Did Kavanaugh do it?

[Andrew NDB]

Without getting political, speaking strictly about the act he allegedly did when he was 17... do you think he did it?

Secondly... how much do you remember about when you were 17? I couldn't even tell you who my teachers were.

[BartAllen]

I find the timing of the accusation suspect.
That said, I do tend to believe that this woman did live through something. I'm just not sure she is correct in her recollection.

I'm reminded of the innocence project and how many men it freed based on DNA evidence. Each of those men's accusers were also certain that the right man was behind bars. They were wrong. I have a suspicion that's the same situation here.

That third accuser has made similar accusations in the past and she was shown to be lying at that time.

The second accuser apparently just saw him flashing a crowd. Big deal.

So what are we left with? One person making a claim another making another. There is no actual evidence backing up Ford's claims, and while I believe her I can't trust her entirely because she is being used as a pawn in this entire situation.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

I hit "probably not" before I saw "this whole thing is dumb." Those both cover my thoughts on the matter.

I mean, come on. We've got a sitting President in office with much more credible witnesses, history, and testimonies of sexual chicanery and misdeeds, so we've got a perfect comparison for Kavanaugh.

Dems just don't want the dude on the bench.

[wpugh2424]

I hit "probably not" before I saw "this whole thing is dumb." Those both cover my thoughts on the matter.

I mean, come on. We've got a sitting President in office with much more credible witnesses, history, and testimonies of sexual chicanery and misdeeds, so we've got a perfect comparison for Kavanaugh.

Dems just don't want the dude on the bench.

I agree with u

[Redeemer]

I hit "probably not" before I saw "this whole thing is dumb." Those both cover my thoughts on the matter.

I mean, come on. We've got a sitting President in office with much more credible witnesses, history, and testimonies of sexual chicanery and misdeeds, so we've got a perfect comparison for Kavanaugh.

Dems just don't want the dude on the bench.

The sitting president? What about the past president Clinton who actually sexually harassed an intern to the point of having an affair with the intern.... Talk about calling the kettle black :lol:

[IndigoErth]

Sadly, the right answer is not an option: No idea.

Either way though he certainly isn't coming across as anyone dignified enough for the lifelong position they want to vote him into.

[PApagreg]

Umm should't this be a political thread or at least in the sexual harassment thread.

[Autbot_Benz]

After seeing his little temper tantrum when being interviewed by the senate Id say yes. Not to mention Trump Is jerry rigging the fbi Investigation so it favors Kavanaugh. Imagine him having that big of a tantrum when he is piss drunk.

[Andrew NDB]

Umm should't this be a political thread or at least in the sexual harassment thread.

It is neither of those things, so no.

[Leo656]

A lot of people say that his "outburst" is "proof" of guilt, but I know damn well that's exactly how I'd react if I were falsely accused of the very thing he's accused of. These things aren't trivial accusations.

Of course, it very well could be that he's lashing out because he's guilty. We don't know. I just know if I were in his position, and I didn't do it, I'd personally spare no expense to see those who've falsely accused me be punished for trying to ruin my life. But then, I'm more than a little vindictive. Anyway, I understand his position.

I also know women who've been raped or otherwise assaulted, so I totally understand why most don't come forward, etc. etc. I'm not insensitive to their plight. Coming forward is still the right thing to do, though, even on the 1% chance you can stop the person who hurt you from hurting someone else. I know "It's hard", but doing the right thing is always harder than doing the opposite. A lot of these cases could have been more cut-and-dry if the accusers didn't wait 30-odd years to say something, and THEN only said something because the person they're accusing is suddenly notorious. They HAVE to be aware of how questionable that makes them, and their accusations, look.

Then you have people like Juanita Broaddrick, who WAS making the same accusations for decades, but was completely and repeatedly dismissed, despite lots of evidence, because... well, because people REALLY wanted to like Bill Clinton, even though he's pretty much definitely a violent rapist. We all know there were many others making these accusations against him and they haven't gone away. If even HALF the stories about Slick Willy are true, then he's far worse than Kavanaugh's accused of being. For the longest time, nobody cared at all. Everything from "Well, they all do stuff like that" to "The women probably loved it, he's charming." Pretty gross stuff.

So in one case, a guy was repeatedly accused WITH evidence, and people ignored or dismissed it because they found him charming and liked his politics. In this case, a guy is repeatedly accused with little-to-no evidence, yet a lot of people immediately assume that he's guilty because he's politically Conservative and "all victims should be believed". It's interesting.

I think definitely all people who claim to be victims of rape or assault should be HEARD. Not immediately believed just by showing up, because people lie, or get their facts from many years ago wrong, as others have stated. False accusations ruin lives, so all evidence must be weighted very carefully before anyone rushes to judgment.

In this case, I'm inclined to believe something happened to her but probably not who and how she's remembering it, and the timing of her coming forward is EXTREMELY suspect. This guy didn't show up yesterday, and she could have come forward at any point over the last two decades to try and keep him from working his way up the ladder. Only NOW, on the eve of the whole Supreme Court deal, she's finally ready to say something? Not when he was up for any one of the countless positions he's had in the interim? Timing is everything, and this just doesn't feel right.

If it somehow comes out that he's guilty, by all means nail him to the wall. But there's a reason why the initial reaction to any kind of He Said/She Said dispute without any evidence is skepticism. Like, it's good that women finally find their courage, even if it takes many years, but... what do you expect anyone to do NOW, exactly? These things need to be treated urgently when they're fresh, no matter how difficult it may be. Staying silent because "nobody would believe you" is still enabling the abuser, and it only makes people believe you even less later on.

I'unno. Personally, I think he didn't do it, but it would be great to know for sure because if he did do it, by no means should he hold the position. Without any proof, though, it's just a big stall tactic. We can't fall into the habit of demonizing people based on "They're guilty because I said so", no matter how horrific the accusations.

I voted "Probably not", because I don't think this situation is dumb. It's theater, but kind of important to where we are right now culturally, with victims of abuse coming forward with their stories, etc. We're still struggling as a group with where we fall between empathy for those who claim to be victims of abuse, and sorting through facts and evidence to see actual justice done. So no, not "dumb"; rather, very much a display of where we're at right now. It's important, even if a person generally doesn't care about politics. None of these issues are going away.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

The sitting president? What about the past president Clinton who actually sexually harassed an intern to the point of having an affair with the intern.... Talk about calling the kettle black :lol:

1). I'd think the president in office who appointed the mam would be a far more compelling comparison than a president from the 90's, but if you're so triggered that you have to respond by deflecting to Billy Boy Clinton who hasn't been politically relevant in years, sure pal. You do you.

2). Those allegations ALSO were far more reputable, with factual specific evidence and accounts, collaborating witnesses, and far more easily proven. Or, for a THIRD more compelling comparison, Harvey Weinstein! Not even a President or a player in politics at all, so my choice of him as an example won't offend anybody!

[Andrew NDB]

Not to mention Trump Is jerry rigging the fbi Investigation so it favors Kavanaugh.

That was a FAKE narrative from the left. They have total autonomy to investigate Kavanaugh and can speak to whoever they want.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

Exceot that he keeps firing everyone in the organization who is even remotely "against" him. Kind of blows your argument out of the water.

Also, for some truly eye-opening info, read Unhinged. Even just skimming through it gave me some real pause regarding both T-rump and anyone he chooses to hire.

[Andrew NDB]

Exceot that he keeps firing everyone in the organization who is even remotely "against" him. Kind of blows your argument out of the water.

Name one FBI official he's fired since this 7th FBI investigation of Kavanaugh began. Or does your argument hinge on... FBI agents being afraid of being fired, so maybe they will misreport? Nonsense.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

Well I guess it depends. How many FBI directors and staff has he gone through since the election? Not so much with Kavanaugh, but with Russia, the porn star scaandal, and everything else. Granted they were not all "fired" per se, but being forced to resign amounts to the same thing. And yes, fear of consequences to their own jobs has a lot to do with it. When his inner circle has threatened individuals with ruin of careers, prosecution, and worse, one has to wonder how accurate such an investigation will be.

[Sumac]

After reading some of the stuff about this case, it looks like it can be ideological attack on the conservative candidate.

Whether he did or not, I leave it up to judges, but I hope he is not guilty.

[IMJ]

That was a FAKE narrative from the left. They have total autonomy to investigate Kavanaugh and can speak to whoever they want.

Stuff like this brings out the mouth-breathers in society, man. Just a head's up that when I refer to "you", I don't mean ANDREW. Instead I am illustrating that sort of ubiquitous "you" for whoever reads this.

01) Because someone gets angry, it doesn't mean that they are guilty. To say, think or feel "well now I think he's guilty because of how he got mad" is making a judgement from very poor mental algebra that isn't cogent at all. This is a society's mouth-breather reaction.

02) We now live in a society where someone can simply say something about you, and there will be a population who arbitrarily crucifies the accused. The mental algebra of those people goes "well I don't think it would be said if it wasn't true". This is either ignorance, or they are simply lying as a manipulation. Society's mouth-breather reaction.

03) Subscribing to a simple "did he do it, yes or no" mentality is complete nonsense when it comes to many "crimes" of social justice. For those who subscribe to this zero-grey-area mentality, consider when it will be your turn to field some kind of accusation. Or, for any millenials here, consider a situation where someone cites their "feels" about something you did to them, and you are mired in a social-justice situation where you respond, saying "I didn't do that", yet some other mouth breather responds saying "well [he/she] feels you did...."

This is a complete kangaroo court. In the Doctor's statement, she says publicly:
"I thought he might kill me" -but he didn't-
"I thought he was going to rape me" -buuuuuut he didn't-
"I wanted a second door put on my house" -an example of the good Doctor's maladjustment, probably over a lot more things than a high school "drinking party with boys"-
-20 minutes of her opening statement, of which only about 3 minutes was the "event" and the remainder was smokescreen for the mouthbreathers of society.
"I received death threats". The mouthbreathers hear this and say that Kavanaugh was guilty. They go "awwwwww that's terrible" - and it is terrible. But Kavanaugh didn't issue her death threats. But the mouth-breathers will hear that statement and draw conclusions from it.

For everyone here: we need equality. We need to continue to be good to each other. We need to pursue each other without threat, but also without reciprocating by threat. Guys - don't force yourself on a girl. Girls - don't act so self-important that you exaggerate some guy's actions into something they were not. See? It's simple! But we also need to stop empowering people who respond to life like children. For example, these are the people who cry at jobs when they aren't catered to, make accusations of being wronged far beyond the threshold of truth, look for vengeance because of someone else's success, or most pathetically sabotage someone else because of "hurt feelings".

The culture in the U.S. is coming to a head of mania. It's happened before - it was called "the Salem Witch Trials". And it's been happening again for years now, except that it's a public disgrace on national television right now.

And with the Salem Witch Trial thing in mind, combine that thought with the knowledge that most of the people "you" may talk to for opinions might not have even watched the good Doctor's 18 or so minute opening argument. Another example of social justice - people passing judgement on situations that they know nothing about but yet get on board with.

For the "you" that is the person or people I've just described (deep down, those of you here will know who you are, although you'll never cop to it), I hope I see the day you are accused because of someone's "feels" where others in society who think like you now turn on you - the kangaroo court - and the witch hunt is on your shoulders.

[BartAllen]

Anyone read the signed statement from Ford's ex stating that she has a working knowledge of lie detectors and was coaching a friend on how to 'beat' them? She's full of **** and I don't believe her anymore.

All this #metoo hysteria is going to come back around and no one is going to believe women anymore even when something bad does happen to them.

[Andrew NDB]

Senator Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said that the report "looks to be a product of an incomplete investigation that was limited perhaps by the White House, I don't know."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/grassley-says-new-fbi-report-kavanaugh-includes-no-new-info-n916601

Yet the investigation was completed more than a full day early? Weird. Why would the FBI give up the investigation over a day early if there was more to investigate? Sounds like "I'm really angry!"

Everything else I'm seeing says the report failed to corroborate anything Ford was saying.

[BartAllen]

Senator Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said that the report "looks to be a product of an incomplete investigation that was limited perhaps by the White House, I don't know."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/grassley-says-new-fbi-report-kavanaugh-includes-no-new-info-n916601

Yet the investigation was completed more than a full day early? Weird. Why would the FBI give up the investigation over a day early if there was more to investigate? Sounds like "I'm really angry!"

Everything else I'm seeing says the report failed to corroborate anything Ford was saying.
Most of the people she claimed were aware of this have come forward and said they don't remember anything like this happening. She's lying. I really wanted to give her the benefit of the doubt, but all of this evidence suggests she's lying.

[PApagreg]

Senator Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said that the report "looks to be a product of an incomplete investigation that was limited perhaps by the White House, I don't know."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/grassley-says-new-fbi-report-kavanaugh-includes-no-new-info-n916601

Yet the investigation was completed more than a full day early? Weird. Why would the FBI give up the investigation over a day early if there was more to investigate? Sounds like "I'm really angry!"

Everything else I'm seeing says the report failed to corroborate anything Ford was saying.


If you actually read the article you would know she was mad that the FBI didn't interview Kavanaugh or accuser Christine Blasey Ford about the allegations.

Also can I say how dumb it is the poll has two answers for no

[Jester]

Isn't that what the hearing was for? To get their testimony on the event? Wasn't the FBI investigation mainly to interview those not questioned before the committee?

[Andrew NDB]

Isn't that what the hearing was for? To get their testimony on the event? Wasn't the FBI investigation mainly to interview those not questioned before the committee?

Yes.

People are like, "B-b-but they didn't talk to Ford some more, or even Kavanaugh!" Why would they? They already testified before the committee. The investigation’s purpose was to see if there was any credibility to the accusations. That’s it.

And why would they want an interview? Did she not get her story out? Did she want to add/change some things? Did she remember even more after the hearing? How would a yes to any of that do anything but damage Ford’s credibility even more?

[PApagreg]

Yes.

People are like, "B-b-but they didn't talk to Ford some more, or even Kavanaugh!" Why would they? They already testified before the committee. The investigation’s purpose was to see if there was any credibility to the accusations. That’s it.

And why would they want an interview? Did she not get her story out? Did she want to add/change some things? Did she remember even more after the hearing? How would a yes to any of that do anything but damage Ford’s credibility even more?
Isn't that what the hearing was for? To get their testimony on the event? Wasn't the FBI investigation mainly to interview those not questioned before the committee?
Except its not really the same thing as an interview and I'm pretty sure the FBI are better at find information than a commitee of senators, it makes no sense to have the FBI investigate the scandal and not interview the primary participates.

[Leo656]

Situations like this are lousy because everyone decides right at the jump whether someone is guilty or not, and nothing anyone says or does will ever convince them. Like if you simply say, "Well, this sounds a lot like He Said/She Said, without a whole lot of evidence," you're accused of being insensitive rather than, y'know, sensible.

"WHY would anyone make up a story like that?" I'unno, because they do? It happens every day. Saying over and over again that something happened only goes so far; at some point, you just have to say, "Well, we have literally all the information we're going to get on this subject" and move on.

Now, as I've said, if something happened and she didn't wait 30 years to say anything... MAYBE something could have been done. Way too late now, and without anything but words as "proof", it really just comes off as completely political.

This is why no matter how hard it is, people who've been abused HAVE to find a way to speak up AT THE TIME. Taking time to cope with it on your own "Because nobody would believe you" only enables a criminal to repeat offend, and then when you do speak up after a few decades nobody's going to believe you by then anyway.

It's totally different, but my parents were often physically abusive. Nobody in my family would believe me, or they'd tell me I "deserved" it. Obviously that was demoralizing, but it never stopped me from speaking out about it. To this day, there's still some relatives I don't get along with, because they weren't there to see it and thus think I was just a spoiled brat making up stories. I get it. It's tough when people don't believe you, or make you think it's your fault.

In those situations, you have to find your inner strength, remind yourself that you're right and they're wrong, and never compromise or back down. Suffering in silence is exactly how abuse is allowed to repeat and spread. I know; "Just Get Tougher!" But seriously... you have to. What all these women are doing, staying silent forever and then "bravely" coming forward to play the victim card? It's noble to a point but it completely doesn't work. It doesn't prevent more abuse and it doesn't make them any less victims; in fact, it reinforces their victim status, because they let someone bully them into silence about something they absolutely shouldn't have been silent about.

Speaking out about being abused never got me a damn thing but scorn and ridicule, so believe me, I know it's tough. But doing The Right Thing is always The Right Thing even if people tell you it's not, even if it seems like it's pointless. It's not pointless, because things like "Truth" and "Integrity" still matter.

If Kavanaugh is guilty, and he gets away with it, it's sadly Ford's own fault, because her decades of silence shattered her credibility completely and made any wrongdoing 100% impossible to prove. It's harsh, but it's the truth. Her chance to be a hero came and went a long time ago; now she's just playing politics.

[BartAllen]

Situations like this are lousy because everyone decides right at the jump whether someone is guilty or not, and nothing anyone says or does will ever convince them. Like if you simply say, "Well, this sounds a lot like He Said/She Said, without a whole lot of evidence," you're accused of being insensitive rather than, y'know, sensible.

"WHY would anyone make up a story like that?" I'unno, because they do? It happens every day. Saying over and over again that something happened only goes so far; at some point, you just have to say, "Well, we have literally all the information we're going to get on this subject" and move on.

Now, as I've said, if something happened and she didn't wait 30 years to say anything... MAYBE something could have been done. Way too late now, and without anything but words as "proof", it really just comes off as completely political.

This is why no matter how hard it is, people who've been abused HAVE to find a way to speak up AT THE TIME. Taking time to cope with it on your own "Because nobody would believe you" only enables a criminal to repeat offend, and then when you do speak up after a few decades nobody's going to believe you by then anyway.

It's totally different, but my parents were often physically abusive. Nobody in my family would believe me, or they'd tell me I "deserved" it. Obviously that was demoralizing, but it never stopped me from speaking out about it. To this day, there's still some relatives I don't get along with, because they weren't there to see it and thus think I was just a spoiled brat making up stories. I get it. It's tough when people don't believe you, or make you think it's your fault.

In those situations, you have to find your inner strength, remind yourself that you're right and they're wrong, and never compromise or back down. Suffering in silence is exactly how abuse is allowed to repeat and spread. I know; "Just Get Tougher!" But seriously... you have to. What all these women are doing, staying silent forever and then "bravely" coming forward to play the victim card? It's noble to a point but it completely doesn't work. It doesn't prevent more abuse and it doesn't make them any less victims; in fact, it reinforces their victim status, because they let someone bully them into silence about something they absolutely shouldn't have been silent about.

Speaking out about being abused never got me a damn thing but scorn and ridicule, so believe me, I know it's tough. But doing The Right Thing is always The Right Thing even if people tell you it's not, even if it seems like it's pointless. It's not pointless, because things like "Truth" and "Integrity" still matter.

If Kavanaugh is guilty, and he gets away with it, it's sadly Ford's own fault, because her decades of silence shattered her credibility completely and made any wrongdoing 100% impossible to prove. It's harsh, but it's the truth. Her chance to be a hero came and went a long time ago; now she's just playing politics.
If there were a 30 year old police report talking about what he had done I would still believe her, but with all the evidence that's pretty much showing she's a liar and manipulator I can't how ANYONE can agree with her.

No this is about power. The left is losing theirs because they went crazy. It's that simple.

[Andrew NDB]

Get ready for lots of tears, furious anger, and Natalie Portman-in-the-Star-Wars-Prequels memes.

[Leo656]

The thing is, a person hears an accusation of a terrible crime, and their empathy kicks in. They think, "God, if that had ever happened to me...!" and it affects them, especially if they're a woman and it DID happen to them. They start thinking with emotion rather than logic, and suddenly, accusations become fact, and to be Accused is the same as being Guilty, despite our entire system being set up specifically so that DOESN'T become the standard.

We all want to believe that people are inherently decent and good - well, MOST people; I kinda gave up on that sh*t a long time ago - so we say, "Well, WHY would anyone lie about something like that?" Lots of reasons. Attention, faulty memory, even payola is never totally out of the question. Maybe stuff happened, but it wasn't who the person claims it was, and they genuinely can't remember because so many years have passed? Or maybe they just want to be on TV and be called a hero. People aren't as decent and pure as some want to believe, and lots of women completely fabricate just these kinds of stories.

That doesn't mean SHE'S lying - although as you said, it's not looking good for her story - but it does mean that we can't just believe any person who says, "This happened, and you have to believe me because I say so, or else you're a monster."

[Andrew NDB]

I can't really call it. Either the Democrats found a leftist so unhinged that they figured they could use her for their own ends (and there's no shortage of them), or more likely, as a leftist activist she was willing to risk becoming a martyr for the cause by perjuring herself. Take one for the team.

I generally believe she's telling a version of the truth, though. I just don't think Kavanaugh was there in the actual truth.

[Candy Kappa]

you boys can discuss 'til you're blue whether or not this former drunken fratboy assaulted Ford, but he sure didn't handle the situation well and clearly isn't fit with his temperamental on the supreme court. But we all know why the republicans want him in despite by now he shouldn't even be touched with a 10' long pole dunked in holy water and Tabasco sauce by anyone that have a political career.

[Autbot_Benz]

you buys can discuss 'til you're blue whether or not this former drunken fratboy assaulted Ford, but he sure didn't handle the situation well and clearly isn't fit with his temperamental on the supreme court. But we all know why the republicans want him in despite by now he shouldn't even be touched with a 10' long pole dunked in holy water and Tabasco sauce by anyone that have a political career.

https://i.imgur.com/0d8F44Y.gif

[Leo656]

As I said, to me the reaction was entirely consistent with the nature of the accusation. Especially if he's innocent.

We'll NEVER know if he's truly innocent or not, unfortunately, but I've often been accused of many things I didn't say or do, so I empathize. I saw nothing out of line; "Your accusations could very well ruin my life, and I'm quite upset about that" doesn't tend to come out of one's mouth very softly or gently with stuff like this. I'd truly like to see anyone keep their cool in that kind of situation.

Easy to say he's out of bounds from over here, but when it's your reputation and livelihood on the line... whole different game. Trust me.

The best was when my Dad's girlfriend assaulted my wife, then me, and in the kerfluffle she hit her head on a door frame and charged me with assault. Now the burden's on me to stand up in court and convince them, "No, your honor, I didn't 'beat her up', she got drunk, started attacking people, and hurt herself." Which was the Biblical truth.

I fought it as best I could, and it got argued down, but I still had to plead "Guilty With An Excuse" and pay a hefty fine, because it was a male/female violence situation and by default they believe the woman, even when that woman is a worthless, dishonest, drunken, pill-popping, lying wretch.

I paid the fine, but I still get pissed about it, because I didn't do anything wrong. I was punished because I was accused by a woman, clean and simple. She lied, and I paid for it. I could have gone to jail over it. Not a small thing.

Anyways, she's dead. :lol: But I'm tellin' ya, being unjustly accused sucks royally and anyone is perfectly within their rights to respond to accusations with anger if those accusations are false.

[IndigoErth]

you boys can discuss 'til you're blue whether or not this former drunken fratboy assaulted Ford, but he sure didn't handle the situation well and clearly isn't fit with his temperamental on the supreme court. But we all know why the republicans want him in despite by now he shouldn't even be touched with a 10' long pole dunked in holy water and Tabasco sauce by anyone that have a political career.


Exactly... For a man who is supposedly innocent some of his responses were unnecessarily strange and not showing a temperament suited to the position.

Not even the emotional parts, but responses like “Yeah, and I’m curious if you have” when he was the one testifying, not the woman questioning him. Rude and pompous much? Who does that.

[Leo656]

Question of guilt aside, some folks don't seem very good at Devil's Advocate. Just sayin'.

I want to see some people's reactions if and when they're accused of something as horrific as this. I'm gonna go out on a limb and say, you're not gonna be calm or polite about it.

((Shrug))

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Question of guilt aside, some folks don't seem very good at Devil's Advocate. Just sayin'.

I want to see some people's reactions if and when they're accused of something as horrific as this. I'm gonna go out on a limb and say, you're not gonna be calm or polite about it.

((Shrug))

Yeah, Kavanaugh getting pissed and lippy is 100% how I'd be reacting. Hell, I'd probably be close to throwing some punches.

Now, Kavanaugh refusing to disagree with Trump's ridiculous statement about "not being able to indict a sitting President" or whatever that BS is... THAT'S what I have a problem with. That sh!t is far too Nixon for my taste.

[Leo656]

Looking up at the TV, it looks like he's gonna be confirmed, so it's all about to be moot, anyway.

I'll say that I *hope* he's innocent, given the circumstances. But there was never gonna be any way to prove it NOW, anyway. So, if he's guilty, it's really only Ford's fault for not doing anything at all to support her accusations, going back several decades.

Teachable moment, kids. Don't let things linger. I've heard all the excuses, and while I empathize, they don't wash. SAY something and DO something, or else... well, you see.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Looking up at the TV, it looks like he's gonna be confirmed, so it's all about to be moot, anyway.

I'll say that I *hope* he's innocent, given the circumstances. But there was never gonna be any way to prove it NOW, anyway. So, if he's guilty, it's really only Ford's fault for not doing anything at all to support her accusations, going back several decades.

Teachable moment, kids. Don't let things linger. I've heard all the excuses, and while I empathize, they don't wash. SAY something and DO something, or else... well, you see.

I agree. It'll all be moot. If he IS guilty, I don't think they did a very good job of proving it or going about the investigation.

But politics is a cesspool. Has been longer than I've been around, innocent naive youngling that I am.

[Leo656]

I also kinda think that the Democrats lost all credibility on these sorts of issues in the 90s, what with You-Know-Who and... y'know... all the rapes that he absolutely did and got away with, and how nobody cared because he could play the Saxomophone.

You can't look the other way on sh*t like that for so long, and then suddenly do a 180 and act like this is stuff you absolutely care about and that you truly want justice done. Just doesn't work.

[Candy Kappa]

There’s a reason why Ramirez, Ford and Swetnick didn’t come out about Brett until now and this very for thread shows it oh so very nicely. *shrug*

[BartAllen]

There’s a reason why Ramirez, Ford and Swetnick didn’t come out about Brett until now and this very for thread shows it oh so very nicely. *shrug*

:roll:

At the end of the day he didn't even rape anyone. At most he held her down laughed at her, got up and walked out of the room. Did he penetrate her in at all? No. You do realize that - AT MOST - he committed misdemeanor assault.

[Leo656]

Ahem.

I've repeatedly said, I'm sensitive to why some people feel they "can't" speak up when these things are fresh.

That doesn't change the FACT that it's still the right thing to do, and IF events had happened as Ford claims, and IF she had tried to do something about it then, there'd at least be a trail of evidence to follow.

Doing what's right is ALWAYS harder than closing your eyes and suffering in silence. It's STILL the right thing to do. No amount of "I feel so bad for you" is ever going to change that. Silence enables the abuser to hurt other people, which frankly is pretty evil in and of itself. "Well, I *WISH* I could have done something, and I know they've hurt many more people since then... but I just couldn't say anything, because Reasons." I'm sure that's great consolation to the other people who get abused by the exact same person; knowing they could have been stopped way earlier by someone else but it was "just too hard".

I do have empathy, but there's a place where empathy stops and common sense takes over. So please, don't try and pull that victim-blaming stuff with me. That's not who I am. I'm just a pragmatist.

Meanwhile, Juanita Broaddrick has been telling her story for DECADES, complete with people who completely swear to the details, but she's been victim-shamed and called all kinds of names because... well, because people like Slick Willy, despite the overwhelming pile of evidence that he's a monster for many reasons. "But he's so CHARMING!" :roll:

It never fails to amuse me how partisan politics play such a big role in shaping peoples' supposed "morality". People don't actually care about justice being done, you just want your side to get ahead and for the other side to all be "Bad Guys." It'd be laughable if it wasn't so tragic.

[Prowler]

As someone who hasn't followed this controversy, I cannot say if he is guilty or not. I'm no judge and I don't know the guy, so there's no way I know or not if he did it or not. At most I could believe he did it or not, but what I think is irrelevant since I'm no judge. So no, I'm not taking any side on this case. I have no dog in this fight either, since I had no clue who Kavanaugh even was until I saw this thread.

As mentioned before, a lot of powerful and rich men get this type of accusations at some point in their lives. Many times it's just a woman lying in order to get a big sum of money out of the man, and other times it's actually legitimate but the guy gets away with it for being a celebrity. I mean, let's face it, we as a society deify celebrities a bit too much and often forget they're as human as we are and that, just because they're famous doesn't mean they're necessarily good people.

All of this stuff just makes me lose even more faith in humanity. The fact that a lot of people in power abuse said power in a certain away and the fact that some people would be willing to make such a serious false accusation against someone.

[Leo656]

Like, "Why would she make something like that up?" I don't know... even though they finally nailed Cosby, it's long since been proven that out of alllllll those accusers, at least a couple of them were lying even if most were telling the truth. Maybe it was money, maybe it was just seeing their name in the news, maybe they're just nuts, I don't know. Either way, they lied and said he raped them when he didn't. Luckily for them, he'd actually raped a ton of other women. But those small few were lying, for reasons unknown, and that's nuts. It's why we have the system in place that we do.

You hear the claim, you investigate, you do what you can, and in a case like this, you really have no choice but to shrug and say, "Well, we hear you... but there's nothing we can do , it's all just words at this point." What's left, with no evidence?
----------------------------------

I forgot to mention, a few friends of mine were assaulted by Larry Nassar, if anyone followed that case at all. So I'm 100% understanding of all the Hows and Whys and such about why women stay silent, and all of that. But there's a growing echo of, "I should have spoken up sooner" in that group, and it's exactly because of things like this case. Nassar's only going to die in jail because enough women DID say something - after many others didn't - to lead to an overwhelming mountain of evidence that finally nailed him. And a lot of the ones who didn't report, or gave up after they weren't believed initially, now mostly wish they had been more persistent when they had the chance.

It worked out in the end, but still... imagine if people REALLY went after him when the very first incidents happened? If instead of the parents taking a payoff and moving their kids to a different gym, they'd settled for nothing less than full prosecution?

My friends were assaulted by him in the late-90s, several years after Nassar's "indiscretions" became an open secret in the gymnastics community. Knowing what they went through, and how it changed them, it's hard for me not to think about things like, "Well, if someone had done something sooner, they might have been spared." Mathematically, it's a fact.

Now, too many of the girls DID try and come forward, and were disbelieved, and that's a huge problem. Many balls were fumbled over many years by many people. But the people working in the gymnastics community knew, because the accusations had followed Nassar from one gym to another for years already; if there had been solidarity among the kids and parents, the organization would have been forced to take action... rather than wait until it became a PR nightmare. Too many people for far too long just shrugged and let it go.

I mean, if you have like 500 girls who actually came forward, or whatever the number was, you have to assume that there were at least a thousand victims, if you round up for all the ones who either never spoke up or killed themselves. A thousand kids, over 20-odd years, because too many people kept quiet.

Those girls coming forward now had the benefit of, enough people DID report it back in the day to establish a paper trail. That's the crucial difference between that and the Ford case. With Nassar, you look back and go, "WOW, this is... this is a LOT of reports and evidence going back decades!" and it's an easy slam dunk. With Ford's accusation, there's just words, and nothing else.

Believe me, I get it. I DO. But people can't sweep stuff under the rug like this, or it becomes a cancer.

I'll tell you this for nothing: If Kavanaugh DID do it, right now Ford is wishing she could go back in time and file a police report, even if nothing came of it. It would make all the difference.

[Sumac]

you boys can discuss 'til you're blue whether or not this former drunken fratboy assaulted Ford, but he sure didn't handle the situation well and clearly isn't fit with his temperamental on the supreme court. But we all know why the republicans want him in despite by now he shouldn't even be touched with a 10' long pole dunked in holy water and Tabasco sauce by anyone that have a political career.
So, like Hilarity?

There’s a reason why Ramirez, Ford and Swetnick didn’t come out about Brett until now and this very for thread shows it oh so very nicely. *shrug*
The only thing this thread shows is a hypocrisy of lefties and that they are sore losers.

[The Deadman]

There’s a reason why Ramirez, Ford and Swetnick didn’t come out about Brett until now and this very for thread shows it oh so very nicely. *shrug*

Because it never happened? In order to be charged for sexual assault, there needs to be evidence. There wasnt any.

[BartAllen]

I just want to clarify something. I don't condone or tacitly promote rape at all. If it is proven that Kavanaugh committed these acts (even after he is given the position of a supreme court justice) then he should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

My problem is the timing and the way Ford has been used as a pawn for political gains. This information was known almost 2 MONTHS before the information was brought to the general public. The second it was known they should have gone public with it. They did things the way they did because ultimately the left doesn't really care about victims of rape (Booker) they just care about maintaining their power. This was a tactic they used to hold up and/or stop the confirmation hearing. They desperately wanted this to happen after this November because they think they're going to be able to impeach Trump.

Add all that to some of the stuff that has happened more recently (Ford's ex boyfriend) and I find her less than trustworthy.

Ultimately this farce has all been about power. The Democrats have ruined a man's reputation solely because they're afraid of losing theirs.

[Sumac]

When it comes to politics - it's all about power.

If you seriously believe that those fatcats from democratic party SERIOUSLY give a **** about progress or equality you are deluding yourself. They just use whatever fad in the people's collective consciousness at the moment, to make a power grab.

And it doesn't matter if said moves go completely opposite of democratic or progressive principles and values. They always will find a way to frame their actions as progressive, like saying: "our enemies forced us to do that" even though it's a traditional excuse of an abuser and a person who does nefarious **** and wants to have 0 consequences for it.

The whole lefty ideology has become solely about control. Which is sad since it should be completely opposite of that. But it's just another prove that when movement has enough followers it stops being about principles and becomes all about totalitarian control and power.

[The Deadman]

https://twitter.com/abc7newsbayarea/status/1048632310579548160

Apparently she isn't going to push the issue any further. Probably because they were false.

[ProphetofGanja]

https://twitter.com/abc7newsbayarea/status/1048632310579548160

Apparently she isn't going to push the issue any further. Probably because they were false.

Or maybe because it feels like trying to tear down a wall by bashing your head against it, to no effect. But I think you're too dumb to get it

[The Deadman]

Or maybe because it feels like trying to tear down a wall by bashing your head against it, to no effect. But I think you're too dumb to get it

Only thing I dont get is why a letter was hidden for 2 months, only to surface when this dude was going to be confirmed, and as soon as he IS confirmed, she no longer wants to pursue it. If she was truly assaulted, she keeps going after it. You dont change your mind on whether or not to keep the issue alive after something happens.

[Autbot_Benz]

Welp we got a man child as president and now an easily angry beer loving fratboy as Scotus what a time to be alive :roll:

[IndigoErth]

Or maybe because it feels like trying to tear down a wall by bashing your head against it, to no effect.
Agree probably this.

Supposedly she didn't want it all to go public to being with, it isn't like she sent that letter to the media, someone else leaked it and forced her into the spotlight. So yeah, she might not have wanted to go through all this to this extent to begin with, simply wanted insiders to be aware of what she supposedly knew of him. If it's an uphill battle that isn't going to go anywhere I can't blame a person for deciding it isn't worth continuing to disrupt their life, family, etc when it is to the point that the other person was pretty much handed immunity.

It's probably a lost cause at this point even if he did do what she said... What more is there at that point then for her to probably just try to go back to her life and try to put it aside again as she's presumably already been doing all these years.

[PApagreg]

Welp we got a man child as president and now an easily angry beer loving fratboy as Scotus what a time to be alive :roll:

Sad thing is, we deserve nothing more.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Sad thing is, we deserve nothing more.

Welp we got a man child as president and now an easily angry beer loving fratboy as Scotus what a time to be alive :roll:

Can't argue with either of you here. :tlol:

[Sumac]

Sad thing is, we deserve nothing more.
People with mindset like this are one of the worst things humanity has to offer.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

People with mindset like this are one of the worst things humanity has to offer.

People's actions and choices deserve consequences.

We the people make the choices, we the people deserve nothing more than those same choices.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

^What he said. Pretty much sums it up. Or to put it another way, this country made its bed, now it gets to lie in it.

[Leo656]

Without evidence, accusations are just words.

People lie every day, so any person repeatedly saying "This happened. I keep saying it did, so you have to believe me!" doesn't wash.

False accusations ruin lives.

Thousands of people have served jail time for rape accusations that they were falsely accused of; many of whom were later exonerated and set free thanks to DNA evidence conclusively proving that they were falsely accused.

That's why evidence is important, not just words.

It's like people aren't getting it. Those people had best hope THEY don't find a finger pointing at them one day, and that the finger pointer doesn't buy the whole "Accusations are proof of guilt" logic.

There wasn't any proof, end of story. There was a chance, a long time ago, to establish a credible trail of evidence, if her story was true, and she declined to do so. End of story. She's either lying, OR, she made a poor decision 40 years ago based on emotion rather than common sense. Should have reported it, if it happened. That will never NOT be true, I'm sorry.

It's like Johnny Depp and Amber Heard; there's some smoke to the fire but ultimately, nobody can prove anything. I'm convinced he hit her, my wife thinks he couldn't possibly have - because she has a crush on him, mostly - but either way, only the two of them really know. So even though I *think* he hit Amber Heard, without any proof I say he should be allowed to keep his job until the time when there is enough proof to say for certain that he's a bad guy. We simply don't know enough to make that judgment.

If proof comes out about Kavanaugh, then absolutely, string him up. Until then, oh well. No sense being mad about stuff that nobody can prove. That's why empathy is supposed to not factor into these kinds of decisions. You're supposed to give people the benefit of the doubt unless there IS no more doubt of their guilt.

Have any of the people who are furious even once considered the idea that maybe he's innocent? I've had people tell me, "There's NO way he's innocent," but you weren't there, were you? What are you basing that on? Right, emotion. "Feelings". Horrible.

If this were a court case in which he were threatened with jail time, he still probably would have been found Not Guilty, by way of reasonable doubt. That's what "reasonable doubt" means; "Reasonably, I don't have enough evidence to convict this person, and it would be wrong to punish them based solely on words. I have doubts of their actual Guilt; thus, Not Guilty."

I mean, I'unno how well some folks did in Criminal Justice class. I did okay; I know we spent a whole big chunk of time on how you can't rush to judgment without any evidence. Granted, we're talking 20 years ago or so, but I doubt things have changed much.

I agree with those who say this whole thing has seemed highly political from the start. It felt way more like a "Stop the Evil GOP" thing than an actual thing about empathy for women. AND it gave me flashbacks to the mid-90s, when all the accusers and mountains of evidence against You-Know-Who was just a "dirty trick" of the Republicans. Funny how things play out when all the roles are reversed, isn't it? Did "All women NOT need to be heard and believed" back in '96? Because I was pretty pissed off about it back then, and even my teachers were like, "Yeah, but he's a Nice Guy. And besides, they all do that stuff." :roll: Even my female teachers were making excuses for the guy! Which is why I find the current teeth-gnashing and caterwauling on the Dems side kind of... well, I won't lie, it's funny. They threw women under the bus when one of their own was accused, NOW they're Champions of Women's Rights. It's "interesting".

Anyways. On to the next conspiracy, folks. This one's out of gas.
-------------------------------------

On a side note: When exactly is "everything" supposed to start falling apart? People keep telling me the country's a mess and everything is a disaster, but I've been on a pretty hot run the last few years. So far so good on my end. What's the problem? I think some people spend all their time counting down the days waiting for an Apocalypse that isn't coming, all because the Guys In Suits that they like aren't the ones sitting in the right chairs. Relax. It's all theater.

[Sumac]

People's actions and choices deserve consequences.

We the people make the choices, we the people deserve nothing more than those same choices.
Punishing everyone for decisions of the few is stupid and unjust. It's infantile mindset.
Collective responsibility is one of the most idiotic ideas that had ever graced mind of the human being.

^What he said. Pretty much sums it up. Or to put it another way, this country made its bed, now it gets to lie in it.
Thanks Bobama! :lol:

On a side note: When exactly is "everything" supposed to start falling apart? People keep telling me the country's a mess and everything is a disaster, but I've been on a pretty hot run the last few years. So far so good on my end. What's the problem? I think some people spend all their time counting down the days waiting for an Apocalypse that isn't coming, all because the Guys In Suits that they like aren't the ones sitting in the right chairs. Relax. It's all theater.
Just fear-mongering of the losing side.

When things go bad for the ideology, start scaring people with wars, disasters and whatnot to unite them. It works, sometimes.

The problem here is that lefties lost connection to reality so much that their preaching comes as nothing more than a paranoid rumbling.

The fact of the matter is that left ideology doesn't work, when applied to the modern world. Multiculturalism - doesn't work. Intersectionality - doesn't work. More and more often than not, stalwart Social Justice Warriors come as paranoid conspiracy theorists or hypocritical manipulators themselves.

Their appeal for morality doesn't work, because, due to the spread of post-modernism, which in part was made possible by lefties themselves, people don't trust them and their ideology, seeing them as phony as other politicians, for a good reason, I must add.

So, all in all, this situation was created by lefties too, who were unable to win, who were unable to accept their lose with grace, and instead has radicalized and become scream bunch of paranoid conspiracy-ridden hateful idiots.

[Leo656]

Punishing everyone for decisions of the few is stupid and unjust. It's infantile mindset.
Collective responsibility is one of the most idiotic ideas that had ever graced mind of the human being.


I frankly have to agree with this 100%. I'm quite fond of saying, "When I do good, give me all the credit; when I do wrong, give me all the blame." One thing I don't like to do is share, so I don't share either credit nor blame; it's all on me, either way.

Like, an entire race isn't to blame for what some people did a few hundred years ago, and people living right now shouldn't be lumped in with them. An entire corporation full of people isn't to blame for the words of a CEO or an employee. All men (or all women) shouldn't be painted with the same brush for the actions of a few. Etc. etc.

The entire reason I don't vote, is because I believe in INDIVIDUAL Responsibility. If I vote for someone, and they win, and then they "turn heel" and start screwing sh*t up, I'm kinda partly at fault for that because I helped put them there, by a certain point of view. Ultimately, only they are at fault for their own actions and misdeeds, but I still endorsed them, and I don't want anyone pointing fingers at me like "YOU helped cause this", as we see people love to do. "F*ck you, I was home jackin' it, don't try and get me involved." :lol:

Which is why I snicker at people who do vote, because they then abdicate ALL responsibility when Their Guy does something bad. Well, didn't you say they were qualified? Maybe we should yell at you a little, eh? It's so selective, anyway; when someone they hate does something bad, they're a monster and so is anyone who supports them. When someone they like does something bad, they're "A victim of circumstance" or whatever. It's all stupid.

But yeah, "We all made a mess and deserve to be punished for it!" is horse sh*t. Most people truly don't give a sh*t and are too busy going to work every day to even care. Seriously; find someone working 6-7 days a week to feed a family and ask them what they think of The President, or Congress, or who sits on the Supreme Court, and 9 out of 10 times you'll get an answer along the lines of "Who gives a sh*t?" Maybe with a little "F*ck 'em, they're all crooks" thrown in. But they're absolutely not invested to the unhealthy degree some people seem to be. And it doesn't make them bad people, it just means they have better priorities and don't feel like being miserable constantly. Try telling them some of this "We all deserve to be punished" stuff, they'll laugh at you. They may even call you a nut and say that everything's fine from where they sit.

Sh*t's fine, relax.


So, all in all, this situation was created by lefties too, who were unable to win, who were unable to accept their lose with grace, and instead has radicalized and become scream bunch of paranoid conspiracy-ridden hateful idiots.

I can't disagree with this, either. I mean, when you start refusing to allow invited speakers to speak at college campuses, threatening them with physical violence, and saying things like, "The First Amendment doesn't matter if you say...", or "It's okay to harass people who are out to dinner with their family because they work for the White House," or "We all should riot, burn and break sh*t if...", or "I hope somebody shoots the President"... you're NOT the Good Guys. And even if we agree on some things, I'm definitely not going to support or associate with you.

Nobody likes a zealot. Once you turn three, banging your rattle and throwing a tantrum isn't supposed to be an acceptable way of making yourself heard, and it definitely doesn't make you right. Even if your heart IS in the right place, as it usually is with these types. Based on what they claim to believe in, they definitely mean well, they just have no self-awareness. "I'm SUCH a Good Person that if you don't agree with me I'LL KILL YOU." :lol:

[IndigoErth]

You're supposed to give people the benefit of the doubt unless there IS no more doubt of their guilt.

Have any of the people who are furious even once considered the idea that maybe he's innocent? I've had people tell me, "There's NO way he's innocent," but you weren't there, were you? What are you basing that on? Right, emotion. "Feelings". Horrible.
Yeah, and is why there is no easy answer because most of it is a whole lot of gray area because no one really knows except the people in the middle of a case like that.

After all, as I keep seeing people going on about online, innocent until proven guilty, of course, but people seem to miss that it goes both ways. Anymore, people are so fast to judge a woman who comes forward about something and start screaming "liar!", judging her as guilty of lying when they, nor anyone else, has any clue what the truth even is. It's all based on bias and feelings no matter what side someone decides to take. Being dragged into the public eye and judged as a liar with no real proof of that either can probably also ruin lives if you're branded with some form of a scarlet letter even if it wasn't deserved. Yeah, good luck changing jobs, etc if they recognize you but sided against you. No one is going to hire or otherwise work with a "liar," be it true or not. Could happen to either party.

I have no idea what to think in this case. It's all just a mess. The innocence here could go either way and none of us in the general public really has any clue. Both of them will not go unaffected, but he at least got the benefit of coming out on top. Good luck to her.

People with mindset like this are one of the worst things humanity has to offer.
Wait, I thought it was the evil liberal mindset that was the worst.


This country did not deserve for things to go like this and get to this point, but I agree... it made that bed, and dug that hole. Can't go doing that without expecting to deal with the consequences of it.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

Exactly. While our country does not deserve (merit-wise) the kind of crap it's being put through, we kind of DID (collectively) do this to ourselves via the old voting box. And now we're reaping the "benefits" of that collective decision. Sad, but true. And the worst part is that we will probably- as a nation- do it all over again in about a month. Because most people just never learn from their mistakes.

[Leo656]

There ARE no "Good Guys" in politics, though, just people who pretend to be. So who to support? Another reason I don't vote is because I don't believe a single word any of these people says to begin with. "Well, we can go by what they say and align ourselves with whoever claims to have values similar to our own!" Bullsh*t, they're lying. Every one of them. Liars. I won't support a liar in such an important position of power. "Well, we can HOPE..." Why? WHY should we "hope" one of them is telling the truth when we know better? The very fact that any of these people openly pursued a position of power means they don't deserve it. Not one of them does what they do to make the country or the world a better place; it's about money, power, status, and perks. Zero exceptions.

I can't help but laugh every time anyone supports a politician, or party, and then - SHOCKINGLY - they get in office and behave exactly the same as the rest. The f*ck did you expect? :lol:

R or D, Red or Blue, nothing ever changes. Once in a while, taxes go up. That's all. Those who cling to the misguided hope that one day, some shining knight is gonna show up and fix everything are truly misguided, and I feel sorry for them. They're choosing to be perpetually miserable instead of just enjoying life for what it is, as best they can. "I'd rather gnash my teeth and wail that it would all be BETTER if someone I personally liked was running things!" Okay then. Enjoy the heartburn.

I will say that as someone who skews slightly more Conservative, I strongly respect the folks on that side for never once pretending to be anyone's friend. I resent politicians on the Liberal side for going to great lengths to seem like "Nice Guys", because it's all just manipulation; they don't really hold those values, they just know how to get people to support them by wearing a mask made up of "Compassion and Empathy." And people fall for it! Constantly! It really blows my mind. I can at least respect an asshole who tells you up front that they're an asshole.

As for "the state of the country", I'm not gonna lie... I'm 100% fueled by self-interest, and I'm making more money now than I did 5 years ago, so I really can't worry too much about what's going on with other people, since they don't pay my bills. Most people in my personal circle are doing fine. So, as usual, I think "the country" is doing fine, and people are simply choosing to be more upset because people they like aren't sitting in the chairs they want to see them in. And it really doesn't matter since it's all a scam. So I'd truly like to see those people relax and pay more attention to something else.
---------------------------

Indigo: For sure, it's a sh*tty situation. I'm not even sure she's lying, per se, but it's entirely possible that she didn't remember things clearly. Problem is, we'll never know; she sabotaged her own case 40 years ago by not reporting what she claims happened. Even one bit of credible evidence would have changed the whole game. She came forward with a very serious claim, and expected people to believe her just because She Said So. Well, it doesn't work like that. I sincerely hope the right decision was made here, but we can't know for sure who's telling the truth, and that's frustrating.

Truth is one of the things I value above all else in life, so sh*t like this really bothers me. BUT, so do people who rush to judgment without evidence. As stated, as a person who's had to go to court and fight a bogus charge, I'm sensitive to these things.

Hopefully the guy does a good job and it all blows over. No winners in this, either way. Everyone's angry, everyone's divided, seeds of mistrust were sown and reputations were damaged. No winners.

F*cking mess.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Punishing everyone for decisions of the few is stupid and unjust. It's infantile mindset.
Collective responsibility is one of the most idiotic ideas that had ever graced mind of the human being.

It's called democracy, man. When the idiots outnumber you, you're hosed.

There ARE no "Good Guys" in politics, though, just people who pretend to be. So who to support? Another reason I don't vote is because I don't believe a single word any of these people says to begin with. "Well, we can go by what they say and align ourselves with whoever claims to have values similar to our own!" Bullsh*t, they're lying. Every one of them. Liars. I won't support a liar in such an important position of power. "Well, we can HOPE..." Why? WHY should we "hope" one of them is telling the truth when we know better? The very fact that any of these people openly pursued a position of power means they don't deserve it. Not one of them does what they do to make the country or the world a better place; it's about money, power, status, and perks. Zero exceptions.

I can't help but laugh every time anyone supports a politician, or party, and then - SHOCKINGLY - they get in office and behave exactly the same as the rest. The f*ck did you expect? :lol:

R or D, Red or Blue, nothing ever changes. Once in a while, taxes go up. That's all. Those who cling to the misguided hope that one day, some shining knight is gonna show up and fix everything are truly misguided, and I feel sorry for them. They're choosing to be perpetually miserable instead of just enjoying life for what it is, as best they can. "I'd rather gnash my teeth and wail that it would all be BETTER if someone I personally liked was running things!" Okay then. Enjoy the heartburn.

All this, right here. People act like corruption and scumminess would be nothing but roses and unicorns if Hillary won.

Nah. Same problems, different suits.

[IndigoErth]

I resent politicians on the Liberal side for going to great lengths to seem like "Nice Guys", because it's all just manipulation; they don't really hold those values, they just know how to get people to support them by wearing a mask made up of "Compassion and Empathy." And people fall for it! Constantly! It really blows my mind.
Funny enough it sounds very similar to the many reasons I don't really trust and resent those on the conservative side.

So Christian and pure and value-filled and oh so patriotic! and blah blah blah -- and the sky is always about the fall and the second it hits the ground they (liberals, immigrants, and "other" people, oh my! -- "the enemy!") will be OUT TO GET YOU -- but never mind, #&$% all that, we just threw all that away! Though we'll never admit it and still claim to have it and anything you heard was "fake news!" It was just to get votes anyhow, just a mask.

And likewise, people fall for it ALL the time and I personally highly resent the manipulation and the untrustworthyness of it and the love of the use of conspiracy theories, fear mongering and trying to play people for fools to control them with it.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

I stand somewhere in the middle- don't really trust EITHER side, nor do I support them beyond putting my vote for whomever I think will do the LEAST amount of actual harm to the country, and to the values we all supposedly uphold. Other than that, I honestly can't understand how anyone can think they are not ALL just in it for themselves. But I'd rather put my money (so to speak, since we all know that's where our taxes REALLY go) where my mouth is in regards to who gets it. If they happen to be better than the previous turd in office, so much the better.

That said, there are SOME truly aweful, scuzzy folks in office, and I'd just as soon they all took a 3-hour boat ride straight to Gilligan's Island and STAYED there. Some people you don't even have to know personally to realize they are scum-sucking creeps, you just have to hear them talk for more than five seconds. Those, I actively despise!

[Leo656]

Eh. As much as I despise those who worm their way into power by promising people Free Everything, an end to all wars, and a transparent government, I'm equally suspicious of anyone who hides behind a flag or a cross.

See... ALL this sh*t is why we need Outer Heaven.
https://scontent.fewr1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/43260391_1573988886034098_3610453374211719168_n.jp g?_nc_cat=101&oh=de839684181d4ba6dbb72ea6fa25b28f&oe=5C5FBB2C

Remember... Big Boss is watching you. :tcool:

[MsMarvelDuckie]

I'm just waiting for the day we have the UFP....

[Leo656]

Eh, my crew has better swag.
http://www.geekshirtshq.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Sons-of-Big-Boss-tees-shirts-by-BiggStankDogg.jpg?b811fa

[MsMarvelDuckie]

Yeah, but the Federation has Rysa, so.... (and hot Orion chicks....)

[Andrew NDB]

Wow, democrats are angry. They're "vowing" to impeach Kavanaugh.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dems-wage-war-on-kavanaugh-court-new-battles-over-legitimacy-impeachment-recusal

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Yeah, but the Federation has Rysa, so.... (and hot Orion chicks....)

Go Green indeed. :twink:

Wow, democrats are angry. They're "vowing" to impeach Kavanaugh.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dems-wage-war-on-kavanaugh-court-new-battles-over-legitimacy-impeachment-recusal

Of course they are. Why on earth is THIS guy the hill the Democrats have to die on? They couldn't pick more worthwhile battles?

[Leo656]

It rhymes with "Shmabortion Kites."

[Sumac]

Wait, I thought it was the evil liberal mindset that was the worst.
Liberalism is good.
But as any other religion or ideology it should be used in moderation. When you start to apply it in excess it leads to anarchy, stupidity and tyranny.

Also, no need to paint me as some kind of "right-wing" monster. I don't support most of the conservative values, however, it doesn't mean that I should automatically lap every drop of that "tasty" liberal juice, many people excreting this days.

I prefer to think first, and than think some more, where are those policies might lead.

There ARE no "Good Guys" in politics, though, just people who pretend to be. So who to support? Another reason I don't vote is because I don't believe a single word any of these people says to begin with. "Well, we can go by what they say and align ourselves with whoever claims to have values similar to our own!" Bullsh*t, they're lying. Every one of them. Liars. I won't support a liar in such an important position of power. "Well, we can HOPE..." Why? WHY should we "hope" one of them is telling the truth when we know better? The very fact that any of these people openly pursued a position of power means they don't deserve it. Not one of them does what they do to make the country or the world a better place; it's about money, power, status, and perks. Zero exceptions.

I can't help but laugh every time anyone supports a politician, or party, and then - SHOCKINGLY - they get in office and behave exactly the same as the rest. The f*ck did you expect? :lol:

R or D, Red or Blue, nothing ever changes. Once in a while, taxes go up. That's all. Those who cling to the misguided hope that one day, some shining knight is gonna show up and fix everything are truly misguided, and I feel sorry for them. They're choosing to be perpetually miserable instead of just enjoying life for what it is, as best they can. "I'd rather gnash my teeth and wail that it would all be BETTER if someone I personally liked was running things!" Okay then. Enjoy the heartburn.

I will say that as someone who skews slightly more Conservative, I strongly respect the folks on that side for never once pretending to be anyone's friend. I resent politicians on the Liberal side for going to great lengths to seem like "Nice Guys", because it's all just manipulation; they don't really hold those values, they just know how to get people to support them by wearing a mask made up of "Compassion and Empathy." And people fall for it! Constantly! It really blows my mind. I can at least respect an asshole who tells you up front that they're an asshole.

As for "the state of the country", I'm not gonna lie... I'm 100% fueled by self-interest, and I'm making more money now than I did 5 years ago, so I really can't worry too much about what's going on with other people, since they don't pay my bills. Most people in my personal circle are doing fine. So, as usual, I think "the country" is doing fine, and people are simply choosing to be more upset because people they like aren't sitting in the chairs they want to see them in. And it really doesn't matter since it's all a scam. So I'd truly like to see those people relax and pay more attention to something else.
---------------------------

Indigo: For sure, it's a sh*tty situation. I'm not even sure she's lying, per se, but it's entirely possible that she didn't remember things clearly. Problem is, we'll never know; she sabotaged her own case 40 years ago by not reporting what she claims happened. Even one bit of credible evidence would have changed the whole game. She came forward with a very serious claim, and expected people to believe her just because She Said So. Well, it doesn't work like that. I sincerely hope the right decision was made here, but we can't know for sure who's telling the truth, and that's frustrating.

Truth is one of the things I value above all else in life, so sh*t like this really bothers me. BUT, so do people who rush to judgment without evidence. As stated, as a person who's had to go to court and fight a bogus charge, I'm sensitive to these things.

Hopefully the guy does a good job and it all blows over. No winners in this, either way. Everyone's angry, everyone's divided, seeds of mistrust were sown and reputations were damaged. No winners.

F*cking mess.
Completely agree with this.

Even though Russia has a very different history when it comes to political leaders and parties most of what you've said rings completely true to this place as well.

[Klunk1234]

Brett Kavanaugh didn't rape that woman. She contradicted her testimony making it confusing. She said she was 15 when the assault happened, but in another one she said that it happened at the end of her teens and for the USA and other English speaking countries, the teenage years ends at 19. Why she waited 36 years for this? If you suffer something horrible, you tell the authorities or somebody you trust.

[IMJ]

I prefer to think first, and than think some more, where are those policies might lead.

Political orientation is a spectrum - not a dichotomy. I think a lot of people don't realize that this is the case, and when you combine that ignorance with a galvanizing need to be part of something, then you have extremism.

The problem with experience though, is that it create galvanizing points of view as well. For example, I tend to find that the spectrum of liberals is widely populated by people who are nuts across the gamut whereas it's seems that the nuts on the conservative side is mostly aligned far, far right (as it you'd expect).

You'd think there'd be more balance near the middle as you fan out, but as soon as you cross two steps into the left you have critical thinking errors all over the place, and the mania begins almost immediately after that.

[IndigoErth]

Why she waited 36 years for this?
Who knows, but even that specific case aside, people seem to forget that the early 80s were different times. Domestic violence itself was still relatively newly considered a serious matter. Before then, it was a "private family matter" that wasn't typically intervened in. But are all police in all places going to start getting involved at the same rate? Probably not. Are all families going to up and decide it's no longer a private issue and should be reported? Probably not. And certainly not those who are guilty of it. Even today of course.

And if kids are raised in such a household, then what is the message there? That it's okay to abuse women (or men, or children, as the case may be) and get away with it? That those women have no power to speak out because this is allowed as a "family issue" and they'd be shamed because it's supposed to be kept private back then?

Granted, in a case like Ford, why then didn't she speak out 10 years ago? Or 20? But maybe after that long most people have put an event aside for long enough that it's just easier to keep it there, shoved to the back of the mind and in the past. (After all, given her age, her formative years were smack dab in the middle of society deciding if abuse was important or not or if victims are supposed to just hush up and deal with it, and people are molded by the times they come from...)

But, in a case like this, I could kind of understand reacting when you're suddenly hearing the guy's name in the news and seeing that a person who abused you could be given a position of power that would allow him to have a hand in decisions that affect the whole country for the rest his life...


Who knows... I have no idea what to make of this case and neither of them are solidly believable. But the history of abuse - be it domestic violence, rape, or what have you - and how society has responded to it and how that and change over time plays a part isn't as simple as people want to make it out to be.


You'd think there'd be more balance near the middle as you fan out, but as soon as you cross two steps into the left you have critical thinking errors all over the place, and the mania begins almost immediately after that.
:roll:

So... are you "far, far right" then? I mean, it seems like a "critical thinking error" to generalize liberals in such a way.

[IMJ]

:roll:

So... are you "far, far right" then? I mean, it seems like a "critical thinking error" to generalize liberals in such a way.

No, I would say that I tend to be Libertarian and nowhere near full-on conservative.

Making generalizations is a way of formatting information. It's not inherently "evil" nor is it rigidly a manner of being biased. Sometimes we make generalizations to organize information based on what we see.

It's no critical thinking error to say this has been my experience when in fact my experience has been that the spectrum of liberals is full of irrationality on a wider scale than the spectrum of conservatism is. But as a liberal yourself, I would expect this kind of response from you. Knee-jerk, emotional, word vengeance not rooted in anything else but the most simplistic views of "good" or "bad".

:trolleye:

For anyone here who is still developing their political orientation, remember that the direction this occurs in is important. For example, don't knee-jerk side with something on the most simplistic of terms and then seek to defend it. Instead, first figure out what each orientation is formally seeking (basically what are the democratic or republican values), second see what each orientation has actually become, third observe the real behaviors, and lastly then pick your belief system.

The only caveat after this is be open to more understanding of each party. For example, I had a convict at one time tell me that "it's simple, democracts are for the people and republicans are for the people with money". It was the most distilled down, simplistic (and therefore inaccurate) way of perceiving a picture too complex for him to digest.

[IndigoErth]

Righhhhht... If you say so.

:roll:

edit: Yeah, I'm probably pretty far off from being the type to make knee-jerk reactions (etc), sorry.

[Candy Kappa]

No, I would say that I tend to be Libertarian and nowhere near full-on conservative.

Making generalizations is a way of formatting information. It's not inherently "evil" nor is it rigidly a manner of being biased. Sometimes we make generalizations to organize information based on what we see.

It's no critical thinking error to say this has been my experience when in fact my experience has been that the spectrum of liberals is full of irrationality on a wider scale than the spectrum of conservatism is. But as a liberal yourself, I would expect this kind of response from you. Knee-jerk, emotional, word vengeance not rooted in anything else but the most simplistic views of "good" or "bad".

:trolleye:

For anyone here who is still developing their political orientation, remember that the direction this occurs in is important. For example, don't knee-jerk side with something on the most simplistic of terms and then seek to defend it. Instead, first figure out what each orientation is formally seeking (basically what are the democratic or republican values), second see what each orientation has actually become, third observe the real behaviors, and lastly then pick your belief system.

The only caveat after this is be open to more understanding of each party. For example, I had a convict at one time tell me that "it's simple, democracts are for the people and republicans are for the people with money". It was the most distilled down, simplistic (and therefore inaccurate) way of perceiving a picture too complex for him to digest.

https://i.imgur.com/ZHmHih5.png

[MsMarvelDuckie]

And it's been my experience that those who accuse others of being overly simplistic and biased in views, generally are themselves. Especially after having made broad generalizations based on an obviously biased view of a group that runs a vast range of ideals and social issues. Fearmongering and media pandering aside, there is really no more rationality on the right than there is on the left. It's just that the lack of critical thinking and mania is better hidden behind the veneer of "god and country" rhetoric. Conservativism is well and good- until it becomes a rallying cry for instilling fear of "evil socialist bullies out to get us" and the mentality of ostracism and persecution that goes with it. Pretty sure the McCarthy era is proof enough of that. We've already (in theory, at least) learned the lesson of over-zealous reactionary retaliation against "socialist conspiracy". Haven't we??

[John Pannozzi]

Multiculturalism - doesn't work. Intersectionality - doesn't work.

How so?

With that point of view in mind, one wonders which kind of liberal/"SJW" can be considered more dangerous: a populist corporate shill statist like Hilary, or a more genuine (if that's possible) socialist like Bernie Saunders?

[Prowler]

How so?

With that point of view in mind, one wonders which kind of liberal/"SJW" can be considered more dangerous: a populist corporate shill statist like Hilary, or a more genuine (if that's possible) socialist like Bernie Saunders?

SJW are the more radical types, though. I wouldn't say your average socialist or your average person who falls into what we call the left-wing spectrum of politics falls into the SJW category.

[Sumac]

How so?

With that point of view in mind, one wonders which kind of liberal/"SJW" can be considered more dangerous: a populist corporate shill statist like Hilary, or a more genuine (if that's possible) socialist like Bernie Saunders?
Multiculturalism doesn't work because people of different cultures are not in hurry to integrate in the society they are living in. And the worst part - most of them don't respect culture of the country they are in.
Of course, in different countries situation might be slightly different, but it's obvious that people of different cultures do not want to assimilate and become proper citizens.

Intersectionality is even worse: lefties eat each other, because, different groups not only pursue their own interests, but they are directly throwing other groups into the trash, whenever there is some sort of disagreement or misunderstanding.

And as for who is more dangerous: fanatics are much more dangerous. You can deal with shallow populist. Generally they won't do crazy stuff, whereas fanatic might ignore basic logic and facts to pursue their own vision of the future. And they are not someone you can make deals with.
So populists are more preferable.

[John Pannozzi]

And as for who is more dangerous: fanatics are much more dangerous. You can deal with shallow populist. Generally they won't do crazy stuff, whereas fanatic might ignore basic logic and facts to pursue their own vision of the future. And they are not someone you can make deals with.
So populists are more preferable.

So, do you consider Bernie to be a fanatic?

[BartAllen]

The american liberal left used to be the party of the intellectual. Now it has just as much science denial and stupidity as the religious right did 30 years ago.

So, do you consider Bernie to be a fanatic?

I'd consider him an idiot.
He said bread lines would be good for people.

[Voltron]

there is really no more rationality on the right than there is on the left. It's just that the lack of critical thinking and mania is better hidden behind the veneer of "god and country" rhetoric.

I disagree. I think the "god and country" thing is a poor, poor argument for their brand of crazy. When the only answers offered to complex issues come in sound bites, there's a problem.

The United States is a country of 350-400 million people. The demographic is as diverse as it can possibly be. Saying that doing things because "god" wants it to be that way is preposterous.

Imagine every time you went to the doctor, he diagnosed you with "demons".

Runny nose? Demons.
Stomach ache? Demons.
Strange rash? Demons.
Diarrhea? Butt Demons.

Chances are, you probably wouldn't stand for it when he gave you some prayers to say and charged you out the wazoo for it.

So why would any sane person accept this as a sensible solution for anything outside of actual, full blown "Linda Blair" Exorcist ****?

There's no rationality in "god and country". It's just a fancy way to say "I hate thinking. Please don't make me do it."

And this isn't to say that Right leaning philosophies are all stupid, or worthless nonsense. But a lot of the people who try to jump into a political argument tend to fall back on these three words as though they mean something profound. They don't. It's the same thing as arguing "social justice and the environment" when liberals are backed into a corner.

The saving grace on the Left, I find, is that they're WAY more likely to divorce themselves from a political figure after some darkness comes out about them. Obama caught it for the Syrian Missile strikes. John Edward was ousted for his affair. Al Franken was ousted, too.

That, to me, shows rationality. Way more so than the Right exhibits.

[Leo656]

I'unno man. They sure love ol' Bill, in spite of... y'know... all those rapes and other sh*t. Just to put it out there. I hear what you're saying, but I feel they're awfully selective.

I mean, just for example: With Kavanaugh, the liberals are like, "Ford is obviously telling the truth, I mean who'd ever make up something like that? And why? We don't need evidence, or witnesses... MY HEART tells me that she's telling the truth." Ummm... okay.

And then, with Clinton, you can go back 40 years all the way through the late 1990s, and you have accusations, witnesses, corroborating evidence, and in one case a smoking gun (or cigar, as it may be)... And in this case, it's always either, "Well, they ALL do stuff like that, he just got caught", which is horrible, OR, "Well, ALL of that stuff really doesn't matter, because, like... we don't KNOW he did it because nobody literally walked into the room AS he was doing it, which we REALLY would need, if we're gonna make a judgment on things like this!" Which exposes their hypocrisy, when compared to the Kavanaugh situation, in which case evidence DOESN'T matter and all we need are gut feelings and empathy.

Just saying. This is why I don't pick sides. Although I do trust the conservatives a bit more, because I fully expect them to screw with me, and so am not shocked when they do.
---------------

I've actually blamed Diarrhea on Butt Demons. That's pretty funny, man. :lol:

[Voltron]

The Clinton Impeachment proceedings are comparable, yes, but there's plenty of difference between the two.

With Clinton, it was an actual trial. He was accused of, then tried for, obstruction of justice and perjury. The trial took place in the Senate and had very clear rules and regulations which had to be observed, regardless of public perception and judgment.

The sexual aspect of the trial was certainly at the forefront, but it wasn't why he was on trial. He was on trial because he lied.

It's probable that Clinton's charm and swagger played a large role in his maintaining or, at least, regaining his positive image. Whether or not he's committed any crimes remains in the court of public opinion. As you've pointed out, a lot of the public seem unconcerned with his behavior.


With Kavanaugh, it's not a trial. It's a job interview. He had to sit down and undergo examination to see if he was fit for a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court.

The rape allegations were pertinent since his character is *extremely* important in this decision. Whether or not he actually did it is less of an issue, unfortunately, as this is all about public perception.

Imagine that you're looking for a baby sitter. You find a promising candidate, but as you're talking to them on the phone, you get a few text messages from their friends and former employers saying that the person is a rapist and has a serious problem with alcohol. While they've never been convicted or even prosecuted, it is going to give you serious pause about letting them have power over people your care about.

We're just scaling up the responsibility.

Another big problem is the legitimacy of his tenure. If people perceive Kavanaugh as a morally reprehensible figure, they're not going to respect his views and decisions on the court.

The court of public opinion has a lot more weight in this scenario, too, since it comes down to whom the country would vote for after the hearings. An example being Susan Collins having a lot of push back from constituents regarding her decision on the matter. That's to say nothing of the lousy press Grassley, Graham, and some other senators got for the thing.

Another aspect is the "charm". Clinton, whether you like him or not, had a ton of it. Kavanaugh showed next to none. He got up there and threw a tantrum over not being confirmed. He gave awkward, rambling responses and even went so far as to claim a conspiracy against him in his defense against Ford.

Whether or not he did it isn't the issue here. It's whether or not we'd want some one like that on the Supreme Court. Even if it came out that he was totally a rapist and raped dozens of people, it wasn't a trial and he wouldn't have gone to jail.

With Clinton, it totally was. However, it was never about rape. It was about whether he perjured himself and tried to obstruct justice.

__________________________________________________ ___

Those butt demons are killer man. A literal pain in the ass.

[Leo656]

Charming or not, he's most likely a rapist, though. The question is largely, "To what degree?" Yet people still love him. They want his wife to be President, despite the fact that she stayed married to a rapist so she could ride his name into the White House one day. And she, for her part, actively worked to silence and discredit his victims.

That's horrible. Those are horrible, horrible people. But they're very popular, mostly for what they say vs. what they do, and this gives me both pause and alarm.

That was my point; you said that in your view, liberals will more quickly pivot away from someone who's been "tainted", and frankly I don't think that's true. I think you can be as dirty as it gets, and they'll still support you as long as you say things they wanna hear. And, of course, if they're "charming", as you said.

I think that's pretty much the case on both sides; I just don't think liberals move any quicker to pivot, I think maybe they're more selective. But then I find everything they do to be very transparent and predictable.

[Voltron]

Charming or not, he's most likely a rapist, though. The question is largely, "To what degree?" Yet people still love him. They want his wife to be President, despite the fact that she stayed married to a rapist so she could ride his name into the White House one day. And she, for her part, actively worked to silence and discredit his victims.

That's horrible. Those are horrible, horrible people. But they're very popular, mostly for what they say vs. what they do, and this gives me both pause and alarm.

Yes. It is horrible, if it's true. This thread started with the question, "did Kavanaugh do it?" The problem here is that, since none of these things were ever brought to trial, we can't say with any finality that they're true. We can believe they are. I can rant and rave all day along about how I think Kavanaugh to be the world record holder for most rapes, but it doesn't mean anything unless we take it to court.

I know that sounds frustrating. I have a friend who's a lawyer and he always stone walls me with the same stuff. During and after the Casey Anthony trial, he would call here innocent. Everyone I know thinks she's guilty, but he (correctly (and infuriatingly)) pointed out that the courts are entrusted to make these decisions, and they decided she was innocent.

The problem, though, is the court of public opinion. That's the point I'm trying to make. Insisting that Clinton's sexual misdeeds have some bearing on Kavanaugh's examination isn't in the same discussion.

That was my point; you said that in your view, liberals will more quickly pivot away from someone who's been "tainted", and frankly I don't think that's true. I think you can be as dirty as it gets, and they'll still support you as long as you say things they wanna hear. And, of course, if they're "charming", as you said.

Charm has a lot to do with it, yes. There's a number of cases where charming assholes have gotten away with murder. Sometimes literally.

What I wanted to get at here is that Kavanaugh isn't charming. Hillary isn't either, if you want to take that road. It's a huge reason why she lost. No one likes her. Hell, even her husband noped out of bed the first chance he got.

Jokes aside, despite it not being a requisite for the position, politicians live and die by public perception. Nixon did a lot of good things for the US, but he's still viewed as a crook. JFK was a total horndog who escalated the Vietnam War and brought us to the brink of nuclear holocaust with Russia, but he's viewed as one of our greatest presidents.

I think that's pretty much the case on both sides; I just don't think liberals move any quicker to pivot, I think maybe they're more selective. But then I find everything they do to be very transparent and predictable.

It's fair to say that both sides have some things to answer for. That being said, as it stands, the GOP controls all three branches of government and are demonstrably driving the country into the ground.

As for the "pivots", I'll stand by the claim that the Left is less forgiving of its political figures. Franken was ousted for joking around about boobs. Roy Moore is an accused pedophile who almost won a senate seat. Anthony Weiner was ousted for his sexting. There's a literal Nazi running on the GOP ticket in several states. Nazis. Not guys who let the "n" word slip once. Guys who think that Hitler was an OK dude, and that we should totally create a "white nation state" and ban the "darkies."

That should raise some eyebrows from Republican voters.

[Candy Kappa]

That should raise some eyebrows from Republican voters.

But it won't, it is the Repuplican party we're talking about.

[Sumac]

I don't think anyone can seriously consider that Left can distance itself from "bad" people, after they have supported Hilarity.

Also, in case of Conservatives "god" represents traditional values, not literal deities.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

I don't think anyone can seriously consider that Left can distance itself from "bad" people, after they have supported Hilarity.

Also, in case of Conservatives "god" represents traditional values, not literal deities.

Um, buddy? Trust me, 4 out of 5 Conservatives believe in a literal deity.

Now, the actual politicians running for the offices? Debatable and laughable. But the voters... oh yeah. Oh yeah they do.

[Andrew NDB]

Um, buddy? Trust me, 4 out of 5 Conservatives believe in a literal deity.

Now, the actual politicians running for the offices?

Large numbers pretend because they have to. Just like Trump pretends to be against abortion when he was publicly very supportive of it as a private citizen. You have to play the game...

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Large numbers pretend because they have to. Just like Trump pretends to be against abortion when he was publicly very supportive of it as a private citizen. You have to play the game...

Yup. They say whatever it takes to get voted by the people. And yet, so many people trust the candidates? Because they say "God bless America?" :trolleye:

[MsMarvelDuckie]

It's fair to say that both sides have some things to answer for. That being said, as it stands, the GOP controls all three branches of government and are demonstrably driving the country into the ground.

As for the "pivots", I'll stand by the claim that the Left is less forgiving of its political figures. Franken was ousted for joking around about boobs. Roy Moore is an accused pedophile who almost won a senate seat. Anthony Weiner was ousted for his sexting. There's a literal Nazi running on the GOP ticket in several states. Nazis. Not guys who let the "n" word slip once. Guys who think that Hitler was an OK dude, and that we should totally create a "white nation state" and ban the "darkies."

That should raise some eyebrows from Republican voters.


Thank you. This is ABSOLUTELY why I will not vote for ANY of those creeps!


Um, buddy? Trust me, 4 out of 5 Conservatives believe in a literal deity.

Now, the actual politicians running for the offices? Debatable and laughable. But the voters... oh yeah. Oh yeah they do.


Seconded. There's a REASON they call our part of the country the "Bible Belt"! And it's being held up by the Bible suspenders.....

[BartAllen]

Thank you. This is ABSOLUTELY why I will not vote for ANY of those creeps!





Seconded. There's a REASON they call our part of the country the "Bible Belt"! And it's being held up by the Bible suspenders.....

But you're cool with voting for Hillary? A woman who has been accused of colluding with her husband to cover up his rapes. Okay!


Anyone want to talk about the fact that NBC sat on evidence that one of Kavanaugh's accusers walked back the accusation and didn't report on it until just a week ago... No? Yea, I wonder why.

One of the accusers admits to making up accusation: https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-11-02%20CEG%20to%20DOJ%20FBI%20(Munro-Leighton%20Referral)%20with%20redacted%20enclosure s.pdf

[The Deadman]

Kavanaugh accuser referred to DOJ for false statements, Grassley’s office announces
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/kavanaugh-accuser-referred-to-doj-for-false-statements-grassleys-office-announces

Whoops

[MsMarvelDuckie]

But you're cool with voting for Hillary? A woman who has been accused of colluding with her husband to cover up his rapes. Okay!

Anyone want to talk about the fact that NBC sat on evidence that one of Kavanaugh's accusers walked back the accusation and didn't report on it until just a week ago... No? Yea, I wonder why.

One of the accusers admits to making up accusation: https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-11-02%20CEG%20to%20DOJ%20FBI%20(Munro-Leighton%20Referral)%20with%20redacted%20enclosure s.pdf

Hillary? Not really. I only voted for her because I considered her the lesser evil in the equation. And still do. BUT! I would have voted for one the other candidates if I had thought they stood a snowball's chance in hell of winning. But they didn't, so I voted to keep that orange idiot OUT. There IS such a thing as voting AGAINST rather than FOR particular candidate(s). I may not like either main runner, but I'm savvy enough to realize that in a two-party system, voting for the opposing side of the one you disagree with the most is usually the only practical option.

[Leo656]

No, the most practical option is to say, "I won't endorse anything or anyone I don't believe in, because my integrity is more important to me than a 'Rock The Vote' button and a bumper sticker."

The lesser of two evils is still evil.

[Autbot_Benz]

Kavanaugh accuser referred to DOJ for false statements, Grassley’s office announces
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/kavanaugh-accuser-referred-to-doj-for-false-statements-grassleys-office-announces

Whoops

really Faux News? :lol:

[The Deadman]

really Faux News? :lol:

It's being reported everywhere but that's the first link that came up on Google.

[Leo656]

Yeah, it's showing up everywhere.

I hate the whole "Fox News/Fake News" thing. All news is slanted to the preferences of whoever owns it. I don't watch ANY news, if I'm curious about something I'll read it in the newspaper. Since, y'know, they're still legally obligated to fact-check and print retractions when things turn out to be false or exaggerated or whatever. TV and internet "news" don't have to do that, which is how so much misinformation gets spread so quickly.

I just notice that a lot of stuff Fox News apparently reports later ends up being true anyway, people just don't like it. Same thing as when the Enquirer starts printing stories about Whitney Houston or Britney Spears being coked up or whatever; people scream "That's just a BS tabloid!" and yet their stories turn out to be true a shocking amount of the time.

I wouldn't recommend "educating" oneself through either Fox News or the Enquirer, by the way. :lol: But I wouldn't recommend MSNBC or CNN, either. It's all "tabloid trash"; I just notice that the stuff people hate on the most still usually ends up being true.

It's not "fake" or "lies"; just slanted. People can hate a source but they shouldn't deny facts, just because they hate the source presenting them. You just end up looking foolish, that way.

[Sumac]

No, the most practical option is to say, "I won't endorse anything or anyone I don't believe in, because my integrity is more important to me than a 'Rock The Vote' button and a bumper sticker."

The lesser or two evils is still evil.
Sadly we don't live in the world where there are "absolutely good people in politics" and "bad people in politics", so sometimes you have no choice, but to support lesser evil.

Like in modern Russia - most of the people opposing Putin are not particularly "good" people, so there is a choice between Putin and anyone else, it's better to get someone else.

[BartAllen]

So... We now have two accusers that have admitted they fabricated their story?

Sad.

The worst part of this sad situation is that it only hurts REAL victims of sexual assault.

The entire 'listen and believe' fiasco is having the opposite effect. No one is going to believe women when this horrible **** happens to them.

[BartAllen]

Multiculturalism doesn't work because people of different cultures are not in hurry to integrate in the society they are living in. And the worst part - most of them don't respect culture of the country they are in.
Of course, in different countries situation might be slightly different, but it's obvious that people of different cultures do not want to assimilate and become proper citizens.

Intersectionality is even worse: lefties eat each other, because, different groups not only pursue their own interests, but they are directly throwing other groups into the trash, whenever there is some sort of disagreement or misunderstanding.

And as for who is more dangerous: fanatics are much more dangerous. You can deal with shallow populist. Generally they won't do crazy stuff, whereas fanatic might ignore basic logic and facts to pursue their own vision of the future. And they are not someone you can make deals with.
So populists are more preferable.
A country can be multi-ethnic and racial and still not be 'Multicultural'. That's the disconnect that no one seems to understand. Countries only work when there is a social contract that everyone within the country agrees with. History has shown that, ultimately, multicultural societies end up falling apart.

The funny part about intersectionality is that its ultimate end goal IS individuality. Judging people based on their actions and not on their immutable characteristics.

[Leo656]

So... We now have two accusers that have admitted they fabricated their story?

Sad.

The worst part of this sad situation is that it only hurts REAL victims of sexual assault.

The entire 'listen and believe' fiasco is having the opposite effect. No one is going to believe women when this horrible **** happens to them.

MY WIFE said the exact same thing just a few minutes ago, man. "This is why nobody believes them."

I am, like, Old Testament-style judgmental. If someone is Guilty, I want them to burn. BUT THEY HAVE TO ACTUALLY BE GUILTY, and we need to have PROOF of that. Not "feelings".

Sadly we don't live in the world where there are "absolutely good people in politics" and "bad people in politics", so sometimes you have no choice, but to support lesser evil.

Like in modern Russia - most of the people opposing Putin are not particularly "good" people, so there is a choice between Putin and anyone else, it's better to get someone else.

Well, that's why I just Observe and Report. I won't "support" any of them. I don't know them, never met them, never spent any time with them... the things they say in speeches that were written by someone else as a way to gain support from the lowest common denominator don't affect me. I just know that, if you wear a suit to work, you're generally a con artist, and those who'd seek power never deserve it.

I've been "friends" with a few politicians, and they were all secretly bad people. They're scam artists. Carnies. Frauds. We've created a system in which we rely on fraudsters and criminals to run things and tell us what to do... then act indignant and outraged when they turn out to be bad people. THAT is why I laugh at the whole thing. We did this to ourselves.

What to do about it? I'unno... "survive", I guess. In a few decades, it won't be my problem anymore, is the best thing I can come up with. But in the meantime, I'm DEFINITELY not going to support someone I don't like, don't know, don't agree with, and don't trust, just because "Well, you gotta pick SOMEONE's side."

Like Breathless said (Paraphrased): "I'm on the same side I'm always on: Mine." What happens outside of Me is all You People, and You People can do what you want. I'm not involved. :lol:

[Sumac]

I've been "friends" with a few politicians, and they were all secretly bad people. They're scam artists. Carnies. Frauds. We've created a system in which we rely on fraudsters and criminals to run things and tell us what to do... then act indignant and outraged when they turn out to be bad people. THAT is why I laugh at the whole thing. We did this to ourselves.
Right now, I am watching some stuff about Ancient Rome and I must say, when it comes to politicians nothing had changed in the last 2000 years.

[John Pannozzi]

Frankly, part of me does not care if Kavanaugh did it or not. I have plenty of other reasons to dislike him. I could go on about the anti-abortion stuff, but I don't really want to.

But I do want to address his claim that Net Neutrality is unconstitutional (https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/07/net-neutrality-rules-are-illegal-according-to-trumps-supreme-court-pick/), which is alarming, to say the least.

It's sort of like how I don't care that much if Trump is found innocent of Russian collusion.