Should Brett Kavanaugh SCOTUS Nomination Continue?

[Final-Fan]

EricHiggin said:

Final-Fan said:

"Please don't ask me to watch videos whose titles are lies.  I didn't see any laugh directed at Clinton. 
"As for what McConnell said, just because the Republicans take their cues nowadays from extremist bloggers, radio talk show hosts, etc., doesn't mean the Democrats are following suit.  Let me know if someone in Congress proposes that, but until then McConnell—and you—are just stretching "a human being in the USA has this idea" to mean "the Democratic Party plans to do this".  I mean, shit, if they were going to pack the court there wouldn't even be a need to impeach Kavanaugh."

This is what you call "focused on the title"?  21 words about it, then 87 words about the other stuff. 

"TYT talking about it and FOX reporting it. They may do either or try both. McConnell smirks in the video which for him is about as close to a laugh as you get."

18 words about the title and 15 words about everything else.  Except even the 15 words were veering off topic, because when I said that you didn't dispute anything I had said you didn't even try to refute me about anything except the title. 

You've been exposed for what you are.  Why not just admit it? 

So you don't like the name of the title of the video, that I didn't make, that was as short and sweet as I could find, that I simply added as proof to help make my point, since the odds were high I would get asked for proof if I didn't?

A portion of a title of a 2:45 clip that also talks about something I didn't even mention at all in my initial post? You want me to say I'm a phony because I tried to answer you and point out how someone other than yourself may interpret that McConnell was laughing?

Well since this is clearly such a major problem for you, I'd be happy to ignore any and all of the following responses you make that veer off track, if even ever so slightly, since apparently it's up to me to decide what you should and shouldn't say when you respond to me, based on what I've already said prior.

Going to be some very short conversations by the the looks of it.

For a guy who wants to talk about the points you made, and not the video title, it's funny how the only part of my response to your points that you addressed was the part where I mentioned the video title.

If you truly think that "maybe he was laughing on the inside" is a reasonable defense of the fact that a video titled "Mitch McConnell LAUGHS At Hillary Clinton And Far Left Mob Over Brett Kavanaugh" shows zero laughter, especially when the video description backtracks to "Mitch McConnell Today smiled and smirked and made fun of all of the opposition", I really don't know what to say.  Maybe you're in the Matrix and everything you do and experience is an illusion?  Asking why I don't assume the video's poster meant he was laughing on the inside is about as silly.

And I realize you're trying to mock me with the third paragraph, but I STILL can't figure out what you're actually referring to as the basis for your mockery, as far as "apparently it's up to me to decide what you should and shouldn't say".  I'm kind of curious, but would be disappointed if answering this question consumed your entire post to the exclusion of all other responses.  Especially if you blamed me for it. 

Last edited by Final-Fan - on 14 October 2018