MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

The Senate Votes to Confirm Brett Kavanaugh

Kavanaugh will replace Justice Anthony Kennedy.

|||Consolidated News Photos/NewscomConsolidated News Photos/NewscomThe Senate has voted to confirm Brett Kavanaugh, 53, as the next Supreme Court justice.

The Senate voted 50-48, reaching the simple majority needed to confirm Kavanaugh. While the votes largely fell along party lines, four senators were watched as swing voters, either because of their tendency to break with their party or because they voiced concerns about the nominee. These senators were Susan Collins (R–Maine), Jeff Flake (R–Ariz.), Joe Manchin (D–W.V.), and Lisa Murkowski (R–Alaska).

The nomination process took a turn toward scandal at the end, when research psychologist Christine Blasey Ford accused Kavanaugh of holding her down and forcefully groping her at a high school party in the 1980s. After her allegation became public, other women came forward with accusations of wrongdoing.

Kavanaugh will replace Justice Anthony Kennedy who announced in June that he would be retiring from his seat. Appointed in 1987 by President Ronald Reagan, Kennedy was a frequent tie-breaking vote who helped decide major cases on gay rights, abortion, and other issues.

Kavanaugh already has a long record of jurisprudence, having written opinions on gun rights, searches and seizures, and Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission while serving as a judge for the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. He dissented in 2011's Seven-Sky v. Holder, the case that considered the constitutionality of Obamacare—Kavanaugh argued that the Anti-Injunction Act of 1867 should have prevented the court from hearing the case.

Photo Credit: Consolidated News Photos/Newscom

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Troglodyte Rex||

    Meh.

  • Fancylad||

    Maybe to you, but the Reason staff are all sobbing into their grande, iced, sugar-free, vanilla lattes with soy milk right now.

    You work so hard to slime Kavanagh, and what happens? Trump goes up 3 points, pussyhatted freakshow protesters repel minority voters, the GOP base gets energized and Kavanagh gets approved anyway.
    It's like the Battle of Dunkirk, only this time around they're the ones being pushed to the sea instead.

    They're devastated.

  • Kivlor||

    and the Dems' 13 point lead in the white woman vote drops to 1 point as John pointed out the other day

  • Pizzagate Conspirator||

    Based on...what?

  • Kivlor||

    I had to go find John's link for you. But if you really want to be sure, I'd go over to RealClearPolitics and get the actual studies.

    Also, although I was having a good laugh about the 13 point change in white women's attitudes toward Dems in the last month, I really wouldn't put too much stock in polls. If anything, it's probably that they only had a 3 point lead to begin with, and were over-sampling a demo that was fanatically left-wing.

  • vek||

    I dunno man... The whole rabid anti white thing coming from the Dems is a large part of what I think killed them in 2016. It's gone up about 100 fold since then. People tend to vote in their own self interests, and I think white women are starting to get the feeling even they're going to be on the wrong side of things if the Dems keep going the way they have been.

  • Kivlor||

    Yeah, I can agree that the rabid anti-white rhetoric isn't helping, but I don't think that caused a 13 point shift in the last 30 days here. It's more likely attached to Kavanaugh, which has been the main talking point for that period, or the lead was never as strong as they polled due to polling errors.

  • HeteroPatriarch||

    Mask slippage.

  • Weigel's Cock Ring||

    Yep. And days like yesterday are the reason why I stick around here, so I can mock and laugh at every one of their lying fugazi asses!

  • Bronze Khopesh||

    This is an historic moment as it is the first time any Supreme Court (or whatever the equivalent is in other countries) has had a justice with first name Brett.

    And that's what this fight was all about!

  • Ken Shultz||

    Just to be clear, it was all about nothing--because Kavanugh was confirmed.

    If he hadn't been confirmed, it wouldn't have been about nothing.

  • Bronze Khopesh||

    It ain't no thing!

  • Bronze Khopesh||

    Or perhaps "thang".

  • HGW xx/7||

    ...but a chicken wing?

  • Bronze Khopesh||

    Or perhaps "wang".

  • HGW xx/7||

    * unzips * go on...

  • Bronze Khopesh||

    In 35 to 38 years you'll regret that!

  • HGW xx/7||

    Oh shit. And you're all sworn, corroborating witnesses!

  • Res ipsa loquitur||

    Yea, you are screwed dude

  • Nardz||

    That's what she said?
    ...

  • Don't look at me!||

    Now it's a funny thang!

  • Derp-o-Matic 6000||

    Brett is a ridiculous name for a Supreme Court justice. How I yearn for such classic names of yore as "Bushrod" and "Lucius Quintus Cinncinatus"!

  • Bill Adams||

    I dunno. Brett Maverick was the most libertarian TV hero of all time. This guy isn't likely to live up to the name, but it's nice to see it out there.

  • CE||

    What is Malcolm Reynolds, chopped Mal?

  • HeteroPatriarch||

    I suppose Ron Swanson loses points for going to the feds.

  • MarkLastname||

    This gives the Brads, Chads, and Chetts a ray of hope.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    This is an historic moment as it is the first time any Supreme Court (or whatever the equivalent is in other countries) has had a justice with first name Brett.

    That weepy one's name is not Brett. It's Bart.

    Bart O'Kavanaugh.

  • Jack Klompus Magic Ink||

    You should have every tooth in your retard face kicked out with a steel-toed boot.

  • HeteroPatriarch||

    He will if he ever actually goes to a "resistance" protest. And he'll never see the irony.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    All three of them?

  • Benitacanova||

    I think it means "hunk of wood" in german or something. How perfect is that.

  • Naaman Brown||

    Brett (Deu.) = board (Eng.)
    Close enough for carpentry.

  • Ken Shultz||

    So, the Republic and American principles survived the social justice warriors for now.

    Maybe not evidence of God, but it's good news nonetheless.

    The interesting question is whether the Democrats make impeaching Kavanaugh a campaign issue for the midterms. Can't imagine doing so will help any Democrat running in a swing state.

    Maybe karma if it happens. Tip O'Neal said that, "All politics is local", but that's been getting it backwards in California for generations. California voters send Democrats to Sacramento because Republicans elsewhere in the country say stupid shit about "legitimate rape". All politics is local morphed into, "Think globally, act locally".

    Turnabout is fair play, right?

    If Midwestern voters send Republicans to the House in droves because of stupid shit someone like Dianne Feinstein says about impeaching Kavanaugh in a place like California, that'll be poetic justice.

  • Rorschach||

  • Qsl||

    At this point it's not about Kavanaugh, the Republic, or even the future of the courts.

    It is about the will to power and the destruction in its wake.

    Another layer of self-restraint has been removed and if further pursued will tear this country apart. Battle lines have been formalized moreso than before and I have to wonder how much longer the center will hold.

    It was an ugly turn of events with, I fear, even more ugliness to follow.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    But the ugliness will yield the very necessary culling of progtardkind. Who have no place in a free country like America.

  • Jessi||

    Hmmm. Progrardkind is precise but doesn't have quite the zing I'm looking for.

    An accurate denigrating term is half the battle in defeating them.

  • Trigger Warning||

    Libtards. Shitbrick (singular). Entitled millennial asswipes.

    17 years on from 9/11, the fact that the progtarded wing of the political wing exists is fucking amazing. The wealthiest, most privileged generation of children in the history of the world, and they pule and groan about microaggressions, triggers, being othered, safe spaces, and their own personal pronouns. As if any of that shit matters, or ever could matter. Fuck them, and fuck their enablers.

    See: Soave, Robert.

  • Trigger Warning||

    Political *left*, sorry.

  • Res ipsa loquitur||

    Cyrus the Great - "soft lands tend to breed soft men"

    It is true. America is a fat, weak, whiny nation who currently extols the virtue of weakness and failure, raising it up to emulate. I am continually bemused listening to progressives, who always hold up those who are weak and attempt to control those who are strong. I am amused watching the Antifa kids run around, weaklings attempting to be strong.

    Few progressives have any clue of how the world really works. I got woke fast, deploying to Afghanistan under President Obama's surge. Talk about a hard land, there the weak die, there the strong die, starvation / poverty are the norm. People from the U.S. / Europe have no understanding of misogyny, go live in a islamic land and you will see true patriarchy.

    The scary part is none of these kids understand what they are unleashing and the suffering it will cause. We are not so far removed from the 20th century and all the horrors. We enjoy the fruits today because "Difficult times made Hard People".

  • Trigger Warning||

    Yeah. Me too. The world is NOT safe space. The fucking Universe itself, all of creation as far as we can see in every direction, is hostile to what we call life, and indifferent to pain and suffering.

    I get angry at kids sometimes, in a vague, old-person-hating-the-younger-generation cliched sort of way. And that pisses me off, because I am not even forty. 26-year-old graduate students should not be looking for employment in the grievance industry. It's fucking ridiculous. Fucking ricockulous.

    I want to grab one, shake him. Shout at him that everything good comes from humans being free. Free to try, free to fail, free to love, free to speak and fuck and eat and work, and to do what makes them happy.

    Only tyrants and ignoramuses want to control other people. The idea strikes me as ludicrous. All power any and every human has to compel other humans to obey is derived from implicit violence of many types.

    In closing: you kids! Get off my fucking lawn!

  • Trainer||

    Yes! This is the type of writing Reason should be publishing.

  • BigT||

    My grandmother used to tell me: "Eat. Children in Europe are starving." Europe was tough.

    But now, in an age of plenty, Europe has completely lost its backbone. As have many Americans. I fear for the future.

  • Rock Lobster||

    Pussyhat Asshats?

    Pussy-Asshats?

  • Rock Lobster||

    How about just "Pussies?"

  • kevrob||

    It's an insult to cats, who will, when required, hunt to eat.

  • John C. Randolph||

    "communists".

    -jcr

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    But the ugliness will yield the very necessary culling of progtardkind. Who have no place in a free country like America.

    You dumbfucks remind me of the yahoos who would hit the number for $500 (nearly a month's pay to many people in those days) and figure they were winners. They'd spring for a few rounds at the bar, buy some dumb shit at the sporting good store, and enjoy being the "big winner" for a couple of days.

    Even at age 11 or 12, I recognized that the drunk buying beers for everyone, sporting a new fishing rod, and handing his wife $100 had probably spent $1,000 on numbers slips to "win" that $500; that $500 wouldn't change his life one bit (let alone enough to merit "investing" a grand); that he had already blown most of the $500 -- in other words, he didn't "win" shit. He was just a loser celebrating being a loser.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    At a broader scale, when I was a kid, the state built a bypass to connect the manufacturing plant town to the railyard town. The local residents were thrilled. We were hitting the big time, with major state investment and a beautiful new four-lane highway. Some of the locals caught some construction work for a couple of summers. Everyone was excited that our towns were back on the map. Then the bypass opened and it gradually dawned on the residents of my hometown -- as businesses faltered, then closed -- that it was called a bypass because they were being bypassed. That five-mile stretch between the (closed) manufacturing plant and the railyard is still desolate 45 years later.

    How will this "big win" for Republicans unfold? We'll see

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Arthur L. Hicklib's pain is HnR's gain.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    I think I triggered his tiny pea brain.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    My gain was a lifetime of getting to compete economically with the half-educated, superstitious, bigoted, unskilled, backward yahoos who turned into Trump supporters. A strong family, a beautiful home in a modern and successful community,, excellent careers based on graduate degrees, hard work, reason, and skill. Getting to watch preferences -- science, tolerance, progress, reason, education, liberty, modernity -- advance in America against the stale wishes and efforts of right-wing goobers. Life is good because I left the sticks and hicks behind at high school graduation and never returned, not for a single night.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    My gain was a lifetime of getting to compete economically with the half-educated, superstitious, bigoted, unskilled, backward yahoos who turned into Trump supporters.

    Arthur L. Hicklib clearly came out on the short end of that competition. Once an 85 IQ hayseed, always an 85 IQ hayseed.

  • Jack Klompus Magic Ink||

    You deserve nothing less than having the ever living shit beaten out of you every moment you're alive until finally the ass kicking puts you six feet under and the rest of the world celebrates that the world's biggest dicknozzle is dead, buried, and forgotten.

  • LarryA||

    And we thank you for that.

  • Incomprehensible Bitching||

    I hate roadz.

  • kevrob||

    This is why Eisenhower has a lot to answer for re: the Interstate Hwy system. Small towns, and the centers of cities the IHS were routed around lost ground. People who owned land near the new highways did well, unless that land was in the path of the road, and was taken. Entire city neighborhoods were demolished, or cut off from the rest of the city. This was only considered constitutional for reasons of "national defense."

    Libertarians tend to know this. Some of us have even read Jane Jacobs.

  • Dizzle||

    You think you made a rational statement on peoples views regarding this nomination.... Based on your dumbfuck relatives reaction to some highway project 50 years ago?

    And you wasted 2 posts doing it lol.

    This is an argument that literally has no value, and makes no sense to anyone but you. And sadly, you think it's rational.

  • Ken Shultz||

    "Battle lines have been formalized moreso than before and I have to wonder how much longer the center will hold."

    The center held.

    All that fury gained them nothing.

    Winning the battle isn't bad news.

  • buybuydandavis||

    So much winning!

  • Ordinary Person||

    'Survived social justice warriors"

    Are you so twisted and confused that you don't recognize that conservatives are social justice warriors and that Trump's base is united by the social issues? Those poor white men are under such assault. Whatever will we do?

  • Res ipsa loquitur||

    Probably die from overdoses, which you seem to support.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Hahaha.

    Kavanaugh! KAVANAUGH! Kavanaugh!

    Lefties lost again.

    Man, Trump is awesome. Since Jan 20, 2017 the lefties have been losing their minds over everything that rolls back their socialist agenda.

    November 2018 is gonna be another big cry session for Lefties.

    Then Trump gets reelected in 2020.

    By then Trump will have replaced Thomas and RBG. Thomas from retirement and RBG from being an old stupid bitch who should have retired when Obama was president.

  • OpenBordersLiberal-tarian||

    November 2018 is gonna be another big cry session for Lefties.

    You can gloat all you want today, but you have no idea how much this right-wing Supreme Court takeover is motivating Democratic voters for next month. I've never seen my progressive friends as focused as they are now. Republicans may have won in the short term, but they've planted the seeds of their eventual downfall.

    #BlueTsunami
    #Resist

  • HGW xx/7||

    B+. The same old claptrap, but delivered in a crisp, concise manner.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Thanks OBL, I needed a good laugh.

  • a tandem||

    >Supreme Court takeover is motivating Democratic voters for next month.

    1) Data and extensive polling say exactly the opposite. Democrats overplayed this and it cost them.
    Of course the house will turn over, it virtually always does against a sitting president at midterms.

    2) The Democrats did worse after Obama appointed Kagan and Sotomayor. Does that mean it was a mistake?

    You are laughably taking a gigantic GOP and libertarian VICTORY and trying to spin it.

  • HGW xx/7||

    It's OBL. He's a counter-troll and does a decent charicature of the typical shrill leftist harpy.

  • Sevo||

    "1) Data and extensive polling say exactly the opposite. Democrats overplayed this and it cost them.
    Of course the house will turn over, it virtually always does against a sitting president at midterms."

    Amazingly enough, a column in the lefty rag SF Chronicle made exactly this point; the Ds shot themselves in the foot, and 'the momentum has cooled'...

  • Rockabilly||

    OpenBordersLiberal-tarian

    Why can't your hands resist touching my private parts?

    Am I that sexy?

    #OpenBordersLiberal-tarianResistTouching

  • Bronze Khopesh||

    If you don't like it then stop making your private parts public!

  • Echospinner||

    You must be. I generally have to pay extra for that kind of action.

  • Rock Lobster||

    You're Too Sexy for your Shirt!

    https://tinyurl.com/8cg9geu

  • Jessi||

    Oh yeah, problem is they are focused on twitter.

    Also "right wing", such a lame term. How about liberty wing? Call us the liberty wing and maybe we will take you seriously.

  • Lost in the Woods||

    The problem with your argument, I think, is that the left was already on maximum tilt long before this pathetic display by Dem senators. Yes, the hard left are motivated, but they already were. What is new is some additional motivation by Trump voters who might have stayed home because Trump is not on the ballot. And some moderates (including women - you know, the ones with sons, brothers, fathers, brothers, etc.) who may now see the Dems for what they truly are.

  • BigT||

    The MSM and Donkeys have been fluffing their voters for two years. Dicks only stay hard for so long.

  • Ben_||

    Lots of Dem voters are minority men who work for a living. They have seen their job prospects and wages improve a lot in the last two years.

    They don't like radical feminists any more than Trump voters do. They don't want to answer for some story some women want to tell about their busy hands when they were 16 year old.

    If Trump can persuade 10% more minority men to vote his way, Dems lose nationwide, over and over and over.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    Just not enough vestigial bigots, half-educated rubes, superstitious yahoos, and disaffected economic losers in modern America to pull off another trick shot in the Electoral College for Republicans.

    Democrats should get worried in a hurry, though, if conservatives ever develop a machine that mass-produces cranky, selfish, bigoted, uneducated, unskilled, superstitious, anti-social, easily frightened, drawling, stale-thinking, disaffected, elderly white males.

  • buybuydandavis||

    Wah wah waaaaaaah!

  • Ben_||

    No one listens to name-callers any more.

  • Jack Klompus Magic Ink||

    Buy a gun and shoot yourself in the face.

  • Weigel's Cock Ring||

    * Takes big swig of red wine *
    * Pauses to laugh my ass off just a little more *
    * Takes an even bigger swig of red wine *

  • Bronze Khopesh||

  • Rorschach||

  • Fancylad||

    It's literally Kirkland's theme song!

  • Rorschach||

  • Ann NY||

    Or, according to the left, a rapist.

  • MatthewSlyfield||

    Beer makes hunters confused. They don't know whether to shoot it or run from it.

  • fdog50||

    Because whiskey's too rough, champagne costs too much, and vodka puts my mouth in gear.

  • Rock Lobster||

    Seriously, dude? I'm sitting in morose silence meditating upon my ill gotten white male privilege.

    HA!!! Just kidding--I'm swilling some outstanding cheap cabernet and laughing my ass off, too.

    Kavanaugh was definitely not my first choice, but after the slanderous "outrage machine" got cranked up, I'm in his corner 100%. In hindsight, he proved to be a shrewd choice by a president who, by design I think, remains easy for his enemies to underestimate. The Democrats definitely turned a lot of people off with their witch trial tactics against a relatively inoffensive guy.

    Although I didn't vote for him in 2016 (I felt the Johnson and grabbed no one by the pussy except my long suffering wife), I will almost certainly vote for him in 2020.

    * Takes big swig of wine to toast Kavanaugh *
    * Pauses to laugh my ass off with you *
    * Takes big swig of wine to toast--still with a fair degree of astonishment--President Trump *

  • Eddy||

    CNN agrees It's all Avenatti's fault

    "A host of Democratic senators and senior aides told CNN that the allegations from Avenatti's client gave the GOP an opening to conflate -- and dismiss -- all the allegations in one broad brush....

    ""It is outrageous that these so-called Democrats would attack a sexual assault victim from coming forward," Avenatti told CNN. "I guess their position is that she should have shut her mouth and remained silent? It is disgusting that these cowards blame my client and the other accusers from coming forward.""...

    "Avenatti sharply criticized Collins -- and Democrats, as well.

    ""How do they know her claims, supported by six witnesses were not credible?" Avenatti said. "They did basically nothing to find out.""

  • John||

    Looks like Reason got their journolist talking points early. They were saying that yesterday

  • Ken Shultz||

    There are only so many shit piles for the lefty flies to land on. What are they going to do, otherwise, admit that Republican politicians were right to ignore unsubstantiated allegations for fear of what the voters might do to them in the midterms? Admit that the Democrats have just made it harder for themselves to take the senate?

  • Nardz||

    This was a stupendous fuck up.
    They need a fall guy.
    Avanetti has been chosen.

  • Sevo||

    It's not like he didn't sort of volunteer for it...
    (I'd love the see the compensation clauses in his contract with that twat).

  • ThomasD||

    She's a nut job and he knows the first rule of being an attorney.

    If someone must go to jail make sure it is the client.

  • Naaman Brown||

    boof
    Etymology 0
    adjective To the extreme or to the maximum
    Etymology 4
    verb To get something wrong or make a mistake.

    Example: The Democrats boofed that boof stunt.

  • shortviking||

    "she should have shut her mouth and remained silent?"

    Yes.

  • Get To Da Chippah||

    "How do they know her claims, supported by six witnesses were not credible?" Avenatti said.

    Multiple personalities =/= multiple witnesses.

  • JesseAz||

    This is proof that avenatti is a shit lawyer. The 6 witnesses were people she told post 2012 and not actual witnesses to the act. Liberals and avenatti are dung beetles pushing the same ball of shit.

  • Derp-o-Matic 6000||

    Looks like Rico is on board with the proggie scapegoat.

    CNN and the Democrats would do well to reflect on why Avenatti had such an impact. Maybe it had something to do with the amount of airtime his claims were given? The seriousness with which they were treated? The fact that no prominent Democrat condemned, denied, or distanced themselves from them?

    No, always everyone else's fault.

  • BigT||

    Hildog blames Avenatti for loss. Film at 11.

  • Tom Bombadil||

    Remind me again who gave Avenatti unlimited airtime?

  • Rorschach||

  • Joe M||

    Hm 50+48=98
    So... who didn't vote?

  • Rorschach||

  • Bubba Jones||

    Murkowski was a paired vote. She agreed to vote present instead of no so that Daines could stay at his daughter's wedding.

    Otherwise they might have had to hold the vote open while Daines flew back to DC tonight. Depending upon outcome.

    Murkowski could have voted no without changing the outcome but this gives her an excuse to say "no" without actually voting no.

    You might say it was an attempt to have it both ways.

  • ||

    Senator's Triangle?

  • JesseAz||

    Senators triangle is another drinking game. It first requires you to steal a quarter from a tax payer.

  • BigT||

    Senators triangle is another drinking game. It first requires you to steal a quarter trillion from a tax payer.

    FIFY

  • Seamus||

    That's not fair to Murkowski. Pairing is, or at least used to be, a courtesy that members of Congress would regularly give each other so that they could go on record even for votes they wouldn't be present to cast, and so that their absence wouldn't affect the outcome.

    I'm pleasantly surprised that enough civility remained in the Senate that Murkowski was willing to offer that courtesy. (I'm sure that Chuck Schumer and the aptly named Dick Durbin would have said, "Fuck you, Daines. You think Kavanaugh needs your vote, you better have your ass on the floor to cast it. We are doing nothing that might help him in any way. If we could find some way to get your plane from Montana grounded, we'd use it.)"

  • Red Tony||

    One Republican voted present, and another one was at his daughter's wedding.

  • Eddy||

    Probably a couple dudes who found a hiding place the Sergeant-at-Arms didn't know about.

  • Eddy||

    OK, maybe not.

  • Eddy||

    "Perhaps we should be grateful that Kavanaugh no longer feels the need to even pay lip service to virtue. For it allows us to look at the current situation in the bright light of unvarnished truth.

    "Supreme Court justices are no umpires. They are partisans, and increasingly naked ones to boot. In more ordinary times, that in itself would be bad enough. But in the extraordinary times in which we now live, it is terrifying."

  • John||

    Even if you believed Ford, why does that make Kavanaugh any more partisan than Kennedy?

  • DesigNate||

    You know, I don't remember them complaining about Kagan's naked partisainship when Obama sat her.

    Bunch of projecting hypocrites

  • OpenBordersLiberal-tarian||

    Today is one of the worst days in the living nightmare that has engulfed our country for nearly two years. An illegitimate President shouldn't get to put anyone on the Supreme Court, much less two people. The progressive / libertarian alliance failed to stop dangerous right-wing extremist Neil Gorsuch. But I was sure that, with Senator Feinstein's help, we'd succeed this time. Well, once again, the party of Russian assets got their way.

    My friends and I are literally shaking right now.

  • Red Tony||

    Are you rattled?

  • OpenBordersLiberal-tarian||

    Yes, but I'm not giving up. On the contrary, I'm contacting all my family members and telling them how important it is to vote Democrat in November. I'm even considering buying them Hulu subscriptions for holiday gifts so they can watch The Handmaid's Tale and understand what will happen to this country if the Republicans aren't stopped.

    #SaveRoe

  • HGW xx/7||

    A-. Any pearl-clutching reference to The Handmaid's Tale makes me giggle. Well done, chap!

  • Tom Bombadil||

    Agreed. The Hulu thread was nice.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    You forgot the halloween costumes.

  • a tandem||

    Data and polling indicate the Democrats mudslinging against this fine jurist is hurting them, not helping

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    New here?

  • Don't look at me!||

    A. Much improved! Keep up the good work!

  • Jessi||

    Bravo! Don't forget to thank the academy.

  • Rock Lobster||

    Thanks, OBL! In honor of Kavanaugh's appointment, I'm going to wear this sexy Handmaid's Tale costume for Halloween:

    https://tinyurl.com/y9u339un

    I'm 5' 7" with an imperial beard, a shaved head, and very hairy legs.

    The squeals of outrage I shall elicit will be glorious!

  • AlmightyJB||

    So you have to give your family Thanksgiving lecture early this year.

  • Sevo||

    Isn't that fun?
    We stopped inviting them about 10 years back, since we got a lefty lecture and any response was considered 'ill-mannered'.
    We now have it with friends instead. Some of whom are lefties, but with the sense to STFU at T-day. I'll return the favor.

  • BigT||

    No, only a 'B'

    This part was underplayed:
    "But I was sure that, with Senator Feinstein's help, ..."

    No Feinstein 's 'brave leadership'? Or Feinstein's 'truth-seeking detective work'?

    Not quite OBL's usual brilliance.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    [hands cream to OBL]

    [waits]

    [enjoys whip cream]

  • Rorschach||

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Sorry, but Sen. Feinstein was busy handing over state secrets to her Chinese spy driver.

  • Bronze Khopesh||

    Her Chinese spy had his own driver? Bold.

  • Rock Lobster||

    Well, his boss is a senator, you know.

  • MatthewSlyfield||

  • Seamus||

    Your salty tears are yummy.

  • Lost in the Woods||

    So, OBL, I ask sincerely. Given all in Washington that you disagree with (despise? fear?), why does the left continue to insist on a big, powerful federal government? Why not a small one, with power to the states, and then you and yours can have the life you want in the state you choose without worrying about Washington?

  • Tom Bombadil||

    He's a parody. He is spoofing the left.

  • Naaman Brown||

    Was that post meant to be satire?

    Some of us need [sarcasm][/sarcasm] tags to tell.

  • Rorschach||

  • Bender B. Rodriguez||

    Wait, what? Someone is replacing Justice Kennedy? How is this the first I'm hearing of this?

  • Don't look at me!||

    Look at Rip van Winkle here.

  • 68W58||

    In fairness Bender only ever takes interest in politics to whatever extent it helps to "kill all humans" and it's a little too early to tell with all of this yet.

  • Anastasia Beaverhausen||

    I live in a swing state with a highly competitive Senate seat currently held by the Republicans. I've been a registered Libertarian for decades.

    I just decided that for the first time in my life. I'm going to vote for a Democrat - I've got to do my bit to flip the Senate and help create divided government, to stop Trump from doing any more damage to this country.

  • Bronze Khopesh||

    You wouldn't happen to be wearing a bathing suit under your clothes would you? Asking for a friend.

  • HGW xx/7||

    Funny, seems that the enthusiasm gap has been shifting in the opposite direction past week or so. You getting nervous, Beaverhouse?

  • OpenBordersLiberal-tarian||

    Thank you! We need a Democratic Congress to remove Drumpf in 2019 when Mueller submits his final report.

    #Impeach

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    LOL

  • a tandem||

    >I live in a swing state with a highly competitive Senate seat currently held by the Republicans. I've been a registered Libertarian for decades.

    Nope you are a highly partisan Democrat who has never registered or voted Libertarian.

    and Damage? the economy is going better than ever.

    Trump is erasing the divisiveness and damage from oblamer.

  • Anastasia Beaverhausen||

    "Trump is erasing the divisiveness and damage from oblamer."

    Which the Republicans caused! OMG.

    Trust me, the Republicrats are no better than the Demopublicans, so the only thing this Libertarian can do is make sure the levers of government aren't all held in one party's hands... because no good ever comes of it.

    I didn't like Obama, didn't vote for him, and wouldn't trust him with my wallet for five seconds - but at least he wasn't a buffoon, a serial sexual predator and an embarrassment on the world stage.

  • John||

    Trump is such an embarrassment. He was plunked and laughed at by Putin in Syria for issuing a red line that meant nothing and sent billions in cash to Iran in return for a meaningless agreement right?

  • Derp-o-Matic 6000||

    Trump is also unprecedentedly dangerous, like that time he used a predator drone to murder American citizens abroad on suspicion of terrorism.

  • BigT||

    Orange is the new black according to John.

  • Sevo||

    "I didn't like Obama, didn't vote for him, and wouldn't trust him with my wallet for five seconds - but at least he wasn't a buffoon, a serial sexual predator and an embarrassment on the world stage."

    I didn't vote for Trump and my best hope was a SCOTUS justice who wasn't a fave of the hag. Instead, we got:
    1) DeVos
    2) Gorsuch
    3) Ajit Pai, end net price fixing
    4) Major reduction in the growth of regulations
    5) Dow +30%
    6) Unemployment at 3.8%
    7) The US Manufacturing Index soared to a 33 year high
    8) Got repeal of the national medical insurance mandate.
    9) Withdrawal from Paris climate agreement.
    10) Not sure about the tax reform; any "reform" that leaves me subisdizing Musk's customers is not what I hoped for. Let Musk run a company for once.
    11) In the waning days of 2017, the Trump administration pulled its support for the $13 billion Hudson Tunnel project.
    12) More than 16,000 jobs have been cut from the federal leviathan
    13) MIGHT have a deal to de-nuke NK.
    And finally:
    14) Still making lefties steppin and fetchin like their pants is on fire and their asses are catchin'

    And you don't like him for un-proven accusations and reasons of style?
    Get lost.

  • BigT||

    You forgot:

    All time lowest black and Hispanic unemployment

    It was significant that the Donkeys sat on their hands when Trump said this during the SOTU speech. Trump should have called them on it: "I'm very sorry to see that none of the Democrats are happy about all time lowest black unemployment. What's wrong, don't you care."

  • John C. Randolph||

    Of course they're not happy about blacks and hispanics being employed. It erodes their base of tax-dependents.

    -jcr

  • Ben_||

    Unemployment 3.7%

    And you forgot:
    - ISIS defeated
    - NAFTA renegotiated
    - US no longer has the world's highest business tax rate

    Personally, I also like:
    - Right to try act
    - IRS forced to apologize, stop targeting conservatives, and pay damages
    - WOTUS ended

    Looking forward to:
    - Prison and sentencing reform
    - Another SCOTUS appointment to replace RBG
    - Trade deal with Europe
    - wall

  • jasno||

    You missed the memo. The commentariat around here all became authoritarians in the last few years. They now seem convinced that anyone not on the trump train is a secret obamaphile. The whataboutism is thick around here.

    I miss HnR in the Bush years... those were the good old days. John was just a minority voice you could laugh at. Now its Johns as far as the eye can see.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Why can't we have Obama back with his pen and his phone? Then all will be right in the world.

  • Sevo||

    "I miss HnR in the Bush years... those were the good old days. John was just a minority voice you could laugh at. Now its Johns as far as the eye can see."

    I don't miss bullshit like this.
    Did you read the list above? Care to comment on how Bush did by comparison? Can we assume you're simply an ignoramus who would not support someone "X-R" under any circumstances?
    BTW, tell us how many wars Trump has started; I'd like to laugh at you even more.
    Idiot...

  • jasno||

    I read the list. Maybe you could try reading my comment. I was talking about HnR and how you've all turned into authoritarians. We're certainly a lot better off under Trump than we were under Bush II. That doesn't mean I have to like the guy.

  • buybuydandavis||

    "OMG"

    Another parody account?

  • Hattori Hanzo||

    I'm considering voting Democrat as well but only because of the Republicans rigging ballot access laws in Arizona that prevent me from having a candidate.

    I lose with Democrats or Republicans so it's no sweat off my back.

    This idea, though, that Trump is more dangerous than Obama is laughable. I don't give a shit what people in other countries think. Trump is an asshole with less power than Obama had.

  • shortviking||

    Yagyu Jubei!

  • Rock Lobster||

    Heh! I live in Texas, so I get to vote against Beto.

    Don't be jealous.

  • Lost in the Woods||

    What damage?

  • Ben_||

    I also live in no specific state — you know, one of the swing states. We all totally believe you.

  • Anastasia Beaverhausen||

    Like I'm going to give any details of where I live and who I am on this comment board filled with right-wing nutballs.

  • Trigger Warning||

    Somebody better put the bouffanted wunderkind on suicide watch.

  • Rorschach||

  • Eddy||

    Victim of traumatic rape exercises forbearance toward her rapist -

    Christine Blasey Ford has no plans to further pursue allegations against Brett Kavanaugh: Attorney

    "Ford only wanted to speak with members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, her attorneys told CNN on Friday. Ford does not want the situation to "drag on into the next Congress should Democrats end up winning control on Capitol Hill," the network reported.

    "When asked about the possibility of impeachment proceedings, attorney Debra Katz told the network: "Professor Ford has not asked for anything of the sort. What she did was to come forward and testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee and agree to cooperate with any investigation by the FBI, and that's what she sought to do here."

    ""She does not want him to be impeached?" CNN's Dana Bash later asked.

    ""No," Katz replied flatly."

  • Bronze Khopesh||

    That's because she can't remember when he was appointed to SCOTUS, or where it was or who the other justices were. And so she's not going through all that again!

  • geo1113||

    Of course, Ford doesn't want an impeachment. She and her story would be put under a microscope .

  • Rock Lobster||

    ^^This^^

  • BigT||

    And likely a perjury charge.

  • markm23||

    She gave no details that could be used to prove her story untrue.

  • MasterThief||

    This shouldn't be a surprise to any competent person who has been following this. If democrats and Ford want to be taken seriously then criminal charges need to officially be filed against Kavanaugh. They were never going to do this win or lose. If they attempt to go through impeachment proceedings before a criminal trial then they've played their hands and showed it's all political bs that even they do not believe

  • John||

    She only claims he groped her and that was a misdemeanor in Maryland in 1982 and had a statute of limitations of a year. So, she couldn't pursue charges if she wanted to

  • MasterThief||

    I'm aware. Most dems probably don't. If they want him gone, that is the way.

  • Rock Lobster||

    The Dems had better worry about the upcoming RBG vacancy. It takes time to concoct a "credible" smear campaign.

  • Comrade Cosmoturf||

    There's a fair chance Trump will get 2 more court picks.

    I'm not worried, even if he selects radical right wing judges, I get free clothes hangers every time I pick up the dry cleaning.

  • buybuydandavis||

    Seems all I ever heard it characterized as was "attempted rape" and "potential mistaken murder".

    Apparently The Narrative is a changin.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    They already did that.

  • Brett Bellmore||

    She's kind of hoping that, if she drops it all right now, there won't be any perjury charges.

  • JesseAz||

    Ford was paid her 1 million, GoFundMe, and most likely another million with a book deal. Liberal pieces of shit take care of their own.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    A justice on the court with a healthy animosity toward the legislature might be a good thing.

  • Don't look at me!||

    +

  • Hank Phillips||

    A justice yes, but a Comstock Law Hitlerite? Must we still be trapped between communists and Beatles-burning biblical bigots?

  • Eddy||

    I suppose time will tell.

  • buybuydandavis||

    #RedPilledJustice

  • HGW xx/7||

    I'm genuinely surprised the Rs pulled it off. The biggest deal for me was seeing the likes of Graham and Collins grow a spine, and call the left out on their shitiness. I think the Left didn't see that coming and it all started the minute Cav got to testify. They really thought that he would be withdrawn, and I though Mitch and company would relent. I'm probably as shocked as they are, though in a much different way.

    Not my pick for the court; not big on folks who hold up religiously as evidence of their goodness and his opinion of the fourth isn't palatable. Still, I'll take a defender of the first and second, on top of a roundhouse to the filthy, hateful face of self-aggrandizing socialists, any day.

    Every last shrieking, hardened lefty can DIAF.

  • Rock Lobster||

    Dems:

    "Where's John McCain when we need him the most?"

  • Sevo||

    Dead, where RBG will be soon.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Civilization wins.

  • HGW xx/7||

    *scoff* Yeah, sure. Every thinking, educated person knows that civilization only exists in proud, socialist-run cities where syringes are free and easy to come by, while wicked straws mean jail time. It's called science!

    (Is the /sarc required here?)

  • Dan Bongard||

    He isn't a good choice from a libertarian perspective, but I'm still pleased the smear tactics didn't work.

  • Muzzled Woodchipper||

    He's actually very good on all but 1 issue.

    I'll take that. It's certainly much better than we could have gotten.

    No judge will ever pass the libertarian purity test. We need to take what good we can get, even if it means losing even more of the 4A (which is already shredded beyond recognition anyways).

  • Eddy||

    A lot of articles about "self-care" for women freaking out over Kavanaugh.

  • John||

    What are these people going to be like when RBG croaks in a year or two?

  • geo1113||

    Mass suicide.

  • Brett Bellmore||

    More likely mass murder. It's not that hard to open up vacancies on the Supreme court once you lose your mind.

  • John C. Randolph||

    But what's the downside?

    -jcr

  • HGW xx/7||

    Do any involve pulling a train and having men line up for their turn while holding red Solo cups?

  • geo1113||

    I think Hatch gave the best self-care advise. Told them to grow up.

  • Eddy||

    Here Are Five Positive Things to Do with Your Rage and Sadness Over the Kavanaugh Vote

    "Have you, like us, spent the last few weeks in a single serve cyclone of rage, fear, and depression? Then the good news is you're awake. The bad news is … that the news is just plain bad. The Senate is convening today to confirm Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court....

    "In times like these, it is easy to want to crawl back into bed with a bag of Babybel cheese and hide from the world until 2020. But we can't do that … because we will run out of cheese eventually, but more importantly, because we have to suit up and be our own damn heroes. In the words of C.S. Lewis, now is the time for "courage, dear heart."..."

  • John||

    I never thought anything could be more enjoyable than Trump being elected but him being re-elected might turn out to be even better

  • ||

    I didn't vote for him the first time, but man, this is all too much fun to not keep it going.

  • Ann NY||

    I didn't vote for him either, and I suspected that the Trump presidency would be entertaining, but this is beyond my wildest imagination. I'm embarrassed for my gender though.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Just like men then. Some of us are embarrased for our gender kin.

  • Rock Lobster||

    I didn't vote for Trump in 2016 (like many here, I felt the Johnson). Instead of watching the election returns, I watched Idiocracy, smiled with bemusement at our fate, and went to bed early, resigned to at least four more years of petty Clintonite corruption and further drift of the country toward leftist Utopia.

    However, when I woke up and read the news, I couldn't help laughing my ass off at the absurd reality that Donald Fucking Trump was now President of the United States. In fact, woke the whole house with my gut busting guffaws.

    To my astonishment, he has been a (mostly) pleasant surprise. Most importantly, he has not retreated one iota in the face of relentless attacks by Democrats and their media auxiliaries. In this, he is unlike all previous Republicans, who inevitably folded like wet paper bags at some point.

    Barring some spectacular fuck up on Trump's part, I will almost certainly vote for him in 2020. Not because I am enamored of all things Trump, but because the Democrats are such an Orwellian horror show, and Trump definitely has their number.

  • HGW xx/7||

    ...and be our own damn heroes.

    Would that require self-sufficiency and individuality? I don't think they're seeing the major flaw in their call to solar-powered arms...

  • Bronze Khopesh||

    C.S. Lewis? Were he alive today I doubt he would be much interested in delivering inspirational quotes to a bunch of weak-willed leftist whiners.

  • 68W58||

    i think he might remind them that, "It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies", but they probably wouldn't get it.

  • lap83||

    "But we can't do that … because we will run out of cheese eventually, but more importantly, because we have to suit up and be our own damn heroes. "

    Liz Lemon called, she wants her shtick back

  • MatthewSlyfield||

  • Echospinner||

    And why will we run out of cheese?

    F*ng Canadians

  • John||

    Unsurprisingly, Senator Blutarsky cast the deciding vote for confirmation

  • Jessi||

    This article fails to illuminate that the allegations were unsubstantiated and Ford was caught lying.

    This is part of why these tactics work- people pretend like they are legitimate.

    Like asset forfeiture isn't actually stealing, etc.

  • John||

    That is an excellent analogy.

  • shortviking||

    hear hear

  • Eddy||

    8 takeaways from the knock-down, drag-out fight over Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation
    America will be forever changed after Kavanaugh's divisive entry to the Court.

    1. "Christine Blasey Ford unintentionally gave us a test of the #MeToo movement. Conservatives largely failed."

    2. "Mitch McConnell proves (again) that he delivers for donors"

    3. "Lisa Murkowski listened to the victims of sexual assault — and the coalition that wrote her into office"

    4. "The conservative movement finally got its majority on the Supreme Court"

    5. "Susan Collins and most Republican women don't believe women when it's their guy getting accused"

    6. "The Supreme Court is damaged as an institution — perhaps irrevocably"

    7. "Some red-state Democrats voted no — come what may in November"

    8. "House Republicans in Clinton-friendly districts might be goners"

  • John||

    House Republicans are goners because the House voted confirm him right? A week ago Republicans had lost women forever. Today, a few Republicans in the House in blue districts might be goners. Talk about moving goalposts. And the unintentional irony of the author using the term Clinton friendly is awesome

  • Muzzled Woodchipper||

    The histrionics are laughable.

    It's been the end of the world for people like those who wrote that article since the election.

    I wonder what will finally drive them kill themselves to save them from the horror modern America.

  • John||

    If they cannot forever have a majority, the Supreme Court is illegitimate. Pathetic

  • HGW xx/7||

    1. "Christine Blasey Ford unintentionally gave us a test of the #MeToo movement. Conservatives largely failed."

    I'd say the test here was of the legitimacy of a weaponized Feminazi campaign. In that case, the left has a very odd understanding of the word, "failed".

  • Rock Lobster||

    Oh, sure. The Democrats and their media auxiliaries may have failed to block the confirmation of a misogynist gropey gang rapist, but they scored a moral victory. Therefore, Yay! You go, girl!

    *Does victory dance*

    See? That was easy.

  • JesseAz||

    Liberals proved once again they are authoritarian pieces of shit who will use the legal system in a pubative manner to go after political opponents. They are no different than Maduro or Castro. They are a dangerous entity who believes ends justify their power gains.

  • Hank Phillips||

    What a surprise. The trick that didn't work on Clarence Thomas (whose crime was having read Atlas Shrugged) didn't work on the Great White Race Suicide Hope either. Maybe the Dems will lighten up on The End Is Nigh Climate Cassandraism and quit banning energy and pushing carbon taxes for everyone except communists. Their voters could profitably switch to voting libertarian--if the idea is to keep all forms of birth control safe and legal. The LP accomplished that before it was even fashionable.

  • Rock Lobster||

    Are you kidding? Their voters will never vote Libertarian, and they damned sure won't vote libertarian. They're too invested in the ideas that it's okay to tell other people what they must think, how they must live, and that any and all rights they may have are granted by Government Almighty.

  • Bubba Jones||

    Two nominees. Two party line votes.

    Go figure.

    Three nominees dating back to Garland.

    It is almost as if this process had become partisan.

  • Eddy||

    OK, just one more, I promise. From two days ago:

    Brett Kavanaugh reminds me of my father: Enraged by threats to power and entitlement

    "I grew up in a house of rage. My parents were both alcoholics. While I would not describe myself as abused, exactly, I would say that I was often terrified. Terror, I can tell you, is an awful thing to feel at 6, at 10, at 16. And for anyone raised in a house with an angry alcoholic, that terror is twinned with the kind of unpredictability that leaves a child never free to relax, to experiment, to feel entirely safe."

  • geo1113||

    Good thing her father wasn't accused of attempted rape.

  • Rock Lobster||

    Give her a chance. Six days meditating with the right lawyer or some extended therapy with a properly woke "medical professional" might generate all kinds of recovered memories.

  • XM||

    Vox (and some other left sites) also put out a lot of articles dealing with rapey 80's and frat culture.

    When Ford turned out to be an unreliable witness and her specific allegations fell apart, the media shifted the narrative quickly to BK's seemingly inconsistent statement (boofing, devil's triangle) and the larger societal problem of women not being heard on rape accusations.

    Lefty mouthpieces like Vox and Mary Sue (I'm blocked there) basically live in an alternate universe on this matter.

  • Drave Robber||

    Rapey Eighties sounds like an excellent band name.

  • Trigger Warning||

    Or a gang of horny octogenerians.

  • Azathoth!!||

    I'd just like to say, to all the 'libertarian' writers at Reason,

    Suck it, losers.

  • SimonP||

    It's depressing to see so many chuckleheads celebrating this confirmation like their team just scored another touchdown.

    Kavanaugh is not going to be a pro-liberty justice. He's not going to be pro-free speech. He's going to be pro-Christian religious freedom, but not pro-freedom of conscience. He will endorse the expansion of federal and executive power when it suits conservative policy. He will make it harder to be poor, non-white, and non-male in this country. A whole lot of people posting here celebrating his victory are going to see him deciding cases against their interests.

    So, gloat away, useful idiots. The elite GOP is using you just like they always have.

  • John||

    He will make it so hard for poor people by allowing them to own guns and curtailing the administrative state. We need someone pro liberty who will ensure the they cannot own guns, start business or make so much as a YouTube video critical of a politician without running afoul of campaign finance laws.

  • SimonP||

    He will make it harder to be poor by: (i) endorsing the widespread use of mandatory arbitration agreements, which effectively preclude access to the courts or administrative bodies in order to enforce federally-protected rights; (ii) further limiting the negotiating and organizing power of unions; (iii) deeming broader swaths of federal welfare benefits as either unlawful or unconstitutional; (iv) making it harder for the poor to participate effectively in elections; (v) endorsing various police and prosecutorial abuses (like civil asset forfeiture, driver license suspensions for unpaid court fees, overcharging/plea agreements, etc.) that disproportionately burden people with less money; (vi) undermining the authority of agencies that exist to protect the health and welfare of the poor; and so on.

    Will poor people be able to arm themselves with greater ease? Sure. And if that's something you care about, it's something to cheer. But they won't be helped by a court that will work to undermine their power to negotiate higher wages, vote for politicians of their choosing, or live free of dangerous pollution.

  • Eddy||

    "overcharging/plea agreements"

    You mean Kavanaugh might overrule all those numerous Supreme Court precedents which so effectively protect the poor from overcharging and plea agreements? Precedents like...well, you know, all of them?

    /sarc

  • HGW xx/7||

    Don't get me started on dangerous pollution. I saw this white patriarch breathing out CO2, without any regard for how his breath was raping fragile Gaia.

    I'll be suing him with the help of the brilliant attorney, Michael Avenatti, Esq.

    #ByAnyMeansNecessary
    #IBelieveGarth

  • SimonP||

    Enjoy drinking your coal ash.

  • HGW xx/7||

    It's especially thirst-quenching when mixed with your tears.

  • SimonP||

    What makes you think that you're going to be somehow immune from the turn the Supreme Court's about to take?

    You like subsidizing Christian institutions? You better get used to it. Do you like being denied products or services based on the religious beliefs of the institutions or employees you're dealing with? Better start compiling a list of reliable providers. Are you looking forward to your employers stealing your wages or discriminating against you on the basis of sex, race, or age, with your only recourse being an arbitration panel stacked by your employer? Better get a lawyer!

    I mean, I could go on. For every concealed-carry-license-across-state-border decision, there will be a, fuck-you-if-you're-not-white-Christian-and-rich decision. We already know that the GOP is not particularly libertarian in policy, and the Roberts Court with an aggrieved culture warrior like Kavanaugh is not going to be any friendlier to any but a narrow band of rights that effectively serve the interests of the rich elite.

  • HGW xx/7||

    You like subsidizing Christian institutions? You better get used to it.

    My tax dollars subsidize so much stupid shit, it's pathetic. I'd prefer to subsidize no one. However, given the choice of my dollars going to, say, a charter school versus a left-wing enviro front bent on SimCity-ing the economy to their whims, I'll certainly choose the former.

    Do you like being denied products or services based on the religious beliefs of the institutions or employees you're dealing with? Better start compiling a list of reliable providers.

    Of course, asking people to pay for abortions and birth control is akin to the Spanish Inquizition. It is known. (Psst: I'm pro-choice and I still speak such herasies.)

    Are you looking forward to your employers stealing your wages or discriminating against you on the basis of sex, race, or age, with your only recourse being an arbitration panel stacked by your employer? Better get a lawyer!

    Yes, those evil employers are all just Scrooge McDucks. For years, a single group of five robed individuals protected my rights, but now, my boss will be free to roast me over an open pit and burn my house down with my family inside.

    One of my laboring orphans is thirsty. Got any more of those coal-flavored tears?

  • SimonP||

    However, given the choice of my dollars going to, say, a charter school versus a left-wing enviro front bent on SimCity-ing the economy to their whims, I'll certainly choose the former.

    The choice will be more between (in the educational context) schools that are obligated to meet certain public standards applicable to all secular recipients of public funds and schools that are free to engage in religious instruction exempt from any such standards, but still entitled to those funds.

    Of course, asking people to pay for abortions and birth control is akin to the Spanish Inquizition.

    I'm not talking about just employer-sponsored healthcare. I'm talking about dying from pregnancy complications because the nearest hospitals are all owned by Catholic operators (without their being required to let you know this). I'm talking about not being able to fill a prescription at your town's only drug store because the pharmacist on duty has a thing about sex outside of heterosexual marriage.

    Yes, those evil employers are all just Scrooge McDucks. For years, a single group of five robed individuals protected my rights, but now, my boss will be free to roast me over an open pit and burn my house down with my family inside.

    You can continue to profess ignorance on current trends in employment law, I suppose.

  • HGW xx/7||

    The choice will be more between (in the educational context) schools that are obligated to meet certain public standards applicable to all secular recipients of public funds and schools that are free to engage in religious instruction exempt from any such standards, but still entitled to those funds.

    This will be a concern of mine the moment private schools take over the mantle of "underperforming" from your beloved public schools.

    I'm not talking about just employer-sponsored healthcare. I'm talking about dying from pregnancy complications because the nearest hospitals are all owned by Catholic operators (without their being required to let you know this). I'm talking about not being able to fill a prescription at your town's only drug store because the pharmacist on duty has a thing about sex outside of heterosexual marriage.

    Seems like a good argument to lessen prescription regulation, and sell birth control over the counter and through the mail. That way, we're more likely to both preserve the concept of NAP and provide the products people want. But some gays won't get that wedding cake. Sad. :(

    Maybe there's this thing called a free market that, I dunno, could see that as a niche market to profit from? Just an idea...

    You can continue to profess ignorance on current trends in employment law, I suppose.

    Good non-answer! Clearly the day has thrown your sterling intellect for a loop. Feel better!

  • Fancylad||

    You like subsidizing Christian institutions
    Whenever you read crap like that, you know you're dealing with a religious nut, who just has a different god. If he calls himself an anti-theist on top of that you know you're in for a bunch of dubious studies, and rejected or discredited papers being misquoted, but adored as holy writ.

  • ThomasD||

    Here's a novel solution to the problem pharmacist - have the person who gives you the prescription sell you the drug. I am not aware of any state that bars an authorized prescriber from dispensing the prescribed drug.

  • Toranth||

    Why are you obsessing about Christians?
    Don't you realize that the laws allowing funding of religious institutions (like schools) only apply if any similar institution can also get the funding? Why do you hate Muslim schools? Why do you hate private schools without religious affiliation?

    Or are you just prejudiced and bigoted?

  • Cyto||

    It is almost as if you never read anything about libertarians.

    Or conservatives. Or Kavanaugh. Or the Supreme Court.

  • Sevo||

    "(i) endorsing the widespread use of mandatory arbitration agreements, which effectively preclude access to the courts or administrative bodies in order to enforce federally-protected rights;"
    Simon, as do lefties in general, lies. There are no "mandatory arbitration agreements" and there is no evidence they do what you claim.

    " (ii) further limiting the negotiating and organizing power of unions;"
    A positive

    "(iii) deeming broader swaths of federal welfare benefits as either unlawful or unconstitutional;"
    Another positive

    " (iv) making it harder for the poor to participate effectively in elections;"
    A bullshit claim

    " (v) endorsing various police and prosecutorial abuses (like civil asset forfeiture, driver license suspensions for unpaid court fees, overcharging/plea agreements, etc.) that disproportionately burden people with less money;"
    Pulled that out of your ass, did you?

    "(vi) undermining the authority of agencies that exist to protect the health and welfare of the poor;"
    Pulled that out of your ass, too, did you?
    Fuck off, slaver.

  • SimonP||

    Sevo, like all clueless Reason commenters, ironically prefers to proffer bullshit than any attempt at reasoned argument.

    You can deem various conservative initiatives as "positives," but you cannot deny that they will ultimately erode the wealth, health, and power of the poor. You might be able to argue that that's actually better for the U.S. and its economy, as a whole. But you cannot argue that they won't get hosed. You should admit that's part of the point.

  • Sevo||

    "You can deem various conservative initiatives as "positives," but you cannot deny that they will ultimately erode the wealth, health, and power of the poor."

    Bullshit.
    Just like communism really helped 'the poor', right?
    Integrating 'the poor' into the workforce will do more than any welfare to help them.
    Stuff your propaganda up your butt.

  • SimonP||

    The "poor" I am talking about are already working. Do try to keep up.

  • Sevo||

    SimonP|10.6.18 @ 7:11PM|#
    "The "poor" I am talking about are already working. Do try to keep up'

    Yeah, I'm sure you 'meant' that...

  • Paloma||

    By the way, how do poor people suffer disproportionately from civil asset forfeiture? How is that even possible when they have very few assets to begin with? Which is, kind of what makes them poor?

  • SimonP||

    Har har. You clearly haven't been following the issue. Are you a libertarian?

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Nothing says libertarian like forced association with unions (your ii)), or forced redistribution of wealth (iii), and certainly the scientifically unfounded, economically illiterate, and empirically disproved benefit of those agencies which "exist to protect the health and welfare of the poor.(vi)" But we can toss in more forced association through the CRA, racial discrimination through Affirmative Action, and blatantly unconstitutional compelled commerce in the form of Barrycare (thankfully neutered by the tax reform bill).

  • geo1113||

    Spoken like a true "progressive".

  • SimonP||

    Spoken like a true useful idiot.

  • geo1113||

    Oh my. What a comeback. Get some original material.

  • SimonP||

    Like "Spoken like a true 'progressive'" was all that original?

  • HGW xx/7||

    Wait... you didn't change anything from his statement. You just used a synonym. So...are you agreeing with him? * scratches head *

  • Rock Lobster||

    I know you are, but what am I?

    *Whack!* Stop hitting yourself!
    *Whack!* Stop hitting yourself!
    *Whack!* Stop hitting yourself!

  • Echospinner||

    + that.

  • JesseAz||

    Everything you've said about kavanaugh has been wrong since day one. Streak appears to continue.

  • SimonP||

    You have been an unthinking moron as long as I've been familiar with the handle, so nothing new on that count, either.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    And you continue to be a cancer that deserves irradiation, so that hasn't changed as well.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    So, gloat away, useful idiots. The elite GOP is using you just like they always have.

    Anything that causes you and yours pain isn't all bad.

    You chuckleheads could have gone after him on legitimate questions of jurisprudence, but decided the memory-repression therapy meanderings of a few wine moms was the better way to go, because you're actually dumb enough to believe that Kavanaugh's appointment was the end of Roe.

    You deserve all the misery you're experiencing right now, and more. The good news is that you can end it all by jumping off a bridge.

  • BigT||

    "A whole lot of people posting here celebrating his victory are going to see him deciding cases against their interests."

    True. We recognize that. Come back and see how we bisembowel Brett's decisions then.

    But Kav is still better than what Fineswine was trying to do.

  • Ben_||

    Witch hunts lost. It's a good day for freedom.

    Maybe he learned what it's like to be unfairly targeted and that experience will guide his decision making.

  • Bronze Khopesh||

    I would not be surprised if some lefty with access to the Supreme Court chambers hides Kavanaugh's chair so he can't actually take his seat at the bench.

  • geo1113||

    Perhaps he will bring his own bar stool.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    Every justice will need a narrower chair when America's betters install at least two new justice in a few years.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Arthur L. Hicklib marinating in his delusions.

  • buybuydandavis||

    He'll just loom over RBH.

    The brute!

  • Crusty Juggler||

    So we have an avowed white male rapist in the White House and on the Supreme Court?

    Where my values gone?

  • Brett Bellmore||

    The same place as your dictionary with "avowed" in it?

  • John||

    Funny how Ford never accused him of rape but somehow people have convinced themselves she did

  • Crusty Juggler||

    He clearly raped her, John. And you know what they say: once a rapist, always a rapist.

  • Red Tony||

    STEVE SMITH NOT ALWAYS A RAPIST.

    SOMETIMES, STEVE SMITH A SLEEP.

    STEVE SMITH MADE PUN. DO YOU GET IT?

    IT'S FUNNY.

  • Hank Phillips||

    The Anti-Injunction law of 1867? That's a bludgeon in the hands of tax collectors to make Lysander Spooner bristle! Hizzonner is pushing looter enabling acts passed six years before the second Comstock Law--the one that put federal teeth and service pistols into christianofascist laws banning all birth control, peektures, Firestone sex toys, Margaret Sanger literature, motherly advice to daughters, and "disloyal" literature. We needed this guy like a stuffed owl.

  • John||

    If the Christofacist thst live under your bed are that powerful, why did it take them so long to take the courts?

  • Fancylad||

    christianofascist, banning all birth control, peektures, Firestone sex toys, Margaret Sanger literature, motherly advice to daughters, and "disloyal" literature
    Did the Amazing Atheist end his YouTube homily early today? Is the Daily Kos down? There's an awful lot of woke, kool-aide drinking true-believers in the comments.

  • DRM||

    So . . . Ginsburg is 84 years old, and fivethirtyeight thinks right now there's a 7-in-9 chance the Republicans keep the Senate in November.

    Justice Amy Coney Barrett, anyone?

  • geo1113||

    Would.

  • John||

    She is pretty cute in a MILF kind of way.

  • Bronze Khopesh||

    You want to enter the Catholic fold?

  • geo1113||

    Wouldn't be the first Catholic fold I've entered.

  • Rock Lobster||

    RBG? Really? Eeeew.

  • BigT||

    RBG will leave in a box.

  • buybuydandavis||

    Google likes to show a black and white photo of RBG. Probably from the 50s. Would.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    I would not...carry that coffin.

  • Unlabelable MJGreen||

    I'M SO HARRRRRDDDDDDDD

  • Crusty Juggler||

    We won! The libs lost!

  • buybuydandavis||

    So much winning!

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Trump won too.

    You motherfuckers refusing to give Trump credit where credit is udue.

  • John||

    Protesters are now at the steps of the Supreme Court yelling Kavanaugh must go.

    We throw around the term full retard around a lot on here. I think the left's actions during this are really worthy of the term

  • HGW xx/7||

    I dunno. Isn't that giving the genuinely (ie not willfully) retarded folks out there a bad name?

  • Red Tony||

    I personally think there are two types of retards.

    The first type are the people with genuine mental retardation–a disability, if you will. These people got dealt a bad hand, and they deserve pity and/or sympathy, not mockery. I genuinely feel bad for them, and if you want to refer to them as "differently abled" or something, I have no problem with that; these people got fucked at birth.

    The second type are people who seem to be functional in society–and then they open their mouths, and prove that they are, without a doubt, complete and utter RETARDS. They deserve nothing but scorn. They. Are. Retards.

    So if you want to give the first type a kinder, more P.C. name, I don't have a problem with that. But the second type are straight-up retards.

  • Tom Bombadil||

    Just like there are two kinds of Fags.

  • sarcasmic||

    What about the Trump worshipers who will be rubbing their "win" in the face of everyone who doesn't worship Trump? Don't they earn the term as well?

  • John||

    That is not retard. That is great fun

  • sarcasmic||

    And if the tables were turned you'd call it retarded, which is exactly may point. Thanks for agreeing with me and calling yourself a retard.

  • buybuydandavis||

    Cry more!

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Sarcasmic needs the world to burn for anarchyland to arrive.

    When the USA comes back from the brink of disaster a little bit, anarchyland gets farther and farther away for ananrchists like Sarcasmic.

    Hes playing his hand.

  • Fancylad||

    It's not that I like Trump, and I certainly don't worship him. It's that I hate modern progressivism and its followers. I genuinely believe that the woke are deluded, evil and insane.

    Their grief is my joy.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    That and in the USA we dont murder people of retarded Lefty political views. We mock them.

  • creech||

    Just talked to the local police chief. There's been 86 rapes in the county since Kavanaugh was confirmed this afternoon. The local university frat boys have a banner hanging downtown proclaiming "Tonite is Rape your Date Night!" Women in bars are being groped and dragged into the bushes. Streakers are wagging their dicks on Main Street. In many towns, this might just be known as "typical Saturday night" but here it's all due to our new Supreme Court unleashing the male barbarians. Bill Clinton and Harvey Weinstein have been set loose!

  • Fancylad||

    The DNC's acolytes actually believe this.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    The Lefties never explained why women would return to rape frat parties time and time again.

    Either women are fucking retards, women like being raped, or the tales are covered in bullshit Lefty lies.

  • AlmightyJB||

    How many women spontaneously combusted?

  • sarcasmic||

    I still can't understand getting emotionally involved in politics. People on both sides have tears running down their faces. Tears of joy for team Trump who will now act even more condescending and smarmy than usual, and tears of pain for team Choice who thinks one judge will single-handedly make all birth control illegal.

    It's so fucking stupid it makes my head hurt.

  • geo1113||

    One of the women who works for us was telling us she has been having a hard time finding a new beer. She went on to say Sam Adams is her favorite but since Cook gave money to Trump, she won't drink it. All I could think was 'you deprive yourself something you really enjoy over something so stupid.'

  • ||

    Maybe it's time we start telling such people to smarten up to their faces. Just say it.

  • geo1113||

    I would get fired if I did that. But it is a shame because I had been thinking she might be someone with whom I could hook up.

  • ||

    Yeh. If they're that facile stay away.

    Hey, I don't know you but I'm Canadian and give free advice on the internet.

  • geo1113||

    Appreciate the offer. However, I know who I am and am living the life I want.

    Could use a maid.

  • sarcasmic||

    Fucking coworkers often results in one being forced to leave when things go south as they inevitably do. Is a piece of ass worth your job?

  • AlmightyJB||

    Don't shit where you eat.

  • Cavadus||

    C'mon, dude. Rule #1: don't shit where you eat.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Dont fuck a subordinate either.

  • Lester224||

    Yep. Goes the same for the Trumpists burning their comfortable Nikes.

  • SimonP||

    If there is some truth in describing the gnashing of teeth over Kavanaugh's confirmation as "histrionic," it has something to do, at least, with the fact that abortion rights are already significantly burdened in this country, and contraception access already subject to the whims of employers, providers, and employees.

    We might assume, for sanity's sake, that an avowedly conservative Court will not adopt, wholesale, a constitutional "right to life" for unborn fetuses, which is the only way I can imagine they could manage to make all birth control illegal. But there's a lot they can and probably will still do, including: (i) adopting the view that regulatory regimes that effectively render abortion access impossible within multiple adjacent states still fall short of Casey's "undue burden" test; (ii) adopting an expansive approach to "religious liberty" that effectively entitles a wide range of employees, employers, landlords, etc., to choose not to deal with anyone on whatever religious grounds they might happen to cite (meaning, for instance, that a pharmacist could arbitrarily decide that, if you're not married, you don't get BC); and (iii) promoting efforts to defund and ostracize providers like Planned Parenthood that properly run contrary to the First Amendment.

  • Sevo||

    "...and contraception access already subject to the whims of employers, providers, and employees."
    Are you capable of posting without lying?

    "(i) adopting the view that regulatory regimes that effectively render abortion access impossible within multiple adjacent states still fall short of Casey's "undue burden" test;"
    Uh, no. The SCOTUS could do nothing of the sort, liar

    "(ii) adopting an expansive approach to "religious liberty" that effectively entitles a wide range of employees, employers, landlords, etc., to choose not to deal with anyone on whatever religious grounds they might happen to cite (meaning, for instance, that a pharmacist could arbitrarily decide that, if you're not married, you don't get BC);"
    You mean you'd have to PAY for your BC? The horror.

    "and (iii) promoting efforts to defund and ostracize providers like Planned Parenthood that properly run contrary to the First Amendment."
    No, not funding anything is not contrary to A1, you fucking ignoramus.

  • SimonP||

    Uh, no. The SCOTUS could do nothing of the sort, liar

    Follow the caselaw. States have been adopting regulatory regimes intentionally designed to shut down abortion clinics, and courts have only sometimes struck down these regimes as "undue burdens" on the right to abortion under existing law. All the SCOTUS needs to do is reason that these regimes are about women's safety, so that their impact on access to abortion is immaterial, and then every red state will follow suit.

    You mean you'd have to PAY for your BC? The horror.

    It's like you're not even reading what I've written. I'm not talking about employer-provided BC. I'm talking about a far broader range of services and access.

    No, not funding anything is not contrary to A1, you fucking ignoramus.

    Actually, choosing not to fund an organization based on its speech would be a violation of the First Amendment. But in any event, I'm not talking about efforts to defund PP, but rather collateral efforts designed to weaken PP by attacking anyone who chooses to do business with PP or to support PP - akin to Cuomo's efforts to attack the NRA.

  • Sevo||

    "Follow the caselaw. States have been adopting regulatory regimes intentionally designed to shut down abortion clinics, and courts have only sometimes struck down these regimes as "undue burdens" on the right to abortion under existing law. All the SCOTUS needs to do is reason that these regimes are about women's safety, so that their impact on access to abortion is immaterial, and then every red state will follow suit."
    So the SCOTUS can't do anything but decide whether the states are following the constitution?

    "It's like you're not even reading what I've written. I'm not talking about employer-provided BC. I'm talking about a far broader range of services and access."
    My mistake; you've been prattling on about how 'the poor' deserve everything for free so much, I missed your bullshit hypothetical.

    "Actually, choosing not to fund an organization based on its speech would be a violation of the First Amendment. But in any event, I'm not talking about efforts to defund PP, but rather collateral efforts designed to weaken PP by attacking anyone who chooses to do business with PP or to support PP - akin to Cuomo's efforts to attack the NRA."
    Uh, the SCOTUS has nothing to do with that.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Abortion is not protected by the constitution.

    You want abortion protected, get a 3/4 majority of states ot amend the constitution and protect it.

    Unless you do, there is about to be a nation discussion about abortion again soon. Rightly so since this is a democratic constitutonal republic.

  • ||

    (ii) adopting an expansive approach to "religious liberty" that effectively entitles a wide range of employees, employers, landlords, etc., to choose not to deal with anyone on whatever religious grounds they might happen to cite (meaning, for instance, that a pharmacist could arbitrarily decide that, if you're not married, you don't get BC);

    I'll take 'Things Likely Never Will Happen except in the mind of a pant shitting progressive who ran out of toilet paper' for $600, Alex.

    As if government programs aren't 'arbitrary' in their premise and application.

  • I'm Not Sure||

    "and contraception access already subject to the whims of employers"

    This is just retarded. How can an employer (on a whim, no less) stop someone from acquiring contraceptives, who decides to get them?

  • BigT||

    Happened to me. My boss was in front of me in line and bought the last extra large condoms. ;>)

  • JesseAz||

    Simon, you'll be shocked to learn what most countries have as the baseline abortion. Very few people like the murder of a 5 month old in utero child.

  • Barnstormer||

    "contraception access already subject to the whims of employers, providers, and employees....."

    This is just sorta trolling, right? Nobody can really be this stupid.

  • sarcasmic||

    How can someone have access to something that isn't free? What if they're broke because they spent all their money on stuff that they want? Then they don't have access. That just isn't fair. Basic needs should be free so people can spend their money on things that they want.

  • Sevo||

    A newbie is gonna think you're serious...

  • Rock Lobster||

    Wow! That guy sarcasmic is super woke. I wanna be just like him. Thank Government Almighty I found this nifty site for true Woketarians!

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    it has something to do, at least, with the fact that abortion rights are already significantly burdened in this country

    Considering that the majority of this country supports having at least some restrictions on abortion, this is irrelevant.

  • DRM||

    abortion rights are already significantly burdened in this country

    So, since you don't like this country's approach, would you prefer the German, French, Italian, Japanese, Polish, or Spanish laws?

  • BigT||

    Spanish fly, French ticklers, Japanese roboporn for all!

  • Ken Shultz||

    I think social justice warriors failing to shut down civil society with mere accusations of bigotry, misogyny, homophobia, etc. (accusations any of us could be subjected to at any time for things we did and said as minors) is something worth celebrating.

    This isn't about politics for me. If it were, I might have opposed Kavanaugh's confirmation.

    This is about standards and principles.

  • ||

    Absolutely.

  • sarcasmic||

    Good point.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    But hardly a new point.

  • JesseAz||

    Sarcasmic.. you've been pretty emotional in these threads dude.

  • sarcasmic||

    You need to get your head checked if you think I've been emotional. Yeah I can get defensive when retards start calling me names instead of addressing my arguments, but that's not getting emotional about the topic.

  • Rock Lobster||

    Sorry dude. You just lack all judicial temperament. No sweat, though. The priesthood ain't for everyone. You'd still make a fine senator.

  • Azathoth!!||

    I still can't understand getting emotionally involved in politics. People on both sides have tears running down their faces. Tears of joy for team Trump who will now act even more condescending and smarmy than usual, and tears of pain for team Choice who thinks one judge will single-handedly make all birth control illegal.

    It's so fucking stupid it makes my head hurt.

    Such yummy tears!

    Keep 'em coming, sarc.

    And, while you're at it, shed a few for who you were, before TDS.

  • Weigel's Cock Ring||

    I just wish everyone in America could have heard those fucking lunatics screaming in the senate gallery during the roll call and could see them now looking they're waiting to attack Kavanaugh's escape vehicle to see just how insane these leftards really are.

  • geo1113||

    You can't blame them. Kavanaugh is literally going to kill millions of women!

  • ||

    That was the sound of the world ending.

    Lol.

  • Unlabelable MJGreen||

    "So, the Republic and American principles survived the social justice warriors for now."

    "Civilization wins."

    "social justice warriors... shut[ting] down civil society"

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    You mad? It was just a job interview...

  • Sevo||

    Perhaps "unlabelable" isn't.

  • ||

    To the extent there was a *winner*, they had to confirm him. If they didn't, it would have signalled this is the way to get what you want. And that would have been terrible for the system in the long run.

    It was never about Ford or whatever happened to her (if anything). It was about keeping a conservative out of SCOTUS. Democrats just didn't want to lose the balance of power.

  • Ken Shultz||

    +1

  • AlmightyJB||

    Yup

  • Echospinner||

    Both Republicans and Democrats want to expand the power of government and control our lives, just in different ways. So I do not care so much who won. If it were not him would have been another.

    This fight was ugly and stupid even by the usual disgusting standards. Every time I think the bar has been set so low it cannot sink any further it does.

    I am just glad it is over.

  • Deconstructed Potato||

    I definitely wouldn't have picked Mr. Patriot Act himself for SCOTUS but I only oppose his appointment on things directly relevant to his judgeship.

    My sister and her boyfriend referred to him earlier as a "sex offender" and declared enthusiastically that "he's been found guilty". I looked up and said, "oh, has there been a trial?" It's chilling how readily people abandon any pretence of deference to due process and will believe anything they want to. From talking to them further I realised that they very much live in a bubble of intense social media garbage that relentlessly pushes a "by any means necessary", highly cynical and provocative approach to browbeating, ridiculing, and shaming the out group, and anyone who dare question the narrative. I don't expose myself to that kind of thing willingly so it was a very strange experience hearing some of what they have accepted as actual facts with no proof other than conspiracy theories that pander to their prejudices. I understand how people are influenced by that, and just how powerful and ruthless the coercion to conform is. Unsettling, chilling, and something I want to be far away from.

  • ||

    That's another lesson in all this. Irrationality is in shallow waters and lurks to close to our sane selves.

    They were fooled into thinking this is about rape and it never was. But they were more than ready to sacrifice possibly an innocent life (indeed any life really) so as to satisfy their tribal narrative.

  • Rock Lobster||

    Identity politics is useful for the useful idiots.

  • ShotgunJimbo||

    +1

    I have a handful of liberal friends who basically considered him convicted at the allegation.

    When I ask them "what evidence is there, how is he guilty, what happened to innocent until PROVEN guilty" they all just throw back "but he was CREDIBLY ACCUSED"...

    Honestly it's scary the left-wing brain washing that is happening.

  • Michael Ejercito||

    I wonder if thry had heard if the Innocence Project.

  • Sevo||

    "I wonder if thry had heard if the Innocence Project."

    Certainly! But it in no way applies to anyone nominated by Trump! Guilty, guilty, guilty!

  • Rock Lobster||

    Sure. First you throw the accused into the water, and if he floats you pull the guilty bastard out and burn him alive. If he drowns, he's innocent and can therefore go about his business.

    The last part is the Innocence Project, right?

  • Derp-o-Matic 6000||

    It's been four hours, and SCROTUS has already ruled all abortions illegal, reinstituted slavery, and ceded all judicial decision-making power to Trump. God help us for what comes next.

  • Don't look at me!||

    Just out: the court declares all women must make sammiches in demand. A gloriously day for mankind!

  • Rock Lobster||

    Well it's about Goddamned time. I've been starving ever since Scalia died.

  • I'm Not Sure||

  • Eddy||

    I guess the Onion decided humor was hard, so they're just going to mock blame Dem setbacks on alleged failure to prog hard enough.

  • Eddy||

    So the blame goes to

    1) Avenatti for muddying the waters (see above)

    2) Feinstein for not fighting hard enough, by gum (what a wimp, amirite?)

    3) Collins for betraying her fellow womynfolk.

    4) The Kochs (see discussion above)

    5) (watch this space, this is so bad there have to be a lot of culprits to blame)

  • Eddy||

    Wait, the Kochs didn't seem to come up in the discussion I mentioned, so I guess #4 should be corporations.

  • Sevo||

    Somebody was posting in a Kav thread a day or so ago claiming that Kavanaugh has been supported all along by 'the Koch brothers and other 1%ers!'

  • Eddy||

    That's right, then some wise guy said the Kochs obviously weren't getting their money's worth from Reason.

  • Sevo||

    I'm betting you left out "(ahem)".

  • Cyto||

    MSNBC was on this hard all day.

    The only reason the swing vote republicans voted for him was because big money was flowing in from super wealthy special interests, especially the Kochs.

    They were discussing which republicans would pay the price for their votes and the consensus was that the Kochs would be sending millions their way to protect them from any fallout. It is a foregone conclusion.

  • Sevo||

    Cyto|10.6.18 @ 11:29PM|#
    "MSNBC was on this hard all day."

    I was stuck in a waiting room in SF last week. This is SF, so the TV was tuned to CNN. I'd brought a book, but like sitting in a pep-rally in a library, you could forget reading there.
    Let's start here: I do not watch TV "news", including Fox. I'd guess them to be as biased as most of the other channels, but to the right rather than the left (for nearly ALL of the other channels).
    Anyhow, the discussion among the talking heads concerned how Kavanaugh was to be buried, since it was obvious that he'd been killed by the 'testimony' of the 'recovered-memory' twat. No other options were considered.
    No, I didn't tell the lefty assholes in the waiting room it really wasn't over, but I'm sorry I wasn't there today

  • Rock Lobster||

    And to be sure, all of their reporting is subject to verification in adherence to the strictest Democratic standards of evidence.

  • I'm Not Sure||

    Progging is hard work. What do you think- everybody agrees that they're too stupid to run their lives without them?

  • AlmightyJB||

    He murdered me. I just now remembered it was him. 100% sure.

  • Eddy||

    "I got better."

  • Don't look at me!||

    Your story is on alignment with other stories that have been told.

  • Rock Lobster||

    Thank God!

    Now we can put the livestock back in the kitchen, put the wimmins back in the corral, send all the Mexicans back to Africa where they belong, roast live kittens over dirty coal fires in our front yards, and randomly wave our private parts at everyone's aunties with absolute impunity!

    Now where's my wife? Make me a sammich, damn it!

  • sharmota4zeb||

    You must have missed the debate over ass cracks and food establishments. The goverment can cite health and safety concerns to mandate colthing over genitals and butts, however breasts, including female nipples, can be exposed at will thanks to freedom of speech.

  • Rock Lobster||

    Not anymore. Kavanaugh is strong on the First Amendment. Naked Ass cracks and labia are fine in the kitchen now, although the government retains a compelling interest in mandating the use of hair nets in the case of excessively hirsute honeys. It's for the children.

  • Don't look at me!||

    Nothing better than roasted live kitties.

  • Rock Lobster||

    Especially when they are served between two slices of bread*, properly salted with the tears of one of the womyn in your harem, who are compelled by law to bring such delicacies to you on demand.

    Happy days are here again!

    (*white, of course)

  • Rob Misek||

    Do you think the Democrats learned about due process?

    Me neither.

  • Sevo||

    Rob Misek|10.6.18 @ 8:59PM|#
    "Do you think the Democrats learned about due process?"

    Do you think the Ds learned to quit whining about Trump being elected?
    Me, neither.

  • kfs||

    Well, well, well, it took a billionaire real estate developer from NYC to show the Republicans how to grow a pair. Who the fuck thought they would see that ? I haven't been this proud to be a (upstate) New Yorker in some time. The Democrats have moved so far to the left, that they made a liberal republican from Maine look like a paleo conservative.

    The Republicans need to : 1. Prosecute Ms. Ford for perjury.
    2. Find out what prog scum leaked her letter and prosecute them.

    These Democrat ass clowns need to taught a lesson so they never pull a stunt like this again!

  • SIV||

    A lesson that utilizes helicopters

  • Rock Lobster||

    Or tracks. Now that's an idea they can really wrap their head around.

  • Cyto||

    The gossip is that it was Chuck Shumer's staff that did the actual leaking.

    I'll give you three guesses where Shumer's office would have gotten the letter.... and the first two don't count.

  • SIV||

    Red-blooded Americans 1

    Lyin' ho-bags 0

  • sharmota4zeb||

    Off the topic, the Wall Street Journal reported that the president of Interpol is missing.

    ...

    Ah, common guys. Don't look at me like that. I swear, I had nothing to do with the kidnapping of the head of Interpol.

  • Don't look at me!||

    What about the nutsack of Interpol, is that missing too?

  • Sevo||

    He is Chinese and has disappeared on his return to China. The Chinese gov't can make people disappear quite easily; 'the most transparent administration evah!!!'
    Obo wasn't as bad as the Chicoms, except for his constant lying.

  • sharmota4zeb||

    :)

  • Eddy||

    I tried to whip myself into enthusiasm over this, but what I managed instead was (a) relief that a worse justice wasn't appointed, and (b) some schedenfreude (sp?) at the discomfiture of the other side. That's good enough, I suppose, no point having a reverse-freakout. There's no guarantee this justice will be a Solomon. It's enough for now he's not Anthony Kennedy 2.0.

  • Sevo||

    "It's enough for now he's not Anthony Kennedy 2.0."
    Agreed as regards the guy, but it's my opinion that he was "#RESISTED" purely because Trump nominated him; the rest is red herring bullshit.
    Now it has been a year and a half since Trump was inaugurated, and the left (witness Tony and Hihn, for pete's sake) still refuses to accept he was elected.
    As mentioned above, I didn't vote for him, but he's been better on libertarian issues than any POTUS in my experience.
    So, pace your schadenfreude comment, it's enjoyable ramming it down the throats of Tony, Hihn, et al. T

  • Echospinner||

    It is the same old story for us. There are some issues where we can more or less agree with republicans and others with democrats but neither are anything close to libertarian. Not much has changed really. Neither party has actual principles just different tactics for getting votes and power.

  • Sevo||

    Echospinner|10.6.18 @ 11:27PM|#
    "It is the same old story for us. There are some issues where we can more or less agree with republicans and others with democrats but neither are anything close to libertarian. Not much has changed really. Neither party has actual principles just different tactics for getting votes and power."

    The lack of principles isn't in question here (except for some dedicated Rs and other dedicated Ds), but by accident or design the POTUS we got is doing better than any in memory.
    Admittedly, he's blowing his rep on tariffs, but there is a theory that is strictly a negotiating tool, and regardless of the spotty damage to US companies (and yes, 'farmers' are companies), the market's response says that's a common opinion.
    I don't know, but regardless, he's got Obo, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, Carter beat all hollow. I'll take it, and screw the snobs who want to take points for style (like the lying twit above).

  • Cyto||

    "Because Trump nominated him" was third or fourth on Charles Schumer's list of reasons Kavanaugh doesn't belong on the court.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    We stared at the abyss and we backed away. That's a win. But I am enjoying all of the sour grapes from the wokatarians who threw their principles overboard at the earliest convenience. I guess mob rule is fine as long as you think you're part of the mob.

  • Echospinner||

    That is true.

    But what did we see if not ourselves.

    "When you stare at the abyss the abyss stares back at you"

    FN.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Civilization is what stands between us and our natures. We did not stop being the selfish, uncaring (but non-malicious) creatures of our infancies, or our vile, cruel selves of our junior high days. We learned that bad things happen if we allow that part of ourselves to control us. Of course we'd see ourselves looking back, our emotional, irrational selves.

  • Sevo||

    NotAnotherSkippy|10.7.18 @ 12:08AM|#
    "Civilization is what stands between us and our natures."

    Not sure.
    When does it become obvious that self-interest is opposed to what you qualify a 'nature'.
    I lean more toward when reason (drink!) suggests that self-interest is better served by cooperation. Civilization results from that, rather than leading to it.

  • Echospinner||

    It begins and ends with you and I Sevo. Just two strangers talking.

    "Do not do to another what is hateful unto you. The rest is commentary. Now go learn."

    Hillel the elder

    Libertarians see the world in a different perspective. A way of seeing each other as individuals, not a collective identity.

  • newshutz||

    In Soviet Union, the abyss stares at you whether you are looking or not.

  • Lost in the Woods||

    Yes, well said

  • CE||

    He's way worse than Kennedy.

  • DRM||

    He could have been Anthony Kennedy 2.0; he was a pure-Establishment Republican who clerked for Kennedy, and the center of the Court is where you wield power and influence. Starting out at Roberts and "evolving" leftward over the next five years was entirely plausible, especially if a lot of moderate Democratic Senators crossed over to vote for him.

    But now? Hah. The left will never forgive him for surviving their slander. They'll ostracize him, which means all his pleasant social contact with the legal establishment (outside the Court itself), and all the positive media coverage he sees, is going to be from the right. That social milieu will cement his position on the right.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    I'm over it.

  • Seamus||

    Where's Rev.? I thought sure he'd be here telling us, "Just wait till November," "Carry on, clingers," and "We'd have pulled it off, too, if it hadn't been for you meddlesome white women who fail to embrace sisterhood with Christine Ford."

  • HGW xx/7||

    I think you have to say his name three times in front of a mirror. Should do the trick.

  • Michael Ejercito||

    Like with Biggie Smalls?

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Bringin the room down a little bit, Boards of Canada - Kid for a day.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    This one feels rapey. sl.drft - let.loose

  • Echospinner||

    A flute master you are. Given country music topic discussed on this thread.

    This masterpiece cannot be ignored.

    https://youtu.be/nBhpiUFSYWI

  • Sevo||

    BTW, I always consult washed-up 70s rockers for my political views:

    "Cher: Our Lives Will Never Be the Same If 'F*cking Train Wreck' Kavanaugh Confirmed"
    [...]
    "In her latest string of all-caps tweets filled with emojis, the Mamma Mia! star claimed that Kavanaugh's confirmation would lead to the repression of LGBT people, an overturn of Roe vs Wade, people of color losing the right to vote, and a situation where Trump would have immunity from criminal prosecution."
    https://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywood/
    2018/09/05/cher-fcking-train-wreck
    -kavanaugh-confirmed/

    The photo suggests she ought to consult a mirror for advice on cosmetic surgeons.

  • JeremyR||

    Was Cher ever a "rocker"?

  • AlmightyJB||

    She rocked this outfit.

    https://youtu.be/Z6E98ZRaU1s

  • Dread Pirate Roberts||

    Democrats haven't been this enraged since Lincoln freed the slaves.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    +1

  • U. R. Huyulov||

    I'm expecting that Democrat AGs (and possibly future Dem presidents) will just refuse to abide by any SCOTUS decision they don't like where Kavanaugh was the deciding vote. Using any number of talking points as justification: the lack of 60 votes requirement for confirmation, the "partisan temperament", etc.

    Sound out there? Yeah, it does. But the notion that an evidence-free accusation from decades ago was enough to render a SCOTUS nominee unconfirmable seemed pretty out there a few months ago.

  • Bronze Khopesh||

    Jeb!

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Kavanaugh! Kavanaugh! Kavanaugh!

  • esteve7||

    As I've said before: Democrats --- Sore losers since 1860.

    If they are like this now, wait until RBG retires.

    Also what a miraculous own goal. They drummed up fake allegations so they could create another war on women, then win the election and keep the court 4-4 until Trump wins in 2020. Instead it looks like the GOP will gain senate seats...

  • vek||

    Or RBG dies. I keep hoping that 2 of the lefties on the court die in the near future... The LOLz from watching the lefties freak out would be epic.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    RBG will definitely croak in the next 6.5 years.

    Breyer probably will croak.

    I think Thomas will retire, so one more pick for Trump.

  • Weigel's Cock Ring||

    Many of our resident leftie commenters like Dipshit Dave Weigel and Chemjeff Status Quo Collectivist are so depressed they can't even bring themselves here.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    Oh Mikey.
    That was a pretty lame bait even for you.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    We will see how much gloating our Reason Republican colleagues will be engaged in when Kavanaugh votes for more domestic spying. I'm sure someone will come up with a novel theory on why it's all the Dems' fault when that happens.

  • Uncle Adolf's Gas and Grill||

    Look, if it upsets you that much, post your address and I'll be glad to mail you a hanky. A nice pink one to go with your politics.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    It's so hilarious and sad that so many people have fallen into the two-party trap that they think "anti-right" must necessarily mean "pro-left".

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    Wait wait let me guess what the rejoinder will be...

    "Sure the Republicans are bad, but the Democrats are an EXISTENTIAL THREAT TO THE REPUBLIC ITSELF!!!!!"

    When I read comments like this, it just tells me that the poster is either (1) born sometime after 1990 and/or has a very shallow knowledge of history, and therefore has no real knowledge of how bad the Republicans can be, and/or (2) falls easily for the fear-mongering Republican propaganda BS that they routinely send out

  • Uncle Adolf's Gas and Grill||

    Aw, you're so cute when you're angry!

    Coochie! Coochie! Coo!

  • vek||

    Ugh.

    But the Democrats ARE an existential threat to the republic!

    They don't believe in free speech. They don't believe in the right to self defense.

    If those were the ONLY 2 things that would be enough to destroy the entire fabric of this country. But they also believe in massive wealth redistribution, they hate the free market economy, they won't even tolerate honest debate on any of their pet issues, they encourage ANTIFA violence and dare not denounce them, etc. One could go on for days.

    In a perfect world the 2 major parties in America would be the Republicans facing off against the Libertarians. That is the perfect political spectrum of debate IMO. The Dems are not the Dems of 1990 anymore, when one could almost make an argument that the Rs and Ds were equally bad, but in different ways.

    There is NO equivalency anymore.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    They don't believe in free speech. They don't believe in the right to self defense.

    Now do Republicans!

    You are being unfairly harsh towards Democrats, and being unfairly kind to Republicans. Which is what I would expect from someone who is still stuck in the dualist tribalism trap.

    Remember when that anonymous NYT op-ed appeared? How many Republicans wanted the author to be charged with sedition? Gee that's some stalwart support for free speech right there, isn't it?

    In a perfect world the 2 major parties in America would be the Republicans facing off against the Libertarians

    Gee, in a perfect world, maybe there would be more than just two points of view up for consideration? Ya think?

    There is NO equivalency anymore.

    They're not equivalent, but neither one is worth defending. Why even bother?

    You realize that the people who got us into the war in Iraq, the big-spending cronyists, the ones who pushed through the Patriot Act and who justify domestic spying, they are still around, right? Give it another few years, when Iraq is a distant memory, and they will be beating the war drums again. Why enable these people?

  • Azathoth!!||

    Remember when that anonymous NYT op-ed appeared? How many Republicans wanted the author to be charged with sedition? Gee that's some stalwart support for free speech right there, isn't it?

    Not for talking, Jeff.

    For actively working to engender a coup.

    Do you not get that? SAY whatever you want.

    And when you tell everyone that you're actively working to foment a coup you're SAYING what you want to say.

    But what you're DOING is the problem.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    Just admit it:

    You hate the left more than you support liberty.

  • Sevo||

    "You hate the left more than you support liberty."

    Hating the left IS supporting liberty.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    Even when the left is supporting criminal justice reform? Opposing the death penalty? Supporting marijuana legalization?

  • Azathoth!!||

    Even when the left is supporting criminal justice reform? Opposing the death penalty? Supporting marijuana legalization?

    They're not.

    They're saying things they think useful idiots want to hear. They're saying it so they'll vote for them and give the left what is the prime tenet--attainment of power.

    But you can't see that.

    Because you believe.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    They're saying things they think useful idiots want to hear. They're saying it so they'll vote for them and give the left what is the prime tenet--attainment of power.

    Oh I see. So you have constructed a non-falsifiable hypothesis about how The Left operates.

    When they do something that libertarians oppose, it's because they're evil.
    But when they do something that libertarians might support, it's because they're lying, because they are evil.

    Either way - evil! How convenient.

    Funny how this analysis is never applied to The Right.

    So when Republicans talk about, say, their opposition to abortion, it can't possibly be because they have sincere moral objections to the taking of a human life. Oh no, it's because "[t]hey're saying things they think useful idiots want to hear. They're saying it so they'll vote for them and give the left right what is the prime tenet--attainment of power."

    So what makes The Left "evil" but The Right just occasionally misguided, but not evil?

  • Azathoth!!||

    The left never does anything libertarians might support. Because everything they do comes from a desire for power over people. They need this power because they seek to fundamentally rework human nature. They SAY this openly, Jeff--that they must change how people think.

    The 'right' is not motivated by the lust for power. It doesn't need to be.

    Individual empowerment can--and has continued to happen--in the face of relentless attempts to undermine it.

    Individual freedom, personal responsibility, individual liberty.

    The keyword, Jeff, is INDIVIDUAL.

    It's a word you mouth, but one I suspect you really don't grasp.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    There we go again, the black/white dualist thinking. Please, put down the comic book stereotypes.

    The 'right' is not motivated by the lust for power. It doesn't need to be.

    You're kidding, right?

    Do you want to know why they continue to support ever-increasing spending? Why they deliberately rile up their base with inflammatory culture war issues that can't really be solved by any government program anyway? Why they continually support restrictive ballot access laws? It's true for both Team Blue and Team Red - it's to maintain their grips on power. Take a look at public choice theory.

    Individual freedom, personal responsibility, individual liberty.

    That describes libertarians. You think it describes Republicans?

    How many times do they have to support banning light bulbs, expanding the surveillance state, demanding conformity to patriotic correctness, expanding the drug war, expanding the police state, before you start to think "hey, maybe those Republicans aren't as down on individual liberty as I thought"?

    For heaven's sake the guy in charge of the Republicans is a guy who proudly and openly said "I love eminent domain". Is THAT consistent with "individual freedom, personal responsibility, individual liberty"?

    If you truly care about individual liberty, then stop being such a suckup to Team Red. BOTH TEAMS ARE TERRIBLE ON THIS SCORE. Are they "equivalently" terrible? No. But they are both bad enough.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    The left never does anything libertarians might support.

    Of course not. This follows from your non-falsifiable hypothesis that The Left is evil no matter what it does.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    See, Azathoth, you are exemplifying precisely the paranoid nuttiness that drove me away from the right. You can't see your opponents as people. They are just cardboard one-dimensional caricatures which are basically indistinguishable from Stalin. That is just absurd and wrong.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    You can't see your opponents as people. They are just cardboard one-dimensional caricatures which are basically indistinguishable from Stalin.

    Don't whine like a bitch just because the left is getting a taste of it's own medicine.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    Because two wrongs make a right! Amirite?

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Talk about begging the question.

  • Azathoth!!||

    Here is a clue to your problem.

    You are seeing 'Republican' when I write 'right'.

    When I use the term 'right', I am referring to those ideas that are anti-authoritarian, anti-totalitarian, and above all, anti-collectivist.

    And I am using the term 'collectivist' to refer to those who see people as cogs in a machine that they call 'society'.

    I do not consider using terms people apply to themselves as 'collectivizing' People form groups of all sorts. Forming into groups isn't a problem--it's being forced into groups that is.

    People who hold and work to fulfill authoritarian, totalitarian, and collectivist beliefs ARE evil.

    Unlike you, a collectivist, I do not assign them a group other than the one their self professed ideas makes them members of.

    They can be Republicans or Democrats, Jeff. If they are pursuing goals of the left, then they are leftists.

    con't

  • Azathoth!!||

    con't

    You see this as me trying to 'absolve' the right' (or possibly the Republicans, you make it difficult to tell).

    But I am not.

    I am assigning IDEAS their place on the spectrum. This insane notion that all political ideas (except those of enlightened anarcho-socialists, of course) warp around to the same end the way modern political thought pretends the 'far left' and the 'far right' do is nothing short of moronic.

    The idea that extremes of to wildly different political concepts converge can only be explained when one notices that it happens because stated ideas of one are being assigned to the extreme edges of the other.

    Collectivism has no place on the 'right' at all. None. It is rejected with the very first step 'rightward'--so why are so many collectivist beliefs, racism, sexism, nationalism ad infinitum so easily accepted as rising from an extremely individualistic mindset?

    Likewise authoritarianism. Extreme authoritarianism on the right can ONLY be the ultimate authority over oneself and one's possessions--it CANNOT extend to others because at the very base, the 'right' explicitly accepts that one has no authority over that which does not belong to one.

    You need to reject the 'horseshoe' or 'convergent' idea, Jeff. It's not real.

    It's an attempt, by leftists, to absolve themselves of the excesses of their belief structure and a means to hamstring the progression of individual liberty.

    Let's have one more 'con't', shall we?

    con't

  • Azathoth!!||

    con't

    The thing that makes the left evil is that they WANT all those perks of individual liberty--as all people do.

    But they see them as something that only the elites, the ruling class, should have. This is why, in leftist circles, everyone supposes that they'll be leaders in the Party because of their loyalty and orthodoxy before the Revolution.

    After the Revolution, the now happy proles will accept the leadership of the Party--which is always looking out for the proles, of course--and provide the Party with the comfortable life their hard work on behalf of the People merits.

    This is, quite literally, the underlying structure of EVERY communist country that has ever existed. It is, in quieter format, the underlying structure of every socialist country that has ever existed--and it is seeping into the American worldview.

    And it leads to misery and death.

    THAT is why the left is evil.

  • vek||

    Jeff, you mistake my absolute hatred for the Democrats as me thinking the Republicans are PERFECT.

    They're not. They're a dumpster fire. As I said, the perfect spectrum of debate IMO is between where the Republicans are, and Libertarian purists. I would be waaay towards the libertarian end of that spectrum.

    To put it another way: The Democrats are like a serial child rapist/murderer, while the Republicans are like a car thief. The car thief is not very awesome... But it is CONSIDERABLY better than the child rapist.

    I've never voted for a Republican for president in my entire life, always Libertarian. As I said, the Dems are not the Dems of the 1990s anymore. They've gone off the deep end, and the one or two issues they're okay on are completely countered by them being batshit crazy on everything else. The Republicans are theoretically better on everything but drug legalization, and abortion if you're into that sort of thing.

    The Dems are just as pro war, bigger spenders, and no longer even feign support for most civil liberties. I will continue to vote Libertarian and/or Republican as applicable when I vote. But I can't stomach any Dems that come from the party as it currently exists.

  • Nardz||

    "It's so hilarious and sad that so many people have fallen into the two-party trap that they think "anti-right" must necessarily mean "pro-left".

    Coming from the guy who exclusively posts from a binary perspective.
    You are the most collectivist thinker here (yes, more than Tony), and it isn't even close.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    We will see how much gloating our Reason Republican colleagues will be engaged in when Kavanaugh votes for more domestic spying. I'm sure someone will come up with a novel theory on why it's all the Dems' fault when that happens

    Well, they could have gone after him on domestic spying, but they chose not to. Instead, they grandstanded about their stupid pet causes during the hearing, most notably MUH ABORSHUN, and then brought out a desperate last-second gambit to paint him as a serial rapist, effectively tarnishing his appointment in the process.

    And yes, this is the Dems' fault. They could have drawn a line in the sand and said, "enough, we can't continue to go along with these programs." They could have staked out an actual opposition stance and declared that Kavanaugh's support of said programs was something they simply couldn't countenance, and hammered on THAT for the last month. But they didn't. That's their fault, not the Republicans.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    And yes, this is the Dems' fault.

    Of course it is. It's always the Dems' fault.

    When Republicans vote for a judge that hates the Fourth Amendment, it's the Dems' fault for not stopping them.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    "The Dems made me vote against the Fourth Amendment! It's all their fault!!!!"

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    You're desperately flailing here.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    You know, Red, the Republicans could have objected to Kavanaugh's nomination on Fourth Amendment grounds, or on any other grounds, before Ford ever showed up. Why didn't they? Was that the Dems' fault too? I guess it was the Dems' fault for not bringing up domestic spying as an issue, because otherwise the Republicans wouldn't have had the agency to come up with the idea on their own, I suppose. Is that it?

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    I'd say it's more telling that you're so ass-mad that the Dems failed to railroad Kavanaugh over spurious sexual assault charges.

  • BigT||

    Come back when that happens and you will hear us carving Kav a new asshole.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    I also think that this entire episode has revealed that both tribes now think of SCOTUS in more or less partisan terms. They don't really want "impartial judges", they want liberal judges or conservative judges. If that's the case then I think it's time to reflect reality and treat SCOTUS like the partisan office that it really is, and put term limits on SCOTUS judges (and probably on all federal judges too).

  • vek||

    It's ALWAYS been partisan. It can only ever BE partisan. The only way it could not be that way is if every judge elected were a squishy moderate, because peoples personal politics ALWAYS influence their thinking.

    As far as term limits, it wouldn't be horrible. Come up with a schedule where they serve a long time, maybe 16 years? Space them out so they're coming up every 2 years so every admit gets to do 2 appointments per presidential term or something. It wouldn't be horrible. The key thing is to not make it easy to remove them, which was to protect their independence from the other branches.

  • CE||

    Just set a mandatory retirement age at 70.

  • Azathoth!!||

    Has it?

    Sotomayor was confirmed 68-31

    Kagan? 63-37

    Ginsburg? 96-3

    I looked over the list of Supreme Court nominees that didn't make it since the founding of the Republican party and all but one of the nominating presidents was Republican.

    And even the one Democrat nominee was shot down by other Democrats.

    There's a party that clearly thinks in partisan terms about SCOTUS, Jeff, but it's pretty clear it's not the GOP.

  • MatthewSlyfield||

    Other than Ginsberg's near unanimous confirmation, that doesn't mean anything without knowing the party breakdown of the Senate at the time of those confirmation votes.

    The Senate that confirmed Sotomayor and Kagan, was 57/41 Dem majority, so 63/31 and 63/37 are not that far off a party line vote.

  • MatthewSlyfield||

    Correction 68/31

  • MatthewSlyfield||

    Correction 68/31

  • Azathoth!!||

    Interesting how you just skipped over this--

    I looked over the list of Supreme Court nominees that didn't make it since the founding of the Republican party and all but one of the nominating presidents was Republican.

    All but one.

    That's kinda telling.

  • vek||

    Thank god. If the Republicans had backed down on this it would have destroyed their own chances in the mid terms, and emboldened the Democrats to pull this shit every single time they didn't like anymore for any office or appointment.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    "Because libertarians should be worried if Republicans lose an election!"

  • vek||

    With Democrats like we have in 2018, they sure should be.

    It's basically turning into a vote for The Red Brigade, or a squishy center right party that at least somewhat believes in freedom. If the Dems ever return to sanity we can readdress the subject.

  • BigT||

    The Donkeys will just prepare their rape or race-baiting witnesses better next time. This was a near miss, not a strategic defeat.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    It will be a strategic defeat when Democrats lose numerous seats in election 2018. The kavanaugh fight just reinforced the Lefty plan for unreasonableness to most Americans.

    Election 2018 will be a bloodbath for Democrats.

  • WJack||

    Two more and the future of the country will be assured for the next few decades.

  • Brett Bellmore||

    One more and as soon as there's a Democratic Congress and President, they'll pack the Court without a moment's hesitation.

  • Michael Ejercito||

    Which, of course, will escalate.

  • CE||

    I'm not sure saying you saw someone at a party sometime in the 1980s is an "accusation of wrongdoing".

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Brett Kavanaugh Confirmed, Sworn In. Now, Here's A Look At His Record
    -NPR

    Here's is the quintessential Lefty view of how things run.

    Attack attack attack! When that fails and the person is confirmed, look at their bureaucratic record.

  • JeffreyL||

    If I was Justice Kavanaugh, the one press release i would have put out this morning would be in regards to clerkships. I would have put out the statement that I have read the letter from law school professors that thought i was unfit for the position, and that if you include a letter of rec from any of them, you are automatically disqualified and in addition, i will never hire a clerk from Harvard or Yale. Recommend you go elsewhere for you potential clerkships.

  • majil||

    The Leftist Democrats are fucking crazy. Trump is an idiot? fine, but you want to put these people that scream and harass anyone that disagrees with them ? You want these Infantile nuts running things ?

  • Lester224||

    This must be enormously comforting for all the conservative preppies who drank too much in their youth. They too, can become federal and supreme court justices.

  • JeffreyL||

    Actually good teaching moment. Alot of regressive's right now want to change the constitution to get rid of equal senate representation for each state.

    None of them have read the constitution obviously. One of only 2 exemptions to Article V amendment process is that a state cannot have their equal senate representation taken without their consent. Given that i doubt any state would willingly give up that representation, it cannot happen without armed insurrection. Good luck with that.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online