ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Brett Kavanaugh , Christine Blasey Ford , Congressional hearings , Supreme Court nominees , Trump controversies

Reply
Old 29th September 2018, 11:10 AM   #121
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 5,193
Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy View Post
There's also the disrespect for the court he displayed in his testimony. He didn't act like the judge he was interviewing to be, he acted like the politician people suspected he was. He was not truthful, he was evasive, he was combative. He was a hostile witness when he should have been proving himself to be above that.


You're comparing sexual assault allegations against a supreme court nominee to a conspiracy theory on Twitter.
This is an example of the right's attempt to minimize Kavanaugh's behavior during the hearing and his repeated lying.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 11:12 AM   #122
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 14,792
To me it all seems remarkably simple:

1. I think that a person being nominated for a life time position for one of the most influential positions in the USA should be vetted very carefully.

2. I believe that Dr. Ford sincerely believes that Kavanaugh attacked her sexually when at school and that her account is sufficiently plausible (even if by no means proven) that a further, truly honest investigation of this accusation is essential before a final vote on the nomination. This guy is going to make major decisions that will affect the country and its people for decades; delaying a vote even a few weeks is a minor issue compared to the possibility of placing an attempted rapist on the highest court in the land. It is only reasonable. Not doing so for political expediency would be outrageous.

3. Kavanaugh denies he is guilty. Sure, that is possible too. So he very much deserves an investigation to clear his name. Frankly I cannot understand why he would want to be confirmed without being given this opportunity, which appears to have been the course he and the Republican leadership favored until their last minute U-turn on Friday. Being outraged is not a substitute for clearing one's reputation.

4. Separate from the sexual assault accusation, Kavanaugh has repeatedly demonstrated his willingness to lie and dissemble under oath. His behavior in the committee hearings on Thursday not only confirmed this but further demonstrated that his temperament, political bias, and paranoia render him completely inappropriate for the high court.
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 11:26 AM   #123
Regnad Kcin
Philosopher
 
Regnad Kcin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 9,000
Originally Posted by Bogative View Post
Yup. This is the left's "Pizzagate."

Digging through high school yearbooks and college records looking for secret code words for sexual assault, rape etc.
How sad for you.
__________________
My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.
Regnad Kcin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 11:27 AM   #124
Beelzebuddy
Philosopher
 
Beelzebuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,273
Via Seth Abramson's retweets, a number of people have been turning up interesting things.

A 1990 warning from DC area headmasters (incl Georgetown Prep and Holton-Arms) to parents about student parties:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archi...=.1182a1b5719e

A 2001 letter purported to be from Kavanaugh, apologizing to his mates for getting aggressive while gambling, which he doesn't recall:
https://twitter.com/NSANate/status/1045705005804785665

My biggest question right now is how on earth did this d-bag pass his background checks in the first place? Does having a history of getting blackout drunk not count against an applicant?

Last edited by Beelzebuddy; 29th September 2018 at 11:34 AM.
Beelzebuddy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 11:28 AM   #125
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 19,026
Originally Posted by River View Post
Disagree. I have nothing invested in Kavanaugh. Don't care if he's shown to be a D bag.
Clearly you do care.
__________________
“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 11:31 AM   #126
Regnad Kcin
Philosopher
 
Regnad Kcin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 9,000
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
I think incidents like this are when we find out who the actual skeptics and critical thinkers are. And it's not looking good.
Yes, judge, but what about the Clintons?
__________________
My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.
Regnad Kcin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 11:36 AM   #127
River
Illuminator
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,962
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
Maybe that is the problem?

How so?
__________________
"I've seen more Bigfoot creatures than Mountain Lions and Wolves combined here in KY." ― ChrisBFRPKY

"I've observed 1 creature eating bark from a pine tree and enjoying like it was cotton candy." ― ChrisBFRPKY
River is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 11:44 AM   #128
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 5,193
Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy View Post
Via Seth Abramson's retweets, a number of people have been turning up interesting things.

A 1990 warning from DC area headmasters (incl Georgetown Prep and Holton-Arms) to parents about student parties:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archi...=.1182a1b5719e

A 2001 letter purported to be from Kavanaugh, apologizing to his mates for getting aggressive while gambling, which he doesn't recall:
https://twitter.com/NSANate/status/1045705005804785665

My biggest question right now is how on earth did this d-bag pass his background checks in the first place? Does having a history of getting blackout drunk not count against an applicant?
If that email really is from K, then that is just more evidence that he lied through his teeth on Friday.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 11:55 AM   #129
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 19,026
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
If that email really is from K, then that is just more evidence that he lied through his teeth on Friday.
Again, we are seeing cognitive dissonance by the Republicans and another declaration that truth doesn't matter.
__________________
“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 11:57 AM   #130
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 10,543
Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy View Post
The accusation is that he tried to rape someone while piss-drunk. The lie is that he never drank that much and he never blacked out, despite literally everyone who knew him back then describing him as a blackout, belligerent drunk.

It is entirely material to the case.

[ETA] Oh also

Speaking of going by the same standards we use ourselves, you are familiar with Kavanaugh's role in the Clinton hearings, right?
With due respect, his role in the Clinton hearings is not relevant. Even if Kavanaugh wants to be judged by different standards than he used against others, that fact is irrelevant regarding what the appropriate standards are. It might make him a hypocrite (and, if so, this is somewhat relevant for a justice), but strictly speaking, it's not directly relevant.

His performance on Thursday ought to be disqualifying because it was remarkably partisan, a stunning display of what we would like to avoid on the highest court.
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 11:59 AM   #131
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 14,792
Originally Posted by River View Post
How so?
You posted that you "Don't care if he's shown to be a D bag." Unless you are arguing that having a D bag as a Supreme Court Justice is no problem, then having the nomination and confirmation process under the control of people who don't care if Kavanaugh is a D bag or not is the problem we are discussing.
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 12:00 PM   #132
Stacko
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 9,971
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
Again, we are seeing cognitive dissonance by the Republicans and another declaration that truth doesn't matter.
The fact that he didn't bother coming up with believable lies is a good hint to how he expected the seat to be handed to him since he was groomed for it.
Stacko is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 12:02 PM   #133
Stacko
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 9,971
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
You posted that you "Don't care if he's shown to be a D bag." Unless you are arguing that having a D bag as a Supreme Court Justice is no problem, then having the nomination and confirmation process under the control of people who don't care if Kavanaugh is a D bag or not is the problem we are discussing.
Here's a case that illustrates why having a D bag on the SCOTUS would be a problem:
BREAKING: Trump admin will ask #SCOTUS to block deposition for Commerce Secy. Wilbur Ross in census citizenship question suit, assuming 2nd Cir won't. Doc: https://politi.co/2NMiOVc Earlier:
Stacko is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 12:10 PM   #134
Aridas
Crazy Little Green Dragon
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,417
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
Maybe that is the problem?
To be fair, I completely don't care about whether Kavanaugh is a D-bag or not, either. I do care about putting a lying and unrepentant criminal who we've had every reason to believe is driven by (extreme) partisan ideology rather than a respect for law or the good of the nation in a position of great authority when it comes to both law and the good of the nation.

As for closed door hearings of Ford... honestly, I think we all know that the Congressional Republicans would have strongly preferred that so that they could simply ignore what she had to say out of hand, in exactly the way that they've been blatantly trying to do throughout. I would first look at them for effectively removing that option from the viable field of play before I would blame the Democrats for being "fine" with helping to point a spotlight on an issue that the Republicans were trying to avoid dealing with at all.
__________________
So sayeth the crazy little dragon.

Last edited by Aridas; 29th September 2018 at 12:16 PM.
Aridas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 12:22 PM   #135
Aridas
Crazy Little Green Dragon
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,417
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
To me it all seems remarkably simple:

1. I think that a person being nominated for a life time position for one of the most influential positions in the USA should be vetted very carefully.

2. I believe that Dr. Ford sincerely believes that Kavanaugh attacked her sexually when at school and that her account is sufficiently plausible (even if by no means proven) that a further, truly honest investigation of this accusation is essential before a final vote on the nomination. This guy is going to make major decisions that will affect the country and its people for decades; delaying a vote even a few weeks is a minor issue compared to the possibility of placing an attempted rapist on the highest court in the land. It is only reasonable. Not doing so for political expediency would be outrageous.

3. Kavanaugh denies he is guilty. Sure, that is possible too. So he very much deserves an investigation to clear his name. Frankly I cannot understand why he would want to be confirmed without being given this opportunity, which appears to have been the course he and the Republican leadership favored until their last minute U-turn on Friday. Being outraged is not a substitute for clearing one's reputation.

4. Separate from the sexual assault accusation, Kavanaugh has repeatedly demonstrated his willingness to lie and dissemble under oath. His behavior in the committee hearings on Thursday not only confirmed this but further demonstrated that his temperament, political bias, and paranoia render him completely inappropriate for the high court.
I think that this was well said.
__________________
So sayeth the crazy little dragon.
Aridas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 12:22 PM   #136
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 69,547
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
I don't think that would happen even if Dems got the Senate. Their nominee would probably be Merrick Garland.


Trump nominating Garland is a stretch.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 12:24 PM   #137
Beeyon
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 271
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
Kavanaugh is like Bork was in that he's a team player. Instead of having principles like Richardson and Ruckleshaus, Bork, the partisan hack fired Cox. The aftermath of course was the partisan Bork was nominated by Reagan, but the Senate did not approve.
Off topic, but Richardson apparently encouraged Bork to stay on and fire Cox to keep the DoJ from falling apart completely.
Beeyon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 12:31 PM   #138
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 19,026
Originally Posted by Beeyon View Post
Off topic, but Richardson apparently encouraged Bork to stay on and fire Cox to keep the DoJ from falling apart completely.
Where did you read that? I hadn't heard that.
__________________
“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 12:37 PM   #139
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 9,246
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
Is this Nelson BC?
Look at my location
__________________
As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.
- Henry Louis Mencken - Baltimore Evening Sun, July 26, 1920
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 12:40 PM   #140
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,920
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Look at my location
Upside down.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 12:41 PM   #141
Paul2
Illuminator
 
Paul2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 4,504
Originally Posted by snoop_doxie View Post
Their emotional outbursts would be disqualifying if the shoe were on the
other foot.
Allow me to put a finer point on this.

To accept K's outbursts must also be to accept similar outbursts by any other nominee, including by left-leaning nominees, at least if one claims consistency and a lack of hypocrisy.

The necessary corollary to this would be that to condemn K's outbursts must also be to condemn similar outbursts by any other nominee, including by left-leaning nominees. As a left-ish Democrat, I have no problem with this corollary. If I failed to condemn something similar by a left-leaning nominee, I can state now that I should be criticized for such hypocrisy.
__________________
It's nice to be nice to the nice.

Aristotle, so far as I know, was the first man to proclaim explicitly that man is a rational animal. His reason for this view was one which does not now seem very impressive: it was, that some people can do sums. - Bertrand Russell
Paul2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 12:46 PM   #142
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 69,547
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
It means something different here, and it doesn't mean what Kav claimed.
https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/9/2...-yearbook-boof
Not to mention the entry, "Have you boofed yet?" makes no sense if the definition is farting. Anal sex OTOH does make sense in that sentence.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 12:48 PM   #143
River
Illuminator
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,962
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
You posted that you "Don't care if he's shown to be a D bag." Unless you are arguing that having a D bag as a Supreme Court Justice is no problem, then having the nomination and confirmation process under the control of people who don't care if Kavanaugh is a D bag or not is the problem we are discussing.
Oh, you made an assumption that I would vote to confirm him? Bad liberal.
__________________
"I've seen more Bigfoot creatures than Mountain Lions and Wolves combined here in KY." ― ChrisBFRPKY

"I've observed 1 creature eating bark from a pine tree and enjoying like it was cotton candy." ― ChrisBFRPKY
River is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 12:54 PM   #144
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 69,547
Originally Posted by River View Post
...

I don't think he should be confirmed, but not because of the baseless allegations. Instead based on he gave testimony that seemed false.
One of these sentences is not like the other. If he gave false testimony, how do figure the allegation was baseless?

He clearly lied about the yearbook entries that were about sex and about his excessive drinking.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 12:55 PM   #145
The Shrike
Illuminator
 
The Shrike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,642
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
To me it all seems remarkably simple:
Fully on board with all of that.
The Shrike is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 12:58 PM   #146
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 19,026
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Look at my location
So no then.

I love Nelson BC. It's about 400 miles from Seattle and has a ski resort there. Its also the town where the Steve Martin movie Roxanne was filmed. Great movie, and great little town.
__________________
“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 12:58 PM   #147
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 69,547
Originally Posted by River View Post
Absolutely. This spectacle didn't need to happen, unless of course the point was to drag people through the mud publicly. There were offers made to interview Ford privately, even at her location. This was a public spectacle, purely because it served democrats agenda. Not to protect possible vitcims, or against salacious allegations with no evidence. This happened how it did, with pure intent.
My my, how incompetent Grassley must have been to allow the Democrats to get such a spectacle when he controlled the committee.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 01:01 PM   #148
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 9,246
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
I think incidents like this are when we find out who the actual skeptics and critical thinkers are. And it's not looking good.
Really?

You think wanting an FBI investigation to look at both sides of these allegations, is not being skeptical?

You think that assessing the credibility of testimony, and the manner in which it is given, is not being skeptical?

I'll tell you what I am skeptical of; the whole of Kavanaugh's testimony. If you watched, you heard, just like the rest of us, when Kavanaugh....

1. Blamed the Clinton's for the position he finds himself.
2. Accused the Democrats of destroying his family and sullying his name.
3. Told bare faced, provable lies about the meanings of terms in his yearbook.
4. Refused to answer question after question that required a simple yes or no answer.

He was evasive, dishonest, belligerent, disingenuous and obnoxious and his behaviour was risible; all attributes that you do NOT want in a Supreme Court Judge (or any Judge on the bench for that matter). You don't have to be much of a skeptic to see this.

In no way is this man a suitable candidate for a seat on SCOTUS, even if the sexual assault allegations cannot be proved. The aforementioned behaviour ought to be sufficient to rule him out.
__________________
As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.
- Henry Louis Mencken - Baltimore Evening Sun, July 26, 1920
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 01:02 PM   #149
Stacko
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 9,971
It was covered on Slate's Slow Burn podcast. They all agreed that Bork would be the hatchet man since they sincerely believed that Nixon would keep firing people until he found one willing to help him obstruct justice. They figured this would leave the DoJ dangerously understaffed.
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
Where did you read that? I hadn't heard that.
Stacko is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 01:05 PM   #150
The Great Zaganza
Philosopher
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 5,458
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
My my, how incompetent Grassley must have been to allow the Democrats to get such a spectacle when he controlled the committee.
The Power of The Deep State compelled him.

Republicans are helpless to stop the minority.
__________________
Opinion is divided on the subject. All the others say it is; I say it isn’t.
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 01:05 PM   #151
River
Illuminator
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,962
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
One of these sentences is not like the other. If he gave false testimony, how do figure the allegation was baseless?

He clearly lied about the yearbook entries that were about sex and about his excessive drinking.


Right, so he lied most likely about those things. That is why I would not vote to confirm. There is absolutely zero corroborating evidence of Fords claims. Including the witnesses she named as being there. Do you dispute that?
__________________
"I've seen more Bigfoot creatures than Mountain Lions and Wolves combined here in KY." ― ChrisBFRPKY

"I've observed 1 creature eating bark from a pine tree and enjoying like it was cotton candy." ― ChrisBFRPKY
River is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 01:06 PM   #152
Lurch
Muse
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 564
Now the Kav Groupies are decrying the horrible and needless spectacle just concluded. Well, what would they expect when a hearing is rushed into being that's *deliberately restricted* to nothing more than a he said/she said?! No other witnesses or documents. No extension to the FBI background check.

If the the Goopers on the Committee had simply agreed to the FBI investigation the accuser and Dems both wanted from the start, it's likely that some smidgen of certitude would have resulted instead of the unavoidable, unmoved positions that this ineptly conceived, ill advised and rushed hearing could hardly be expected to alter.

And another thing. The sheer irony of the Kav Groupies trying to have it both ways: At this time--RIGHT NOW--an FBI investigation cannot possibly be probative. Oh, but only if the Dems had asked for an FBI investigation back when they first got Ford's accusation, instead of sitting on the letter. Yeah, sure, I'll buy that bridge you're selling!

Finally, as I and others (including legal minds on the telly) rightly point out. This is all moot in a just, parallel Universe. Kav's deplorable behaviour at Friday's hearing automatically is disqualifying. Even if he's completely innocent of *all* accusations, his intemperance betrays the political operative that he is. Such a mindset is utterly incompatible with a position demanding of confidence in impartiality. (His infamous actions regarding the pregnant teen in immigration custody is certainly indicative of his bias, and willingness to use his position to impose his agenda.)
Lurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 01:08 PM   #153
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 9,246
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
I guess the secret to holding hearings for the snowflake crowd is to come up and have two protesters scream at you.

No, the secret is that when Truth speaks to Power, sometimes Power listens!
__________________
As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.
- Henry Louis Mencken - Baltimore Evening Sun, July 26, 1920

Last edited by smartcooky; 29th September 2018 at 01:31 PM.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 01:15 PM   #154
Lurch
Muse
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 564
I heard it mentioned on the telly that "boofing" means to ingest alcohol/drugs anally. In the context of an early '80s yearbook entry, this certainly seems to me to be more likely than a reference to butt secks.
Lurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 01:16 PM   #155
applecorped
Rotten to the Core
 
applecorped's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 18,457
Dems sure do love doxxing people.


Upon further research, it appears that the IP address traces back to the office of Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA).



https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-...augh-testimony
__________________
All You Need Is Love.
applecorped is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 01:17 PM   #156
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 10,543
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
I don't think that would happen even if Dems got the Senate. Their nominee would probably be Merrick Garland.
Sorry, but how does that make sense? Trump nominates, Senate confirms or not. Garland isn't going to be nominated again for the Supreme Court unless some president chooses him again. Tain't likely to be Trump or Pence or any other Republican, far as I can tell.
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 01:19 PM   #157
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,749
Originally Posted by River View Post
Disagree. I have nothing invested in Kavanaugh. Don't care if he's shown to be a D bag.
And you would still want him confirmed to the Supreme Court? Is he really the best judge conservatives can find? Or just the hack Trump needs?
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 01:21 PM   #158
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 10,543
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
The Renate explanation deserves to be looked into, and witnesses who could testify to the extent of Kavanaugh's early drinking history. Not because it was so bad; just because it would offset his own minimizing testimony and speak to his veracity. If he did get blackout drunk - and he was extremely evasive and aggressive regarding this - it ups the chances that he doesn't remember some of his alcoholic behavior. I suppose his financial situation has been explained, but that might bear further looking into, including a timeline showing how he got into debt and out of it.
If he got blackout drunk in high school and denied it under oath, then (far as I'm concerned) nothing else matters. He lied under oath to the Senate. Not a reasonable pick for the Supremes.

Honestly, perjury is an even worse offense for justices than for our President. We all know the current President lies all the time (that this doesn't bother some people is a shame), but the Supreme Court consists of those who should take oaths most seriously.
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 01:27 PM   #159
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 10,543
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
Depends on the type of lie. If he sexually assaulted anyone, he's out.


If it turns out that one night in the dorms he had to ask his roommate whether or not he threw up in the trash can when he stumbled in, no.

And if it turns out that he meant the same thing that everyone else meant by "boof", I'll scratch my head and wonder what the heck he's thinking, but otherwise wouldn't care. (Afraid he would be called homophobic? I really don't know why you would make up a different meaning. There are, I suppose, local variation in slang. In my home town, a "hooter" was a slang term for fellatio. I've never heard that use anywhere else in the world.)
Er, surely, judges should take oaths seriously? Surely?

I think he probably committed perjury and I definitely believe this is reason to reject him. But an even easier reason is this: his performance was dramatically partisan, in a manner which would sully the Court's presumption of fairness. Let the bastard go, far as I'm concerned. He might have been playing to Trump, but no matter. That's a line that no SJ nominee should cross.
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2018, 01:29 PM   #160
Elagabalus
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,125
Originally Posted by applecorped View Post
Dems sure do love doxxing people.


Upon further research, it appears that the IP address traces back to the office of Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA).



https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-...augh-testimony
This story has all the hallmarks of Russian Trollskies. Maybe wait for the dust to settle?
Elagabalus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:17 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.