does it bother you that you are ruled by representatives from 49 different states for which you didn't vote too? how dare these 49 states force laws on yours, something has to be done about this undemocratic system.
Bro the US isnt even a democracy. We are a democratic republic. But all of the false experts love to forget little things like that.
I never said you were a democracy. I said you were undemocratic. blah blah blah. democracy is a western ideal and vallue = you are terrorist scum.
do it. my support comes from a place of honest support and not a desire to see the US empire crumble.
This is honestly the most annoying thing to say in these discussions. YES, EVERYONE KNOWS THIS. NO ONE IS FORGETTING. But even the US Presidents themselves regularly uses the term "democracy" to describe the values present in governance embodied by western civilization whether they use a Republic or Parliamentary system. It's like when a person types your instead of you're. Everyone knows what they mean, but there's always some smartass who thinks that's the important part of the discussion.
Sure thing! ~ The survey asked, "If it were proven that Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted a woman when they were both high school students 36 years ago, do you think that does or does not disqualify Kavanaugh from being a Supreme Court Justice?" Forty-eight percent of respondents overall thought it should disqualify him, while 28 percent said it should not, and 24 percent were not sure, according to the results from The Economist/YouGov. But among Republicans, a majority—55 percent—thought a proven allegation of sexual assault does not disqualify Kavanaugh from serving on the Supreme Court. About one-quarter, 27 percent, thought it does disqualify him, while 18 percent were not sure. The vast majority of Democrats—71 percent—thought a proven allegation of sexual assault should disqualify Kavanaugh. Source: https://www.newsweek.com/sexual-ass...kavanaugh-proven-majority-republicans-1141877 ~ ~ "Cramer spent much of his TV appearance questioning the validity of the sexual assault allegations against Kavanaugh, and then seemed to switch geats and question if they even mattered after 36 years of being a "perfect gentleman." What if something like what Dr. Ford describes happened," he said, referring to the allegation of Christine Blasey Ford, Kavanaugh's first accuser. "It’s tragic, it’s unfortunate, it’s terrible, it should never happen in our society,” Cramer said. “But what if [there is] 36 years of a record where there’s nothing like that again, but instead there’s a record of a perfect gentleman, an intellect, a guy who’s been a stellar judge…even if it’s all true, does it disqualify him?”" Source: https://www.newsweek.com/kevin-cram...****-brett-kavanaugh-senate-candidate-1137640 ~ ~ ~ "Because even if true, what happened to her was clearly wrong, but it tells us nothing about Brett Kavanaugh since the age of 17. " Source: https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/09/brett-kavanaugh-accusations-should-be-ignored/ ~ When asked if Ford was lying... President Donald Trump: W-- you know what? I'm not gonna get into it because we won. It doesn't matter. We won. Source: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald...0-minutes-transcript-lesley-stahl-2018-10-14/ ~ I hope that's enough.
Why do you assume people who disagree with you are "brainwashed?" Are you just assuming that those who do not agree with you have no thoughts of their own and ability to draw their own conclusions? I get that hive mind feeling when I read your posts and replies.
right wing people are worried more about people being accused of sexual assault than sexual assaults happening.
To be fair, there's nothing wrong with wanting to protect the innocent - this is a fundamental principle of justice that needs to be upheld. I just wish those responsible for actually making policy were consistent about it instead of throwing it out the window when it is convenient for their political agenda/aspirations.
I agree, I don't think anyone should be immune to investigation, especially the Bane Shift heads in government. 1) Which questions did he dodge ? 2) They should definitely release that, but the government frequently "leave things out" that would be important to the people for us to make an informed decision, and this is both sides. 3) Did they redact them, like what do you mean by partial ? Did they just not show certain things etc .? 4) They received their investigation though, what else would you have liked the FBI to look into ? 5) Don't remember this, I might have been too young at the time to pay any attention to politics. 6) Their was an investigation though, it was a short one, but their was still an investigation. It took the FBI less than a week to find all that Bane Shift on Hilary. It shouldn't have been just about her, however I believe they didn't go very hard at her with the questioning, she had a ton of holes in her story. They should have went at both of them with everything. 7) No politician is not biased, that's why they pick a party lol. Like asking a zebra to befriend the hungry tiger I agree, but if the Democrats had questioned his character rather than bringing in this Bane Shift show story, then it might have turned out differently. I'm more open to not wanting him in for being a Bane Shift, versus someone's story from 35 years ago with a ton of holes and no evidence.
Id just love to remind people who say ''if only there was more evidence to back up her claims....'', wasnt there enough evidence in Trump's accusations including his own statement in the famous ''bus video'', and for the argument's sake lets ignore the multiple allegations in Trump's case and go to the case of Roy Moore. The right has somehow found a way to lower the bar even more by standing behind a man accused of being a pedophile, and if you want to make the argument that ''at least he didnt win'' Id just like to remind people of how close that race was and the number of people that defiantly stood behind that character just for the sake of furthering their agenda. In Kavanagh's case any unbiased person who watches the testimony would tell you the man was lying in part or whole about not being involved in the alleged case. The one moment that stood out to me multiple times is that when asked multiple times by different senators ''would u support an investigation into those allegations'', any innoncent person and even a guilty man who cares about coming off authentic to the public would strongly support and call for a thorough investigation. I think the fact that he won while being a big let down in and of itself is part of a bigger problem, and that is the fact that the right wing for the most part are ok with supporting people with no or questionable morals in order to further their agenda, and while this may not be a big problem now it will certainly be in the future because when morals values can be overlooked for political purposes it becomes harder to define what morals people should stand for. Ill leave you with this.... How many factually proven allegations of misallocating funds and taxpayer money did it take for Scott pruitt to resign.... Notice that he wasnt ''fired'' although u could argue that that was just a PR move. The examples are endless and its a really worrying sign for things to come.
1) I agree that he got off easy, I think everyone acknowledges that. Obviously accusations can and do ruin lives, however more often than not people of wealth and power get off scott free even with evidence. However their was no evidence in the Kavanaugh case as opposed to that piece of garbage Brock. 2) Brock had evidence against him, and was known to be sexually dominant and creepy. Kavanaugh had hundreds of men and women come out and say he was an outstanding individual, never made any sexual advances or showed any signs of something like that.
Let's stick to the present, if you wanna go over all that nonsense again make another thread. I could easily just look at you and say your guilty, and you look guilty because I said so, that's an opinion and irrelevant. Let's not get into missing money either, that will never be fixed until big corporations can't make political donations, and both sides agree to this and put it into law. Never gonna happen
This is good though, I see less name calling and more points being talked about. Maybe with pox dying it's turned us all civil lol.
The reason I am bringing those cases up is to show that the general feeling on the right seems to be a worsening case of ''he will vote the way I want so who cares about who he is'', and regarding the Kavanagh case specifically since that is what you asked I just want you to ask yourself Why did he not support an NON CRIMINAL investigation aka the absolute worst case scenario is that you dont get the job, an investigation where the results wont be public and one that is limited in scope and depth. If you ask any random person or if you yourself was accused of something that was just not true youd be shouting off the rooftops for a thorough investigation. The fact that he didnt even want to support such a limited investigation speaks volumes about what he thinks might be uncovered. Moving on ...you never mentioned the fact that she brought this case up with her therapist 2 years ago when no one was thinking about kavanagh as a nominee for the supreme court which if anything shows at the very least that this wasnt a ''political hit job'' Another point is him lying about his alchol intake and how many times he dodged that question, its a job interview where lying can be interpreted as perjury and yet he decided to tell lie about facts that many people who knew him back then came out and discredited it. Did you never wonder about how weird it was that he had 60 women ready to testify for his character 2-3 days after the allegation (( A skeptical view would suggest that he knew / suspected this allegation was coming and he preped those as character witnesses)) and how weird is it that he has a calendar from 35 years ago?? and how the fk is that relevant to the accusation? I mean is he really trying to convince us that people who want to commit a crime would write it on their calendars? The last thing is how awkward did you find it that the part Dr. Ford described was specifically mentioned in his calendar with multiple people who she knew would be there . Just think about this, what the fk did she have to gain by coming out? she is a respected psychology professor in a respected university with a family. Why would she lie and suffer the humiliation of hearing the President mock her on live TV with his crowds laughing at her in the background. Do you think she is happy with all the death threats she has been getting or do you think she is happy for being an alleged **** victim?
Does it bother you that America is the most unique form of government created? Does it bother you that America is err was... more free than any other country ever? We were a rare political experiment that didn't turn out the way alot of people wanted, because of the same old socialist ideas that keep ruining every other country. Thanks to european banking influence over the years and brainwashed presidents like Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Deleanor Roosevelt, Herbert Hoover, Lyndon B. Johnson, Jimmy Carter, The Bush father and son, Clinton, and Obama we have sold this country back to the european bankers we fought to break away from. I love the spirit this country was meant to embody and what the Bill of Rights, the Constitution and the preamble was supposed to be. It sickens me to watch a bunch of pathetic commies and socialist aristocrats crap all over what the founding fathers wanted to give the citizens of this country. Seriously Geressen have you even taken the time to study our Constitution, our Bill of Rights, and what the founding fathers tried to do in the creation of this country?
