Going Kavanaugh on Barrett

[Libertarian666]

"Mazie Hirono Asks Amy Coney Barrett if She Is a Sexual Assailant"
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020 ... assailant/

[I Shrugged]

As far as I can tell, Hirono has Peter-Principled.

[Libertarian666]

As far as I can tell, Hirono has Peter-Principled.

Yes, a long time ago.

[dualstow]

This is ridiculous. Everyone knows you can only sexually assault someone if you have a penis.

As far as I can tell, Hirono has Peter-Principled.

Yes, a long time ago.

But for casual readers, that is not what the Peter Principle means.

[GT]

"Mazie Hirono Asks Amy Coney Barrett if She Is a Sexual Assailant"
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020 ... assailant/

She is covering for the fact she asked Kavanaugh the same questions - Now she can claim that she is just being consistent

"Hirono asked Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh the same two questions during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Hirono called for a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) into Kavanaugh at the time, saying the agency needed to determine whether Kavanaugh was a “very belligerent, aggressive drunk.”"

Well to really be consistent, Hirono would need to ask the FBI to investigate Amy's drinking for possible "very belligerent, aggressive drunk" side effects.

[Libertarian666]

"Mazie Hirono Asks Amy Coney Barrett if She Is a Sexual Assailant"
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020 ... assailant/

She is covering for the fact she asked Kavanaugh the same questions - Now she can claim that she is just being consistent

"Hirono asked Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh the same two questions during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Hirono called for a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) into Kavanaugh at the time, saying the agency needed to determine whether Kavanaugh was a “very belligerent, aggressive drunk.”"

Well to really be consistent, Hirono would need to ask the FBI to investigate Amy's drinking for possible "very belligerent, aggressive drunk" side effects.

I don't think that's all that they (the Senate Democrats) have in mind.
I think they are scouring records of Barrett's students to find one to accuse her of improprieties.

[vnatale]

This is ridiculous. Everyone knows you can only sexually assault someone if you have a penis.

As far as I can tell, Hirono has Peter-Principled.

Yes, a long time ago.

But for casual readers, that is not what the Peter Principle means.

I read the book in the 70s. It's definition is being promoted until you reach your level of incompetency (which was what I stated about myself while I was getting my masters degree. No way would I ever consider a PhD).

What does it mean to the "casual reader"?

Vinny

[Kriegsspiel]

I think dualstow meant to type the Pener Principle, which is what tomfoolery was referring to. AFAIK the Peter Principle means what you think it means.

[dualstow]

This is ridiculous. Everyone knows you can only sexually assault someone if you have a penis.

As far as I can tell, Hirono has Peter-Principled.

Yes, a long time ago.

But for casual readers, that is not what the Peter Principle means.

I read the book in the 70s. It's definition is being promoted until you reach your level of incompetency (which was what I stated about myself while I was getting my masters degree. No way would I ever consider a PhD).

What does it mean to the "casual reader"?

Vinny

(Sigh). Vinny. Are you going to make me destroy the joke by deconstructing it? i found it funny, the convergence of the term “Peter Principle” and “if you have a penis.” upside down:

[pp4me]

If these confirmation hearings are always going to be nothing more than an opportunity to throw as much dirt on the candidate before confirmation as possible and make political speeches then they should probably do away with them. All of the democrats are going to vote against confirmation any way so what is the point?

RBG, nominated by Clinton was confirmed 96-3. Breyer the following year 87-9. Anthony Kennedy, nominated by Reagan was 97-0.

I guess those days are gone forever.

[vnatale]

If these confirmation hearings are always going to be nothing more than an opportunity to throw as much dirt on the candidate before confirmation as possible and make political speeches then they should probably do away with them. All of the democrats are going to vote against confirmation any way so what is the point?

RBG, nominated by Clinton was confirmed 96-3. Breyer the following year 87-9. Anthony Kennedy, nominated by Reagan was 97-0.

I guess those days are gone forever.

The are gone FOREVER!!!

Vinny

[Libertarian666]

If these confirmation hearings are always going to be nothing more than an opportunity to throw as much dirt on the candidate before confirmation as possible and make political speeches then they should probably do away with them. All of the democrats are going to vote against confirmation any way so what is the point?

RBG, nominated by Clinton was confirmed 96-3. Breyer the following year 87-9. Anthony Kennedy, nominated by Reagan was 97-0.

I guess those days are gone forever.

They are gone until and unless the Democrat party is reduced to rubble and rebuilt as an actual American political party.

[Xan]

Appointment of judges should be non-controversial. Every judge should be a textualist and originalist. Anything else should be an immediate disqualification.

It's amazing to me how one political party has gone whole hog for the sick, twisted RBG-style view of the law: that the law is something to be used and manipulated in order to achieve some desired outcome. Wrong.

I heard an interesting interview the other day ( https://issuesetc.org/2020/10/09/2832-r ... k-10-9-20/ ) where it was posited that it's Roe v Wade that basically is causing this. If Roe v Wade ends up being overturned, and the spectre of its overturn no longer haunts Supreme Court confirmations, then they may well get less rancorous.

[Libertarian666]

Appointment of judges should be non-controversial. Every judge should be a textualist and originalist. Anything else should be an immediate disqualification.

It's amazing to me how one political party has gone whole hog for the sick, twisted RBG-style view of the law: that the law is something to be used and manipulated in order to achieve some desired outcome. Wrong.

I heard an interesting interview the other day ( https://issuesetc.org/2020/10/09/2832-r ... k-10-9-20/ ) where it was posited that it's Roe v Wade that basically is causing this. If Roe v Wade ends up being overturned, and the spectre of its overturn no longer haunts Supreme Court confirmations, then they may well get less rancorous.

The Democrat party wants policies that they can't enact legislatively because they are too unpopular with the populace.
So they have decided that the Supreme Court (and other courts too) should act as unelected super-legislatures that can enact these policies instead.
This is of course poisonous to the whole idea of "the rule of law", but is just another example of why I'm an anarcho-capitalist: it is impossible for the citizenry to make the government stay within its supposed boundaries.

[WiseOne]

IDisgusting political theater aside.... Amy Coney Barrett has been completely composed no matter what's been thrown at her, and her answers are well considered and professional. In fact, she's showing up the questioners as being remarkably unprofessional - wonder if that's coming across to everyone or is it just me? Many of them are lawyers and should know better than to ask questions like "how would you rule for Cause X?" Not a single question about her qualifications as a judge.

I think it's actually a very good idea for an unelected lifetime appointment of this magnitude to be reviewed by elected representatives. Too bad the elected representatives are acting like a bunch of spoiled children.

[vnatale]

IDisgusting political theater aside.... Amy Coney Barrett has been completely composed no matter what's been thrown at her, and her answers are well considered and professional. In fact, she's showing up the questioners as being remarkably unprofessional - wonder if that's coming across to everyone or is it just me? Many of them are lawyers and should know better than to ask questions like "how would you rule for Cause X?" Not a single question about her qualifications as a judge.

I think it's actually a very good idea for an unelected lifetime appointment of this magnitude to be reviewed by elected representatives. Too bad the elected representatives are acting like a bunch of spoiled children.

The representatives on both sides are, for the most part, not covering themselves in glory. Two examples. Harris thought she could outsmart her and trap her but at every turn she was one step ahead of Harris. And, Sasse went on and on and on with his speechifying, thereby eliciting zero information during that time from her. It caused me to reach the end of patience which resulting in me shouting out loud, "Shut Up!" even though I was all by myself!

Vinny

[Mountaineer]

IDisgusting political theater aside.... Amy Coney Barrett has been completely composed no matter what's been thrown at her, and her answers are well considered and professional. In fact, she's showing up the questioners as being remarkably unprofessional - wonder if that's coming across to everyone or is it just me? Many of them are lawyers and should know better than to ask questions like "how would you rule for Cause X?" Not a single question about her qualifications as a judge.

I think it's actually a very good idea for an unelected lifetime appointment of this magnitude to be reviewed by elected representatives. Too bad the elected representatives are acting like a bunch of spoiled children.

With you on your assessment.

[Libertarian666]

IDisgusting political theater aside.... Amy Coney Barrett has been completely composed no matter what's been thrown at her, and her answers are well considered and professional. In fact, she's showing up the questioners as being remarkably unprofessional - wonder if that's coming across to everyone or is it just me? Many of them are lawyers and should know better than to ask questions like "how would you rule for Cause X?" Not a single question about her qualifications as a judge.

I think it's actually a very good idea for an unelected lifetime appointment of this magnitude to be reviewed by elected representatives. Too bad the elected representatives are acting like a bunch of spoiled children.

The representatives on both sides are, for the most part, not covering themselves in glory. Two examples. Harris thought she could outsmart her and trap her but at every turn she was one step ahead of Harris. And, Sasse went on and on and on with his speechifying, thereby eliciting zero information during that time from her. It caused me to reach the end of patience which resulting in me shouting out loud, "Shut Up!" even though I was all by myself!

Vinny

Harris isn't smart enough to realize how dumb she is. "See Dunning-Kruger" effect for details.

[vnatale]

IDisgusting political theater aside.... Amy Coney Barrett has been completely composed no matter what's been thrown at her, and her answers are well considered and professional. In fact, she's showing up the questioners as being remarkably unprofessional - wonder if that's coming across to everyone or is it just me? Many of them are lawyers and should know better than to ask questions like "how would you rule for Cause X?" Not a single question about her qualifications as a judge.

I think it's actually a very good idea for an unelected lifetime appointment of this magnitude to be reviewed by elected representatives. Too bad the elected representatives are acting like a bunch of spoiled children.

The representatives on both sides are, for the most part, not covering themselves in glory. Two examples. Harris thought she could outsmart her and trap her but at every turn she was one step ahead of Harris. And, Sasse went on and on and on with his speechifying, thereby eliciting zero information during that time from her. It caused me to reach the end of patience which resulting in me shouting out loud, "Shut Up!" even though I was all by myself!

Vinny

Harris isn't smart enough to realize how dumb she is. "See Dunning-Kruger" effect for details.

I am well aware of that effect. However, I don't at all think Harris is dumb. My guess is that somehow she lapsed into thinking that she was back into her prosecutor role dealing with a clearly inferior (to her) witness. Here she was dealing with someone who I think IQ is in the 150 to 160 range. I'd not want to tangle with her. She does not let anyone intimidate her. Her 7 kids probably don't get away with anything!

Vinny

[I Shrugged]

This is why I'm glad that sports are back.

[Libertarian666]

IDisgusting political theater aside.... Amy Coney Barrett has been completely composed no matter what's been thrown at her, and her answers are well considered and professional. In fact, she's showing up the questioners as being remarkably unprofessional - wonder if that's coming across to everyone or is it just me? Many of them are lawyers and should know better than to ask questions like "how would you rule for Cause X?" Not a single question about her qualifications as a judge.

I think it's actually a very good idea for an unelected lifetime appointment of this magnitude to be reviewed by elected representatives. Too bad the elected representatives are acting like a bunch of spoiled children.

The representatives on both sides are, for the most part, not covering themselves in glory. Two examples. Harris thought she could outsmart her and trap her but at every turn she was one step ahead of Harris. And, Sasse went on and on and on with his speechifying, thereby eliciting zero information during that time from her. It caused me to reach the end of patience which resulting in me shouting out loud, "Shut Up!" even though I was all by myself!

Vinny

Harris isn't smart enough to realize how dumb she is. "See Dunning-Kruger" effect for details.

I am well aware of that effect. However, I don't at all think Harris is dumb. My guess is that somehow she lapsed into thinking that she was back into her prosecutor role dealing with a clearly inferior (to her) witness. Here she was dealing with someone who I think IQ is in the 150 to 160 range. I'd not want to tangle with her. She does not let anyone intimidate her. Her 7 kids probably don't get away with anything!

Vinny

Ok, let me rephrase: Harris isn't nearly as smart as she thinks she is.
I agree with you on Barrett's IQ, because she appears to be about as smart as I am.

[Mountaineer]

IDisgusting political theater aside.... Amy Coney Barrett has been completely composed no matter what's been thrown at her, and her answers are well considered and professional. In fact, she's showing up the questioners as being remarkably unprofessional - wonder if that's coming across to everyone or is it just me? Many of them are lawyers and should know better than to ask questions like "how would you rule for Cause X?" Not a single question about her qualifications as a judge.

I think it's actually a very good idea for an unelected lifetime appointment of this magnitude to be reviewed by elected representatives. Too bad the elected representatives are acting like a bunch of spoiled children.

The representatives on both sides are, for the most part, not covering themselves in glory. Two examples. Harris thought she could outsmart her and trap her but at every turn she was one step ahead of Harris. And, Sasse went on and on and on with his speechifying, thereby eliciting zero information during that time from her. It caused me to reach the end of patience which resulting in me shouting out loud, "Shut Up!" even though I was all by myself!

Vinny

Harris isn't smart enough to realize how dumb she is. "See Dunning-Kruger" effect for details.

I am well aware of that effect. However, I don't at all think Harris is dumb. My guess is that somehow she lapsed into thinking that she was back into her prosecutor role dealing with a clearly inferior (to her) witness. Here she was dealing with someone who I think IQ is in the 150 to 160 range. I'd not want to tangle with her. She does not let anyone intimidate her. Her 7 kids probably don't get away with anything!

Vinny

Ok, let me rephrase: Harris isn't nearly as smart as she thinks she is.
I agree with you on Barrett's IQ, because she appears to be about as smart as I am.

Whoa there Kemosabe, way to shoot me down. I’m a ‘couple’ digits less than that.

[Libertarian666]

IDisgusting political theater aside.... Amy Coney Barrett has been completely composed no matter what's been thrown at her, and her answers are well considered and professional. In fact, she's showing up the questioners as being remarkably unprofessional - wonder if that's coming across to everyone or is it just me? Many of them are lawyers and should know better than to ask questions like "how would you rule for Cause X?" Not a single question about her qualifications as a judge.

I think it's actually a very good idea for an unelected lifetime appointment of this magnitude to be reviewed by elected representatives. Too bad the elected representatives are acting like a bunch of spoiled children.

The representatives on both sides are, for the most part, not covering themselves in glory. Two examples. Harris thought she could outsmart her and trap her but at every turn she was one step ahead of Harris. And, Sasse went on and on and on with his speechifying, thereby eliciting zero information during that time from her. It caused me to reach the end of patience which resulting in me shouting out loud, "Shut Up!" even though I was all by myself!

Vinny

Harris isn't smart enough to realize how dumb she is. "See Dunning-Kruger" effect for details.

I am well aware of that effect. However, I don't at all think Harris is dumb. My guess is that somehow she lapsed into thinking that she was back into her prosecutor role dealing with a clearly inferior (to her) witness. Here she was dealing with someone who I think IQ is in the 150 to 160 range. I'd not want to tangle with her. She does not let anyone intimidate her. Her 7 kids probably don't get away with anything!

Vinny

Ok, let me rephrase: Harris isn't nearly as smart as she thinks she is.
I agree with you on Barrett's IQ, because she appears to be about as smart as I am.

Whoa there Kemosabe, way to shoot me down. I’m a ‘couple’ digits less than that.

My wife told me I shouldn't brag, so I apologize.

[Mountaineer]

IDisgusting political theater aside.... Amy Coney Barrett has been completely composed no matter what's been thrown at her, and her answers are well considered and professional. In fact, she's showing up the questioners as being remarkably unprofessional - wonder if that's coming across to everyone or is it just me? Many of them are lawyers and should know better than to ask questions like "how would you rule for Cause X?" Not a single question about her qualifications as a judge.

I think it's actually a very good idea for an unelected lifetime appointment of this magnitude to be reviewed by elected representatives. Too bad the elected representatives are acting like a bunch of spoiled children.

The representatives on both sides are, for the most part, not covering themselves in glory. Two examples. Harris thought she could outsmart her and trap her but at every turn she was one step ahead of Harris. And, Sasse went on and on and on with his speechifying, thereby eliciting zero information during that time from her. It caused me to reach the end of patience which resulting in me shouting out loud, "Shut Up!" even though I was all by myself!

Vinny

Harris isn't smart enough to realize how dumb she is. "See Dunning-Kruger" effect for details.

I am well aware of that effect. However, I don't at all think Harris is dumb. My guess is that somehow she lapsed into thinking that she was back into her prosecutor role dealing with a clearly inferior (to her) witness. Here she was dealing with someone who I think IQ is in the 150 to 160 range. I'd not want to tangle with her. She does not let anyone intimidate her. Her 7 kids probably don't get away with anything!

Vinny

Ok, let me rephrase: Harris isn't nearly as smart as she thinks she is.
I agree with you on Barrett's IQ, because she appears to be about as smart as I am.

Whoa there Kemosabe, way to shoot me down. I’m a ‘couple’ digits less than that.

My wife told me I shouldn't brag, so I apologize.

Apology accepted, but there was no need to do so. I was trying to be humble with my shoot me down comment. My first thought was "only 150 -160?, I feel bad for such inadequate peons", but I too did not want to brag.