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 12th October 2018, 12:21 PM   #3161
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 22,613
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
It wasn't an interview at that point. Furthermore, he wasn't playing to you. You weren't his target audience. Your opinion didn't matter. Among the people whose opinion he needed to sway, his performance worked. You may not like that, but objectively speaking, successfully playing to the audience that matters isn't disqualifying for any job.

What audience was he playing to, the ones who already wanted him on the court? How would that performance make anyone think he was more suitable than they already did?

It was a hearing to determine his fitness to serve on the Supreme Court. In a matter of minutes he made it clear that he isn't.

This is true whether he was "playing to the audience" or not.

And that "playing to the audience" excuse sounds an awful lot like the, "He's not being serious." apologia that Trump cultists would drag out whenever he was opening his mouth just to change feet.
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."
quadraginta 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 12th October 2018, 12:32 PM   #3162
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 41,379
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
What audience was he playing to, the ones who already wanted him on the court?
No. The few senators who were wavering and their swing voters.

Quote:
It was a hearing to determine his fitness to serve on the Supreme Court. In a matter of minutes he made it clear that he isn't.
Opinions on the matter obviously differ.

Quote:
And that "playing to the audience" excuse sounds an awful lot like the, "He's not being serious." apologia that Trump cultists would drag out whenever he was opening his mouth just to change feet.
I never said anything about him not being serious.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat 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 12th October 2018, 12:33 PM   #3163
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 22,613
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I'm pretty sure that keeping a conservative justice off the Supreme Court represents a substantial gain for a lot of progressives.

I'm pretty sure that keeping Kavanaugh off the Supreme Court wouldn't keep some other conservative off the Supreme Court. Even if the Dems manage to get the Senate in November.

Maybe, just maybe, they wanted to keep this conservative off the Supreme Court, as opposed to one whose loyalty was to the law, rather than to the Party.
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."
quadraginta 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 12th October 2018, 12:38 PM   #3164
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 22,613
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Who said that he wasn't actually angry? Nobody. Honestly, this is one of your weakest attempts at a counter-argument.

Furthermore, so far nobody has even said that he shouldn't be angry if the charges are false. People have only complained that he showed that he was angry. Supposedly this demonstrates a lack of self-control, which is the basis for the argument that it's disqualifying, NOT the fact that he was angry.

<snip>

It isn't that he was angry, it's the way he demonstrated that anger, as well as the targets he chose while doing it.

Someone can demonstrate their anger without blubbering, acting like a spoiled child, and invoking conspiracy theories.

That sort of self-restraint is is a quality which should be expected of a SCOTUS candidate, not hand-waved away when its absence is apparent.
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."
quadraginta 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 12th October 2018, 12:39 PM   #3165
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 22,613
Originally Posted by sylvan8798 View Post
Does Jesus approve of barbecuing Dr Ford?

Everyone's Jesus is not the same.
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."
quadraginta 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 12th October 2018, 12:44 PM   #3166
Mike!
Official Ponylandistanian National Treasure. Respect it!
 
Mike!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Ponylandistan! Where the bacon grows on trees! Can it get any better than that? I submit it can not!
Posts: 30,081
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
Everyone's Jesus is not the same.
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
__________________
"Never judge a man until you’ve walked a mile in his shoes...
Because then it won't really matter, you’ll be a mile away and have his shoes."
Mike! 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 12th October 2018, 12:44 PM   #3167
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 17,501
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
No. The few senators who were wavering and their swing voters.
I think he actually made it harder for them. A more composed response would have made it an easier "he said/she said" toss up for those wavering.

But he endeared himself to Trump, so there's that.
__________________
I once proposed a fun ban.

Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa
Dr. Keith 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 12th October 2018, 12:58 PM   #3168
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 17,501
Originally Posted by Mike! View Post
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
I am totally confused by the Truck in that video. The grill looks like a jeep XJ product but the door shot is clearly a full sized truck like a Series 1 Dodge Ram (even has the door paint not matching the body paint, a classic sign of Dodge Quality). The Jeep full size pickups from that period had a completely different grill from the XJs. So confusing. Probably had something to do with all the beer Bart and I were drinking back then.
__________________
I once proposed a fun ban.

Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa
Dr. Keith 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 12th October 2018, 01:00 PM   #3169
Paul2
Illuminator
 
Paul2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 4,718
WAY behind the curve (= late) on this reply, sorry if it duplicates another reply.

Originally Posted by River View Post
They can understand for every action they take, there is a reaction or consequence. Not everything is an entitlement in this world.
Favoring free contraception need not be supported on the basis that the users are entitled to it, or that it is an entitlement. The basis for supporting it, that others have mentioned, is that it is beneficial to *everyone* because everyone as a whole (society) does not need to deal with the harmful consequences of unwanted pregnancies and STDs.

It's a matter of societal self-defense, not gifting something to someone else.
__________________
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

Last edited by Paul2; 12th October 2018 at 02:21 PM.
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 12th October 2018, 01:04 PM   #3170
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 17,501
Originally Posted by Paul2 View Post
Favoring free contraception need not be supported on the basis that the users are entitled to it, or that it is an entitlement. The basis for supporting it, that others have mentioned, is that it is beneficial to *everyone* because everyone as a whole (society) does not need to deal with the harmful consequences of unwanted pregnancies and STDs.

It's a matter of societal self-defense, not gifting something to someone else.
That this still has to be explained is sad.
__________________
I once proposed a fun ban.

Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa
Dr. Keith 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 12th October 2018, 01:07 PM   #3171
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 41,379
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
I think he actually made it harder for them. A more composed response would have made it an easier "he said/she said" toss up for those wavering.
I keep hearing this argument, but everyone who is advancing it opposed his nomination from the beginning. I don't see actual evidence that it's true, that he actually hurt his chances in any way.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat 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 12th October 2018, 01:10 PM   #3172
Mike!
Official Ponylandistanian National Treasure. Respect it!
 
Mike!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Ponylandistan! Where the bacon grows on trees! Can it get any better than that? I submit it can not!
Posts: 30,081
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
I am totally confused by the Truck in that video. The grill looks like a jeep XJ product but the door shot is clearly a full sized truck like a Series 1 Dodge Ram (even has the door paint not matching the body paint, a classic sign of Dodge Quality). The Jeep full size pickups from that period had a completely different grill from the XJs. So confusing. Probably had something to do with all the beer Bart and I were drinking back then.
Perhaps I can help with that. It's a third generation Dodge, D series (1972-80), with the grill blacked out in an odd fashion. The recessed door handle is a pretty distinctive feature.
__________________
"Never judge a man until you’ve walked a mile in his shoes...
Because then it won't really matter, you’ll be a mile away and have his shoes."
Mike! 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 12th October 2018, 01:22 PM   #3173
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 41,379
Originally Posted by Paul2 View Post
Favoring free contraception need not be supported on the basis that the users are entitled to it, or that it is an entitlement. The basis for supporting it, that others have mentioned, is that it is beneficial to *everyone* because everyone as a whole (society) does not need to deal with the harmful consequences of unwanted pregnancies and STDs.

It's a matter of societal self-defense, not gifting something to someone else.
It may surprise you to find out that in the Hobby Lobby ruling, the Supreme Court did not actually rule on whether the government had a compelling interest in providing access to birth control. This is what they said:
We will assume that the interest in guaranteeing cost-free access to the four challenged contraceptive methods is compelling within the meaning of RFRA, and we will proceed to consider the final prong of the RFRA test, i.e., whether HHS has shown that the contraceptive mandate is “the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling govern-mental interest.”
...
The most straightforward way of doing this would be for the Government to assume the cost of providing the four contraceptives at issue to any women who are unable to obtain them under their health-insurance policies due to their employers’ religious objections.
In other words, the conservative wing of the court has already accepted government-provided birth control as constitutional. I think it's a pretty safe bet that the liberal wing wouldn't have a problem with that either. Birth control isn't about to be denied to people by this court.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat 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 12th October 2018, 01:28 PM   #3174
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 17,501
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
I keep hearing this argument, but everyone who is advancing it opposed his nomination from the beginning. I don't see actual evidence that it's true, that he actually hurt his chances in any way.
His chances were ultimately not hurt because those who voted for him would have voted for him even if he had chugged a forty and pissed all over the desk before walking out of the hearing.

But that certainly wouldn't have made it easier for them to vote for him. Flake had to push for an investigation because the testimony was not enough to close the door on the issue. Graham had to interrupt the proceedings because Kav was doing such a poor job. He was amateurish, but he was their amateur and they had already invested too much to admit that he was an amateur.
__________________
I once proposed a fun ban.

Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa
Dr. Keith 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 12th October 2018, 01:31 PM   #3175
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 17,501
Originally Posted by Mike! View Post
Perhaps I can help with that. It's a third generation Dodge, D series (1972-80), with the grill blacked out in an odd fashion. The recessed door handle is a pretty distinctive feature.
I was going to mention that it could have just been a weird grill mod. I think you are right. That square grid grill was ugly enough that it needed some mods. And good catch on the handle, those dodges were so timeless, they hardly changed at all for more than 20 years, it seemed. Brett and I used to fill the bed with kegs. You could fit six if you were trying to keep them below the top of the bed.
__________________
I once proposed a fun ban.

Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa
Dr. Keith 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 12th October 2018, 01:58 PM   #3176
sylvan8798
Master Poster
 
sylvan8798's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,829
Originally Posted by River View Post
They can understand for every action they take, there is a reaction or consequence.
This is a law of physics, not a law or principle of society, or of human interaction, or of anything else for that matter.
__________________
DoYouEverWonder - Engineers and architects don't have to design steel buildings not to collapse from gravity. They already conquered gravity when they built it.

- Professional Wastrel
sylvan8798 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 12th October 2018, 02:24 PM   #3177
Paul2
Illuminator
 
Paul2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 4,718
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
It may surprise you to find out that in the Hobby Lobby ruling, the Supreme Court did not actually rule on whether the government had a compelling interest in providing access to birth control. This is what they said:
We will assume that the interest in guaranteeing cost-free access to the four challenged contraceptive methods is compelling within the meaning of RFRA, and we will proceed to consider the final prong of the RFRA test, i.e., whether HHS has shown that the contraceptive mandate is “the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling govern-mental interest.”
...
The most straightforward way of doing this would be for the Government to assume the cost of providing the four contraceptives at issue to any women who are unable to obtain them under their health-insurance policies due to their employers’ religious objections.
In other words, the conservative wing of the court has already accepted government-provided birth control as constitutional. I think it's a pretty safe bet that the liberal wing wouldn't have a problem with that either. Birth control isn't about to be denied to people by this court.
My point didn't have anything to do with the court or the legality of providing birth control. My point was purely that the basis for favoring free birth control wasn't necessarily that those using birth control are entitled to it, which was the rationale that you [ETA: It was River, actually, I think] were critiquing. There is another rational basis for favoring free birth control (it is to the benefit of society as a whole, as means or pro-active minimizing the harm of not having widespread, accessible birth control).
__________________
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

Last edited by Paul2; 12th October 2018 at 02:26 PM.
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 12th October 2018, 04:19 PM   #3178
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 18,353
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
However character is a matter to consider in appointing a judge so in his case it is not a "personal attack" in the sense you were using it.
It is exactly a "personal attack" in the sense I was using it.

We could call it some other term if "personal attack" carries some sort of connotation people don't like. Maybe we could call it a "character attack", or something. It wouldn't change what it was.

The point I was making was still the same. By introducing those issues at the last minute, it guaranteed that those attacks would be what is remembered about this confirmation process, and I would also remind people that in the single successful challenge of a Supreme Court nominee in my lifetime, no personal attacks, by whatever name they are called, were needed. Robert Bork was rejected based on how he was likely to behave as a judge, not what he did in high school.


My suspicion is that Brett Kavanaugh will be the same sort of justice that Robert Bork would have been, i.e. a right wing judicial activist. Had the Democrats pushed that point, I think it is unlikely that the outcome would have been any different, but at least they would not have looked so awful on television.
Meadmaker is online now   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 12th October 2018, 04:21 PM   #3179
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 22,613
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
I keep hearing this argument, but everyone who is advancing it opposed his nomination from the beginning. I don't see actual evidence that it's true, that he actually hurt his chances in any way.

It isn't about whether it did hurt his chances of being appointed. That was unlikely no matter what he did, in view of the adamantine support he had from the GOP.

It is that it should have, and such support simply exposed the raw party politics of his nomination. The Republicans never had any concern about whether or not he would be a good candidate, only that he would be one compliant to their power hungry agenda, no matter what the cost to rule of law.
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."
quadraginta 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 12th October 2018, 06:42 PM   #3180
sylvan8798
Master Poster
 
sylvan8798's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,829
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
It isn't about whether it did hurt his chances of being appointed. That was unlikely no matter what he did, in view of the adamantine support he had from the GOP.

It is that it should have, and such support simply exposed the raw party politics of his nomination. The Republicans never had any concern about whether or not he would be a good candidate, only that he would be one compliant to their power hungry agenda, no matter what the cost to rule of law.
Personally, I have at least a nanogram more respect for those who basically said straight out that it didn't matter what he did in his past over those like Susan Collins who said they believed Dr. Ford but didn't believe that it was actually Brett Kavanaugh. At least they are having some honesty about it, however minute.
__________________
DoYouEverWonder - Engineers and architects don't have to design steel buildings not to collapse from gravity. They already conquered gravity when they built it.

- Professional Wastrel
sylvan8798 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 12th October 2018, 07:06 PM   #3181
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 70,449
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
No. It's proof that his performance in the hearing wasn't disqualifying [because the Republicans were determined to approve his appointment no matter what]. Improve your reading comprehension.
ftfy
__________________
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 12th October 2018, 07:08 PM   #3182
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 70,449
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Lucky for him, Supreme Court judges are not elected by popular vote.
You got that right, the minority party is in control of the government.

The system is rigged.
__________________
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 12th October 2018, 07:10 PM   #3183
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 70,449
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
...
You cannot reasonably infer that Ms. Ford must have been telling the truth based on the fact that you cannot come up with a motivation for her to lie.
Aaaannnd there you go again, cherry picking a straw man this time.
__________________
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 12th October 2018, 07:32 PM   #3184
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 11,994
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
Robert Bork was rejected based on how he was likely to behave as a judge, not what he did in high school.
I recall that the videos he rented came into play.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche 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 12th October 2018, 08:24 PM   #3185
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 18,353
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
I recall that the videos he rented came into play.
You are conflating Bork with Thomas. During the Anita Hill soap opera, some people tried to bring up video rentals by Thomas.

At least, that's the way I remember it.

The most commonly remembered bit from the Bork hearings was Ted Kennedy talking about how, in Robert Bork's America, civil rights would go out the window. Senator Kennedy was surely guilty of hyperbole, but it wasn't fabrication. The fact is that Bork was no fan of most civil rights legislation, and thought that most interference in economic affairs was unconstitutional. I was a young man back then, but I remember reading that he felt federal minimum wage laws, anti-trust laws, and many environmental regulations were all unconstitutional. Of course, Roe v. Wade was a terrible ruling, in his view. That's what I mean by Bork being a right wing judicial activist.

Unfortunately, the main legacy of those hearings was to get future nominees to clam up about Roe v. Wade, or any other case. Bork was the last nominee to actually answer questions about his actual opinion on any controversial subject. It's weird that we talk about the hearings as a job interview, but it's a very strange job interview where a candidate won't say how he would do his job, or even comment about whether the outgoing or past employees did their jobs.

Last edited by Meadmaker; 12th October 2018 at 08:27 PM.
Meadmaker is online now   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 12th October 2018, 09:17 PM   #3186
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 11,994
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
You are conflating Bork with Thomas. During the Anita Hill soap opera, some people tried to bring up video rentals by Thomas.

At least, that's the way I remember it.
No it was Bork. link
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche 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 12th October 2018, 10:27 PM   #3187
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 41,379
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
You got that right, the minority party is in control of the government.

The system is rigged.
The system is always rigged when Democrats are out of power. That's how they always interpret being out of power.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat 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 12th October 2018, 10:31 PM   #3188
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 70,449
Originally Posted by Aridas View Post
So, how did Kavanaugh do on his first day on the job? He was disrespectful...

...and apparently interested in arguing the case himself.

Not a particularly confidence boosting beginning, in short.
But from the sound of it, it confirms the conclusions people who live in my reality drew from the evidence we had going in.
__________________
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 12th October 2018, 10:34 PM   #3189
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 70,449
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
I'm pretty sure that keeping Kavanaugh off the Supreme Court wouldn't keep some other conservative off the Supreme Court. Even if the Dems manage to get the Senate in November.

Maybe, just maybe, they wanted to keep this conservative off the Supreme Court, as opposed to one whose loyalty was to the law, rather than to the Party [of Trump].
ftfy

Wonder if Justice Roberts gets to do some dressing down?
__________________
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 12th October 2018, 10:39 PM   #3190
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 70,449
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
That this still has to be explained is sad.
And that it is still not understood and/or accepted is even sadder.
__________________
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 12th October 2018, 10:44 PM   #3191
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 18,353
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
No it was Bork. link
I stand corrected. I don't remember that, perhaps because, as the Wikipedia article on him put it,

"His video rental history was unremarkable, and included such harmless titles as A Day at the Races, Ruthless People, and The Man Who Knew Too Much. "


The incident I remembered was this one, from the Wikipedia article on Clarence Thomas' nomination.


"According to Mayer and Abramson, soon after Thomas was sworn in, three reporters for The Washington Post "burst into the newsroom almost simultaneously with information confirming that Thomas' involvement with pornography far exceeded what the public had been led to believe."[63] These reporters had eyewitness testimony and video rental records showing Thomas' interest in and use of pornography.[64] However, according to Jeffrey Toobin, because Thomas was already sworn in by the time the video store evidence emerged, The Washington Post dropped the story."

There had been rumors of his video rental habits during the hearing, but the committee wouldn't entertain those rumors openly. (I won't vote for Biden in the primaries because he's too darned old, but I've voted for him in the past, and I really respected the way he handled the Thomas hearings.)
Meadmaker is online now   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 12th October 2018, 10:45 PM   #3192
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 6,190
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
The system is always rigged when Democrats are out of power. That's how they always interpret being out of power.
Unlike Republicans, who claim the system is rigged even when they are in power (i.e. Deep State).
__________________
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 12th October 2018, 10:46 PM   #3193
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 70,449
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
It may surprise you to find out that in the Hobby Lobby ruling, the Supreme Court did not actually rule on whether the government had a compelling interest in providing access to birth control. This is what they said:
We will assume that the interest in guaranteeing cost-free access to the four challenged contraceptive methods is compelling within the meaning of RFRA, and we will proceed to consider the final prong of the RFRA test, i.e., whether HHS has shown that the contraceptive mandate is “the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling govern-mental interest.”
...
The most straightforward way of doing this would be for the Government to assume the cost of providing the four contraceptives at issue to any women who are unable to obtain them under their health-insurance policies due to their employers’ religious objections.
In other words, the conservative wing of the court has already accepted government-provided birth control as constitutional. I think it's a pretty safe bet that the liberal wing wouldn't have a problem with that either. Birth control isn't about to be denied to people by this court.
So Hobby Lobby and the nuns that refused to have birth control included in the health insurance they provided employees and the nuns who wouldn't allow the government to supplement the cost so the nuns could say they weren't paying for it weren't really impacted by SCOTUS decisions?

These people want the government to support their pushing their religion on other people. (It's not Sharia Law we have to worry about, but I digress.)
__________________
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 12th October 2018, 10:48 PM   #3194
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 70,449
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
His chances were ultimately not hurt because those who voted for him would have voted for him even if he had chugged a forty and pissed all over the desk before walking out of the hearing.

But that certainly wouldn't have made it easier for them to vote for him. Flake had to push for an investigation because the testimony was not enough to close the door on the issue. Graham had to interrupt the proceedings because Kav was doing such a poor job. He was amateurish, but he was their amateur and they had already invested too much to admit that he was an amateur.
I think Graham and Flake and probably a few more GOP Senators were in denial about Kav's lack of fitness for the job.
__________________
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 12th October 2018, 10:50 PM   #3195
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 70,449
Originally Posted by sylvan8798 View Post
Personally, I have at least a nanogram more respect for those who basically said straight out that it didn't matter what he did in his past over those like Susan Collins who said they believed Dr. Ford but didn't believe that it was actually Brett Kavanaugh. At least they are having some honesty about it, however minute.
Is it honest to be in denial? Collins cherry picked, I don't think that was honest.
__________________
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 12th October 2018, 10:52 PM   #3196
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 70,449
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
The system is always rigged when Democrats are out of power. That's how they always interpret being out of power.


Just our imagination I guess.
__________________
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 12th October 2018, 11:03 PM   #3197
Minoosh
Philosopher
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 8,252
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
Maybe, just maybe, they wanted to keep this conservative off the Supreme Court, as opposed to one whose loyalty was to the law, rather than to the Party.
I think maybe his new colleagues will not like that he was so open, even aggressive, in declaring his partisanship. I wonder how that will play out.
Minoosh 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 13th October 2018, 04:39 AM   #3198
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 76,590
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
The system is always rigged when Democrats are out of power. That's how they always interpret being out of power.
Evidence?

Also, Trump calls the system rigged as well.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... 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 13th October 2018, 04:46 AM   #3199
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 9,691
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
The system is always rigged when Democrats are out of power. That's how they always interpret being out of power.
You have a very short memory...

http://fortune.com/2016/10/21/poll-s...lection-claim/

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/...lection-229845

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion...gged-election/

https://www.zanesvilletimesrecorder....0/17/92281560/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.33823504c5d5
__________________
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 13th October 2018, 06:01 AM   #3200
applecorped
Rotten to the Core
 
applecorped's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 18,533
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
And that it is still not understood and/or accepted is even sadder.


__________________
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
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 12:29 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.