Jump to content

Kavanaugh vote today


THE KING

Recommended Posts

 

I don't think you understand the Affordable Care Act, nor the previous medical insurance system.

 

You might discover you are mistaken.

 

If we argue about, it's likely others will join in and we'll close another thread!

You might discover you are mistaken.

 

Having discussions and debate doesnt get threads closed.

Insults, baiting and disrespectful arguments do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In reference to highly regarded.....Garland was never downgraded from "Well qualified" to "Qualified" by the ABA.

 

 

No other nominee in history had more federal judicial experience than Garland.

Do you remember some of the comments from Hatch about Garland?

2010 -

 

Senator Orrin Hatch said he had known the federal appeals court judge, seen as a leading contender for the Supreme Court, for years and that he would be “a consensus nominee.”

Asked if Garland would win Senate confirmation with bipartisan support, Hatch told Reuters, “No question.”

“I have no doubts that Garland would get a lot of (Senate) votes. And I will do my best to help him get them,” added Hatch, a former Judiciary Committee chairman.

-------

“I know Merrick Garland very well,” said Hatch, who helped Merrick win Senate confirmation to the appeals court a decade ago.

“He (Merrick) would be very well supported by all sides (as a Supreme Court nominee) and the president knows that,” Hatch said.

 

6 years later....in 2016.....a few days before Obama nominated Garland...Hatch said this:

"[Obama] could easily name Merrick Garland, who is a fine man," the senator told the conservative news site Newsmax.
"He probably won’t do that because this appointment is about the election," he added. "So I’m pretty sure he’ll name someone the [liberal Democratic base] wants."

 

 

Obama played it straight and fair. Garland was a moderate....who never even got a vote.

 

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/merrick-garland-who-is-he-220865

 

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-hatch/republican-would-back-garland-for-supreme-court-idUSTRE6456QY20100506

 

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/merrick-garland-deserves-a-votefor-democracys-sake-1468797686

 

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/273208-obama-nominates-merrick-garland-to-supreme-court

 

 

I don't understand why people are acting shocked how this is turning out. A Supreme Court seat was stolen, no one thinks the other side will try to steal one back by any means necessary? This is the new new. 51 votes....and I suspect that in the future we will actually see judges impeached.

 

 

---------------------------------------

 

Total side note: I started on this post days ago...but got tired of dealing with the quoted post limit. That is why it now starts as "in reference to"...so yeah.....that quote limit sucks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This site is getting old with archaic ways.

 

Who freaking cares if every post in a reply is quoted whem responding.

 

Are donations to IC not also for site upkeep?

 

Responding to a post on to be told the allotted amount of quotes has been exceeded is ridiculous.

 

Done, gone, out...... see ya!

 

 

It is easy when posting with quotes to delete the early quotes so that the post is within the limits. Do it all the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

No one loses... Everyone wins.

 

 

Nothing is free, someone has to pay the bills, who do you think that burden falls upon and how are those paying more than their share not losers?

 

 

... You are paying for everyone who isn't covered already. Might as well take care of it before they hit the expensive ER.

 

Further thoughts from me require a couple hours in person over good beers... we could shoot first and get to know each other on common ground.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

It is easy when posting with quotes to delete the early quotes so that the post is within the limits. Do it all the time.

 

 

Plus, it's a pet peeve of mine to have a post a mile long because people keep all the quotes. Now, I'm going to scroll up and delete the early quote so my post won't be a mile long.

 

Then why not have it default set to only include the post you are referring to? I hate mile long posts as well.

 

Every forum but this one(that I frequent) has only one quote in the reply when quoting a post and that is the reply you are quoting.

 

Maybe post a tutorial on how to easily deleted the quotes you do not want?

 

I can't do it on a phone which is where 98% of my posts originate from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... You are paying for everyone who isn't covered already. Might as well take care of it before they hit the expensive ER.

 

But contrary to the claims, ER visits didn't decrease with Obamacare, in fact, there is evidence they increased... So now I'm not only paying to subsidize their insurance that they don't/can't use because they can't afford the deductibles, all the while the 'expensive ER' visits continue to rack up, a double whammy aka losing.

 

If you want government insurance, join the military and earn it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

... You are paying for everyone who isn't covered already. Might as well take care of it before they hit the expensive ER.

 

But contrary to the claims, ER visits didn't decrease with Obamacare, in fact, there is evidence they increased... So now I'm not only paying to subsidize their insurance that they don't/can't use because they can't afford the deductibles, all the while the 'expensive ER' visits continue to rack up, a double whammy aka losing.

 

If you want government insurance, join the military and earn it.

 

People with insurance go to "urgent/prompt care's" to lower their own costs. People without go to ER's thinking they get a better and more experienced observation at no cost.

 

Reality says they get the same treatment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

In reference to highly regarded.....Garland was never downgraded from "Well qualified" to "Qualified" by the ABA.

Neither was Kavanaugh.

 

Yes, he was.

At some point, he made it back to well qualified...but he was downgraded in 2006.

 

The reasons? Mostly inexperience, bit also temperament, and (lack of freedom of) bias.

 

https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/migrated/scfedjud/statements/kavanaugh.authcheckdam.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

In reference to highly regarded.....Garland was never downgraded from "Well qualified" to "Qualified" by the ABA.

Neither was Kavanaugh.

Yes, he was.

At some point, he made it back to well qualified...but he was downgraded in 2006.

 

The reasons? Mostly inexperience, bit also temperament, and (lack of freedom of) bias.

 

https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/migrated/scfedjud/statements/kavanaugh.authcheckdam.pdf

2006? Really?

 

In 2018 he has the highest rating possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In reference to highly regarded.....Garland was never downgraded from "Well qualified" to "Qualified" by the ABA.

Neither was Kavanaugh.

Yes, he was.

At some point, he made it back to well qualified...but he was downgraded in 2006.

 

The reasons? Mostly inexperience, bit also temperament, and (lack of freedom of) bias.

https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/migrated/scfedjud/statements/kavanaugh.authcheckdam.pdf

2006? Really?

In 2018 he has the highest rating possible.

 

Well, in 1981 or 1982 or 1983, he was a drunken orgy rapist. He also sneezed on an old lady in 1975!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...