On Thu, 27 Sep 2018 08:53:30 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 9/27/2018 8:44 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/27/18 7:42 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/27/2018 7:31 AM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

Mr. Luddite wrote:

Which, of course, is the whole purpose of the current bull****
campaign
going on orchestrated by your party.



You think the revelations about Kavsnaugh are B.S.? How very
Republican of
you.

Kavanaugh is a deeply flawed man, that much is clear.Â* His
part in the Starr investigation is ironic now that the shoe
is on the other foot.Â* He is simply reaping what he's sown.
Of course to Luddite, it's all "unfair."Â* Snowflakes all.
It's a given that they blame the Dems for all their sins.
It's all Pelosi's fault!Â* It's Schumer's fault!
Crybabies.



"Snowflakes" and "Crybabies" are terms that referred to the
progressive liberals, mostly in California, and was coined by those on
the conservative side of the fence.

In true dishonest behavior the left has now stolen those terms to
describe their adversaries on the right.Â* Figures.

Show me proof that Kavanaugh is "deeply flawed".Â* You can't.
You've just joined the liberal bandwagon, repeating the same
unified claims.

I just mentioned to Harry ... if it were not Kavanaugh and Trump's
choice of a nominee was another person of conservative leanings,
I suspect we'd be witnessing a similar smear campaign.

What *really* would be interesting is if Kavanaugh is rejected
and Trump replaces him with a very conservative *woman* as his
nominee.

What will be the Dem's strategy then?




As I have previously posted, there is no shortage of right-wing trash
who appeal to Trump waiting in the wings.


You didn't answer my question. What if he replaced Kavanaugh with an
equally conservative woman as his nominee?

How would your party smear her?

I think we are about to find out, after this inquisition is over.

I do agree Kavanaugh is probably toast, not because they have proved
anything but simply because he was "Borked".
It may be a misstep by the left tho because he might have been the
least objectionable candidate to them. I doubt they can do this twice
in a row.