Have the Kavanaugh confirmations on in the background

[BG_Knightmare]

You must be new here

I was being sarcastic lol everyone here can almost unanimously agree that partisan politics have taken over and is destroying this country yet the same critics will happily jump to polarizing sides of any political argument without getting all the facts first because party comes first apparently

 

[NinjaKnight]

I was being sarcastic lol everyone here can almost unanimously agree that partisan politics have taken over and is destroying this country yet the same critics will happily jump to polarizing sides of any political argument without getting all the facts first because party comes first apparently

underlined is what pisses me off the most.

 

[UCFKnight85]

Disgusting left wing smear

 

[The Branch]

Look ... anybody that knows anything about DC knows .... Feinstein KNEW this was weak ... which is why she didn't bring it up when she got it.

She knew it had no traction ..... unless it was a last minute bombshell ... when even the perception of wrong doing might be enough to flip a senator or two on the vote.

Just wait till the November elections .... you are going to be seeing 20 year old #metoo stuff flying the week before the vote.

 

[UCFKnight85]

I think even Feinstein recognized this is a disgusting left wing smear and lie effort since she didn’t let her rabid, lying sack of shit colleagues see the letter. Probably knowing they’d release it and guarentee the contents are 100% true as a way to appease their extremist base

 

[sk8knight]

I was being sarcastic lol everyone here can almost unanimously agree that partisan politics have taken over and is destroying this country yet the same critics will happily jump to polarizing sides of any political argument without getting all the facts first because party comes first apparently

We can all agree with that. The issue is that conservatives feel like they’ve been trying for decades to reach compromising positions on most legislation other than a very few key issues (this is a perception). For years, the democratic party has voted as a solid block in the majority of votes while the republican party has almost never voted that way until very recently. Conservatives and republicans are tired of being accommodating to people who (a) won't budge on their issues and (b) are never satisfied. The reason this seems to have jumped out of nowhere for you and many democrats is that conservatives decided to play the game the same way the progressives have been playing for years.

 

[BG_Knightmare]

We can all agree with that. The issue is that conservatives feel like they’ve been trying for decades to reach compromising positions on most legislation other than a very few key issues (this is a perception). For years, the democratic party has voted as a solid block in the majority of votes while the republican party has almost never voted that way until very recently. Conservatives and republicans are tired of being accommodating to people who (a) won't budge on their issues and (b) are never satisfied. The reason this seems to have jumped out of nowhere for you and many democrats is that conservatives decided to play the game the same way the progressives have been playing for years.

There are a number of arguments saying the same thing but from the other side of that on the political spectrum.

I'll bring up Garland again because his case is a recent prime example, conservative judge nominated by liberal president to replace a conservative judge only to be blocked by conservative majority unwilling to work with a liberal president.

ACA passage was a vote along party lines because conservatives refused to vote on it. During it's drafting Obama went to great lengths to try and make it a bipartisan bill. The legislation itself is actually very friendly to private insurance companies in having them be a major part in providing health insurance. All of that was put in place through GOP amendments which were implemented into the final bill.

With the passage of the GOP tax cut for corporations and the wealthy democratic input was largely ignored and the bill was shrouded in secret right up until before the vote was scheduled to take place. The headline for that article is very click baity but read through it and draw your own conclusions.

With that said I'm not sold on the argument the the GOP is open and willing to work with the Dems but the Dems just ram through what they want regardless of the other side. I see more evidence to the contrary that the GOP is the party ramming through their agenda with little input from the Dems because they are the majority and they don't really need it.

 

[UCFKnight85]

There are a number of arguments saying the same thing but from the other side of that on the political spectrum.

I'll bring up Garland again because his case is a recent prime example, conservative judge nominated by liberal president to replace a conservative judge only to be blocked by conservative majority unwilling to work with a liberal president.

ACA passage was a vote along party lines because conservatives refused to vote on it. During it's drafting Obama went to great lengths to try and make it a bipartisan bill. The legislation itself is actually very friendly to private insurance companies in having them be a major part in providing health insurance. All of that was put in place through GOP amendments which were implemented into the final bill.

With the passage of the GOP tax cut for corporations and the wealthy democratic input was largely ignored and the bill was shrouded in secret right up until before the vote was scheduled to take place. The headline for that article is very click baity but read through it and draw your own conclusions.

With that said I'm not sold on the argument the the GOP is open and willing to work with the Dems but the Dems just ram through what they want regardless of the other side. I see more evidence to the contrary that the GOP is the party ramming through their agenda with little input from the Dems because they are the majority and they don't really need it.

I’ve never seen such an obvious partisan parading around as a curious moderate quite like you. Obama knowingly sold Obamacare on a fundamental massive lie to the American people and yet you think he had “bipartisan outreach” simply because he didn’t go straight for single payer. Lol

 

[BG_Knightmare]

I’ve never seen such an obvious partisan parading around as a curious moderate quite like you. Obama knowingly sold Obamacare on a fundamental massive lie to the American people and yet you think he had “bipartisan outreach” simply because he didn’t go straight for single payer. Lol

You are part of the problem of polarizing politics and you don't even recognize it.

 

[UCFWayne]

There are a number of arguments saying the same thing but from the other side of that on the political spectrum.

I'll bring up Garland again because his case is a recent prime example, conservative judge nominated by liberal president to replace a conservative judge only to be blocked by conservative majority unwilling to work with a liberal president.

ACA passage was a vote along party lines because conservatives refused to vote on it. During it's drafting Obama went to great lengths to try and make it a bipartisan bill. The legislation itself is actually very friendly to private insurance companies in having them be a major part in providing health insurance. All of that was put in place through GOP amendments which were implemented into the final bill.

With the passage of the GOP tax cut for corporations and the wealthy democratic input was largely ignored and the bill was shrouded in secret right up until before the vote was scheduled to take place. The headline for that article is very click baity but read through it and draw your own conclusions.

With that said I'm not sold on the argument the the GOP is open and willing to work with the Dems but the Dems just ram through what they want regardless of the other side. I see more evidence to the contrary that the GOP is the party ramming through their agenda with little input from the Dems because they are the majority and they don't really need it.

lol at trying to make it seem like obama tried to make obamacare bipartisan.... i mean really?

 

[UCFKnight85]

You are part of the problem of polarizing politics and you don't even recognize it.

No, I’m just honest that I have a side. You pretend to be this post partisan moderate and yet offer up post after post that is merely more mildly worded DNC talking g points

 

[UCFKnight85]

lol at trying to make it seem like obama tried to make obamacare bipartisan.... i mean really?

YOURE PART OF THE PROBLEM!!

BG IS A CENTRIST!

 

[BG_Knightmare]

No, I’m just honest that I have a side. You pretend to be this post partisan moderate and yet offer up post after post that is merely more mildly worded DNC talking g points

It's easier for people to digest dissenting opinion when it's worded neutrally to mild. You and others sharing your world view are who I'm attempting to communicate ideas to with backed arguments. Did you even read the articles linked in the post?

 

[Crazyhole]

Disgusting left wing smear

View embedded media

Calling BS on this one. 65 women all came to his defense? Thats fantasyland talk right there. I don't care how great of a guy he is, getting 65 women to agree on anything is impossible.

 

[UCFKnight85]

It's easier for people to digest dissenting opinion when it's worded neutrally to mild. You and others sharing your world view are who I'm attempting to communicate ideas to with backed arguments. Did you even read the articles linked in the post?

You claimed Obama attempted to make OCare bipartisan then asserted that the tax cuts only went to wealthy people and corporations. Both of which are patently false. Why should I listen any further when you’re just spewing partisan falsehoods - because it’s “nicer”?

 

[UCFKnight85]

Feinstein sent the letter to the FBI yet redacted the name. Which proves once and for all that this is a dirty subhuman smear attempt by liberals and even she could see it and wouldn’t push for any actual investigation.

Now her extremist Senate challenger is taking the letter as gospel and knifing her for it.

The left will end up destroying itself over this

 

[The Branch]

There are a number of arguments saying the same thing but from the other side of that on the political spectrum.

I'll bring up Garland again because his case is a recent prime example, conservative judge nominated by liberal president to replace a conservative judge only to be blocked by conservative majority unwilling to work with a liberal president.

ACA passage was a vote along party lines because conservatives refused to vote on it. During it's drafting Obama went to great lengths to try and make it a bipartisan bill. The legislation itself is actually very friendly to private insurance companies in having them be a major part in providing health insurance. All of that was put in place through GOP amendments which were implemented into the final bill.

With the passage of the GOP tax cut for corporations and the wealthy democratic input was largely ignored and the bill was shrouded in secret right up until before the vote was scheduled to take place. The headline for that article is very click baity but read through it and draw your own conclusions.

With that said I'm not sold on the argument the the GOP is open and willing to work with the Dems but the Dems just ram through what they want regardless of the other side. I see more evidence to the contrary that the GOP is the party ramming through their agenda with little input from the Dems because they are the majority and they don't really need it.

I think you have lost your mind. Obama appointed Garland because he was a conservative judge?

 

[BG_Knightmare]

I think you have lost your mind. Obama appointed Garland because he was a conservative judge?

Alright saying conservative is a stretch but as you pointed out he is a contributor to a known hard right partisan organization although I doubt he would be on their list of preferred SC nominees as Gorsuch and Kavanaugh.

 

[UCFKnight85]

Alright saying conservative is a stretch but as you pointed out he is a contributor to a known hard right partisan organization although I doubt he would be on their list of preferred SC nominees as Gorsuch and Kavanaugh.

Does claiming the Federalist Society a “hard right partisan organization” make you feel better? Do you saw this simply because the left has no organized judicial organization like the Federalist Society?

The FS is an organizational network of centrist and right leaning lawyers and judges. To call it a “hard right” organization is laughable.

 

[The Branch]

Alright saying conservative is a stretch but as you pointed out he is a contributor to a known hard right partisan organization although I doubt he would be on their list of preferred SC nominees as Gorsuch and Kavanaugh.

Do you actually believe in your head that Obama would have appointed a guy that was a member of a "hard right partisan organization"???

Do you actually believe that Fried Kookin and Ninja would be SOOOO upset that Garland didn't get considered if he was actually the member of a "hard right partisan organization"??

 

[BG_Knightmare]

I'm open to criticism about the partisan influence of The Federalist Society but when you recognize who the major donors and biggest proponents notably Scalia and Bork and their stance on the political spectrum is hard to deny a heavy right leaning. This article here I don't expect to be read in it's entirety and full disclosure it comes from left leaning organization but everything is cited and factually true for you to draw your own conclusions.

 

[UCFKnight85]

I'm open to criticism about the partisan influence of The Federalist Society but when you recognize who the major donors and biggest proponents notably Scalia and Bork and their stance on the political spectrum is hard to deny a heavy right leaning. This article here I don't expect to be read in it's entirety and full disclosure it comes from left leaning organization but everything is cited and factually true for you to draw your own conclusions.

I read this commentary piece (not article) but had to stop when they labeled Orrin Hatch a “radical right winger”.

The entire piece read as “we’re mad liberals aren’t this organized so we’re going to fear monger for 20 paragraphs”

 

[KnighttimeJoe]

I'm open to criticism about the partisan influence of The Federalist Society but when you recognize who the major donors and biggest proponents notably Scalia and Bork and their stance on the political spectrum is hard to deny a heavy right leaning. This article here I don't expect to be read in it's entirety and full disclosure it comes from left leaning organization but everything is cited and factually true for you to draw your own conclusions.

Are you a moderator in here too or just the fan forum?

 

[BG_Knightmare]

Are you a moderator in here too or just the fan forum?

I can moderate any of the open boards but mainly stick to the fan forum where the trolls congregate. The water cooler gets attention if there's someone making threats or posting obscene NSFW stuff.

 

[sk8knight]

I can moderate any of the open boards but mainly stick to the fan forum where the trolls congregate. The water cooler gets attention if there's someone making threats or posting obscene NSFW stuff.

Well damn, that’s half the posters here