America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 5 years ago by Ewok126. 63 replies replies.
2 Pages12>
Hang on...that's what it meant???
victor809 Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
https://politics.theonion.com/mark-judge-can-t-believe-that-****-lightweight-kavan-1829398554

Seriously? I thought boofing was supposed to mean vomiting from drinking too much.

Satire is dead. It has been replaced by news.
victor809 Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Huh... That link isn't gonna work unless you replace **** with f---ing
danmdevries Online
#3 Posted:
Joined: 02-11-2014
Posts: 17,365
Worked for me.

But I thought boofing was butt-chugging beer...
victor809 Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Apparently it is... I'm literally more out of touch than a 50year old SCJ nominee....

Sigh...
Time to go die.
danmdevries Online
#5 Posted:
Joined: 02-11-2014
Posts: 17,365
I've also heard it used in the context of taking cocaine up the butt as well. Maybe boofing is just getting messed up via the butt
victor809 Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
... like when drafter spent some time doing gay porn?
delta1 Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,784
"rolf" is vomiting from drinking too much...and Kavanaugh lied about that one too...if he lies so frequently about these minor insignificant details....................
victor809 Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
.... He'll be confirmed by the end of the week.


(Finished it for ya Al.... :)...)
delta1 Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,784
sadly, for US...

jjanecka Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 12-08-2015
Posts: 4,334
Why didn't they seal his highschool/college record like they did Obama's? And why are dems making such a big deal of this since we know Bill forced himself on women too.
frankj1 Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,221
so you actually believe he did it?
jjanecka Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 12-08-2015
Posts: 4,334
Nope. I don't believe it for a second. Dems are just stalling to see what comes out of November.
bgz Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
Ya, I don't think he did it either... but I think he probably was a compulsive boofer.
opelmanta1900 Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 01-10-2012
Posts: 13,954
delta1 wrote:
"rolf" is vomiting from drinking too much...and Kavanaugh lied about that one too...if he lies so frequently about these minor insignificant details....................

of all the things that have happened, this has bothered me most... the guy was a heavy drinker in high school and college... why lie about it? I say move on to the next candidate...
bgz Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
I didn't hear him deny it, I heard him say he never drank to the point where he couldn't remember what happened the next day.

That I can believe.
opelmanta1900 Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 01-10-2012
Posts: 13,954
this is what finally soured me on kav:

I have been contacted by numerous reporters about Brett Kavanaugh and have not wanted to say anything because I had nothing to contribute about what kind of justice he would be. I knew Brett at Yale because I was a classmate and a varsity basketball player and Brett enjoyed socializing with athletes. Indeed, athletes formed the core of Brett’s social circle.

In recent days I have become deeply troubled by what has been a blatant mischaracterization by Brett himself of his drinking at Yale. When I watched Brett and his wife being interviewed on Fox News on Monday, and when I watched Brett deliver his testimony under oath to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday, I cringed. For the fact is, at Yale, and I can speak to no other times, Brett was a frequent drinker, and a heavy drinker. I know, because, especially in our first two years of college, I often drank with him. On many occasions I heard Brett slur his words and saw him staggering from alcohol consumption, not all of which was beer. When Brett got drunk, he was often belligerent and aggressive. On one of the last occasions I purposely socialized with Brett, I witnessed him respond to a semi-hostile remark, not by defusing the situation, but by throwing his beer in the man’s face and starting a fight that ended with one of our mutual friends in jail.


I do not believe that the heavy drinking or even loutish behavior of an 18- or even 21-year-old should condemn a person for the rest of his life. I would be a hypocrite to think so. However, I have direct and repeated knowledge about his drinking and his disposition while drunk. And I do believe that Brett’s actions as a 53-year-old federal judge matter. If he lied about his past actions on national television, and more especially while speaking under oath in front of the United States Senate, I believe those lies should have consequences. It is truth that is at stake, and I believe that the ability to speak the truth, even when it does not reflect well upon oneself, is a paramount quality we seek in our nation’s most powerful judges.


I can unequivocally say that in denying the possibility that he ever blacked out from drinking, and in downplaying the degree and frequency of his drinking, Brett has not told the truth.

I felt it was my civic duty to tell of my experience while drinking with Brett, and I offer this statement to the press. I have no desire to speak further publicly, and nothing more to say to the press at this time. I will, however, take my information to the F.B.I.

Charles (Chad) Ludington
bgz Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
I've been stumbling drunk before and still remembered what happened.

There were a few times I guess when I was a super noob lightweight where some info was a little spotty, but after lots of practice, I remembered all the embarrassing sh*t like a champ.
opelmanta1900 Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 01-10-2012
Posts: 13,954
Well that would be a silly argument to have... Not being a lightweight, being able to handle your alcohol, whatever else you want to call it, it has nothing to do with your ability to not black out while drunk... You either have the alcoholic gene or you don't... If you've got it, then at least some of the time you black out when drinking in excess...
bgz Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
So because I don't have the alcoholic gene, it makes sense I didn't black out in high school despite frequently having a few too many?

Does the gene itself make you black out, or does the gene just cause you to drink enough to make it happen?

How are you so certain the judge has this gene?

I've never woken up somewhere and wondered how I got there.

Never woke up with some chick I didn't remember going to bed with (or dude, dog, goat or anything else you freaks).

Can't say that I ever woke up on a park bench.

Yet, I too liked beer in high school and college... a lot, and haven't ever had anything like that happen.

Despite the amount of partying that I've done in my life, I rarely get drunk any more... and usually when I drink, I just have a single drink, where if I have a second, it's usually just a wee dram topper offer.
opelmanta1900 Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 01-10-2012
Posts: 13,954
Do you also like long walks on the beach and orchestral music? Lots of impertinent info about yourself there...

My point was simply that I care not if kav ever blacked out and having an argument about it would be silly... He was a heavy drinker in high school and college and has attempted to paint that as not being the case... For whatever reason... Next candidate...
bgz Offline
#21 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
I don't know man, saying you used to like beer and that you liked it a lot... and still like beer. Doesn't really sound like a guy claiming to have been a choir boy.

His claim was that he's never blacked out to the point of not remembering what happened.

That's believable to me. I didn't hear him claim he didn't like to party.

Not a fan of ruining someone's career because they partied like a boss in they're youth. This whole thing sets a dangerous precedent. The only people who will be suitable for government in the future will be the dorks and dweebs who no one invited to parties. You don't want those weirdos running things do you?
opelmanta1900 Offline
#22 Posted:
Joined: 01-10-2012
Posts: 13,954
The sober guys that spent the best years of their life investing in their future instead of squandering their present on fleeting pleasures? Ya, kinda...
opelmanta1900 Offline
#23 Posted:
Joined: 01-10-2012
Posts: 13,954
Also, beer guys/frat boys/ jocks were the biggest douche bags at all 9 colleges i went to...
victor809 Offline
#24 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Bgz... I think (Opel can correct me) Opel is just saying he's bothered that kavaunagh didn't just say "yeah I drank a lot then. I don't now."
bgz Offline
#25 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
Well, when you're getting grilled by people who are doing everything in their power to ruin you, your career and your family on live national television... you would probably be hesitant to give up too much information too.

Easy to be an armchair quarterback from your recliner.

victor809 Offline
#26 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
bgz wrote:
Well, when you're getting grilled by people who are doing everything in their power to ruin you, your career and your family on live national television... you would probably be hesitant to give up too much information too.

Easy to be an armchair quarterback from your recliner.


that's a retarded point of view.

If that's the case, then he really shouldn't be judge, because he's too stupid.

If you're being grilled by people who want to ruin you, you don't obviously lie about something which wouldn't in itself take you down and can be easily disproven.

If you think he lied simply because mean people were grilling him and wanted to find a reason not to confirm him, then he's certainly not qualified to be SCJ, let alone his current job. He should be smart enough to know that a past of drinking doesn't disqualify you (presidents have smoked pot and inhaled in college). Current character is what is cared about. And if his current character is to lie because someone's being mean and asking questions.... well.... he sucks.

But, again... confirm his azz. this just reinforces the possibility that he's covering something worse. If he's making such bad decisions he's either really stupid or really panicked. At least one of these will serve to amuse me for decades to come.
frankj1 Offline
#27 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,221
Clinton lied about a BJ...most here would take one of those.

Kav lied about being a drunken bum in school (possibly more too)...most here have had nights like that.

the difference comes down to which team does one root for, as TW likes to point out.

For many, lying under oath is OK if the liar is opposed to women's right to choose.

We all select what we perceive to be the higher ground when supporting what we know is wrong.
ZRX1200 Online
#28 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,599
Um, one was blatantly proven (with an attempted cover up) and one is not proven. Some people like things to go throug that pesky process thing
victor809 Offline
#29 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Frank... This may be partisan, but I find more justification in lying about a BJ when you're married.

From Clinton's standpoint, lying about a BJ is theoretically an attempt to keep from having a pissed off wife . That's more understandable to me at least. Lying about drinking.... No one cares if he used to drink in high school or college. Literally... No one.... So from that standpoint, he's purgering himself for no logical reason.

Clinton purgered himself, and when he did it I defended it as "dude... He's married, of course he's going to lie about it"... If someone asked kavanaugh if he assaulted any of these women in the past (however long he's been married) I'd say "dude... He's married, of course he's going to lie about it".
victor809 Offline
#30 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Z.... One had an extensive and long investigation. The other has not.
bgz Offline
#31 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
victor809 wrote:
that's a retarded point of view.

If that's the case, then he really shouldn't be judge, because he's too stupid.

If you're being grilled by people who want to ruin you, you don't obviously lie about something which wouldn't in itself take you down and can be easily disproven.

If you think he lied simply because mean people were grilling him and wanted to find a reason not to confirm him, then he's certainly not qualified to be SCJ, let alone his current job. He should be smart enough to know that a past of drinking doesn't disqualify you (presidents have smoked pot and inhaled in college). Current character is what is cared about. And if his current character is to lie because someone's being mean and asking questions.... well.... he sucks.

But, again... confirm his azz. this just reinforces the possibility that he's covering something worse. If he's making such bad decisions he's either really stupid or really panicked. At least one of these will serve to amuse me for decades to come.


Got it, so you would prefer robot judges, and not people who actually had to go through this thing we call life.

Again, he said he drank... and he said from time to time he drank too much. So you're saying he should have went a step further and said he was a slobbering stumbling drunk every day of the week and still managed to be the top of his class, get into and graduate from Yale, and continue on to the position he is currently in? He would be like... the most high level functioning drunk ever in the history of man...

On another note, you like to throw around words claiming others are idiots and retarded more than anyone else on these boards, do you even re-read half the sh*t you write?
delta1 Offline
#32 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,784
One expects a more even keeled temperament from someone who wants to sit on the highest court, where he's likely to encounter a few vicious, accusatory and despicable people...and that's just the 8 other justices...
bgz Offline
#33 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
delta1 wrote:
One expects a more even keeled temperament from someone who wants to sit on the highest court, where he's likely to encounter a few vicious, accusatory and despicable people...and that's just the 8 other justices...


Sounds like he'll be in good company then, lol.
opelmanta1900 Offline
#34 Posted:
Joined: 01-10-2012
Posts: 13,954
victor809 wrote:
Bgz... I think (Opel can correct me) Opel is just saying he's bothered that kavaunagh didn't just say "yeah I drank a lot then. I don't now."

That is what I'm saying... I would expect the average person to panic under questioning and lie... I don't want the average person on the supreme court...
victor809 Offline
#35 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
bgz wrote:
Got it, so you would prefer robot judges, and not people who actually had to go through this thing we call life.

Again, he said he drank... and he said from time to time he drank too much. So you're saying he should have went a step further and said he was a slobbering stumbling drunk every day of the week and still managed to be the top of his class, get into and graduate from Yale, and continue on to the position he is currently in? He would be like... the most high level functioning drunk ever in the history of man...

On another note, you like to throw around words claiming others are idiots and retarded more than anyone else on these boards, do you even re-read half the sh*t you write?


He said this: I drank beer with my friends, Almost everyone did. Sometimes I had too many beers. Sometimes others did. I liked beer.

You're right... he did sort of say he drank too much. That was in his opening statement. After that, he was extraordinarily evasive about answering any questions regarding drinking. That's better than I recalled (I hadn't remembered this statement), but there really was no need for him to be evasive after that.

And yes, I reread my posts constantly. It's the only way I can get some coherent thoughts out of this place. Ya retard.
opelmanta1900 Offline
#36 Posted:
Joined: 01-10-2012
Posts: 13,954
It does smack of someone who is proud rather than ashamed of his stupid frat boy antics... I had a boss who once told me "joining a frat was the smartest thing I ever did... I definitely recommend you join one if you get the chance".... That guy was a douche... I think kav probably is too...
bgz Offline
#37 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
victor809 wrote:
He said this: I drank beer with my friends, Almost everyone did. Sometimes I had too many beers. Sometimes others did. I liked beer.

You're right... he did sort of say he drank too much. That was in his opening statement. After that, he was extraordinarily evasive about answering any questions regarding drinking. That's better than I recalled (I hadn't remembered this statement), but there really was no need for him to be evasive after that.

And yes, I reread my posts constantly. It's the only way I can get some coherent thoughts out of this place. Ya retard.


Oh brother, here we go again...

They kept harping on it, he kept saying refer to his opening statement... after a while of people asking you the same thing phrased differently 100 times, I'm guessing it could get a bit tedious.

Anyway, keep boofing your own horn Einstein.
Abrignac Offline
#38 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,273
victor809 wrote:
He said this: I drank beer with my friends, Almost everyone did. Sometimes I had too many beers. Sometimes others did. I liked beer.

You're right... he did sort of say he drank too much. That was in his opening statement. After that, he was extraordinarily evasive about answering any questions regarding drinking. That's better than I recalled (I hadn't remembered this statement), but there really was no need for him to be evasive after that.

And yes, I reread my posts constantly. It's the only way I can get some coherent thoughts out of this place. Ya retard.


So engaging in perfectly legal activities should disqualify someone from sitting on the Court?
opelmanta1900 Offline
#39 Posted:
Joined: 01-10-2012
Posts: 13,954
Yes.
Ewok126 Offline
#40 Posted:
Joined: 06-25-2017
Posts: 4,356
Boofing? I thought it was just a descriptive word used to describe the sound that is made when you tapping that fat girl from behind in a kiddie pool full of lime jello and twinkies?
frankj1 Offline
#41 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,221
victor809 wrote:
Frank... This may be partisan, but I find more justification in lying about a BJ when you're married.

From Clinton's standpoint, lying about a BJ is theoretically an attempt to keep from having a pissed off wife . That's more understandable to me at least. Lying about drinking.... No one cares if he used to drink in high school or college. Literally... No one.... So from that standpoint, he's purgering himself for no logical reason.

Clinton purgered himself, and when he did it I defended it as "dude... He's married, of course he's going to lie about it"... If someone asked kavanaugh if he assaulted any of these women in the past (however long he's been married) I'd say "dude... He's married, of course he's going to lie about it".

not sure we disagree.

but the supporters on either side have a way of justifying wrong if it works as a means to an end.
delta1 Offline
#42 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,784
opelmanta1900 wrote:
That is what I'm saying... I would expect the average person to panic under questioning and lie... I don't want the average person on the supreme court...


Applause
JadeRose Offline
#43 Posted:
Joined: 05-15-2008
Posts: 19,525
I thought it meant anal. Or is that BooFOOing?


Whatever......it means butt stuff.
opelmanta1900 Offline
#44 Posted:
Joined: 01-10-2012
Posts: 13,954
That would look great on a tombstone...

"Whatever... It means butt stuff"
dstieger Offline
#45 Posted:
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
opelmanta1900 wrote:

And I do believe that Brett’s actions as a 53-year-old federal judge matter. If he lied about his past actions on national television, and more especially while speaking under oath in front of the United States Senate, I believe those lies should have consequences.
Charles (Chad) Ludington



“I don’t think you should lie to Congress and there have been a lot of people over the last year that have lied to Congress,” Trump told reporters gathered on the White House lawn. “For me, that would not be acceptable.”



weird
Buckwheat Offline
#46 Posted:
Joined: 04-15-2004
Posts: 12,251
jjanecka wrote:
Why didn't they seal his highschool/college record like they did Obama's? And why are dems making such a big deal of this since we know Bill forced himself on women too.


And he was impeached for it (indirectly). Sounds like a precedent has been set on this kind of behavior that should be applied to all elected officials. fog
delta1 Offline
#47 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,784
Clinton was specifically impeached for perjury, lying under oath. A second charge was obstruction of justice.

I find it ironic that Kavanaugh was a lead investigative attorney, the right hand man on Ken Starr's team. They dug for more than four years (Aug '94 to Sep '98) looking for dirt on Clinton. Kavanaugh was a major contributor to Starr's final report, laying the ground-work for Clinton's impeachment.

and now...it is possible that he may be brought down by his own perjured testimony, if there are any clear thinking and objective GOP members of the Senate...
teedubbya Offline
#48 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
It's a cycle. Most in here latch more on to one side and see everything the other side does wrong and misses their own.... or uses the other sides wrongs as a diversion or excuse for their own.

Just as Special K was slimy in the Clinton investigation, hill dog was slimy in Watergate etc.

Its all the game


look something shiny

confirmed

By the way I can hardly understand Graham anymore with the big orange carrot in his mouf 24/7. He really must want to be AG
delta1 Offline
#49 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,784
or an Oscar nomination for Best Actor, Leading Man...

he saved Special K's nomination, and him from more cross examination by the GOP's prosecutor during the hearing, just as she was zeroing in on his July 1, 1982 calendar entry. Graham recognized the danger of the moment and went off on his tirade...Mitchell the prosecutor never asked another question, and Kavanaugh's responses to Dem questioning became more aggressive, belligerent and contemptuous...

...then Graham's meek response the next day to the GOP's 1 week extension for an FBI investigation showed it was all farcical political theater...
JadeRose Offline
#50 Posted:
Joined: 05-15-2008
Posts: 19,525
opelmanta1900 wrote:
That would look great on a tombstone...

"Whatever... It means butt stuff"





Where do you think I got it?
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages12>