The Soapbox

Hoos Operator

Joined: 11/11/2005 Posts: 8891
Likes: 15149


To state you haven’t condemned him in any way is pure idiocy.


In your scenario, this eminently qualified candidate should get torpedoed due to an unsubstantiated claim which has all the earmarks of a political hit job and lacks critical details. You are clueless as to whether this is really a “character issue” or not BECAUSE WE DON’T KNOW IF IT ACTUALLY HAPPENED. How and when would he be cleared of this charge and able to resume the confirmation process in your mind? My guess is as long as it’s after the midterm elections, you don’t care.

In the highly unlikely event that evidence does come out to prove he’s guilty of attempted rape, yes I will change my opinion. But giving a therapist conflicting details of the event, not remembering when this act happened some four decades ago and the accused having an unblemished record throughout his life should cast doubts about the veracity of her story.

What distinguishes this confirmation hearing from that of the prior SC court nominees to which you refer is the devious and acrimonious attempts at character assassination the degree to which more closely resembles the Robert Bork hearing.

I understand that you disagree with some of Kavanaugh’s decisions and I’m not knowledgeable enough to discuss the merits of the opinions which with you differ. But well-respected legal scholars have praised his legal qualifications and it would appear that this is not in dispute. Is it possible that you are allowing your professional differences to interfere with your judgement of his character?


[Post edited by Hoos Operator at 09/19/2018 4:37PM]

(In response to this post by WahooRQ)

Posted: 09/19/2018 at 4:33PM



+0

Insert a Link

Enter the title of the link here:


Enter the full web address of the link here -- include the "http://" part:


Current Thread:
  A play in one act -- Fuzzy Dunlop 09/19/2018 10:50AM
  "Much Ado About Nothing"? ** -- Tuckahokie 09/19/2018 10:52AM
  2 to 10% of accusations are fake -- WahooMatt05 09/19/2018 10:12AM
  Stealing someone else's response -- WahooMatt05 09/19/2018 09:56AM
  Opps. I thought SC wrote the response. ** -- Shenhoo 09/19/2018 09:40AM
  I'm glad I'm not a lawyer ** -- BocaHoo91 09/19/2018 09:47AM
  You’re not smart enough.... -- WahooRQ 09/19/2018 09:56AM
  Too ethical :>O ** -- Tuckahokie 09/19/2018 10:02AM
  That's definitely NOT it... ** -- BocaHoo91 09/19/2018 10:22AM
  For more than one reason ; ) ** -- Cold Hoober Hoo 09/19/2018 09:55AM
  See Matthew Dowd of ABC News -- TpkeHoo 09/19/2018 09:01AM
  Ok. But what about the hundreds that don't? -- hoolstoptheheels 09/19/2018 09:47AM
  We certainly agree about our opposition to the sentiment. ** -- hoolstoptheheels 09/19/2018 12:57PM
  Ok. I agree, that's just stupid. -- hoolstoptheheels 09/19/2018 09:12AM
  This could be one of the examples -- Hoodafan 09/19/2018 08:48AM
  Is that a "normative discussion?" Those are tweets. -- hoolstoptheheels 09/19/2018 09:07AM
  He has no right? Have her allegations been proven true. ** -- Cold Hoober Hoo 09/19/2018 08:22AM
  Thought about you while I was watching the NewsHour yesterday. -- hoolstoptheheels 09/19/2018 08:39AM
  The whole thing is a stall tactic, which bothers me. -- hoolstoptheheels 09/19/2018 09:37AM
  To your first point, revenge. ** -- Cold Hoober Hoo 09/19/2018 07:30AM
  Did I say that was the case with Kav? I was making a general -- Cold Hoober Hoo 09/19/2018 09:06AM
  Or justice ** -- 111Balz 09/19/2018 07:38AM
  Yep. You can’t get behind that. ** -- Hokieesith 09/19/2018 12:00AM

Notice: Trying to get property 'queue' of non-object in /data/www/sportswar.com/wp-includes/script-loader.php on line 2781

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /data/www/sportswar.com/wp-includes/script-loader.php on line 2781
vm307