Trump's Supreme Court nominee

[MrFanti]

I wonder, Mr Fanti if people who claim to be Libertarian can justify their beliefs by explaining how the US would function if the models normally associated with it were to replace the system you have now. I suspect some so-called Libertarians claim it just to oppose the two party politics and the tax-based politics of State and Federal governmet because they can't think of any alternative. In reality, a Libertarian US is not going to happen because it is not in the interests of Wall St or Washington DC or your State to dismantle the system from which they benefit -Libertarian just beomes a slogan rather than a movement, and crucially, the man you claim is not part of the political establishment has done nothing to undermine it, but is in fact using it to line his own pocket and polish his ego. If you think he was a revolutionary, you have been had, by a one trick pony whose time may be running out. You can only pull a rabbit out of a hat once for the trick to work.

It would be tough in respect because of the current state of how money is inter-twined with establishment politicians. What the Democrats and Republicans totally missed was that the rise of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump (both being non-establishment, although Trump is more non-establishment than Sanders) is that a huge sector of the populace was tired of establishment politicians. So the key in terms of Libertarian is as they say to "drain the swamps". And right now, the current establishment is doing a better job at draining the swamps than previous Presidential establishments.

[MrFanti]

If one is a true defender of violence against women, then 'that one' should apologize to and/or support those women that accused Bill Clinton of rape and sexual harassment. Those women were treated like shit and ostracized.

I meant to add this yesterday: And if you can't see/support the above, then you are just an angry person at Trump and/or Kavanaugh and are not in support of women, but rather your own personal agenda.

[CD_Sasha]

Their agenda was BELIEVE ALL WOMEN, no proof needed... Unless it's against a Democrat. But oh well, that part of the battle is over and I'm glad common sense prevailed where if there's no evidence to prove an allegation case, then there shouldn't be any conviction - simple logic there. Every person should be viewed innocent until proven guilty.

[buttslinger]

Bill Clinton's women were never raped, or sexually harassed. They all were consenting adults. They all had their own agenda. Bill Clinton was a PIG. But every bit of legislation was Pro-Woman.

[MrFanti]

Bill Clinton's women were never raped, or sexually harassed. They all were consenting adults.

You should read up on Juanita Broaddrick...

[filghy2]

I meant to add this yesterday: And if you can't see/support the above, then you are just an angry person at Trump and/or Kavanaugh and are not in support of women, but rather your own personal agenda.

But what exactly is the point that you are making in relation to the appointment of Brett Kavanaugh? Are you saying that it's a bad thing that Republicans have impugned Christine Ford's motives for political reasons? Or you saying that it doesn't matter whether she was telling the truth because of what happened with Bill Clinton more than 20 years ago? If you won't say the first then it looks very much like you are insinuating the second.

[buttslinger]

You should read up on Juanita Broaddrick...

I liked the part where she failed a lie detector test.

[MrFanti]

I liked the part where she failed a lie detector test.

Excellent point - I'll give you that one
However..

Keep on defending Clinton and not being a true supporter of aggressive male acts against women (unless they are against Republicans)...shows your true agenda (which has nothing to do against supporting women)...

And when you look at the big picture, the 'Clinton women' were treated like shit by the Democrats...

But hey...that's cool, just don't try and combine the two unless you eliminate party politics and defend women....

[buttslinger]

...And when you look at the big picture, the 'Clinton women' were treated like shit by the Democrats...

Clinton's sluts demeaned by Democrats? Oh No!!!! Look at the picture, Fanti. Where are the Women?
Attachment 1099053

[filghy2]

Keep on defending Clinton and not being a true supporter of aggressive male acts against women (unless they are against Republicans)...shows your true agenda (which has nothing to do against supporting women)...

And when you look at the big picture, the 'Clinton women' were treated like shit by the Democrats...

You remind me of Fonzie in Happy Days when he could not bring himself to say the word 'sorry'. You couldn't even bring yourself to put the word "also'' in the last sentence I quoted.

My biggest issue with you is not what you say, but what you don't say. You make vague statements, but avoid spelling out what you mean or providing concrete examples. Your claim about Trump 'draining the swamp' is another example of this. It looks like you try to avoid being pinned down, perhaps (as Stavros suggested) because you don't feel confident that you can explain and defend your position.

By the way, in the first sentence I quoted you have actually said the opposite to what I assume you intended.