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 , Congressional hearings , Supreme Court nominees

Reply
Old 1st October 2018, 12:27 PM   #41
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 41,387
Originally Posted by dmaker View Post
Lying under oath is now objecting to mistreatment?
That isn't what Belz was talking about.
__________________
"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 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 1st October 2018, 12:29 PM   #42
dmaker
Graduate Poster
 
dmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,380
I think Republican are just miffed because they knew that Dr. Fords allegations were basically unprovable and that they would just need to calmly sit out the storm and in the end it would be alright. But then Der Groppenfuhrer saw the calm Kavanaugh and didn't like it and demanded more tantrum. Sadly for Republicans, BK cranked the uppity on his lie machine to 11 and now they know his nomination is in jeopardy and it's no longer just about unproven allegations.

Last edited by dmaker; 1st October 2018 at 12:31 PM.
dmaker 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 1st October 2018, 12:32 PM   #43
The Shrike
Illuminator
 
The Shrike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,733
I've learned that, as I had suspected since the 1991 Clarence Thomas fiasco, our last vestige of sanity in terms of a check on the other branches of government is well and truly screwed. The SCOTUS nomination and confirmation process is politically compromised. The American Experiment was fun while it lasted, I suppose.
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 1st October 2018, 12:32 PM   #44
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 9,702
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Likely but not for certain. It's quite possible she believes what she's saying. But it is very, very unlikely that her claims are actually true.
That's three different and conflicting things you have said there

1. She is likely to be lying.

2. She believes what she is saying (so she's not lying, just mistaken)

3. He clams are untrue (so she IS lying, or mistaken, or.....what?)

You haven't really thought about this much have you?

Have you been taking equivocation lessons from Brett Kavanaugh?
__________________
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 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 1st October 2018, 12:34 PM   #45
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 19,464
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
You have that exactly backwards. It is exclusively the Democrats, not Republicans, who launch these vicious personal attacks against judicial nominees. The Democrats whined endlessly (and to this day) about Republicans blocking Garland, but the Republicans never said one bad thing about Garland himself. The toxicity comes from an abandonment of constitutional principles, not from adherence to them.
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Yeah, Republicans just refuse to consider those nominees, instead. And I'll remind you that Gorsusch, or whatever his name is, didn't have to go through all this.

Can we stop with the partisan rhetoric and whataboutism now?
Zig's post is pure nonsense. Vetting and asking questions of a candidate is not 'attacking'. Its called vetting. Gorsuch was never accused of lying. Also, he never was accused of sexual misconduct and the Democrats in the Senate are not accusing Kavanaugh of that either. They are simply doing their jobs in attempting to investigate a candidate for the highest court in the land. This as opposed to the Republicans hiding documents and not investigating Kavanaugh properly.

Also Zig, the Constitutional process makes it a duty for the Senate to fully investigate a Supreme Court nominee.
__________________
“ 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 1st October 2018, 12:36 PM   #46
Donal
Illuminator
 
Donal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,557
Things I learned:

There was someone else to add to my ignore list

Urban Dictionary is now a legal reference guide

Bret Kavanaugh likes beer

Stuff I already knew but was re-affirmed

Way too many of our government procedures rely on "gentlemen's agreements" and good faith. I realize politics is the art of compromise, but there is no way a small bunch of radical lunatics should be able to crash the whole system into a free for all of power grabs and feudal kingdoms

Middle and upper class whites would sooner bury their own children than take a hard look at the system so many of us have benefited from and ask the hard questions about it
Donal 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 1st October 2018, 12:37 PM   #47
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 41,387
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Oh? Why not?
You can read a pretty good dissection from Rachel Mitchell, the investigative counsel for the judiciary committee, here:
https://www.scribd.com/document/3898...sel#from_embed

There's a number of serious issues with her testimony. Ford's account has been inconsistent, she has no memory of key details, nobody can corroborate even part of her account, she's been evasive, forgetful and uncooperative about recent events surrounding these allegations, and it appears that she's basically been coached by Democratic operatives.
__________________
"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 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 1st October 2018, 12:37 PM   #48
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 6,208
Kavanaugh gets to fight for the seat.
Garland never got the chance.

How do you know how much that seat meant for Garland?
__________________
Opinion is divided on the subject. All the others say it is; I say it isn’t.

Last edited by The Great Zaganza; 1st October 2018 at 12:38 PM.
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 1st October 2018, 12:43 PM   #49
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 19,464
Originally Posted by dmaker View Post
I think Republican are just miffed because they knew that Dr. Fords allegations were basically unprovable and that they would just need to calmly sit out the storm and in the end it would be alright. But then Der Groppenfuhrer saw the calm Kavanaugh and didn't like it and demanded more tantrum. Sadly for Republicans, BK cranked the uppity on his lie machine to 11 and now they know his nomination is in jeopardy and it's no longer just about unproven allegations.
I said this earlier and it bears repeating. It wasn't Ford's testimony that made me believe Kavanaugh was unfit. It was Kavanaugh's testimony. It was that pathetic, wimpy frat boy entitlement. The absurd indignance, his lack of forthrightness and temperament. Nothing about him says to me that he can be counted on to be trustworthy and impartial.
__________________
“ 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 1st October 2018, 12:43 PM   #50
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
 
johnny karate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 11,730
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
You can read a pretty good dissection from Rachel Mitchell, the investigative counsel for the judiciary committee, here:
https://www.scribd.com/document/3898...sel#from_embed

There's a number of serious issues with her testimony. Ford's account has been inconsistent, she has no memory of key details, nobody can corroborate even part of her account, she's been evasive, forgetful and uncooperative about recent events surrounding these allegations, and it appears that she's basically been coached by Democratic operatives.
Sound like an investigation is required to address these alleged inconsistencies.
johnny karate 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 1st October 2018, 12:44 PM   #51
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 41,387
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
That's three different and conflicting things you have said there

1. She is likely to be lying.

2. She believes what she is saying (so she's not lying, just mistaken)

3. He clams are untrue (so she IS lying, or mistaken, or.....what?)

You haven't really thought about this much have you?

Have you been taking equivocation lessons from Brett Kavanaugh?
You haven't really thought much about what I said, have you?

Let's suppose her claims are not true. I believe that to be the case, you may not, but let's take that as a given for the sake of argument. *IF* her claims are not true, what then?

Well, then we have several different possibilities. And unsurprisingly, there is a degree of mutual exclusivity among them. She could be lying. She could believe what she said. These are mutually exclusive. If she believes it but it's not true, that too could have multiple possible causes (complete delusion, the memory of a real event that got changed over time, etc).

So, did I say conflicting things? Sure, because there are conflicting possibilities. Unless you know everything, that will always be the case. Is it wrong to describe conflicting possibilities? No, that would be absurd.

You really don't have any coherent objection at all.
__________________
"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 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 1st October 2018, 12:47 PM   #52
Hlafordlaes
Disorder of Kilopi
 
Hlafordlaes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: State of Flux
Posts: 9,101
I done seen Kavanaugh's towering innalect. Dood's smart.
__________________
Driftwood on an empty shore of the sea of meaninglessness. Irrelevant, weightless, inconsequential moment of existential hubris on the fast track to oblivion.
His real name is Count Douchenozzle von Stenchfahrter und Lichtendicks. - shemp
Hlafordlaes 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 1st October 2018, 01:07 PM   #53
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 19,464
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Likely but not for certain. It's quite possible she believes what she's saying. But it is very, very unlikely that her claims are actually true.
I dont think so. I see at as a classic 'he said' she said' scenario. Almost impossible to know with any confidence who is telling the truth.

Isn't it interesting that the one person who objects to an investigation is Kavanaugh. Ford took a polygraph, Kavanaugh has not. The only person who might be able to shed light on this is hiding.
__________________
“ 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 1st October 2018, 01:08 PM   #54
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 44,754
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
Kavanaugh gets to fight for the seat.
Garland never got the chance.

How do you know how much that seat meant for Garland?
It is good when republicans destroy someone's life out of pure spite of course. Have to keep the double standards going.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle 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 1st October 2018, 01:11 PM   #55
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 44,754
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
I said this earlier and it bears repeating. It wasn't Ford's testimony that made me believe Kavanaugh was unfit. It was Kavanaugh's testimony. It was that pathetic, wimpy frat boy entitlement. The absurd indignance, his lack of forthrightness and temperament. Nothing about him says to me that he can be counted on to be trustworthy and impartial.
You make it sound like trustworhty and impartial were actually related to his choice. Torture loving is a much more important requirement, but of course they lost those documents. Willing to lie to congress is of course a pluss too.

There are so many reasons he is a really poor choice for a judge to people who care about things like law and order. That is why republicans like him he really hits the fascism kick they are on well.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle 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 1st October 2018, 01:24 PM   #56
Trebuchet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trebuchet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: The Great Northwet
Posts: 19,083
My opinion that anyone who ever went to a prep school or Ivy League college should be forbidden from holding public office has been reinforced.
__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.
Trebuchet 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 1st October 2018, 01:29 PM   #57
Slings and Arrows
Graduate Poster
 
Slings and Arrows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 1,743
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
I dont think so. I see at as a classic 'he said' she said' scenario. Almost impossible to know with any confidence who is telling the truth.

But it's not a classic 'he said, she said' scenario. Actually, Dr. Ford would have a better case if it were.

As Rachel Mitchell's analysis points out, Dr. Ford named 4 other people who were present at the time of the alleged attack -- 2 of them were eye witnesses.

However, all 4 people have either denied the allegations, or claimed they don't remember the incident ever happening.

Worst still, Dr. Ford's high-school friend, Leland Keyser, claims she has never even met Brett Kavanaugh, and never been to a party where he was present.
Slings and Arrows 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 1st October 2018, 01:36 PM   #58
Cabbage
Muse
 
Cabbage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 691
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
You have that exactly backwards. It is exclusively the Democrats, not Republicans, who launch these vicious personal attacks against judicial nominees. The Democrats whined endlessly (and to this day) about Republicans blocking Garland, but the Republicans never said one bad thing about Garland himself. The toxicity comes from an abandonment of constitutional principles, not from adherence to them.
Republicans didn't have to smear Garland because they already invested their time smearing Obama.

Nice spin attempt, however. LOL
Cabbage 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 1st October 2018, 01:44 PM   #59
Cabbage
Muse
 
Cabbage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 691
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post



Kavanaugh is getting his name dragged through the mud by Democrats. They are absolutely making the accusations. And those accusations are intended to personally destroy Kavanaugh.


Oh, I see now. When anyone accuses a Republican, it's a dirty Democrat attempting to smear a virtuous Republican.

However, when anyone accuses a Democrat, whether the accused is Bill Clinton or Al Franken or whoever, it's a principled search for Truth and Honesty.

Have I got that right?
Edited by zooterkin:  Edited for rule 0 and rule 12.

Last edited by zooterkin; 1st October 2018 at 02:27 PM.
Cabbage 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 1st October 2018, 01:46 PM   #60
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 70,469
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
You have that exactly backwards. It is exclusively the Democrats, not Republicans, who launch these vicious personal attacks against judicial nominees. The Democrats whined endlessly (and to this day) about Republicans blocking Garland, but the Republicans never said one bad thing about Garland himself. The toxicity comes from an abandonment of constitutional principles, not from adherence to them.
WTF, is this a Poe?
__________________
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 1st October 2018, 01:52 PM   #61
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 70,469
Lesson for the Democrats, stop worrying about overturning Roe, they are never going to admit it and you know anyone nominated off a Federalist Society list is going to be anti-abortion. Do look more closely at partisan history in a nominee's background. When there is evidence of perjury in past confirmation hearings.

And look more closely at the pro-1%, anti-99% rulings the candidate has made.

He worked for Ken Starr, that history must have been full of red flags.

Find better ways to counter the attack on the messenger one can expect from the GOP.

Don't attack the ideology, bring up very specific rulings.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 1st October 2018 at 01:54 PM.
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 1st October 2018, 01:55 PM   #62
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 14,885
Originally Posted by Cabbage View Post
Have I got that right?
Edited by zooterkin:  Edited for rule 0 and rule 12.
Let's all put the Phasers back on Stun, okay?
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal

Last edited by zooterkin; 1st October 2018 at 02:29 PM.
JoeMorgue 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 1st October 2018, 01:57 PM   #63
Cabbage
Muse
 
Cabbage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 691
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Let's all put the Phasers back on Stun, okay?
Point taken, but it is objectively true based on his posts.
Cabbage 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 1st October 2018, 02:00 PM   #64
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 14,885
Originally Posted by Cabbage View Post
Point taken, but it is objectively true based on his posts.
And, to be as fair to you as you were to me, I think this obsession with ideological purity is not helping.

Being inconsistent is not a greater sin than being wrong.

All ideologies are hypocrites because an ideology cannot account for the full scale of the human condition.

If our entire discourse is based on nothing but finding inconsistencies in ideologies (i.e. hypocrisy) that's all we're ever gonna do and as good as it often feels, it doesn't accomplish much on any practical level.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
JoeMorgue 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 1st October 2018, 02:04 PM   #65
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 19,464
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Likely but not for certain. It's quite possible she believes what she's saying. But it is very, very unlikely that her claims are actually true.
Originally Posted by Slings and Arrows View Post
But it's not a classic 'he said, she said' scenario. Actually, Dr. Ford would have a better case if it were.

As Rachel Mitchell's analysis points out, Dr. Ford named 4 other people who were present at the time of the alleged attack -- 2 of them were eye witnesses.

However, all 4 people have either denied the allegations, or claimed they don't remember the incident ever happening.

Worst still, Dr. Ford's high-school friend, Leland Keyser, claims she has never even met Brett Kavanaugh, and never been to a party where he was present.
1. You are using Rachel Mitchell, who was appointed by the Republicans to say what they wanted her to say.
2. Anyone who knows anything about memory would be able to tell you that while a victim may be able to remember certain things vividly, from a traumatic experience they are just as likely to misremember others.
3. They did not really deny anything, just because they didn't have a memory of it. 2 of them? You mean Judge and Kavanaugh?
__________________
“ 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 1st October 2018, 02:04 PM   #66
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 31,030
Originally Posted by Cabbage View Post
Oh, I see now. When anyone accuses a Republican, it's a dirty Democrat attempting to smear a virtuous Republican.

However, when anyone accuses a Democrat, whether the accused is Bill Clinton or Al Franken or whoever, it's a principled search for Truth and Honesty.
[edit=Agatha]Edited to comply with previously moderated post
You should have seen how Zig lost his mind over a lie Obama told that was only untrue for less than 4% of the country. Funny how his dedication to truth has faltered in the Age of Trump.
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.

Last edited by Agatha; 3rd October 2018 at 11:57 AM.
Upchurch 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 1st October 2018, 02:06 PM   #67
Elagabalus
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,440
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
...But it could be because the Dems have just become that much more toxic...
I believe you're confusing toxicity with "The Mojo".
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
Old 1st October 2018, 02:08 PM   #68
Cabbage
Muse
 
Cabbage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 691
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
And, to be as fair to you as you were to me, I think this obsession with ideological purity is not helping.

Being inconsistent is not a greater sin than being wrong.

All ideologies are hypocrites because an ideology cannot account for the full scale of the human condition.

If our entire discourse is based on nothing but finding inconsistencies in ideologies (i.e. hypocrisy) that's all we're ever gonna do and as good as it often feels, it doesn't accomplish much on any practical level.
But Lying and/or Willful Ignorance...that's something else entirely.
Cabbage 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 1st October 2018, 02:10 PM   #69
Sideroxylon
Featherless biped
 
Sideroxylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Aporia
Posts: 19,858
Originally Posted by River View Post
Lessons to be learned. Never talk **** in your year book. All politicians are ****. The process has been marred, and I hope some bipartisan regulations are made so that another fiasco like this never happens.
There has never been anything like this administration and president.
__________________
'The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool.' - Richard Feynman
Sideroxylon 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 1st October 2018, 02:13 PM   #70
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 14,885
Originally Posted by Cabbage View Post
But Lying and/or Willful Ignorance...that's something else entirely.
Yeah but... cards all on the table here... for all practical purposes all of our political discourse being nothing but a long game of "You said that then, now you say this now" kind of got stale for me a long time ago.

People are gonna protect their tribes. This should not be shocking to anyone at this point.

And 99 times out of a 100 "OMG this side protected Bill but attacked Ted and the other side attacked Ted but protected Bill when they both did the same thing!" just means both Bill and Ted... are just awful.

We need to get out of this loop, bad. We are stuck in. Meaningful, influential people both in the leadership and in the trenches of both "sides" are going to have to sucking it up and doing what's best for the country even if it means not returning a childish jab the other side landed.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
JoeMorgue 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 1st October 2018, 02:15 PM   #71
Slings and Arrows
Graduate Poster
 
Slings and Arrows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 1,743
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
1. You are using Rachel Mitchell, who was appointed by the Republicans to say what they wanted her to say.

"This memorandum contains my own independent assessment of Dr. Ford’s allegations, based upon my independent review of the evidence and my nearly 25 years of experience as a career prosecutor of sex-related and other crimes in Arizona. No senator reviewed or approved this memorandum before its release, and I was not pressured in any way to write this memorandum or to write any words in this memorandum with which I do not fully agree. The words written in this memorandum are mine, and I fully stand by all of them. While I am a registered Republican, I am not a political or partisan person."

-- Rachel Mitchell (Sept 30, 2018)
Slings and Arrows 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 1st October 2018, 02:19 PM   #72
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 9,702
Originally Posted by Slings and Arrows View Post
"This memorandum contains my own independent assessment of Dr. Ford’s allegations, based upon my independent review of the evidence and my nearly 25 years of experience as a career prosecutor of sex-related and other crimes in Arizona. No senator reviewed or approved this memorandum before its release, and I was not pressured in any way to write this memorandum or to write any words in this memorandum with which I do not fully agree. The words written in this memorandum are mine, and I fully stand by all of them. While I am a registered Republican, I am not a political or partisan person."

-- Rachel Mitchell (Sept 30, 2018)

Yeah, right, and we can take her word on that
__________________
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 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 1st October 2018, 02:27 PM   #73
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 76,594
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Likely but not for certain. It's quite possible she believes what she's saying. But it is very, very unlikely that her claims are actually true.
Based on what? What do you know that the rest of us don't?

Quote:
That isn't what Belz was talking about.
No, but I wasn't talking about anything relating to what you responded, either. Responding to accusations is fine. Defending yourself is fine. Frothing at the mouth while spouting partisan conspiracy theories is not. It's the mark of a person unfit to sit on the Supreme Court.

You'd agree, if only the judge had been nominated by a Democrat; that's the sad state of affairs, here.

Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
You can read a pretty good dissection from Rachel Mitchell, the investigative counsel for the judiciary committee, here:
https://www.scribd.com/document/3898...sel#from_embed

There's a number of serious issues with her testimony. Ford's account has been inconsistent, she has no memory of key details, nobody can corroborate even part of her account, she's been evasive, forgetful and uncooperative about recent events surrounding these allegations, and it appears that she's basically been coached by Democratic operatives.
Ok but loss of details is something common in such recollections. We know this. It does put a question mark on the testimony, and we may never know the truth, but you seem far more convinced that she's wrong or lying than the evidence suggests. I'm asking you why, and this link does not satisfy that burden.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

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


Belz... 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 1st October 2018, 02:29 PM   #74
River
Illuminator
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,962
Originally Posted by Sideroxylon View Post
There has never been anything like this administration and president.

Fixed below.


Quote:
There has never been anything trolled like this administration and president.
__________________
"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 1st October 2018, 02:30 PM   #75
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 76,594
Originally Posted by Slings and Arrows View Post
But it's not a classic 'he said, she said' scenario. Actually, Dr. Ford would have a better case if it were.

As Rachel Mitchell's analysis points out, Dr. Ford named 4 other people who were present at the time of the alleged attack -- 2 of them were eye witnesses.

However, all 4 people have either denied the allegations, or claimed they don't remember the incident ever happening.

Worst still, Dr. Ford's high-school friend, Leland Keyser, claims she has never even met Brett Kavanaugh, and never been to a party where he was present.
Wow, a full post with arguments and all.

You should do that more often.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

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


Belz... 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 1st October 2018, 02:33 PM   #76
Planigale
Master Poster
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,940
As an outsider my understanding is that in the US there is supposed to be a separation of powers between the executive the legislature and the judiciary. By politicising judicial appointments that separation of powers is being reduced. Other countries manage to have a non-political judiciary; there could be a non-political commission that could recommend potential candidates from whom the president could appoint (and the senate approve). Rather than having a list of candidates from a frankly political body which is what has happened in this case.
Planigale 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 1st October 2018, 02:37 PM   #77
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 19,464
Originally Posted by Slings and Arrows View Post
"This memorandum contains my own independent assessment of Dr. Ford’s allegations, based upon my independent review of the evidence and my nearly 25 years of experience as a career prosecutor of sex-related and other crimes in Arizona. No senator reviewed or approved this memorandum before its release, and I was not pressured in any way to write this memorandum or to write any words in this memorandum with which I do not fully agree. The words written in this memorandum are mine, and I fully stand by all of them. While I am a registered Republican, I am not a political or partisan person."

-- Rachel Mitchell (Sept 30, 2018)
Sure.

Never mind that she knows who butters her bread. That Kavanaugh would not be prosecuted is not the same as saying that Ford is lying or beyond reproach. No one should be reviewing this coming to the conclusion that there is enough here to seek charges. No, the question is, is there enough to question whether this candidate is suitable for a very important job.
__________________
“ 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 1st October 2018, 02:38 PM   #78
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 76,594
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Yeah but... cards all on the table here... for all practical purposes all of our political discourse being nothing but a long game of "You said that then, now you say this now" kind of got stale for me a long time ago.

People are gonna protect their tribes. This should not be shocking to anyone at this point.

And 99 times out of a 100 "OMG this side protected Bill but attacked Ted and the other side attacked Ted but protected Bill when they both did the same thing!" just means both Bill and Ted... are just awful.

We need to get out of this loop, bad. We are stuck in. Meaningful, influential people both in the leadership and in the trenches of both "sides" are going to have to sucking it up and doing what's best for the country even if it means not returning a childish jab the other side landed.
That's all true but, sue me, I'd like people, myself included, to be more consistent in their ideologies so that, when someone on our "sides" does something wrong, we call it out. That way when we complain about those on the other "sides", we have the high ground...

...

...

__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

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


Belz... 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 1st October 2018, 02:45 PM   #79
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 6,331
Originally Posted by Slings and Arrows View Post
"This memorandum contains my own independent assessment of Dr. Ford’s allegations, based upon my independent review of the evidence and my nearly 25 years of experience as a career prosecutor of sex-related and other crimes in Arizona. No senator reviewed or approved this memorandum before its release, and I was not pressured in any way to write this memorandum or to write any words in this memorandum with which I do not fully agree. The words written in this memorandum are mine, and I fully stand by all of them. While I am a registered Republican, I am not a political or partisan person."

-- Rachel Mitchell (Sept 30, 2018)
"Well,[s]he would say that, wouldn't [s]he?"

-- Mandy Rice-Davies
Matthew Best 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 1st October 2018, 02:49 PM   #80
Cabbage
Muse
 
Cabbage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 691
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Yeah but... cards all on the table here... for all practical purposes all of our political discourse being nothing but a long game of "You said that then, now you say this now" kind of got stale for me a long time ago.

People are gonna protect their tribes. This should not be shocking to anyone at this point.

And 99 times out of a 100 "OMG this side protected Bill but attacked Ted and the other side attacked Ted but protected Bill when they both did the same thing!" just means both Bill and Ted... are just awful.

We need to get out of this loop, bad. We are stuck in. Meaningful, influential people both in the leadership and in the trenches of both "sides" are going to have to sucking it up and doing what's best for the country even if it means not returning a childish jab the other side landed.
In that case, I suggest you address those same comments to the partisan hypocrite, not me.

I'll continue to call BS when I see quite obvious BS.
Cabbage 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 10:41 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.