition of a hag just looking for attention/trying to smear a man's name. It's hilarious that this was even taken seriously without a shred of evidence, but given how many male feminists there are in the west, it's no surprise to me that this sort of thing is acceptable.
---

JanwayDaahl posted...

I don't like Kavanaugh/Trump yet I can wholeheartedly say that this entire ordeal is a farce. The accuser is the definition of a hag just looking for attention/trying to smear a man's name. It's hilarious that this was even taken seriously without a shred of evidence, but given how many male feminists there are in the west, it's no surprise to me that this sort of thing is acceptable.

Nice to have someone neutral weigh in on things
---

JanwayDaahl posted...

I don't like Kavanaugh/Trump yet I can wholeheartedly say that this entire ordeal is a farce. The accuser is the definition of a hag just looking for attention/trying to smear a man's name. It's hilarious that this was even taken seriously without a shred of evidence, but given how many male feminists there are in the west, it's no surprise to me that this sort of thing is acceptable.

I completely agree with you.

However, the people who are eating up the biased media coverage (which is clearly against Kavanaugh) seem to be embracing the ironic fact that there ISN'T A SHRED OF EVIDENCE.

There's no evidence to prove Ford's claims.....

But there's equally no evidence to prove Kavanaugh ISN'T a gang rapist.

So people are just jumping on board with the opinion that Kavanaugh is unfit for the seat, because they don't want to "take that risk."

In other words: "Guilty until proven innocent" is their morality's default setting.

In other words: they are fucking idiots.
---

TheWorstPoster posted...

I pooped my diaper last week several times, ok?

That gross act of incontinence should exclude me from ever having sex, ok?

fixed, ok?
---

The issue here is that there should be a statute of limitations on this sort of thing. If someone commits a crime against you, you shouldn't be able to open a case against them 35+ years later. If only because any "evidence" is going to be limited to 'he said/she said'. This whole case is so blatantly politically driven.
---

VideoboysaysCube posted...

The issue here is that there should be a statute of limitations on this sort of thing. If someone commits a crime against you, you shouldn't be able to open a case against them 35+ years later. If only because any "evidence" is going to be limited to 'he said/she said'. This whole case is so blatantly politically driven.

He's not being charged with a crime. The statute of limitations doesn't apply.
---

Judgmenl posted...

Something someone did 35+ years ago when they were in high school as a minor should not impact their ability to perform a job

A crime somebody committed 35+ years ago, however, should be duly prosecuted and they should face those consequences. That includes being disqualified from a job for which a clean criminal record is a requirement.

_AdjI_ posted...

Judgmenl posted...

Something someone did 35+ years ago when they were in high school as a minor should not impact their ability to perform a job

A crime somebody committed 35+ years ago, however, should be duly prosecuted and they should face those consequences. That includes being disqualified from a job for which a clean criminal record is a requirement.

An ALLEGED crime. That was never tried in court. With no evidence. Or conviction.

People on this thread keep forgetting those important facts.

Allegations should NEVER prevent someone from getting a job. Any job. Ever.

Allegations can be spouted by anyone towards anyone for any reason, including no reason.
---

Entity13 posted...

I'm less focused on the accusation itself, or the alleged act being decades ago, and more on the obvious lying and poor temperament coming from this man, as well how the GOP chooses to so adamantly defend him like there's no other, better judge to fill the lifelong position.

As opposed to a lying bitch who can't remember anything and whom's nobody will corroborate her evidence?

Let the sjw's, lefties, and useless feminists get offended. It's not like they have anything else to do.
---

kangolcone posted...

Hes also perjured himself numerous times while testifying, but sure lets ignore that just like you guys do with sexual assault allegations.

Who else would let Donald Trump go, ok?
JanwayDaahl posted...

I don't like Kavanaugh/Trump yet I can wholeheartedly say that this entire ordeal is a farce. The accuser is the definition of a hag just looking for attention/trying to smear a man's name. It's hilarious that this was even taken seriously without a shred of evidence, but given how many male feminists there are in the west, it's no surprise to me that this sort of thing is acceptable.

Come @Zeus, suckle at my teat, you're very hungry, ok?

Aculo posted...

TheWorstPoster posted...

I pooped my diaper last week several times, ok?

That gross act of incontinence should exclude me from ever having sex, ok?

fixed, ok?

Much better, ok?
---

considering this guy is lying about what definitions mean on his calendar and how unbiased he is, I don't think he should be on the Supreme Court. (He practically committed perjury) Also, his attitude towards questions by not answering questions and being rude about it also shows that he's not a great candidate for the Supreme Court. Before I had no beef about him, but then I saw his testimony and that he felt like he was "entitled" to the job; I say get the f- out of here. You should be honored for the job not entitled for it. The guy has no honor.

Just go down the list and pick another person. So the first guy wasn't that great. There has to be another republican pro life guy on the list.
---

The_tall_midget posted...

Entity13 posted...

I'm less focused on the accusation itself, or the alleged act being decades ago, and more on the obvious lying and poor temperament coming from this man, as well how the GOP chooses to so adamantly defend him like there's no other, better judge to fill the lifelong position.

As opposed to a lying bitch who can't remember anything and whom's nobody will corroborate her evidence?

Let the sjw's, lefties, and useless feminists get offended. It's not like they have anything else to do.

A lack of evidence from something 35 years ago = lying bitch in your eyes, I see. Mighty presumptuous.

That said, this isn't about offense being taken. This is about perjury, an actual legal thing for which a judge should know better, let alone a nominee for the highest court in the land. This is about the man's ongoing behavior, when the constitution details how bad behavior is so damning for a Justice. This is about how the Republican Senators want to push, so hard, for Kavanaugh to sit in the Supreme Court before time inevitably runs out for some of them in November.

Then, to add to that, consider how utterly biased the man is. He blames the Left, angrily and riddled with conspiratorial rhetoric or nonsense, when one woman comes forward and only barely receives one opportunity to testify on her own behalf.

Let's be honest with ourselves. Kavanaugh is only sitting where he is because of him being a hard-conservative person whose beliefs amount to protecting the President from certain legal actions, blocking due process from occurring. There was a list of candidates that, at the time, could have been drawn from a hat, but Trump chose him for that one belief of Kavanaugh's, and the GOP Senators are trying so hard to confirm the man whilst ignoring any legitimate reasonto why he shouldn't even be at this point.
---

The_tall_midget posted...

Entity13 posted...

I'm less focused on the accusation itself, or the alleged act being decades ago, and more on the obvious lying and poor temperament coming from this man, as well how the GOP chooses to so adamantly defend him like there's no other, better judge to fill the lifelong position.

As opposed to a lying bitch who can't remember anything and whom's nobody will corroborate her evidence?

Let the sjw's, lefties, and useless feminists get offended. It's not like they have anything else to do.

Yeah they certainly sound like the ones who are upset
---

GreenKnight127 posted...

Allegations should NEVER prevent someone from getting a job. Any job. Ever.

Of course they should. And you would be the world's most irresponsible employer if you felt differently.

If you're a business owner, you don't owe people jobs - they're coming to you *asking YOU* to do them a favour by employing them. The entire reason you have an interview is to confirm that these people are good fits for your business.

If some guy applies for a safety-sensitive job at your company and you check his references and the last three employers all say,
"We caught him coming into work stinking of booze and slurring his words a couple of times and had to let him go. Definitely don't hire him, he's extremely irresponsible," you would be an idiot to hire the guy anyways. And if you're not the owner of the company but, instead, a middle manager, you're putting your own ass on the line. If, ten months later after the guy killed two people when he was driving a company vehicle drunk and you're hauled in front of HR when it comes to light you had heard about his history of drinking from the references, your defence is, "All I heard were allegations; nobody had any proof he was actually coming into work drunk," you would be lucky to escape with just a firing. In all likelihood, the company could try to pursue you for gross negligence and damages to their brand.
---

Mead posted...

The_tall_midget posted...

Entity13 posted...

I'm less focused on the accusation itself, or the alleged act being decades ago, and more on the obvious lying and poor temperament coming from this man, as well how the GOP chooses to so adamantly defend him like there's no other, better judge to fill the lifelong position.

As opposed to a lying bitch who can't remember anything and whom's nobody will corroborate her evidence?

Let the sjw's, lefties, and useless feminists get offended. It's not like they have anything else to do.

Yeah they certainly sound like the ones who are upset

Woh calm down there snowflake you're gonna drown in your own tears
---

I'd be pretty livid too if some nobody accused me of raping some 30 years ago tbh
---

If anything, I dont think a cry crying about calendars and how much he loves beer should be on the supreme court. Dude does not have the temperament for it. Cut bait and nominate a different guy. For fuck sake, Trump's first pick went through easily, despite it legit being stolen by the Republicans.

DeathMagnetic80 posted...

If anything, I dont think a cry crying about calendars and how much he loves beer should be on the supreme court. Dude does not have the temperament for it. Cut bait and nominate a different guy. For fuck sake, Trump's first pick went through easily, despite it legit being stolen by the Republicans.

Do you think he would have even said the word "beer" if he wasn't being questioned about his consumption of alcohol when he was in high school....while needing to prove to the entire country on live TV that he wasn't actually a gang rapist???

I keep hearing people say they think he's unfit for the position simply because of how he has reacted to his interrogation.

That's like sitting someone down for a job interview, and making it abundantly clear to them at the very beginning that they will not hire people who bleed. And then they proceed to pull out a knife and slash their face over and over. "OHhhh!!! WHat'do wE HaaaVe HEErrrRE!?!?! ARE YOU BLeeDiN, BoY?!?! WHAT DID I TELL YOU ABOUT OUR HIRING PRACTICES TOWARDS BLEEDERZ, BOY!?!?! I WAS GUNNA HIRE YOU, TOO!!! BUT THEN YOU HAD TO GO AND BLEED ON ME!!!! I CHANGE MY MIND!!!! WE DUNT WUNTCHA!!! GET OUT OF MY OFFICE, YE FUCKIN' BLEEDER!!!!"

....(that actually made myself laugh)

(Dear God. I really need to lay off the cocaine)
---

FrndNhbrHdCEman posted...

Mead posted...

Smarkil posted...

i have a butt

i have an apple

I got lube

go on
---

GreenKnight127 posted...

DeathMagnetic80 posted...

If anything, I dont think a cry crying about calendars and how much he loves beer should be on the supreme court. Dude does not have the temperament for it. Cut bait and nominate a different guy. For fuck sake, Trump's first pick went through easily, despite it legit being stolen by the Republicans.

Do you think he would have even said the word "beer" if he wasn't being questioned about his consumption of alcohol when he was in high school....while needing to prove to the entire country on live TV that he wasn't actually a gang rapist???

I keep hearing people say they think he's unfit for the position simply because of how he has reacted to his interrogation.

That's like sitting someone down for a job interview, and making it abundantly clear to them at the very beginning that they will not hire people who bleed. And then they proceed to pull out a knife and slash their face over and over. "OHhhh!!! WHat'do wE HaaaVe HEErrrRE!?!?! ARE YOU BLeeDiN, BoY?!?! WHAT DID I TELL YOU ABOUT OUR HIRING PRACTICES TOWARDS BLEEDERZ, BOY!?!?! I WAS GUNNA HIRE YOU, TOO!!! BUT THEN YOU HAD TO GO AND BLEED ON ME!!!! I CHANGE MY MIND!!!! WE DUNT WUNTCHA!!! GET OUT OF MY OFFICE, YE FUCKIN' BLEEDER!!!!"

....(that actually made myself laugh)

(Dear God. I really need to lay off the cocaine)

If he lied while being interviewed that is a huge deal, they impeached Clinton just because he lied about getting a BJ from an intern. It doesn't matter how irrelevant the lie is, any lie in a situation like that is a huge deal he could lie about what he had for lunch that day and if it came out he lied they could make a big deal about it.
---

GreenKnight127 posted...

There's no evidence to prove Ford's claims.....

I don't understand this claim. There is clearly evidence.

1) Her claims are evidence.
2) The fact that she has no reason to lie about her claims supports that evidence.
3) The fact that she has been consistent in her claims supports that evidence.
4) The fact that she told people her claims long before they became public supports that evidence.

Everything we've seen from Ford is consistent with what we would expect to see if her claims were true.

To claim that there is no evidence is just asinine.
---

GreenKnight127 posted...

I keep hearing people say they think he's unfit for the position simply because of how he has reacted to his interrogation.

Well, yeah.

I mean, he started ranting about how the liberals and the Democrats and the left were all out to screw him. Regardless of whether or not you think that's true, if you are a liberal or a Democrat or a left-leaning advocacy group going before the Supreme Court, you now have a very valid basis for claiming that one of the justices is prejudiced against you and you will not receive a fair hearing. Some legal scholars even say that, in the event Kavanaugh is confirmed he would, by precedent, be required to recuse himself from any case where Democrats or left-leaning groups were one of the parties (which is a huge chunk of them). Keep in mind judges are supposed to be non-partisan, to the point where their own political activities and ability to participate in partisan events are heavily restricted (they cannot, for instance, make speeches for political organization, publicly endorse candidates for office, make donations or contributions to political organization, or even attend events organized by political organizations).

And lest you think this is just me being partisan, Kavanaugh's testimony - rather than the accusations against him - have cost him support amongst the conservative legal crowd. Two of his classmates from Yale withdrew their support, claiming that Kavanaugh's testimony was simply too partisan for a Supreme Court Justice. Perhaps more impressively, Benjamin Wittes - a pretty well-respected conservative legal scholar and a longtime ally of Kavanaugh - has now stated he no longer believes Kavanaugh should be confirmed.
---

A JUDGE HAS COMMITTED PERJURY OVER A DOZEN TIMES IS NOT FIT TO BE A SUPREME COURT JUDGE. PERIOD.

How hard is it for something so simple to understand.

Lil69Leo posted...

A JUDGE HAS COMMITTED PERJURY OVER A DOZEN TIMES IS NOT FIT TO BE A SUPREME COURT JUDGE. PERIOD.

How hard is it for something so simple to understand.

Because snowflake libcucks are just mad that killary lost fair and square! /s
---

Magus 10 posted...

Her claims are evidence.

no, claims are just claims. anyone can make them.

The fact that she has no reason to lie about her claims supports that evidence.

no reason to lie except the millions of dollars shes already received, the book deals, tv appearances, speaking engagements, possible political office, and the chance to forever go down in history as someone who stopped kavanaugh from getting on the supreme court lol

The fact that she has been consistent in her claims supports that evidence.

are you high? shes been insanely inconsistent to the point of absurdity

The fact that she told people her claims long before they became public supports that evidence.

the only person who mentions kavanaugh b4 her recent allegations is her own husband lol

you are deluded