The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Kavanaugh Is Trump's Pick
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Not the other guy with the name that also begins with K but is harder to spell. Nor the lady with the name that sounds like it begins with K but is actually a C.

Check back periodically for more insightful insights into the spelling of the names of Supreme Court contenders from, apparently, a Whole Word reading instruction student.

 
Hide 235 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Ann Coulter likes him. He should make the leftists apoplectic. Both are positives.

    No one knows how these picks will work until well after now.

    • Replies: @Thomas
    , @Anon
  2. DCThrowback says: • Website

    Good enough for Queen Ann, good enough for this guy

    • Replies: @Clyde
    , @Tim Howells
    , @Anonymous
  3. MikeCLT says:

    If he is good enough for Ann Coulter, he is good enough for me. Besides, you can never have too many Irishmen not named Kennedy.

  4. Anonym says:

    Trump is /ourguy/. At least in this instance. This will get the base out to vote for the midterms. Jack Hanson in 3… 2… 1…

  5. Anonymous[250] • Disclaimer says:

    If he is confirmed there will be six catholics on SCOTUS.

  6. Anonymous[250] • Disclaimer says:

    Jeb Bush tweeted his strong approval of this pick tonight.

    That’s not good.

    • Replies: @res
  7. KenH says:

    As long as he rules against illegal aliens and refugees who think they have the right to be reunited with their extended family then I’ll support him even though he is an Ivy Leaguer. I’m sick and tired of judges who grant standing and Constitutional rights to anyone who sneaks into this country. Based on what little I’ve seen he’s supposed to be pro-American on immigration issues which means the left sees him as a white supremacist and Nazi.

    I’m in total agreement with whoever asked why every SCOTUS pick has to come from the Ivy League. It’s time they pick a judge who went to University of Illinois Law, or Alabama law, or Arizona St. law, etc. It’s an insult to judges who graduated from those and other non-Ivy League law schools that they’re rarely, if ever, considered for SCOTUS.

    But at least he’s not Jewish. Three’s enough and we know how they vote.

  8. Anonymous[250] • Disclaimer says:

    Kind of a wimpy appearance and a horribly wimpy voice. Surrounded by wife and daughters — another top elite guy with no sons.

    Babbling about his Jesuit upbringing (the satanic Fake-Pope is a Jesuit).

    WTF.

    • Replies: @Svigor
    , @Dissident
  9. MEH 0910 says:

  10. slumber_j says:

    Off-topic, I just ran across this satisfyingly revolting piece of news:

    Former University President Drew G. Faust has joined the board of directors of Goldman Sachs, the company announced in a press release Thursday.

    The move comes less than a week after Faust ended her 11-year tenure at the helm of the nation’s oldest university. Her appointment to Goldman Sachs’s board as an independent director will expand the group from 11 to 12 members.

    https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2018/7/5/faust-goldman-sachs/

    Why Goldman’s board feels compelled to expand itself to include a Civil War historian with Resting Smirk-Face is anyone’s guess…

    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
    , @Bill
    , @pyrrhus
  11. Anonymous[250] • Disclaimer says:

    Kavanaugh acceptance speech hit all the DEMOCRAT talking points.

    • Replies: @res
  12. ken says:

    This pick puts all the blue senators serving from red states in a deep bind. If they vote against Kavanaugh and the two liberal Republican broads do as well they could kill the nominee. But then their general elections will be a month or two away. Maybe President Trump is playing the long game. January comes around and you now have 53-54 Republican senators.

    • Replies: @prusmc
  13. KenH says:

    I hear the ADL is “concerned” about Judge Kavanaugh so if he’s on their sh*t list then I like him already.

    • Replies: @Anon
  14. Clyde says:
    @DCThrowback

    Good enough for Queen Ann, good enough for this guy.

    Same with me. Somehow I think Donny Junior and Kimberly Guilfoyle were in the background giving Donald Trump sound advice. What is sound advice?
    Don’t cave because it gets you nothing anyways.

    DJT deviously dropped the Senate push through process into Mitch McConnell’s lap. Two months ago McConnell declared there would be be no summer recess for the Senate. This was to deny Trump appointing people via recess appointments.

  15. Dan Hayes says:

    I was all for Kavanaugh and admit that I was influenced by Coulter’s recommendation. Although I hope that in this case she proves more prescient than in her previous support for a Romney presidency.

  16. Thomas says:

    Good. He was the best possible pick out of the likely candidates.

    The confirmation is going to be merciless though.

  17. It’s a nice little head fake. Now, I’d be happier if this guy wasn’t an Ivy League beltway whore, but we’re not gonna get a true Trump judge until the second term. All the shrieking was about Barrett and abortion rights, but I don’t care about that right now. What I do care about is the highest court validating the Trump campaign to deport illegals, shut off travel from foreign shitholes, and finally get a border wall with military garrisons guarding it in a security zone.

    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
    • Replies: @Sarah Toga
    , @Dissident
  18. Berty says:

    LOL at Anonymous[250] pretending to be different people. I would say “nice try” but it was actually a rather poor one.

  19. Dan Hayes says:
    @slumber_j

    slumber_j:

    Remember that Harvard with its gargantuan endowment functions as a Wall Street Casino Operator masquerading as an educational institution.

    • Replies: @slumber_j
    , @Mr. Anon
  20. Thomas says:
    @Anonymous

    If he is confirmed there will be six catholics on SCOTUS.

    I see Swiss Guards parachuting into Iowa any day now…

  21. Kavanaugh’s speech sounded like a dumb chick’s Tinder profile: “I luv sports. My mom is my hero. I have two kids.” He should have ended the stream of irrelevant details with “Not here for hookups!”

    • Replies: @KenH
    , @Jack D
    , @Simon
  22. Clyde says:

    The confirmation is going to be merciless though.

    The US Senate is not in recess this summer. Mitch McConnell has made it this way. Summer time is steamy and repulsive in the DC Swamp and to be avoided by Senate staffers via accumulated vacation time. So a great time for Donald and Mitch to ram through KAV as his Supreme appointment. iow These Lefties and snowflakes who comprise the Senate staffers. And they do the grunt work. Gonna lose this one! They can’t take the DC heat this time of year.

  23. Thomas says:
    @Charles Erwin Wilson II

    Ann Coulter likes him. He should make the leftists apoplectic. Both are positives.

    No one knows how these picks will work until well after now.

    One thing that’s a very good sign, IMHO: he’s been sitting on the second-most important federal court for 12 years now. He’s still reliably conservative and he comes with top-caliber judicial experience. That’s the sort of thing that could make for a justice who’s actually influential in the long term beyond just being one more vote.

  24. slumber_j says:
    @Dan Hayes

    Remember that Harvard with its gargantuan endowment functions as a Wall Street Casino Operator masquerading as an educational institution.

    Yeah, I texted the news about the Faustian Bargain to a friend. He replied: “I guess she didn’t have a non-compete clause in her contract…”

    • Agree: Dan Hayes
  25. istevefan says:

    It’s been almost 50 years since the Vietnam protests. Can we stop with the “hey hey, ho ho, something something has got to go”. Shit you’d think people could be a little more creative.

  26. @Anonymous

    A few years ago Pat Buchannan remarked on how the most under-represented Americans (as to SCOTUS) are White Evangelicals. I suppose that includes White Protestants in a broad-brush sort of way.

    I have pondered why the “Protestant” world has become such under-achievers. My first thought is the cult-Marxists who marched through from the 30′s to the 60′s, my second thought are the draft-dodgers who went to Protestant seminaries in the 60′s and 70′s in order to maintain student deferments.

    The sum total of education and church taken over by those emoting girly-boys (and more recently many lesbos) has reduced Protestantism to a bunch of wimps who cannot reason their way out of wet paper bag. Evangelicals have some men but not much intellect. Just MHO.

    • Replies: @Excal
    , @Bill
    , @Hibernian
  27. @KenH

    Not only Ivy League, but Yale. There really is something seriously wrong with a system in which two law schools have a “lock” on the Supreme Court. The last non-Harvard/Yale justice was Rehnquist, the last state law school graduate was O’Connor.

    And another federal judge. I appreciate that the last state judge named to the high court (David Souter) was a huge disappointment, but there really needs to be some legal background diversity on the SCOTUS.

  28. Hibernian says:

    It’s been reported that the very wise Justice Sotomayor shows up at Mass only for family celebrations. Sort of like me during my misspent youth.

    • Replies: @Father O'Hara
  29. KenH says:
    @Daniel Williams

    That he boasted about his mother teaching at majority black high schools brought tears to my eyes. He’s a good white man who understands that blacks need special attention and coddling from whites.

    • Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic
  30. @Shingas the Terrible

    StT – trainloads of agreeance here, bro!

  31. Hey Steve, is this the one we want? What working person has time to pay attention to all this?

  32. BenKenobi says:

    2 genders.
    2 scoops.
    2 terms.
    2 supremes.
    2 womps.

    Feels good, man.

  33. They had the anti-Kavanaugh signs out minutes after the pick, suggesting there are boxes of “No to Kethledge/Barrett/Hardiman” signs that will be collecting dust (hopefully just until the replacement pick for RBG anyway).

    • Replies: @Alfa158
  34. anon[217] • Disclaimer says:

    On immigration issues he is the most solid of all the other names mentioned. He’s Ann Coulter’s pick. A real gauntlet thrown down in front of the Democrats. Game on! I want to see lots of video of apoplectic liberals suffering agonizing emotional moral contortions. Great sport!

  35. Pepe says:

    I’ve been out of the US for a while, but when did Supreme Court Justice nominees start giving political speeches, with family nearby, when nominated?

    I graduated from a top 20 law school around the time Kavanaugh did, and this has to make him feel very weird.

    Especially since he (correctly) supports a constitutional jurisprudence in which personal experience and politics should play no role in judicial decision making.

    The post-liberal world in which we now live.

    • Agree: Almost Missouri
  36. herp derp says:

    kinda lol at his speech. but he has many years in law and hundreds of legal decisions in his background which suggest he will probably do ok as a justice for the republicans.

    with regard to catholics on the supreme court – they have more kids, do they not? protestants started birth controlling their offspring aggressively in the 60s. catholics did not. we are now seeing some of the results of that. although kind of unusual this guy was an only child.

    also, no evidence for this since i haven’t looked, but suspect protestant europeans in the US are very weak on the important issues. you can’t have somebody weak like them even getting into the final 5 nominees. not an incorrect stereotype that observant catholics trend stronger on the important questions. it was italy that went against the EU first among the big nations. germanics are very weak on these topics. and scandinavians are the weakest by far.

    agree that it’s more important he rule correctly on the national question and a few other topics, than on abortion or whatever topic floats rick santorum’s boat, who did not seem enthused.

    thomas may be the most important justice on the court now. in particular, these lower court judges trying to call the shots for the entire country, from some circus court in hawaii or wherever. they’re on thomas’ shit list.

    off topic steve, but mcallen texas voted against reagan both times. another data point.

    • Replies: @Rapparee
    , @Anon
  37. Dr. X says:

    The Good:

    -Seems to have a solid conservative record from the D.C. Circuit
    -Young enough to be on the Court for decades
    -Not a Jew

    The Neutral:

    -Catholic. Again. This is an open question, because Catholics range from great jurists (Scalia and Thomas) to flaming liberals (Sotomayor). I tend to agree that we need a couple of more Protestants on the Court, but then again, the devil’s in the details — Stevens was the last Protestant, and he turned out to be a flaming liberal. So it’s got to be the right kind of Protestant, like a Southern Baptist… not an Episcopalian, because Episcopalians have been overtaken by flamboyant gays and lesbians. But Gorsuch is a Catholic-turned-Episcopalian, so… this one’s a coin toss. Meh. Still, five Catholics, three Jews, and one Catholic-sorta-Episcopalian is not a very “diverse” bunch… Thomas is probably the only one if them who has ever lived outside the bubble in “rill ‘Murica” and consequently he’s the best justice of all right now. But I can say this: if Trump had picked someone from Liberty University School of Law, the Left would have shit themselves… that would have been worth the entertainment value alone.

    The Bad:

    -Another Yale grad. Good God… how about somebody from SMU??? BYU??? Ann Arbor?? This Yale-Harvard, Harvard-Yale shit is getting old

    -Too closely associated with the Bushes.

    -Born in Washington, D.C., for God’s sakes. Spent his entire f–ing life in the Acela corridor.

    • Replies: @Bill
    , @Svigor
  38. res says:
    @Anonymous

    The responses are fun though.

    It does make one wonder…

    Some background: https://heavy.com/news/2018/07/brett-kavanaugh-bush-george-jeb-family/

    Any thoughts on this NRO piece? https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/07/brett-kavanaugh-supreme-court-potential-pick/

    • Replies: @Jack D
  39. anon[118] • Disclaimer says:

    Good pick. So glad he didn’t go with Kethledge or Hardiman, both have a track record of siding with illegal immigrants in past cases. Amy Coney Barrett just doesn’t have enough history, she was just confirmed as a federal judge 7 months ago, and besides, given the way all female judges have voted on the supreme court, i.e. extremely liberal, I have no confidence in female judges staying conservative.

    Two people I trust the most, Pat Buchanan and Ann Coulter, both like Kavanaugh, so he’s good enough for me. Buchanan said that if Kavanaugh is confirmed, we might finally have a SCOTUS that interprets the law, rather than one that tries to make laws, hallelujah. And affirmative action will be on the chopping block, about freaking time.

  40. res says:
    @Anonymous

    Working towards his confirmation?

  41. renault says:
    @KenH

    Law schools do a pretty good job of sorting themselves by intelligence, due mainly to their very meritocratic admissions policies (at least when compared to undergrad and other professional schools).

    If you have a good GPA and a 170+ LSAT, you can and will get into a top tier school, even if you’re a white, conservative guy from flyover country. Nobody with the drive, conscientiousness, and intelligence required to push for the Supreme Court is going to Alabama when they’ve got Yale or Harvard as options.

    • Replies: @KenH
  42. Anonymous[353] • Disclaimer says:

    I’m #250 and I simply posted my cynical thoughts. Didn’t try to create illusion of multiple commenters……

    I like Ann Coulter but she was deeply in love with Romney for chrissakes.

    Bottom line is that this is a D.C. establishment pick. Bigtime. Bushes love this guy so logically Kavanaugh can’t be anti-globalist. Because if he were then the Bushes wouldn’t love him at all.

  43. Mr. Anon says:

    If Kavanaugh is solid on immigration and the 2nd amendment, I don’t care if he personally performs abortions in his free time.

    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
  44. Anonymous[353] • Disclaimer says:

    KenH says:
    July 10, 2018 at 2:24 am GMT
    @Daniel Williams
    That he boasted about his mother teaching at majority black high schools brought tears to my eyes. He’s a good white man who understands that blacks need special attention and coddling from whites.

    Bullseye. This guy’s speech evidences a lefty mindset.

    But maybe he didn’t write one word of it. I get the politics of senate confirmation but c’mon….

  45. Mr. Anon says:
    @Dan Hayes

    Remember that Harvard with its gargantuan endowment functions as a Wall Street Casino Operator masquerading as an educational institution.

    Indeed. Harvard is a hedge fund that happens to own a university.

    • Agree: Dan Hayes
  46. Jack D says:
    @Daniel Williams

    It was intended to be disarming. Schumer is going to paint Kavanaugh as a monster with blood dripping from his fangs, so this was Kavanaugh’s chance to get out in front and paint himself as a just a regular guy who loves his family, his church and his sports teams. K is a very intelligent man and he could have expounded to the nation on his theories concerning the Constitutional limits of judicial power but he wisely chose this opportunity to present himself as a human being instead. First impressions are important and now Schumer will have a harder job slandering someone who is clearly a just a (much smarter than average) regular guy and not a monster or an elitist like Hillary whose feet no longer touch the ground.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  47. My concern is the way that conservatives appointed to the SCOTUS have, once seated thereon, shown a dismaying tendency to turn left. Presuming his confirmation, Kavanaugh’s votes as a SCOTUS justice will deserve our closest scrutiny.

  48. Karl says:

    a free lunch at Presidents Hummus (in Afula) to the first iSteve-Commentariat-nik who….

    ….correctly predicts the date of the first leftist attack on Special Counsel Mueller, for not timely producing the goods which might have turned around Kavanough’s Senate approval

    Free beverage thrown in, ==if== you ALSO correctly predicted the identity of the leftist writer.

    • Replies: @anonymous
  49. anon[118] • Disclaimer says:

    Hmm…the NYT actually put Kavanaugh to the left of Gorsuch on the conservatism scale. Gorsuch took a hard left by ruling against Trump in the deportation of violent criminal case, which was a total sellout.

  50. Jack D says:
    @res

    I read the NRO piece and I was unimpressed. It’s impossible to draw overall conclusions about K’s judicial philosophy by cherry picking two close cases out of the hundreds that K voted on and you can’t call him a base hit rather than a home run just on the basis of these two not very important votes. I’m sure we will be treated (by Schumer, the NYT, etc.) to DOZENS of cases that K decided that put him to the right of Attila the Hun. Not every case gets decided purely by ideological litmus tests – these were close calls and K called them the way that he saw them. You want a guy on the court with some integrity and who is not a pure ideological shill.

    • Replies: @res
    , @L Woods
    , @27 year old
  51. Jack D says:
    @Auntie Analogue

    Those days are over. The nation is more polarized and K has a long track record as a Republican partisan – anything is possible but K becoming a liberal Democrat is about as likely as K converting to Buddhism. He is a 53 year old man with a well formed character and is not likely to change now. All the justices who went squishy were people without such clear track records. K is no pig in a poke.

    • Replies: @Auntie Analogue
  52. Dan Hayes says:
    @Auntie Analogue

    Auntie Analogue:

    Those SCOTUS nominees who have been properly vetted did not eventually earn new found respect from the liberal political establishment.

    Also important is the political support of their wives – will they be tough-cookie ideologues like Mrs. Alito and Mrs. Thomas? – who make sure that their hubbies spine not turn into jello!

  53. “Kavano has got to go,” the leader chants.

    Let me guess – the rest of it starts with “Hey ho, hey ho…” Man, the ctrl-left has had 5 decades to come up with new chants, and it’s still the same old, same old. I am sorely disappointed by their lack of creativity.

    Glad to hear about this nomination. Listening to the Federalist Society is a step in the right direction for this president in starting trusting the right people. That’s part of being a leader. Good job, Pres.!

    • Agree: Clyde
    • Replies: @Dissident
  54. @Anonym

    As a card-carrying Eyeore, I look forward to my berating … beat me, whip me, make me write bad checks, Hanson!

    I’m just happy about this, that’s all.

    • Replies: @anonymous
    , @Jack Hanson
  55. BigFire says:
    @Anonymous

    When Gorsuch was confirmed, he was the first non-Jew/Catholic justice on the bench in a while. Kavanaugh is merely replacing another Catholic (Kennedy).

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  56. @Diversity Heretic

    Though I agree on the ridiculous concentration of boorish Yalies, I don’t agree with your last clause:

    …but there really needs to be some legal background diversity on the SCOTUS.

    How about just a very non-diverse mindset of every one of these bastards that the US Constitution means what it says, in plain English?! That’s all I ask for in a SCOTI. Can we also please quit using this term that is way too close to a male body part?

    And you’re the diversity heretic, too.

  57. @Jack D

    That sounds like a good explanation, Jack, and you always seem to have them. Agreed, but you also have just explained why women shouldn’t have ever been allowed to vote. If we get Ann Coulter, once Ginsburg goes down that Long March to utopia, maybe we can get that changed too. Miss Coulter’s on my side on this, and has only let me down once in the last decade.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  58. anonymous[331] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonym

    Jack Hanson has been proven a prophet, what have you done Eeyore?

    • Replies: @Anonym
  59. res says:
    @Jack D

    Thanks. Given your legal background and perspicacity I would appreciate any other thoughts you have on K (e.g. “his theories concerning the Constitutional limits of judicial power”). From my naive viewpoint he is looking like an excellent choice.

    So far I am finding the thoughtfulness and efficiency with which Trump is handling his Supreme Court opportunities one of the most encouraging things about his presidency.

    P.S. Great reply to Daniel Williams.

    • Replies: @AP
    , @Jack D
  60. anonymous[331] • Disclaimer says:
    @Auntie Analogue

    So true. It’s hopeless, that’s why I voted for Hilary.

  61. Excal says:
    @Sarah Toga

    There are considerable intellects to be found among the evangelicals, but they tend to be tragically undernourished by the race-to-the-bottom theology and education available to them.

    Evangelicals tend to be taught from earliest ages to view anything outside the camp with the greatest suspicion, and to approach the world as though infiltrating or even assaulting it.

    A similar mentality is often found among Muslims and savages.

    • Replies: @TTSSYF
    , @SBaker
  62. L Woods says:
    @Jack D

    You want a guy on the court with some integrity and who is not a pure ideological shill.

    …a sentiment only ever expressed by the right. A rapid rightist appointment willing to fight as dirty as the left has since its inception is the only thing that could possibly have hoped to reverse the decline. I’m about through caring at this point. Too-little-too-late appointments like this spell the end more clearly than years of outright leftist triumphs. Conservative constitutionalists will prop up the cadaver of the American republic another generation or two — long enough to render its inevitable demise someone else’s problem. If the West wants to die on the pyre of its antiquated ‘principles,’ it can be my guest — it’s not as though I ever had any real stake in it anyway. I give up.

    • Replies: @Dissident
  63. Berty says:

    The only “conservatives” bitching about K are losers like Rick Santorum who don’t care about anything except abortion.

  64. Anon7 says:
    @Twinkie

    Yes, we mustn’t forget the curious incident of the dogma in the night-time.

  65. @Jack D

    My dear Jack D, lifelong conservative SCOTUS appointee Earl Warren was, to borrow your phrasing, a sixty-one “year old man with a well formed character and” was “not likely to change.”

  66. AP says:
    @res

    So far I am finding the thoughtfulness and efficiency with which Trump is handling his Supreme Court opportunities one of the most encouraging things about his presidency.

    Well, he’s not doing it himself, he’s outsourcing this to the Federalist Society. They deserve the credit for efficiency, he deserves credit for staying out of the process and letting them handle it.

  67. herp derp says:

    two charts which show each justice’s idealogical drift over time.

    going back to 1950

    going back to 1935

    results: democrat justices start left and stay left, often becoming more left over time.

    republican justices start right, then what happens next varies. they may stay about the same, become more conservative, but most often, they become less conservative. but rarely they drift all the way to being on the left.

    thomas is the now the most conservative justice and has become more conservative over time. he is one of the most conservative justices of all time.

    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
    , @res
  68. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Charles Erwin Wilson II

    Regeans picks didn’t work out too well. No telling what happens when they’re elavated to be one of 9 supreme rulers of 330 million people for life.

    It’s nice to see the liberals heads explode at everything Trump does.

  69. Anonym says:
    @anonymous

    If you read my posts at the time I gave Trump as much chance as about anyone here, as early as anyone. That being said, once your guy is elected, apply Game. Treat ‘em mean and keep ‘em keen.

  70. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @KenH

    ADL is concerned because Kavanaugh isn’t a lefty Jew.

  71. @Hibernian

    Some aver that she secretly attends Temple services…

    • LOL: Dan Hayes
  72. LondonBob says:

    Trump’s guys sound qualified, unlike Obama’s affirmative action hires.

  73. anonymous[331] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Hanson will not be mocked!

  74. Dan Hayes says:
    @herp derp

    herp derp:

    Justice Thomas is a exemplary practitioner of Don’t Get Mad, Get Even in settling the score for his Anita Bryant Senate show trial!

  75. anonymous[331] • Disclaimer says:

    If you read my posts at the time I gave Trump as much chance as about anyone here, as early as anyone.

    OK, that’s good but it’s not … Hansonesque. :)

  76. res says:
    @herp derp

    Those charts are great. Thanks! I think they are worth including inline.

    There are some pretty big differences between the two charts (e.g. Douglas). I wonder why.

    The data is available at http://mqscores.lsa.umich.edu/measures.php

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  77. Twinkie says:
    @BigFire

    When Gorsuch was confirmed, he was the first non-Jew/Catholic justice on the bench in a while.

    Gorsuch was raised as a Catholic and went to the same Catholic parochial school as Kavanaugh. Apparently he started attending an Episcopalian church after marrying his British wife.

    I guess she wears the religious pants in his family.

    One thing that concerns me about Kavanaugh is that he lives in a DC suburb in Maryland… as Roberts does. In contrast, stalwarts such as Thomas and Alito live in Virginia, as did Scalia. (Scalia belonged to perhaps the most orthodox Catholic parish in the Diocese of Arlington, which had the reputation of being the most orthodox diocese in the country under its last bishop).

    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
    , @Anonymous
  78. @DCThrowback

    I dunno. I’m 100% with Ann Coulter since the Trump era began, but going back in time into the GW Bush era we start to diverge. My understanding is that this is a Bush guy, which I don’t like, but I really don’t know anything about him. Fingers crossed.

    • Replies: @Tim Howells
  79. Anonymous[337] • Disclaimer says:

    From these posts it appears that people here self-identify as “conservatives”.

    I thought there was more independent thought here.

    That said, I hope Trump gets re-elected.

    Seeing one of the lefties replaced?

    Now that would be fun.

  80. Dan Hayes says:
    @Twinkie

    Twinkie:

    Justice Scalia’s widow was an invited guest at last night’s ceremony. A nice touch hopefully presaging that the torch is being passed on.

    Continuing along this vein, Trump attended Phyllis Schlafly’s funeral during the late stages of his presidential campaign.

    Maybe there is more to DJT than commonly believed/accepted!

    • Replies: @Anon
  81. The two of them attended Georgetown Prep, the oldest (1789) of the Jesuits’ many college preps throughout the USA. It is the last of them which still boards its students, and has a reputation as a school for the Catholic elite of Washington DC, including the foreign diplomatic corps.

    But it is Jesuit and thus relentlessly liberal in its social teaching. Kavanaugh spoke approvingly of Kennedy’s blows for “liberty” and his mother’s commitment to”equality”.

    Trans rights and more affirmative action?

    If he is a contented member of a typical modern Catholic parish, then he is a modernist at heart, and there is nothing much to expect from him other than progressive disappointment.

    If, on the other hand, he is, even if only potentially, an old Mass fan like Scalia and Thomas, then he remains what Catholics used to be, and what the other “Catholics” on the Court are not – a respecter of the past, of tradition, of precedent.

    Another point: Kavanaugh is a third generation Yalie, and his great-grandfather worked for the place as an “inspector”.
    So let’s not be too hard on him for having gone there – he’s not a ladder-climber, but a traditionalist.

  82. @Jack D

    You want a guy on the court with some integrity and who is not a pure ideological shill.

    No

    We want a guy who fights for our team period.

    Jfc

  83. TTSSYF says:
    @Excal

    In my experience, much of the Evangelical world has drifted too far to the Left, probably in an effort to maintain membership. It’s a fallacy, or perhaps, just a conceit of Big Media, to assume that the majority of Evangelicals are conservative Right-wingers. Support of gay marriage, abortion on demand, illegal immigration or legal immigration of large numbers of refugees from chitwhole countries, Obamacare or Medicare for all — this is more prevalent among Protestant Evangelicals than it ever used to be. The pragmatic types such as Falwell or Huckabee understand that Trump is a crude means to a desirable end. They understand what a precarious state our country is in and are willing to take extreme measures (supporting Trump) to help save it. Too many Evangelicals have simply been brainwashed by the Left.

    • Replies: @anonymous
  84. Tiny Duck says:

    He is a nazi and will never be confirmed

    Down with kavanaugh

    Leonard Pitts doesn’t like him
    That tells you something right there

    • Replies: @Unladen Swallow
  85. @Dan Hayes

    Anita Hill. Bryant had a whole nother gig. Whatever happened to Hill?

    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
  86. Anonymous[266] • Disclaimer says:
    @DCThrowback

    Ann Coulter was pushing for Mitt Romney in 2012 for Prez and and Chris Christie early on for 2016 for Prez. She’s a rootless cosmopolitan with no husband or kids who spends her time between West Palm Beach, LA, and Manhattan. She doesn’t really have any religious conviction. Kavanaugh is a Bushie who was picked by Kennedy upon announcing his retirement to Trump. Kavaugh’s mother was an SJW. Kavanaugh claims to be Catholic but got married in an Episcopal church in Georgetown. His wife is also a diehard Bushie. I’m sure they were either Rubio or Jeb supporters in 2016.

    “Here’s Kavanaugh advising the parties on how to help a 17-year old girl get an abortion so as to avoid judicial review. Nice.”

    https://mobile.twitter.com/morgeezy/status/1016477061152694272

    • Agree: Dan Hayes
  87. KenH says:
    @renault

    Yale and Harvard law practice AA and grant admission to non-whites over more qualified whites maybe not to the extent of the their undergrad program but it goes on. So you mean to tell me that affirmative action recipient, Yale law grad and wise Latina Sonia Sotomayer who as a federal judge had more decisions overturned by SCOTUS than any other SCOTUS nominee is a superior jurist to top graduates from non-Ivy League law schools?

    That there’s no white candidates from state law schools who aren’t better than Harvard law grad and Jewess Elena Kagan who sitting on the high court for no other reason than her Jewishness and Jewish political power and influence? There’s plenty of white gentile judges with state law school degrees that are far more qualified than her.

    Gerry Spence, one of the most legendary and renowned defense attorneys in U.S. history only went to Wyoming college of law. I’ll take someone like him as my counsel any day over the average grad of Harvard or Yale.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  88. @res

    Another thing those charts show is that liberal judicial activism really did sabotage the country in the 1960s. At the beginning of the decade, the median justice on both charts takes a sudden and steep lurch to the left. After a decade of skyrocketing crime and every other social pathology, the Court seems to realize they effed up bad and tries to course correct, but even five decades on, we’re still living with the consequences of their hippie-era dalliance.

    • Replies: @res
  89. Anonymous[266] • Disclaimer says:
    @Twinkie

    Brett Kavanaugh is a Bushie who got married in an Episcopal church in Georgetown with George and Laura Bush in attendance. Only a loser cuck who grew up Catholic would get married in a church founded by a king wanting a divorce. Episcopal. LMAO. About a couple notches down in sacredness than getting married by a friend ordained by the Universal Life Church to perform your wedding.

    • Agree: Travis
    • Replies: @Johann Ricke
  90. Cautiously optimistic. Judge K seems spot-on, though FOX was reporting that Rand Paul may have issues over K’s reading of the Fourth Amendment. Would like to hear him questioned on that point.

  91. Rapparee says:
    @herp derp

    “Protestants started birth controlling their offspring aggressively in the 60s. Catholics did not.”

    There was a Catholic lag relative to Protestants on this, but actually a bit earlier, corresponding strongly with the Baby Boom. Anglicans caved in 1930 (contraception was already secretly common amongst the upper classes), and most other denominations followed suit shortly thereafter. Catholic opposition was solid until the late ’50s and early ’60s, when liberal theologians and priests started floating the idea of a reversal. Eventually, it was concluded that the teaching was irreversible (contraception has been condemned as far back as the first-century Didache) and Humanae Vitae was issued in 1968, but by then many Catholic married couples had been contracepting for nearly a decade with the tacit or even explicit permission of their priests. Liberal theologians threw a giant hissy fit over the encyclical, and the Vatican’s utterly spineless and craven response to their tantrum ensured that the teaching would never be mentioned again from the pulpit for the next half-century.

    • Replies: @Anon
  92. President Mueller has made his choice. Now let’s see him defend it!

  93. Protestants decided a ways back there that if we gave up on all forms of subuniversal solidarity, then everyone would be cool with us ruling the world.

    In the meantime we haven’t gotten around to noticing that it hasn’t worked and/or we’ve lost interest in ruling the world. Haven’t gotten around to develop much subuniversal solidarity though.

    • Replies: @Charles Pewitt
  94. SBaker says:
    @Excal

    Your comment sounds as if it was lifted from the Jerusalem Post.

  95. We’ve got both kinds of justices in this joint- Catholic and Jewish!

    Though it would be more diverse if it were 5-4 instead of 6-3. Should have nominated Volokh.

  96. I don’t trust a man — nor a woman — who can’t come up with multiple spellings for the name of that guy who wrote about the gulag archipelago.

    Solz-hen-it-sen

    Solz-hen-net-syn

    Solz-hin-et-syne

    Alex Saltmarsh would be easier, but these Russian bastards don’t do nothing easy.

  97. Jack D says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    No one was supposed to vote for the US Senate, the body which consents to the President’s S. Ct. choices. Senators were supposed to be appointed by the state legislatures. Since the Republicans control most state legislatures (and would control even more of them if women did not vote) then K would have been a sure thing for confirmation.

    At this point K is pitching himself to the 2 women RINO senators and to the 3 or 4 red state Democrats whose votes he has a chance of receiving and to the voters of their states. Those are the only votes that are in play. All the other votes are predetermined and we are going to see a lot of Kabuki theater between now and this fall as the players pretend they are still making up their minds. Casey of PA at least had the integrity to come out and say something true yesterday (before K was announced) – he said that he was going to vote against whoever Trump nominated. The same is true of 90+% of the Democrat senators so what is the point of holding hearings in which they quiz K about various issues (other than the Senate Judiciary Committee members (of both parties) LOVE to see themselves on TV)? It’s like a job interview where the interviewer has already decided not to hire you even before you walked in the door, so what is the point of the charade?

  98. anonymous[331] • Disclaimer says:
    @Karl

    10-ee-cee Coates on Bastille Day.

  99. If I was the sort to imagine that Trump really does play 4D chess, I could see how appointing a very moderate “conservative”, who probably would’ve been considered a moderate Democrat ten years ago, would set off howls of rage and accusations of NAZI!!! from the left, thus showing them to be even more unhinged then everyone already thought.

    Continuing with my fantasy, this would make the left blow their wad too soon, allowing Trump to appoint a real far right judge. As others have pointed out, as long as the right continues with this “balanced and fair” crap, they will only continue to lose.

    A guy can dream can’t he?

    • Replies: @Jack D
  100. @Desiderius

    Protestants decided a ways back there that if we gave up on all forms of subuniversal solidarity, then everyone would be cool with us ruling the world.

    The Southern Anglo-Celts ain’t so cool anymore with the American Empire. Northern WASP turds did indeed buy off the Southern English with military bases and rural electrification and telling the Southern English not to go barefoot around where the pigs shit, but all that is by the wayside now. That was nice of the Northern English.

    Trump won the votes of the Southern English and he won with the votes of the Germans in the Great Lakes states. Trumpy used the German Strategy to overcome the WASP/JEW ruling class of the American Empire. Trumpy’ll do it again and again.

    The Portland to Portland WASP continuum will be wiped out of power when the dipshit English Southerners understand that the central banker shysters have all the power. The moron Southern English have a lot of the US military behind them, they just need to gain control of the Federal Reserve Bank and the electronics to take over the American Empire.

    The American Empire is an electronic empire. The currency; the propaganda; the command and control of the nuclear weapons…

  101. anonymous[552] • Disclaimer says:
    @Old Palo Altan

    All Jesuit education is way overrated. There is no there there. It’s just a status marker for RCs, especially those of the Paddy and Dago variety.

    • Replies: @Old Palo Altan
  102. @Dan Hayes

    I hope K does a Clarence Thomas or Oliver North if some moron like Feinstein starts demanding he grovel. “Yeah, I ruled against the illegal because that’s what the law says. So what’s it to you?”

  103. Jack D says:
    @res

    I think he will do just fine. He is not going to be the partisan bomb thrower that some people here are dreaming of, who can’t wait to set fire to the entire liberal edifice built over the last 50 years, but he is going to be a good solid conservative vote along the lines of Gorsuch.

    Partisans on both sides always say “the other side is always extreme so why can’t we pick our own extremists to balance out theirs?”. That way lies hell. 90% of what the Supreme Ct. does is non-partisan and you need people with sober judicial temperaments to work this kind of stuff out. Scalia and RBG were close personal friends (not THAT close – Scalia was married and faithful). K was picked to teach at Harvard by Kagan. And that is how it should be in a functioning republic. Coulter and Maddow have their place but it is not on the Supreme Court.

    • Replies: @res
    , @Anon
    , @Svigor
  104. Brett isn’t really the ideal name for a Supreme Court justice. Maybe we can help him come up with more distinguished nickname like Whizzer.

    • Replies: @Father O'Hara
  105. @Anonymous

    My sense is that Scalia was a big inspiration for conservative Catholics over the last 30 years. It’s possible that his profound presence on the Extreme Court was enough to drive Catholics to law school and to make others a generation younger pursue a higher career in judicial positions.

    Or maybe Catholics are just better at this stuff. Serious Protestants go into ministry wherever they want while the Catholics are hamstrung by their hierarchy. So the deep thinkers become lawyers and judges.

    • Replies: @Rapparee
    , @Desiderius
  106. @Jack D

    It’s like a job interview where the interviewer has already decided not to hire you even before you walked in the door, so what is the point of the charade?

    Yep, not at all what the Founders intended by “approval of the Senate”, is it? It’s nothing but our-side-vs-your-side at this point. Well, the exception to that is when the D SC nominee is being voted on by the GOP cucks and they play it all straight by Robert’s Rules of Order. (I’m starting to think they are not stupid, as they are mostly all on the same team.)

    On the direct election of Senators point, you are preaching to the choir on Amendment XVII, Jack. I noticed, because I AM one of those noticers, that the FED act, Amends, 16 and 17, woman’s voting rights, etc. all seemed to get implemented about a century ago. What’s up with that?!

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    , @Reg Cæsar
  107. prusmc says: • Website
    @ken

    Expect a negative vote of 52 to 47 unless McCain is carried in on a stretcher for a final FU. Possibly his wife will replace him to vote no making it 53 negative. Flake will give a goodbye back stab and Murcowski and Collins join the democrats as votes of “conscience”.

    • Replies: @Svigor
  108. “Ah Kavanaugh… is that Morris or Pierre???”

    “Sally Ann Kavanaugh…”.

  109. Alfa158 says:
    @SonOfStrom

    I don’t trust Barrett or Kethledge so I hope that they will only be used as misdirection props again for the RBG replacement.
    Also someone posted unconfirmed stories that The Wise Latinx has barely controlled diabetes that has required EMT intervention in the past, so there may be an opportunity for a fourth appointment.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    , @Jack Hanson
  110. Jack D says:
    @KenH

    A side effect of AA is that those (like Judge K) who are not its beneficiaries have to be extra-extra good to get in. Someone like Gerry Spence has street smarts but in terms of intellectual horsepower, you would be hard pressed to argue that someone like K is not the elite of the elite. That being said (as a grad of a different Ivy that used to send judges to the S. Ct. back in the day) , I don’t understand the modern trend toward Harvard and Yale only – it wouldn’t kill them to take someone from one of the other top 10 schools now and then.

    • Replies: @KenH
  111. Jack D says:
    @Johnny Smoggins

    It is no secret, and it will not change anyone’s mind, that the Left was going to oppose whoever Trump nominated even if he was Souter’s twin brother. The Woman’s March organization had a press release ready says ” XX will take away women’s rights and we oppose his nomination. XX is an extremist, blah, blah, blah.” When K was nominated, they sent out this press release and forgot to substitute K’s name for XX in several places.

    K to me seems just right – neither too squishy nor too extreme to get thru Congress – Trump is playing the ball down the fairway but on the right side of it. Schumer is going to make a lot of noise but, unless they can find some real dirt on the man (a fondness for altar boys), Schumer is destined to lose (and he knows that he is).

    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
  112. Bill says:
    @Sarah Toga

    American Catholicism has all the same problems, though. Maybe just not quite so far advanced.

  113. Bill says:
    @slumber_j

    “Resting Smirk-Face”

    That’s awesome. It is your coinage?

    • Replies: @slumber_j
  114. Bill says:
    @Dr. X

    Stevens was the last Protestant, and he turned out to be a flaming liberal.

    Did you mean to say Souter, who was the last Protestant before Gorsuch? Or do Episcopalians just not count as Protestants for you? Stevens was a long time ago.

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
  115. Bill says:
    @Auntie Analogue

    My concern is the way that conservatives appointed to the SCOTUS have, once seated thereon, shown a dismaying tendency to turn left. Presuming his confirmation, Kavanaugh’s votes as a SCOTUS justice will deserve our closest scrutiny.

    Why, it’s almost as if the GOP makes it a habit of screwing its base.

  116. Longtime-Steve reader here–I’ve known Brett for 20 years. Awesome choice. More right-wing than he lets on (and what he let’s on is plenty right-wing). He’s played this perfectly. More like Alito than Scalia (who let pet theories lead him off the deep end at times). He’s a member of Congressional, but not (I think) Burning Tree, so they can’t get him on that. His academic stuff has scrubbed the taint of his working for Ken Starr. It’s also pretty bland. He’s very smart, but not really an intellectual, which is good. Thank goodness it’s not Barrett, but I fear we haven’t heard the last of, if RBG dies in the next year or two.

  117. res says:
    @Almost Missouri

    Looking at the first chart the shift left appears to have been a two stage process. There was a solid six justice conservative group in 1950. By the late 1950s all but one of these were gone with four being replaced by much more liberal justices (what was Eisenhower thinking?). Frankfurter’s shift rightward from 1955 to 1962 helped compensate for that (he was median justice during much of that time). Then the median justice shifted hard left in 1962 when Frankfurter retired and Whittaker had a nervous breakdown (the latter in hindsight seems pivotal to enabling the changes in the 1960s), both being replaced by more liberal justices (Goldberg and White).

    Chief Justice Warren’s shift leftward from 1955-1962 was also dramatic and important.

    Then there was a third stage of a shift back rightwards in 1969-1970 when Warren retired and Fortas resigned–replaced by much more conservative Burger and Blackmun respectively.

    Another interesting thing about the Supreme Court in the 1960s was the resignations of three justices: Whittaker, Goldberg, and Fortas. There were only four resignations from 1880-1960 (and none since 1970) and the Whittaker and Fortas resignations were both important to the balance of the court (respectively the 1962 move left and 1970 move right).

    It would be interesting to calculate a metric for shift in view for each instance of a justice being replaced. And then map that to things like the party balance of the senate and president at nomination and confirmation.

    One interesting characteristic of the current court is that five of the current justices had more than 30 negative votes at confirmation (Thomas, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Gorsuch). Close votes were uncommon historically, even right before the Civil War (with the notable exception of 26-23 for Clifford in 1858, and a series of three votes with a quarter or third negative in 1836-1837).

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Justices_of_the_Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States

    was useful for resignation, succession, and confirmation vote data.

    P.S. This bit from Whittaker’s Wikipedia page makes for some interesting what if speculation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Evans_Whittaker#Final_years

    At the behest of Chief Justice Earl Warren, Whittaker recused himself from the case and retired from the Court effective March 31, 1962, citing exhaustion from the heavy workload and stress.[3]

    Final years

    Effective September 30, 1965, Whittaker resigned his position as a retired Justice in order to become chief counsel to General Motors. He also became a resolute critic of the Warren Court as well as the Civil Rights Movement, characterizing the civil disobedience of the type practiced by Martin Luther King, Jr. and his followers as lawless. He wrote a piece for the FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin that advised protesters to use courts instead of taking to the streets.[5]

    Whittaker died in 1973 at St. Luke’s Hospital in Kansas City of a ruptured abdominal aneurysm.[6][7]

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  118. @Diversity Heretic

    The last non-Harvard/Yale justice was Rehnquist, the last state law school graduate was O’Connor.

    O’Connor went to Stanford Law, along with Rehnquist.

    http://125.stanford.edu/the-law-school-class-of-1952/

    Former Chief Justice William Rehnquist, ’48 MA ’48 LLB ’52, himself an Army Air Corps veteran, and former Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, ’50, LLB ’52, are the only Supreme Court justices in U.S. history to come from the same law school class.

  119. pyrrhus says:
    @slumber_j

    Goldman can always use another well connected commie–Faust is perfect.

  120. Anon[173] • Disclaimer says:
    @herp derp

    germanics are very weak on these topics.

    What about the residents of the Bavarian and Prussian regions?

  121. Berty says:

    Hey Anonymous, if you want to maintain your veil of anonymity then constantly using buzzwords like “Bushie” instantly gives you away. Of course you’re a troll, so you’ll keep doing what you do.

    Or you could choose a handle and stick with it and maybe we’d take you seriously.

  122. res says:
    @Jack D

    Partisans on both sides always say “the other side is always extreme so why can’t we pick our own extremists to balance out theirs?”. That way lies hell.

    Yes. And a very distressing trend that is. Looking at the 2016 version of the charts I inlined above, today’s court is notable for its lack of moderates (just Roberts and, until now, Kennedy). This makes the nomination and confirmation process ever more contentious. Especially for the few moderate seats–like this one.

    I can only see the nomination and confirmation process becoming more contentious. And, absent any substantial shifts in the views of the current justices or overall court composition, I wonder what kind of Hell will break loose when it is time to replace Roberts.

    Do you have any thoughts on the idea that the court will (or has) polarize into left and right seats with a strong expectation that replacements will respect that even if the president and senate are biased the opposite way? I think that trend was definitely in evidence in the post-Scalia discussions. Some of the historical appointments (e.g. Nixon’s) are notable for how much they were the opposite of that.

    One thing that I had not realized (do you agree with the chart on this?) was Scalia’s leftward shift from 2000-2015. The chart places Gorsuch right at Scalia’s endpoint which was not the sense I had.

    I would very much like to see where K would fall on those charts (e.g. relative to Gorsuch). I am guessing if he is confirmed Roberts will become the median justice (seems to be the consensus, right?). That is a pretty large shift in the median by historical standards. I think this is a good thing, but I can see why the Dems would be more concerned about K than they were about Gorsuch.

    It would also be interesting to know where Garland would have fallen on those charts.

    P.S. I wish I understood the cause of the differences between the 2012 and 2016 versions of those charts. They differ in important ways.

    P.P.S. One thing about those charts is that I don’t think the 0 point is an objective reality. I think it is filtered through a “relative to present day thinking” filter. I’m not sure if my observation is correct, and if so whether or not that is a good or bad thing (though it would be deceptive IMHO). Has anyone done an analysis giving a trend line for “present day thinking”? I mean SSM would not even fit on the chart circa 1935.

    • Replies: @Mark F.
    , @Ian M.
  123. CCZ says:

    A California “resister” proposes a way to block the nomination.

    Gaius Publius: How to Block the Trump Nomination: [How To] Shut Down the Senate

    https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2018/07/gaius-publius-block-trump-nomination-shut-senate.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+NakedCapitalism+%28naked+capitalism%29

    He concludes the results of his strategy would be: “This move would put Democrats in a position of unblockable power until a future election changed the numbers. They could force — not ask, but force — the nomination to wait until after the 2018 election.”

    • Replies: @fish
    , @Crawfurdmuir
  124. Anon[173] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D

    Where would Kavanaugh come out on birthright citizenship?

  125. Anon[277] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rapparee

    So the Church Fathers can abrogate my responsibility for my own actions? What did they say about double parking?

  126. @anonymous

    The Paddy and Dago variety?

    In the USA, what other kind is there? At Bellarmine, my Anglo (indeed famously Wasp) name made me a remarkable and not always appreciated anomaly.

    • Replies: @Flip
    , @Jack Hanson
  127. Dan Hayes says:
    @It's All Ball Bearings

    It’s All Ball Bearings:

    Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

    Question: Whatever happened to Hill?
    Answer: She’s followed a natural regression from Oral Roberts University to Brandeis University.

  128. Dan Hayes says:
    @Old Palo Altan

    Old Palo Alto:

    You are correct about Georgetown Prep being a vile place. That’s why Gorsuch earned his spurs there as a conservative bomb thrower against its pervasive political and religious liberalism!

    • Replies: @Old Palo Altan
  129. Mark F. says:
    @res

    Scalia had a bit of a libertarian streak on a few issues like flag burning.

  130. Svigor says:
    @Anonymous

    Yeah he looks cucky. No, I don’t care if he rolled the dice twice and got two daughters. No, I’m not thrilled about another bloody Catholic. Yes, Bergoglio is a heretic.

    But so far I’m hearing good things about his immigration history, so that’s a good thing. Seems a lot better than that Barrett chick or Kethlidge or Kethridge or whatever his name is – the one who donated legal services to immigrants.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
  131. Svigor says:
    @Jack D

    Partisans on both sides always say “the other side is always extreme so why can’t we pick our own extremists to balance out theirs?”. That way lies hell.

    Hell it is then. The left can always back off, if they don’t like it.

    • Agree: L Woods
  132. Svigor says:
    @prusmc

    Or maybe all the geriatrics will be more worried about their futures in GOPe (who don’t take kindly to ****ing about with SCotUS picks) and toe the party line.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
  133. slumber_j says:
    @Bill

    It is your coinage?

    It is, and thanks.

    • Replies: @scrivener3
  134. Flip says:
    @Old Palo Altan

    Lots of German Catholics in the Midwest.

    • Replies: @Old Palo Altan
  135. @Desiderius

    That’s the nickname the Dems are trying to place on Trump!

  136. Anon[325] • Disclaimer says:

    I’m glad the pick wasn’t Barrett. I knew she was a fool when I heard she adopted two Haitian kids. Considering that any Haitian kid up for adoption is likely coming from parents who have lower IQs than normal for Haiti, and Haiti has the rock bottom IQs in the Western Hemisphere, those kids are going to be struggling to do normal-level school work by fifth grade. Nor are they going to be able to function normally as adults in a complicated western society. There are plenty of kids in the US who could use adopting who would have a a better set of genes. The woman is a blockhead.

    For some people, adopting Haitian kids is just like a king installing a dwarf in the royal household. They aren’t doing it to be nice. They’re doing it because they’re narcissists who like having something around to feel superior to. They always pick warped Curiosities, and the more freakish, the better. It’s something they can get away with it in this day and age, whereas they would be criticized for putting a black lawn jockey in their yard.

    • Replies: @EdwardM
  137. Rapparee says:
    @stillCARealist

    Anyone who has read much Thomas Aquinas can easily imagine him winding up a Supreme Court justice if he had been born 700 years later in the USA. Exposure to medieval Scholasticism is probably good preparation for law school. The Catholic Church also still operates its own elaborate independent legal system that rivals plenty of secular courts in size and complexity.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  138. @res

    “Effective September 30, 1965, Whittaker resigned his position as a retired Justice in order to become chief counsel to General Motors.”

    I don’t know what it was like in 1965, but today, leaving the Supreme Court for a Chief Counsel job at a major corporation would be an order of magnitude MORE stressful. Kinda weird.

    • Replies: @res
  139. @Svigor

    He looks like Harriet Miers part two.

    Maybe he’s the fall guy that gets the normals riled up enough to vote.

  140. @Flip

    I was being, er, flippant.

  141. res says:
    @Almost Missouri

    That whole situation seems kinda weird. There were 3.5 years (exactly, perhaps not a coincidence?) between his resignation (as justice, he was a “retired Justice” in the interim apparently and then resigned from that?) and that GM chief counsel job so perhaps he was able to get things sorted out and then moved on.

    Does anyone know what exactly this means: “Whittaker resigned his position as a retired Justice”?

    • Replies: @Hibernian
  142. @Achmed E. Newman

    The Great War hit the world right in the nads.

    Though the beginning of the end was the income tax in 13. Income being change in wealth an income tax is the ultimate regressive policy.

  143. @Dan Hayes

    Yes, I remember liking his “Fascism Forever” club, even after it turned out to have been no more than a yearbook joke.

    • Agree: Dan Hayes
  144. @Anonymous

    Only a loser cuck who grew up Catholic would get married in a church founded by a king wanting a divorce. Episcopal. LMAO. About a couple notches down in sacredness than getting married by a friend ordained by the Universal Life Church to perform your wedding.

    And yet, on that religious basis (i.e. schism vis-a-vis Rome), the English decapitated Charles I, and continued their wars with France for centuries. Say what you will about Anglicanism – it wasn’t always a milk-and-water religion, and its adherents certainly gave English Catholics enough reason for angst to trigger Guy Fawkes’s assassination plot.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    , @LondonBob
  145. A Cavanaugh was mayor during the Detroit riots.

    For that matter, a relative of John Updike was mayor during the NYC draft riots.

  146. Jack D says:

    Gee, the man must be a genius. I suppose no one has ever read the Constitution or thought of this before he did.

    In fact it is based on a false premise:

    “nowhere in our government is there a mechanism but shame for compelling congressional attendance.”

    This is not true. When a quorum call goes out, the Sergeant at Arms has the right to physically drag the absent members onto the floor.

    https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Getting_even.htm

    We have a remarkably stupid “resistance” , thank God.

    • Replies: @fish
    , @Jim Don Bob
  147. Anonymous[138] • Disclaimer says:

    Kavanaugh seems like the right pick. He has a long, fairly conservative track record as a judge and is well-liked and respected by his peers. Based on his affable personality, I don’t think he’s gonna be as ideologically reliable as Scalia was. Nonetheless, he’s a good pick. At the very least, Kavanaugh is an improvement over Kennedy.

    In contrast, Barrrett was only recently appointed by Trump and has very little experience as a judge. After she’s been a judge for a few years and shown a consistent track record of conservatism and competence, I’m fine with appointing her to Ginsberg’s spot as soon as she dies. It would be great to see Barrett write the opinion on the case that eventually overturns Roe v. Wade, if only to see liberals fuming at a woman leading the charge against abortion.

    Additionally, Sotomayor is not very old, but has poor health, so it’s feasible Trump could appoint another two justices after Kavanaugh, meaning 4/9 judges on the Supreme Court would be Trump appointees (yet another reason why the NeverTrumpers should all be tossed out of flying helicopters).

  148. anonymous[394] • Disclaimer says:
    @TTSSYF

    The conservative evangelical subculture is finished in the age of girls and women on social media 24/7.

    I’m not saying theyll all leave the church–just that if they stay they will turn evangelical christianity into purely spastic, feminine bleeding heart nonsense (obviously it was much better when it was nonsense + patriarchy)

  149. fish says:
    @CCZ

    That is the worst comment thread I’ve ever seen! Makes SacBee.com look positively intellectual in comparison!

    NakedCapitalism.com has blown for years!

  150. fish says:
    @Jack D

    This is not true. When a quorum call goes out, the Sergeant at Arms has the right to physically drag the absent members onto the floor.

    “Might I suggest using your nightstick officer”!

    Eddie Murphy – “Trading Places”

  151. @CCZ

    Democrats in Wisconsin tried absenting themselves to thwart Gov. Walker by denying the state legislature a quorum. It didn’t work for them.

    It impresses me that a great many of the ‘resistance’ tactics now being used against Trump had their dress rehearsal in use against Walker in Wisconsin, including obstructionism in the legislature, massive riotous demonstrations, ‘lawfare’ attacks by an overreaching Democrat prosecutor, etc. They largely failed.

  152. Dr. Doom says:

    With a Fistful of Traitors, he picked the one who Jeb Bush liked.

    El Presidente Donald Duck.

    In other news, small gang of traitors gives finger to 40 Million Gun Owners.

    Mole News says he’s the guy that the neocons trust to push their values on “flyover country”.
    Can Moles Fly, then?

  153. @Anonymous

    If he is confirmed there will be six catholics on SCOTUS.

    3+1+6=9? Hmm. That’s not what Sister Mary Antonine taught us in 2nd grade.

    I’d prefer that these appointments were unimportant because the Supreme Court was operating pretty much like an AI program operating on the Constitution and federal law. Unfortunately that is not the case. As bad as things were before, we have an elite, basically hostile to republican government. So we have these philosopher kings weighing in all the time with their deep knowledge and insight.

    If the Supremes are going to be this un-elected, un-restrained rule making body, then yes, one could argue the court ought to be more “representative”. Jews are wildly, wildly over-represented. (Ideal: never more than one.) And Catholics mildly over-represented. (Ideal: 3 in background, one Hispanic, two white and two practicing.)

    Personally, i’m happy with anyone who is inclined to even mildly nudge us back toward representative government, federalism and the Constitution. Right now these folks are completely out of control. The district court rulings against Trump’s “Muslim ban” were appalling, directly contrary to federal law. (Trump should have ignored them.) But even the Supreme Court vindication was appalling, with even the “conservative” justices seeming to believe they have the authority to parse the President’s immigration actions for malice or prejudice against Muslims as if Americans aren’t entitled to excluding people from their nation on the basis of religion or race or for any damn reason they choose.

    The judicial branch is simply out of control. The left likes that because it’s a method to drive their agenda where they can’t win elections. We simply must reign in these black robed tyrants or any prospects of living in a free society and recovering from the disaster will be gone.

    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
    • Replies: @Hibernian
  154. Dissident says:
    @KenH

    But at least he’s not Jewish. Three’s enough and we know how they vote.

    Hypothetically, if there were a SCOTUS candidate who had unsurpassed credentials as a qualified, competent, committed, reliable originalist but he was also a Jew, would you reject him on the basis of the latter?

    • Replies: @KenH
  155. @Bill

    High Anglicans are something like Catholics with a different pope.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
  156. @Svigor

    Only if McConnell grows a pair and starts enforcing party discipline like Shumer does all the time.

    Sam Rayburn told his peeps that, unless a vote would hurt them in their district, they were expected to vote as told, or they could kiss things like committee chairmanships good by.

    The Rs forever have let “mavericks” like McCain (POS-AZ) vote against the party and still enjoy its perks.

  157. Dissident says:
    @Anonymous

    another top elite guy with no sons.

    Are you suggesting some type of deliberate scheme here?

  158. Dissident says:
    @Shingas the Terrible

    What I do care about is the highest court validating the Trump campaign to deport illegals, shut off travel from foreign shitholes, and finally get a border wall with military garrisons guarding it in a security zone.

    What about mandatory e-Verify? Where does that rank on your scale of priorities?

    • Replies: @Shingas the Terrible
  159. @KenH

    Reading your comment about him boasting about his mama teaching at majority black high schools bringing tears to your eyes brought tears to my eyes.

    Some of my best friends ever, like, in the whole wide world, are black.

    • LOL: KenH
  160. Dr. X says:

    Souter retired before Stevens did…so Stevens was the last Protestant on the Court, but not the last one nominated.

  161. Dissident says:
    @Twinkie

    Re: “the dogma lives loudly within”, etc.:

    As if Progressives/Democrats/Leftists/Cultural Marxists/SJWs are any less dogmatic…

    Reminds me of the time I heard David Sedaris, in an interview with former WNYC host Leonard Lopate*, remark that what ‘got’ him the most about [Badwhites; conservative/traditionalist religious types] was just how absolutely, unquestioningly certain they were in the correctness of their beliefs. Sedaris said he just couldn’t get over that.

    Sedaris, Lopate, et al., of course, being exemplars of independent, careful thought and consideration. I mean, can there be any doubt, whether on race, sex, sexuality, abortion or any other highly polarized question, that the positions held by the aforesaid individuals (ones that just happen to align perfectly with The Mandated Narrative) were arrived at only after many hours of careful, critical thought and consideration? {cue Radio Derb‘s stock laughter clip}

    *Lopate has since become an apparent victim of what would appear to be #MeToo purgery at its most absurd:
    New York radio station WNYC’s avocado controversy is the pits

    According to a WNYC news report detailing several complaints against Lopate, an unnamed producer told the station’s management that while she was preparing to do a segment on a cookbook, Lopate offered an explanation of how the avocado got its name. He told her it derives from an Aztec word meaning “testicle.”

  162. Simon says:
    @Daniel Williams

    Perfect! (And clearly written like a guy who’s read more than his share of Tinder listings.)

  163. Veritatis says:
    @Twinkie

    You caught that little slip too.. Icthys times may be upon us, all over the world.

  164. Anon7 says:

    Here is a video of President Trump’s speech nominating Kavanaugh, and the judge’s subsequent speech. If you skip ahead to Judge Kavanaugh’s remarks, you’ll note that he spends about half his time complementing his mother, his wife and his daughters.

    Is this really necessary? The Democrats will fall upon him like wolves, what possible effect would his unctuous praise of women have? And he’s not commending his mom for being a good mother, but for going to law school when he was ten, effectively abandoning him to latchkey caretakers (if any).

    Now that we know how the Dems will come at him, by attempting a #MeToo strategy because of his past association with powerful men with dubious records involving women in the work place, will this immunize him in the public mind?

    Hopefully the Republicans have enough votes and enough motivation for a quick confirmation.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    , @Desiderius
  165. scrivener3 says: • Website
    @slumber_j

    Good, but derivative

    Resting bitch face, also known as RBF, or bitchy resting face, is a facial expression which unintentionally appears as if a person is angry, annoyed, irritated, or contemptuous, particularly when the individual is relaxed, resting or not expressing any emotion.[2][3]

    The concept has been studied by psychologists and may have psychological implications related to facial biases, gender stereotypes, human judgement, and decision making

  166. Anon[250] • Disclaimer says:
    @Dan Hayes

    As a foreigner .. And thinking Trump is not a ‘three-moves-ahead’ planner.. Is it probable he intends for his first nominee to go down during confirmation process, and is really hoping to get the woman “loud dogma within” in the end?

  167. Simon says:

    Re Clarence Thomas:

    Love the guy — love the fact that, among other things, he seems to be more pro-cop than pro-individual-liberties — but wouldn’t it be nice if he, too, announced his retirement right now, before there’s any chance of the GOP losing the Senate? After all, he’s 70. Realistically, how many more years does he have to serve? Imagine replacing him with a conservative in his 50s.

    Re Anita Hill:

    I remember watching the hearings day after day. She struck me as an uptight priss. And there are so many examples, over the years, of her cowardice, treachery, and opportunism… But one that has always struck me, and that I haven’t seen mentioned, is the fact that — at least so far as I’m aware — upon leaving her job, she never warned whatever woman succeeded her that the boss might be a tad flirtatious. Supposedly she complained to a friend or two that Thomas had come on to her, but wouldn’t you think she’d have said something to alert her innocent replacement? Didn’t she owe a fellow female that consideration?

    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
  168. KenH says:
    @Jack D

    Kavanaugh possesses an elite legal mind and intellect and is eminently qualified for SCOTUS. That’s not in dispute. But could you find another rightist judge who’s about the same age with similar qualifications but who went to a state law school? Probably.

    No doubt Harvard and Yale still attract some highly intelligent law school students when you subtract the affirmative action/SJW contingent. But there’s also the prestige and networking factor of an Ivy League school, particularly Harvard and Yale, in the halls of power in D.C. and this gives them an advantage in job openings.

    Not all top students desire to attend Harvard or Yale Law. There’s others that could easily get accepted (if they don’t get bumped by the quota crowd) but may not be able to afford it or wish to travel half way across the country.

    • Agree: Dissident
    • Replies: @Hibernian
    , @Desiderius
  169. Svigor says:
    @Dr. X

    So it’s got to be the right kind of Protestant, like a Southern Baptist… not an Episcopalian, because Episcopalians have been overtaken by flamboyant gays and lesbians.

    Just so you know, my background is Episcopalian. I haven’t been to church in about 20 years, and your point is correct, but…just sayin’.

  170. @Tiny Duck

    Yes it does, you and Leonard Pitts are both morons.

  171. Hibernian says:
    @Sarah Toga

    Evangelicals don’t care much for Latin but they study Hebrew and Greek. Ken Starr is an Evangelical. Wheaton college graduates are no dummies. Kethledge is a conservative Protestant and I hoped he’d get the nod. We Catholics ought to be represented on SCOTUS by a few Italian-Americans like Scalia and Alito; they seemed better at holding to their convictions than the Irish-Americans Roberts and especially Kennedy.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @RadicalCenter
  172. Anon[174] • Disclaimer says:
    @Hibernian

    Didn’t Kethledge have a reputation of being soft on immigration?

    • Replies: @Hibernian
  173. Hibernian says:
    @AnotherDad

    “(Ideal: 3 in background, one Hispanic, two white and two practicing.)”

    Never trust a non-practicing Catholic. (I was one for almost a decade.)

  174. Hibernian says:
    @Alfa158

    Some diabetics live a long time. Let’s not be ghoulish.

  175. @Jack D

    … the Sergeant at Arms has the right to physically drag the absent members onto the floor.

    How about Congress gets him to arrest Stroszk for contempt and throw him in jail for a while.

  176. Hibernian says:
    @Anon

    Some people seem to think so. I’m not sure if it had anything to do with his jurisprudence or if it was based on some church related charitable work.

  177. Hibernian says:
    @KenH

    “But could you find another rightist judge who’s about the same age with similar qualifications but who went to a state law school?”

    You bet your sweet bippy you could. Especially if the state law school was Michigan, Virginia, Boalt Hall, UCLA, Illinois, Wisconsin, etc.

  178. Hibernian says:
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Very few Anglicans are truly “almost Catholic,” with only reluctance to accept the leadership of the Pope to separate them from us RCs.

  179. Hibernian says:
    @Johann Ricke

    Those early Anglicans were romping stomping guys politically and militarily, but theological “flexibility” was baked in the cake from the start.

  180. @Dissident

    An integral part of the package, my man, right up there with a review of voter registration rolls, and the upholding of state voter ID laws…

    • Replies: @Dissident
  181. Hibernian says:
    @res

    There’s something called “senior status” where retired Justices occasionally sit on lower courts. I think Sandra O’ Connor is on senior status.

    • Replies: @res
  182. Dan Hayes says:
    @Simon

    Simon:

    Why should Thomas take any such retirement since he’s only 70 years old? Ruth Bader Ginsburg is still serving at 85 despite two separate cancer operations and a stent!

    BTW one must give Justice Thomas the utmost respect and admiration for the guff he has courageously endured from members of his own race. That takes guts and fortitude.

    • Replies: @Simon
  183. Hibernian says:
    @Sylvester Stallone

    What does Apollo Creed have to say?

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  184. Hibernian says:
    @Old Palo Altan

    It’s hard to imagine an Irish Catholic 3rd generation Yalie, unless they’re in the cast of characters of Stephen Birmingham”s “Real Lace.”

    • Replies: @Old Palo Altan
    , @Benjaminl
  185. donut says:

    It makes no difference who Trump picks . It’s over , fall back and regroup . Only a fool would think we could even hold what we’ve got .

  186. res says:
    @Hibernian

    Thanks! More on “senior status”:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senior_status

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/retired-supreme-court-justices-still-judge–and-get-judged/2013/03/10/1b22943c-897f-11e2-8d72-dc76641cb8d4_story.html

    The second link actually concludes with something about Whittaker:

    But former justice Charles E. Whittaker probably got the worst treatment from a former colleague.

    The request to have a retired justice serve is made from a court to the chief justice. Whittaker, who left the high court in 1962, was prepared to serve. But Myers quotes from a book by David N. Atkinson that says Chief Justice Earl Warren nixed the idea of Whittaker.

    Warren reportedly told another judge, “Tell him that I never could get him to make up his mind, and I’ll be damned if I will let him do that to me again trying cases.

    “So the answer is no.”

    I am guessing retired justice status is incompatible with private sector employment which is why he had to resign from that just before starting his GM job.

  187. KenH says:
    @Dissident

    would you reject him on the basis of the latter?

    No, but only if he had a long and distinguished record of originalist rulings and ruling against the left when they file lawsuits seeking extra Constitutional rights and privileges for the rainbow coalition. There are a few exceptions but it’s almost like a needle in a haystack. It seems the vast majority of Jewish judges are leftist and activist.

    But assuming this mythical Jewish judge of yours didn’t fall into that category I could probably support him/her.

    • Replies: @Dissident
  188. Ian M. says:
    @res

    The Court made up of only left-wing extremists and right-wing extremists?

    No, there is no such thing as a right-wing extremist in the modern political setting. We have left-liberals and right-liberals, all of whom are extreme liberals. Our system is designed to portray as polarizing opposites what in actuality is a very narrow political spectrum. No one in modern politics actually questions the underlying liberal principles of our ruling ideology. Moderns can hardly conceive of what such a thing would even look like.

    If one were to zoom out on that graph and graph it on some sort of absolute scale, all those lines would be bunched up near the left-wing extremity of the graph.

    • Replies: @Rob McX
  189. Dissident says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Man, the ctrl-left has had 5 decades to come up with new chants, and it’s still the same old, same old. I am sorely disappointed by their lack of creativity.

    At least Hillary (Rodham-)Clinton gave us something new: Basket of Deplorables. Gotta give her (or at least her speechwriter) credit for that much, as did John Derbyshire did.

  190. Dissident says:
    @L Woods

    If the West wants to die on the pyre of its antiquated ‘principles,’ it can be my guest — it’s not as though I ever had any real stake in it anyway.

    What part of the world do you (a) reside in and (b) identify with?

  191. Rob McX says:
    @Ian M.

    True. The ideological “middle ground” (as defined by the media, academia, etc.) is shifting to the left year by year. Anyone who wants to preserve his country and its ethnic identity is now classified as “extreme right”.

  192. LondonBob says:
    @Johann Ricke

    Not really, Catholics were tolerated by Elizabeth I and James I, no windows in to mens souls, but this wasn’t acceptable to the RC who tried to overthrow the monarch. In contrast when Bloody Mary was on the throne Protestants were burned at the stake wholesale, just for their religious beliefs rather than any political activity.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Protestant_martyrs_of_the_English_Reformation

    • Replies: @Dissident
  193. @Achmed E. Newman

    Address checks to the Jack Hanson Institute for Eeyoritis.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  194. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Auntie Analogue

    My concern is the way that conservatives appointed to the SCOTUS have, once seated thereon, shown a dismaying tendency to turn left.

    The sad fact is that just about every American who identifies as a conservative is actually a right-wing liberal. So conservative politicians and judges etc don’t actually turn left, they just increasingly show themselves in their true liberal colours. If they’re “conservative” on fiscal issues you can pretty much guarantee they’re going to be social liberals.

    Even if they’re Christians it doesn’t mean much these days. Mainstream Christianity is pretty secular liberalism with a thin spiritual veneer. The Protestants are a joke but the Catholics are pretty much liberals as well these days.

    The bottom line is that anyone who rises high enough in the system to be in contention for a job like Supreme Court justice is not going to be genuinely conservative.

  195. @Jack D

    Pretty much this.

    I know here in Autism Town its hard to remember recent history from all the way from a year ago, but remember Nielsen said what she had to in order to get her conformation and then declared that the President had no legal authority to extend DACA once confirmed.

  196. Dissident says:
    @LondonBob

    Your comment and the others in this tangential exchange brought to mind Barnaby Rudge, Charles Dickens’ work of historical fiction centered around the Gordon Riots of 1780.

    Any opinion about the historical accuracy of Dickens’ portrayal? Do you think it reveals or exhibits any biases on the part of the author?

  197. @Alfa158

    That was me.

    Search “Sotomayor health” and you’re going to see multiple “paramedics called to aid Justice” news stories.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    , @RadicalCenter
  198. @Old Palo Altan

    The Gomez version comes to mind.

  199. @Hibernian

    My apologies: his grandfather was indeed a Yale graduate (and then a telephone company executive), but his father was Georgetown. His mother went to Trinity, the women’s college in DC which in the old days (when my grandmother went there, graduating in 1910) was a finishing school for leisured Catholic girls; the idea being that they would meet their future husbands who were at Georgetown or Catholic U. This continued into the Sixties.
    His mother’s father was a Georgetown educated physician, so one might fairly conclude that the Catholic side prevails over the Yalie in Kavanaugh’s educational background.

  200. Dissident says:
    @KenH

    It seems the vast majority of Jewish judges are leftist and activist.

    Alas.

    I would add that, common misconceptions, distortions and conflations notwithstanding, such Jews are far from loyal-to or representative of Judaism.

    (As others have pointed-out, the term Tikkun Olam properly refers-to a concept that involves scrupulous devotion to Judaic Law and moral principles. Applying the term to Cultural Marxist and other Leftist activism is an utter perversion and sacrilege.)

    Thank you for answering.

  201. Dissident says:
    @Shingas the Terrible

    An integral part of the package [mandatory e-Verify], my man, right up there with a review of voter registration rolls, and the upholding of state voter ID laws…

    Does the President agree? When was the last time he advocated for mandatory e-Verify?

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
  202. @Tim Howells

    Hate to admit it, but Cenk Uygur has the goods on this guy. He’s a highly political Bush-Republican activist. Served (very aggressively) on the Ken Starr Special Counsel, and pushed for asking the most embarrassingly obscene questions possible of then President Clinton. Then he flipped completely when serving under GWB and argued that serving Presidents should not be subject to any kind of judicial investigation at all. This guy is a real Deep-State op with no judicial scruples at all, it would seem. Maybe this is what we need, but I don’t think so, and if this stuff comes up in the hearings, it sure will not look good, at least to me.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  203. @Jack Hanson

    Of, course, my brother’s writing out an American Express traveler’s check. He always likes to write em out on the glovebox …

    Go to 03:10

  204. Jack D says:
    @Tim Howells

    The whole “X is a hypocrite” thing is overdone as an indictment of politicians but it really meaningless when it comes to lawyers. Lawyers, like that other profession that they resemble, are paid by their client to take a position. When you are working as a prosecutor, you are all law and order, put the guy in jail and when you become a defense counsel, then you are all the poor man is innocent. This has nothing to do with your own political views. A lawyer is supposed to be a zealous advocate for his client so when his client changes the things that he is zealous about change as well.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    , @Dissident
  205. Jack D says:
    @Jack Hanson

    Multiple stories but only 2 incidents. There are 5 million hits but this doesn’t mean that Sotomayor was sick 5 million times.

    In one incident she had low blood sugar and in the other she fell and broke her shoulder. Neither are fatal conditions. Sotomayor is diabetic and practices tight control of her blood sugar levels, meaning that she checks often and takes insulin when they are too high. This is good for long term longevity and keeping your limbs but this kind of control constantly puts you at risk of sending your sugar levels too low. Normally you quickly grab some orange juice or glucose tablets and you are fine again but this time she missed the warning signs and must have fainted or something like that. Obviously it would be better for her long term health if she wasn’t diabetic but this is not a sign of imminent demise – she could go on for decades this way. She has been diabetic since childhood.

    • Agree: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
  206. Jack D says:
    @Anon7

    Is this really necessary? The Democrats will fall upon him like wolves, what possible effect would his unctuous praise of women have?

    Yes it was necessary. You can say a lot of bad things about Trump from both the left and the right but you can’t say that the man doesn’t have good political instincts (and the whole “I love women” thing was surely not K’s idea – Trump and his team gave him his marching orders) – he went from literal laughing stock to the Oval Office. This was not just some random blather but part of a planned strategy. Which is not to say that it was tested with 999 focus groups (that would be Hillary’s style) but the Trump team’s political instincts are (proven) better than some AI sabermetrics computer in Brooklyn.

    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
    • Replies: @Dissident
    , @Hibernian
  207. @stillCARealist

    Serious Protestants haven’t gone into ministry for fifty years (blame smaller family sizes). That’s the root of the problem.

  208. Benjaminl says:
    @Hibernian

    The story of Vincent Scully says a lot about Yale then and now. He doubtless experienced anti-Irishism, but went on to become as much a Mr. Yale figure as anybody. He probably had some ambivalence about WASPy Olde Yale, but doesn’t seem to have been consumed by resentment.

    http://archives.yalealumnimagazine.com/issues/2008_03/scully.html

    He grew up in New Haven, in a two-family house at 61 Derby Avenue, halfway between the campus and Yale Bowl. His father was a successful Chevrolet salesman until the Depression, and later served as president of the board of aldermen. His mother was a singer, whose piercing coloratura seems to have given him a lifelong ambivalence about music. Neither of them went to college. But Scully never considered that he would end up anywhere other than Yale.

    He entered Phelps Gate in 1936, the shank of the Depression, and the experience sounds Dickensian now. He was just 16, a townie from an Irish Catholic family with no money. “I hadn’t gone to a prep school, I didn’t know the proper codes. I knew the dress code all right, but I couldn’t afford it.” As a scholarship student, he worked freshman year waiting on his wealthier classmates in Commons. “You said, ‘Will you have the meat of the day? Will you have the cold cuts?’ And I didn’t like it, I really didn’t like it. I felt a lot of snobbery. Whether real or imagined, it poisoned my years at Yale. I had a few friends, but not many. And I just never grew up enough. Properly.”

    It seems like college football teams, whether Big State U.s in the SEC, or (once upon a time) in Northeastern polyglot cities, whatever their other problems, can do something to create a sense of communal or fraternal belonging.

    http://www.ivy-style.com/golden-years-the-tables-down-at-morys.html

    In the 1940s, New Haven classmates at my public elementary school came from surrounding Irish, Italian and Jewish neighborhoods. I never had a WASP peer until my parents sent me to private school. I sold football programs with some of my sixth grade pals at the Yale Bowl. We were always regulars at all the Eli athletic events. Our heroes included Levi Jackson, former star at Hillhouse High School before entering Yale. His father was a dining-room steward at the college, and Jackson became the first black football captain in the Ivy League. We also worshipped balletic hook-shots of all-American basketball star Tony Lavelli, a scholarship kid from Somerville, Massachusetts, who made pocket change playing accordion at the Loew’s Poli movie palace before each feature.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  209. @Hibernian

    Probably at most a few percent of evangelicals study Greek or Latin, come on. More than the general population, presumably, but not significant.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
  210. @Jack Hanson

    I’ll guess Ginsburg dies and the narrowly re-elected President Trump nominates seventh circuit judge Amy Coney Barrett, then still only 48-49 years old, to succeed her.

    Having nominated two men for two seats, and needing to replace a woman, that’s a logical choice for trump given her age and her record thus far. He seems serious about picking nominees only from the combined list of 25 names issued during the campaign, and she’s on the list (which is now down to 23,I think).

    Sotomayor probably will keep ambling along, paramedics or no, but one can hope that she will retire. (It would be unChristian to wish anything else….)

  211. Jack D says:
    @Benjaminl

    Even at the height of their glory as WASP havens, Yale and Harvard were not populated solely by WASPy prep school types. America used to be a much poorer country – there were just not enough rich WASPy people (whose kids possessed academic chops) around to fill up the classes. There were always ambitious local immigrant kids (often Jewish until the quotas kicked in), the children of faculty and staff, small town boys on scholarship, boys with proper WASP credentials but whose families had fallen on hard times, etc., etc. The prep school boys sat at the top of the social pyramid and set the tone for the place but they were never the whole show.

  212. Dissident says:
    @Jack D

    Yes it was necessary.

    Are you sure about that?

    Headline I saw as I scrolled through news.google.com just after reading your comment:

    Playing Up Brett Kavanaugh As A Good Dad To Girls Is Shameless

    I did not bother following the link, which leads to a HuffPo piece.

    Just below, another headline, linking to a Washington Post piece, reads,

    ‘Judge Kavanaugh is your worst nightmare’: Democrats resist Trump’s nominee

    Seems like one just can’t win with the pussy-hatted, “MeToo” harridans and Co.; darned if you do, darned if you don’t.

    (Remember how they condemned Mike Pence for his commendable practice of avoiding placing himself into situations with women that could test him or arouse suspicion? )

    Meanwhile, how many of these self-anointed defenders of women and children (peddlers of what the legendary NYC talk radio caller (Vintage) Frank from Queens dubbed political kiddie porn; or, to use Nassim Nicholas Taleb’s recent coinage, pedophrasty) were at least complicit, if not fully culpable, in cheering and championing convicted child-rapist Roman Polanski? These sanctimonious scolds must be confronted with that, along with numerous other instances of rank hypocrisy on their part, every time they dare to open their foul traps in purported moral indignation.

  213. @KenH

    I traveled it and wish I hadn’t. Not alone and not quiet about it. Elite (sic) banality is a sign that the brain drain slowed down a ways back.

    Maybe not as far back as Kavanaugh, but we’re getting there.

  214. @Anon7

    He’s a conventional R. Conventional Rs are people pleasers, and progs play them like fiddles.

    But the Bushies have Trump by the short hairs, so we get conventional Rism.

  215. Hibernian says:
    @RadicalCenter

    I meant the seminarians. Hebrew and Greek, not Latin. Latin is Catholic.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  216. BB753 says:

    A bad pick, Steve. A Yalie, Skull &Bones, Bush family crony. That’s Kavanaugh.

  217. Hibernian says:
    @Jack D

    I think it helps to be center/left to defend and center/right to prosecute. And don’t anyone ever tell me that corporate lawyers’ choice of pro bono work isn’t generally a guide to their political beliefs

  218. Hibernian says:
    @Jack D

    He’s got reasonably good political instincts or he wouldn’t have been President. His success, however, was not due to absolute political genius, but to times crying out for an alternative to the Establishment.

    • Agree: Dissident
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
  219. @Hibernian

    Seems about right, but many of us center-right or at least anti-left people would have a hard time, morally, “serving” as prosecutors given the “laws” these days.

  220. @Hibernian

    Ah, fair enough.

    As for Latin, the founding fathers were Protestant almost to a man yet they studied Latin, and I believe that Protestant ministers studied Latin as well as Greek and/or Hebrew.

    I could be wrong, though, gonna go look that up (and perhaps ask our own Protestant pastor).

    • Replies: @Desiderius
  221. @Rapparee

    The catholic legal system is impressive, even useful and logical in some respects. But it is also, like our secular legal system, needlessly complicated and arcane, and staffed by people largely out of touch with the real world of normal men.

  222. @Hibernian

    There’s a reason we won’t ever see that movie. Even the beloved Rocky series had to be Africanized, eh?

    But “Balboa”, i.e. Rocky VI, the last installment of the pre-African-worship phase of the series, was surprisingly decent.

  223. @Sylvester Stallone

    What’s wrong with Judge Amy Barrett? Seriously asking. Other than the pathetic fact that she adopted two dindus, her own five natural children not being enough, apparently.

  224. Anonymous[425] • Disclaimer says:
    @Hibernian

    Do corporate law firms offer pro bono opportunities that DO NOT involve representing foreigners?

  225. @Achmed E. Newman

    I AM one of those noticers, that the FED act, Amends, 16 and 17, woman’s voting rights, etc. all seemed to get implemented about a century ago.

    You left out the stupidest one of all– ratified by a record 47 (out of 48) states: the 18th.

    There were four “progressive” amendments going through the state capitols that decade. Southerners rejected the 17th and 19th, but were first in line to ratify the 16th and 18th. What’s up with that?

    The 18th gave us federal gun control (BATFE), which the 16th pays for.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  226. @Reg Cæsar

    Yep, that one was a total cluster. To me the 16th was THE WORST, though. Once can rightfully complain about the amount of money confiscated, the invasions of privacy due to Feral Gov needing to know what one did/made for a living, the distortion of markets due to later extreme complication of the tax code, and some I’m probably just missing right now. However, the worst result, I’m pretty sure intended by some of the instigators, was the flow of the money. It does directly from the people to the Feds, then gets doled out like Halloween candy to the states and the people … if they’ve been nice, not naughty.

  227. Simon says:
    @Dan Hayes

    I followed the hearings avidly, and admire Thomas more than any other justice. I’ve never forgotten what he was put through (including the fact that Jane Mayer and Jill Abramson attempted to find out, from his local video store, the titles of any porn movies he’d rented, to help smear him in their book).

    But to suggest that he’s likely to live as long as Ginsburg — or even nearly as long — is absurd. Just to be on the safe side, I’d like to give the conservative Court an additional 20 years.

    • Agree: Dan Hayes
  228. Dissident says:
    @Jack D

    Lawyers, like that other profession that they resemble, are paid by their client to take a position.

    But how often do practitioners of “that other profession” self-righteously champion their work the way that both prosecutors as well as defense attorneys, respectively, routinely do theirs? That’s just for starters…

    When you are working as a prosecutor, you are all law and order, put the guy in jail and when you become a defense counsel, then you are all the poor man is innocent.

    Imagine the following hypothetical:
    A random individual with at least some minimum level of moral conscience witnessing, as a reasonably objective third-party, the proceedings of even one of the most respected and reputable justice systems in existence.

    How plausible is it that, if exposed to enough cases, such an observer would remain confident that in all of them, both the prosecution as well as the defense acted only in good faith and with decency and integrity? Is it not inevitable that there would be
    (a) a certain percentage of defendants whom said hypothetical observer would be convinced were wrongly charged (whether because of being convinced that the defendant was actually innocent of the charges; a belief that the sought penalty was excessive on account of one or more significant mitigating factors; or a belief that the defendant was selectively and unfairly targeted),
    as well as,
    (b) a certain percentage of defendants that said observer was convinced not only were guilty as charged but also that the punishment being sought by the prosecution was at least commensurate with what justice demands?

    How often do prosecutors or defense attorneys, respectively, based on considerations such as those I enumerated above, decline a case as a matter of conscience?

    A lawyer is supposed to be a zealous advocate for his client so when his client changes the things that he is zealous about change as well.

    Do you find nothing wrong with that? Employing moralistic rhetoric and drama on a daily basis, flipping the script 180 degrees based on nothing more than which party one is getting paid by?

    Also note that attorneys who work in the field of landlord-tenant disputes, for example, actually routinely ‘flip the script’ back-and-forth, even within the same day. When representing a landlord trying to evict a tenant, an attorney will be as shrewd, cunning and ruthless as he can get away with being, employing every possible dirty but technically legal (if even that much) trick he can think of against the tenant. Then, when hired by a tenant whom a landlord is trying to evict, that same attorney will turn right around and use everything he can against the landlord while simultaneously painting him as a villain to ingratiate himself to his (the lawyer’s) tenant client. I happen to have witnessed exactly what I just described firsthand. I’m still reeling from the degree of rank hypocrisy so brazenly exhibited by the attorney.

  229. @Jack D

    No you’re right – an elderly morbidly overweight diabetic minority is the pillar of health.

  230. @RadicalCenter

    In your better mainline seminaries Hebrew and Greek are required, but you pick up a good bit of Latin here and there just like anyone well-versed in biblical times would.

  231. EdwardM says:
    @Anon

    It is true that some, perhaps most, people who adopt Haitian kids take them on as status symbols and/or as their dutiful contribution to left-wing social engineering. But not all. There was a time when a real Christian would consider it his duty to adopt the downtrodden.

    I’ll never forget in college I was with one of the Campus Crusade for Christ types as we were getting screamed at by some hairy lesbian on the subject of abortion. The guy said, if you truly can’t find someone to take the black child with supposedly no opportunity, no father, no future, don’t abort him — I will adopt him. The butch said, what about the other million kids in the same position? The Christian replied, there are 1,000,000 people just like me.

    He truly meant it. That real, earnest compassion and lack of cynicism, born of Christianity, is out there. It’s hard to find today — I am not saying that I share his viewpoint in light of HBD — but this statement made an impression on me as an irreligious product of the coasts.

    I am not commenting on the Barrett woman’s motivation — I have no idea and am glad that we avoided the risk of any female nominee — but I don’t think we should dismiss the concept of adopting a Haitian child out of hand.

    • Agree: Desiderius
  232. EdwardM says:
    @Hibernian

    Does any pro bono work conducted by lawyers at major law firms or major corporations not involve left-wing causes? Never heard of such a lawyer working on pro-life or pro-Second Amendment cases. Even pro-First Amendment speech or religion cases will get one tossed out of polite society, and the ability to operate under the radar screen is probably gone too.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Hundreds of POWs may have been left to die in Vietnam, abandoned by their government—and our media.