A serious question for our anti-Kavanaugh protestor crowd

If Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s written opinions conform to the text of our written Constitution, and are in harmony with its documented legislative intent, which gives context to its text, will you guys apologize for the disgraceful treatment you participated in during his confirmation hearings?


The primary function of a Supreme Court Justice is to be obedient to the plain text of our Constitution, and give effect to its documented legislative intent which gives context to its text.

What specific treatments would be shown false by his rulings? There may be some stuff to apologize over, but what stuff is the question people will ask.

So, we’re going from pardoning Ford in advance (of something) to apologizing to Kavanaugh (for something).

I have nothing to apologize for.

I pray those who voted for Brett Kavanaugh will at least have the decency to apologize to the American people if the dark side of Brett that came out at the hearings comes out at the court.

1 Like

i like beer. i still like beer.


I have no idea what you are asking.


"The public welfare demands that constitutional cases must be decided according to the terms of the Constitution itself, and not according to judges’ views of fairness, reasonableness, or justice." – Justice Hugo L. Black ( U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1886 - 1971) Source: Lecture, Columbia University, 1968

Like when he said… “boofer”


Don’t hold your breath.

Drinking St Bernardus Abt 12 tonight. It’s quite nice.

I certainly hope the unhinged angry ugly crying douchenozzle we saw at the senate hearings was just a one off deal and not the kind of justice he’s gonna be.

1 Like

Kavanaugh’s “dark side”?


Civil rights ought not be based upon the perverted desires of sexual deviants who now impinge upon the inalienable right of mankind being free to mutually agree in their contracts and associations.

I expect him to rule without bias and in line with the constitution. I won’t apologize for him if he does; it’s his job.

Good thing we have a wise Latina woman who can make a better judgment than a white man to counter him.

I don’t seem to recall any problems whatsoever with that statement when it came up…

What the hell are you goin on about here?

You don’t recall Sotomayor giving speeches saying that a wise Latina woman can make a better decision than a white man?


You are either very young, or did not pay attention to what Sotomayor has said in the past.

See Sotomayor’s ‘Wise Latina’ Line Maybe Not So Wise

"Even before she appears before the Senate Judiciary Committee for her confirmation hearings, Judge Sonia Sotomayor can expect Senate Republicans to grill her on the wise-Latina-versus-white-man line in her by now famous 2001 speech. "


The whole aim of construction, as applied to a provision of the Constitution, is to discover the meaning, to ascertain and give effect to the intent of its framers and the people who adopted it.
_____HOME BLDG. & LOAN ASS’N v. BLAISDELL, 290 U.S. 398 (1934)

She said that once 8 years before she was nominated. It was a stupid way to communicate that she values diversity of perspectives/experience on the court.

BK acted like an angry idiot less than 2 weeks ago. That’s what we’re discussing here.

I know what Sotomayor said once 17 years ago. I just fail to see how it serves any purpose here other than to deflect from the vindictive emotional “what goes around comes around” conspiracy loving justice we just hired.

That’s all you needed to say. It doesn’t bother you when someone on the left says and does something stupid and can call into question their objectivity. Only those on the right.

How do you think Sotomayor would have reacted if she had been called a sex criminal in committee, at the last moment in order to stop her being approved?
And based on something alleged from 36 years ago, not 8 years ago.

1 Like