Or 7 minutes in heaven !! ??Yer right, Blackjack "Pogo" PershingI don't know Kavanaugh's positions on these issues, but nor do I think they would be relevant. A SCOTUS judge isn't there to legislate; he --- or she --- is there to interpret the Law as to whether a given one fits under the Constitution. As such, his or her personal opinions on that law should be entirely irrelevant and absent from deliberation.
Which means a SCOTUS judge must be impartial, even-tempered, openminded and deliberative. What I saw from Kavanaugh on Thursday ... which is the sum total of what I know about him.... struck out on all four of those ideals.
Frankly based on what I saw and heard in that hearing -- from everybody --- I think the next SCOTUS judge, who very much does reflect those qualities, should be Rachel Mitchell.
You apply the Constitution, not interpret it.
You would have melted under the pressure on Tuesday. We should be so lucky to have such an honest, thoughtful, respectable person as a Justice.
Excuse me --- *I* would have "melted"?
Why? Do you even know me?
Strange post dood.
I'm guessing that's a drinking game. Like "Devil's Triangle".