(10-01-2018 09:15 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-01-2018 08:06 PM)OldOwlNewHeel2 Wrote:  

(09-28-2018 02:54 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-28-2018 02:20 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I think a week for the FBI to investigate will give one of the following results:

A. They conclude BK is guilty. Democrats are giddy. Probability: 0.0000000000000000000000000001%
B; They conclude Ford is lying or wrong: Democrats ask for more investigation, blaming the lack of results on the short time period. Probablity: 0.000000001%
C. They conclude they cannot prove Ford's story or disprove his: Democrats ask for more time: probability: 100 - (A+B)%.

Clearly just a ploy for time. Republicans might have to allow it to get Flake's vote.
(Aside: Has there ever been a better name for this kind of person than Flake?)

And when C occurs (and we have the same evidence as where we are now), the incessant beat for 'more' will keep on. Even in the light of zero corroborative evidence.

I have no problems with doing this to get Flake on. And, probably at this point Murkowski. Thats 50.

And watch the gnashing level rise.

It is amazing to me where we are with literally zero supporting evidence. But, sadly, I am not surprised. Especially in light of the historical lengths the Democrats will stretch personal destruction to get a SCOTUS seat. And it is amazing how many people are either happy or neutral wannabe with where this farce has brought us, or supportive of this process. And they are utterly oblivious to (or perhaps happy with) the methodology and process being utilized.

By the way, the Democrats wont *ask* for more time, it will be a demand.

And we're back with Robert (rejected by bipartisan consensus) Bork again! Unless this time you're talking about Harriet Miers? Let's see . . . 1) called a "disaster on every level" by none other than Bork, which is hilarious; 2) called out by Republican senators for not having strong enough anti-abortion views; described in wholly bland terms by the Wall Street Journal, no less. Can't wait to hear you pin this one on the Dems, too.

Or are you talking about Garland? Still waiting for that "pattern" to show up.

To a certain extent I could label pretty much every fing campaign versus Republican nominees as that. Some a lot more than others.

I guess I never saw the campaign of 'This is Ginsburg's America, an America where every person who wants a right made up out of whole cloth can get one'. Can you point that out to me in your o-so righteous defense?

Can you point out the campaign where 90 per cent+ of Republican Senators came out within 4 weeks of declaring matter of factly that the 'a wise Latina is wiser than most' in unfit and that they will not be voting that way?

Man, perhaps put on a German Wermacht Sgt's uniform and keep proclaiming 'I see nothink' some more dude.

Seriously, you think that that Democrats have been of-so fing accepting of the vast majority of Republican nominees. Got it. When you actually bother to look at the history of the personal slams (I guess the term 'borking' came about by sheer happenstance, correct?) and of the sheer obstructionism you see *no* Democratic history there?

Hey dude, at least I dont have 8 inch lenses on my rose colored glasses. Garland was a shut down. I recognize that. Funny that you kind of snidely bring that up as such a *horrible* outreach, and utterly fail in the fing slightest to even take into account anything in the last thirty years *except* Garland. Got it.

Tee up the whine about Garland in five.... four.... three... two....

Hey - you have the right to die on whatever hill you want, but I doubt anyone will call you a martyr for choosing this one. My point is not, and has never been, that Dems share no blame for the shitshow that now passes for the SCOTUS nomination process. My point has always been that your narrative that it's always and only the Dems' fault is simply untrue. There's historical context. There's personal context. There's political context. It's not enough to just count the votes and tally the obstruction points. That's my point.

Any my prescription is only -1.75, so my glasses aren't THAT thick. In any event, better to have rose-colored glasses than a blindfold.