The Unfathomable Depths of Leftists

[Vastator]

I seriously don't know how any person of integrity can admit to being a Democrat these days.

Every day, there are new revelations about how base, unethical, dastardly, immoral, and profoundly untruthful the whole lot of them (you) are.

This WHOLE Kavanaugh caper is nothing but lies piled upon more lies, distortions, misrepresentations, and fantasies. Democrat politicians, lawyers, and operatives go on the screen night after night, claiming that they are only seeking "the truth" about what happened that night so many decades ago, and the truth is the farthest thing from their minds...and EVERYONE LISTENING TO THEM KNOWS IT! It is all about delaying the confirmation of this spectacularly-qualified judge, and ultimately overturning the results of the 2016 election, by which the American people emphatically stated that they wanted to reverse the Leftist, anti-Constitutional tidal wave in the Supreme Court.

The daily slanders against our admittedly-flawed President grow more and more absurd. Major "news" outlets repeat eminently dubious rumors and hearsay as though it were brought down from the Mountain by Moses. The good economic news is confined to Conservative-leaning websites, while the MSM either ignores or downplays a cornucopia of new jobs opening up, dramatic increases in American wealth (mainly through investments and 401k plans), remarkable diplomatic achievements, and a President who is doing more to keep his campaign promises than anyone in human memory.

Democrat initiatives that would legalize tens of millions of uneducated, government-dependent border jumpers, cripple our power and energy sectors, compromise 80% of our institutions of "higher learning", and bankrupt the country through asininities like "Medicare for All," are treated as serious policy proposals, to be considered by the unwitting masses.

The Media is wholly vested in the Democrat-Leftist program for a "soft coup", with the result that those who only loosely follow the news (read the headlines and little more) have slowly been convinced to believe the lies and distortions, thus pointing to a potentially-disastrous Democrat takeover of Congress in January. As recently pointed out by noted conservative Historian Victor Davis Hanson, we are closer to a bloody civil war than we have been since 1864.

Don't say nobody told you.

The distillation is nearly complete. Just a casual perusal of the discourse on this forum, or any other will demonstrate that quite clearly. The “middle ground is little but a sliver, and those who claim to occupy it are given over to indifference, and are mercilessly caught in the crossfire of the two competing ideologies. With sides having been increasingly made clear; there is little left but outright conflict.

 

[Hiryuu]

Ideology is that which creates the herd mentality.

Yes, yes it does. I have no problem with the sheep that want to be sheep.

 

[Crepitus]

I seriously don't know how any person of integrity can admit to being a Democrat these days.

Every day, there are new revelations about how base, unethical, dastardly, immoral, and profoundly untruthful the whole lot of them (you) are.

This WHOLE Kavanaugh caper is nothing but lies piled upon more lies, distortions, misrepresentations, and fantasies. Democrat politicians, lawyers, and operatives go on the screen night after night, claiming that they are only seeking "the truth" about what happened that night so many decades ago, and the truth is the farthest thing from their minds...and EVERYONE LISTENING TO THEM KNOWS IT! It is all about delaying the confirmation of this spectacularly-qualified judge, and ultimately overturning the results of the 2016 election, by which the American people emphatically stated that they wanted to reverse the Leftist, anti-Constitutional tidal wave in the Supreme Court.

The daily slanders against our admittedly-flawed President grow more and more absurd. Major "news" outlets repeat eminently dubious rumors and hearsay as though it were brought down from the Mountain by Moses. The good economic news is confined to Conservative-leaning websites, while the MSM either ignores or downplays a cornucopia of new jobs opening up, dramatic increases in American wealth (mainly through investments and 401k plans), remarkable diplomatic achievements, and a President who is doing more to keep his campaign promises than anyone in human memory.

Democrat initiatives that would legalize tens of millions of uneducated, government-dependent border jumpers, cripple our power and energy sectors, compromise 80% of our institutions of "higher learning", and bankrupt the country through asininities like "Medicare for All," are treated as serious policy proposals, to be considered by the unwitting masses.

The Media is wholly vested in the Democrat-Leftist program for a "soft coup", with the result that those who only loosely follow the news (read the headlines and little more) have slowly been convinced to believe the lies and distortions, thus pointing to a potentially-disastrous Democrat takeover of Congress in January. As recently pointed out by noted conservative Historian Victor Davis Hanson, we are closer to a bloody civil war than we have been since 1864.

Don't say nobody told you.

Stopped reading at the very first sentence. No tRumpanzee has any call to impinge anyone's integrity.

Seriously, it's like discussing air quality with a fish.

ROFL! Says one of the biggest douchebags in the forum.

Yet another non-response from the peanut gallery.

Look! tRumpanzees!

 

[Crepitus]

Non sequitur.

Try again please.

You're too stupid to understand why it's relevant.

Lol, nope. You just run out of arguments.

Hmmmmm, nope. Watch the video of the douchebag Hirono from Hawaii.

Right, because she's lying and it never happened.

And if it did it happen it wasn't that bad.

But if it was that bad it's not a big deal because everybody does it.

You kids should step back and listen to this pathetic weaseling.

It never happened, moron. Anyone who says it did is a despicable piece of shit who is helping to smear an innocent man. You have no ethics or credibility. The "weaseling" is all being done by the scum who are participating in this circus.

Lol, thank you for demonstrating my point.

Well done.

 

[hadit]

You need to shut up and step up

Non sequitur.

Try again please.

You're too stupid to understand why it's relevant.

Lol, nope. You just run out of arguments.

Hmmmmm, nope. Watch the video of the douchebag Hirono from Hawaii.

Right, because she's lying and it never happened.

And if it did it happen it wasn't that bad.

But if it was that bad it's not a big deal because everybody does it.

You kids should step back and listen to this pathetic weaseling.

You do, though, have to take the entire picture into consideration. If the incident really did happen, it happened when Kavenaugh was a minor, and we have a strong tradition of clearing the slate when a kid becomes an adult. Are we willing to set that on its head just for this one occasion? "Sorry, Mister Brown, your exemplary life as an adult simply doesn't matter. The fact that you robbed a gas station when you were 17 disqualifies you for this job. We simply can't have violent thugs like you stocking our shelves".

To say that he is a dangerous sexual predator is fallacious because he's been a model citizen for a very long time. Let's let his accuser testify and see if her story holds up. If not, let it go.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

I seriously don't know how any person of integrity can admit to being a Democrat these days.

Every day, there are new revelations about how base, unethical, dastardly, immoral, and profoundly untruthful the whole lot of them (you) are.

This WHOLE Kavanaugh caper is nothing but lies piled upon more lies, distortions, misrepresentations, and fantasies. Democrat politicians, lawyers, and operatives go on the screen night after night, claiming that they are only seeking "the truth" about what happened that night so many decades ago, and the truth is the farthest thing from their minds...and EVERYONE LISTENING TO THEM KNOWS IT! It is all about delaying the confirmation of this spectacularly-qualified judge, and ultimately overturning the results of the 2016 election, by which the American people emphatically stated that they wanted to reverse the Leftist, anti-Constitutional tidal wave in the Supreme Court.

The daily slanders against our admittedly-flawed President grow more and more absurd. Major "news" outlets repeat eminently dubious rumors and hearsay as though it were brought down from the Mountain by Moses. The good economic news is confined to Conservative-leaning websites, while the MSM either ignores or downplays a cornucopia of new jobs opening up, dramatic increases in American wealth (mainly through investments and 401k plans), remarkable diplomatic achievements, and a President who is doing more to keep his campaign promises than anyone in human memory.

Democrat initiatives that would legalize tens of millions of uneducated, government-dependent border jumpers, cripple our power and energy sectors, compromise 80% of our institutions of "higher learning", and bankrupt the country through asininities like "Medicare for All," are treated as serious policy proposals, to be considered by the unwitting masses.

The Media is wholly vested in the Democrat-Leftist program for a "soft coup", with the result that those who only loosely follow the news (read the headlines and little more) have slowly been convinced to believe the lies and distortions, thus pointing to a potentially-disastrous Democrat takeover of Congress in January. As recently pointed out by noted conservative Historian Victor Davis Hanson, we are closer to a bloody civil war than we have been since 1864.

Don't say nobody told you.

^ far right partisan hackery

You always criticize others posts and never give your own opinion on issues. You are an ignorant fool and a clown.

 

[Correll]

In my circle, sexual assault had been and is extremely uncommon. If your world looks different, you need to hang out with a better class of people.

That is what that individualism does. It alienates people from society.

Just ignore it then.

Individualism does not alienate people from society.

And I am not calling to ignore sexual harassment. I just don't support false accusations.

Yes it does alienate people. You just proved it by saying that sexual assault does not exist in your world. Yet, clearly it exists in our society.

There is no objective reason to claim the accusation false.

Interesting.


You changed "uncommon" to "does not exist".


SUch dishonest or irrational behavior, utterly demolishes your credibility to make a claim about "objectivity".


There are several "objective" reasons to doubt the claim.

Name one objective reason to call the accusation a lie.

It is not credible that a drunk frat boy would use the proper term for a man's genitals.

 

[Crepitus]

Non sequitur.

Try again please.

You're too stupid to understand why it's relevant.

Lol, nope. You just run out of arguments.

Hmmmmm, nope. Watch the video of the douchebag Hirono from Hawaii.

Right, because she's lying and it never happened.

And if it did it happen it wasn't that bad.

But if it was that bad it's not a big deal because everybody does it.

You kids should step back and listen to this pathetic weaseling.

You do, though, have to take the entire picture into consideration. If the incident really did happen, it happened when Kavenaugh was a minor, and we have a strong tradition of clearing the slate when a kid becomes an adult. Are we willing to set that on its head just for this one occasion? "Sorry, Mister Brown, your exemplary life as an adult simply doesn't matter. The fact that you robbed a gas station when you were 17 disqualifies you for this job. We simply can't have violent thugs like you stocking our shelves".

To say that he is a dangerous sexual predator is fallacious because he's been a model citizen for a very long time. Let's let his accuser testify and see if her story holds up. If not, let it go.

We aren't talking about a job at the 7-11 here son. This is a lifetime appointment to the supreme Court.

How can we expect this douchebag to rule fairly on the rights of all women if he has a history of being unable to respect the rights of even even one?

 

[Papageorgio]

The "giant social problem" is the Democrat party and all the sleazy lying dirtbags that infest it.

The problem isn't rooted in politics. Politics is just the form that the problem manifests itself in this particular case.

We have a society where what has been alleged isn't uncommon. And it is not uncommon for women to repress what has happened to them. And so here we are. The problem has manifested itself once again in the political arena. And since what has been alleged is not entirely unbelievable it cannot be dismissed as callously as partisans would wish for it to be. And so the resentment grows.

Wouldn't it be more reasonable to address the real problem outside of the politics?

In my circle, sexual assault had been and is extremely uncommon. If your world looks different, you need to hang out with a better class of people.

That is what that individualism does. It alienates people from society.

Just ignore it then.

Individualism does not alienate people from society.

And I am not calling to ignore sexual harassment. I just don't support false accusations.

Yes it does alienate people. You just proved it by saying that sexual assault does not exist in your world. Yet, clearly it exists in our society.

There is no objective reason to claim the accusation false.

There is no objective reason to claim they are true. If we take both of their statements at face value we really have nothing and neither has proof. We have nothing. So, the woman needs to talk and the man needs to talk and we will sit an wonder. The issue is if he did do this she is the victim, if he didn’t do this he is the victim. The only evidence that has been brought forth is a memory and they are very fallible and unreliable. We can listen to what both have to say and make a judgement, we can listen to the evidence and make a judgement however with the people she claims to be there not remembering anything of the event, it makes it difficult for me to say a man is guilty and should be disallowed to serve.

 

[Tehon]

The problem isn't rooted in politics. Politics is just the form that the problem manifests itself in this particular case.

We have a society where what has been alleged isn't uncommon. And it is not uncommon for women to repress what has happened to them. And so here we are. The problem has manifested itself once again in the political arena. And since what has been alleged is not entirely unbelievable it cannot be dismissed as callously as partisans would wish for it to be. And so the resentment grows.

Wouldn't it be more reasonable to address the real problem outside of the politics?

In my circle, sexual assault had been and is extremely uncommon. If your world looks different, you need to hang out with a better class of people.

That is what that individualism does. It alienates people from society.

Just ignore it then.

Individualism does not alienate people from society.

And I am not calling to ignore sexual harassment. I just don't support false accusations.

Yes it does alienate people. You just proved it by saying that sexual assault does not exist in your world. Yet, clearly it exists in our society.

There is no objective reason to claim the accusation false.

There is no objective reason to claim they are true. If we take both of their statements at face value we really have nothing and neither has proof. We have nothing. So, the woman needs to talk and the man needs to talk and we will sit an wonder. The issue is if he did do this she is the victim, if he didn’t do this he is the victim. The only evidence that has been brought forth is a memory and they are very fallible and unreliable. We can listen to what both have to say and make a judgement, we can listen to the evidence and make a judgement however with the people she claims to be there not remembering anything of the event, it makes it difficult for me to say a man is guilty and should be disallowed to serve.

That's where I am at on this also.

 

[Olde Europe]

There is no objective reason to claim they are true. If we take both of their statements at face value we really have nothing and neither has proof. We have nothing. So, the woman needs to talk and the man needs to talk and we will sit an wonder. The issue is if he did do this she is the victim, if he didn’t do this he is the victim. The only evidence that has been brought forth is a memory and they are very fallible and unreliable. We can listen to what both have to say and make a judgement, we can listen to the evidence and make a judgement however with the people she claims to be there not remembering anything of the event, it makes it difficult for me to say a man is guilty and should be disallowed to serve.

That's where I am at on this also.

Really?

You are willing to entertain the idea that Ford, either on her own or with some canny Democratic operatives, sits down and invents an assault involving not one but two perpetrators (which immediately puts her in a weak position as she has two testimonies against her own)? And, considering, she has nothing of any value to gain, and a heck of a lot to lose, throwing herself into the maelstrom of a high-profile confirmation proceeding on the national level. Considering further that she has no history whatsoever of high-profile political activism, no high-profile media experience, and still she decides to go up against the President of the U.S. of A. and the right-wing smear-machine at his disposal, from Faux News to Breitbart to even loonier ultra-right.

Really, that's what you would have to believe if you think that Kavanaugh's denials and Ford's accusation are equal candidates for the truth.

 

[Tehon]

There is no objective reason to claim they are true. If we take both of their statements at face value we really have nothing and neither has proof. We have nothing. So, the woman needs to talk and the man needs to talk and we will sit an wonder. The issue is if he did do this she is the victim, if he didn’t do this he is the victim. The only evidence that has been brought forth is a memory and they are very fallible and unreliable. We can listen to what both have to say and make a judgement, we can listen to the evidence and make a judgement however with the people she claims to be there not remembering anything of the event, it makes it difficult for me to say a man is guilty and should be disallowed to serve.

That's where I am at on this also.

Really?

You are willing to entertain the idea that Ford, either on her own or with some canny Democratic operatives, sits down and invents an assault involving not one but two perpetrators (which immediately puts her in a weak position as she has two testimonies against her own)? And, considering, she has nothing of any value to gain, and a heck of a lot to lose, throwing herself into the maelstrom of a high-profile confirmation proceeding on the national level. Considering further that she has no history whatsoever of high-profile political activism, no high-profile media experience, and still she decides to go up against the President of the U.S. of A. and the right-wing smear-machine at his disposal, from Faux News to Breitbart to even loonier ultra-right.

Really, that's what you would have to believe if you think that Kavanaugh's denials and Ford's accusation are equal candidates for the truth.

Really. I am sympathetic to all that you say but in the absence of any objective proof I believe it is the proper position to take.

 

[Papageorgio]

There is no objective reason to claim they are true. If we take both of their statements at face value we really have nothing and neither has proof. We have nothing. So, the woman needs to talk and the man needs to talk and we will sit an wonder. The issue is if he did do this she is the victim, if he didn’t do this he is the victim. The only evidence that has been brought forth is a memory and they are very fallible and unreliable. We can listen to what both have to say and make a judgement, we can listen to the evidence and make a judgement however with the people she claims to be there not remembering anything of the event, it makes it difficult for me to say a man is guilty and should be disallowed to serve.

That's where I am at on this also.

Really?

You are willing to entertain the idea that Ford, either on her own or with some canny Democratic operatives, sits down and invents an assault involving not one but two perpetrators (which immediately puts her in a weak position as she has two testimonies against her own)? And, considering, she has nothing of any value to gain, and a heck of a lot to lose, throwing herself into the maelstrom of a high-profile confirmation proceeding on the national level. Considering further that she has no history whatsoever of high-profile political activism, no high-profile media experience, and still she decides to go up against the President of the U.S. of A. and the right-wing smear-machine at his disposal, from Faux News to Breitbart to even loonier ultra-right.

Really, that's what you would have to believe if you think that Kavanaugh's denials and Ford's accusation are equal candidates for the truth.

I need proof, I am unwilling to take to word of one over the other. She named four people at the party, one is her friend, and none remember the party or even being there. I am not going to say she made it up, nor am I willing to say he is lying. There is nothing to back her story, that is a problem for me.

 

[Olde Europe]

Really. I am sympathetic to all that you say but in the absence of any objective proof I believe it is the proper position to take.

I need proof, I am unwilling to take to word of one over the other. She named four people at the party, one is her friend, and none remember the party or even being there. I am not going to say she made it up, nor am I willing to say he is lying. There is nothing to back her story, that is a problem for me.

You both don't seem to understand the question put before you.

There is no "proof" to be had in the traditional sense, no rape kit, no DNA evidence, and failing memories after a long time. So, the purpose of this exercise is different, as are the deliberations involved.

There are basically two options.

First, the incident did actually happen. It is supremely easy to explain Kavanaugh's behavior, that is, lying about it: He wants that seat on the Supreme Court ("I'm not going anywhere."), and lying about being a sexual assaulter is the way to get there.

Second, it didn't happen. Explain, how Ford got to the point of making the allegation she did. Make a case as convincing as the explanation for Kavanaugh's denials above. What does she have to gain not by making any accusation, but the accusation she actually did make. If you can't, you should lean towards Ford's position, because her account is the more plausible one.

....

Oh, and BTW, "We need proof!" is the way how assault in private, without witnesses, went unpunished for times immemorial, how the perpetrators went on to their next exploit, and how women's reputations were tarnished. Time's up for that kind of self-serving (from a male perspective), fake-equitable procrastination. In Kavanaugh's case we actually have at least two independent accusations of assault, and for neither is there any evidence even hinting at a political plot bringing it to life.

 

[Tehon]

Really. I am sympathetic to all that you say but in the absence of any objective proof I believe it is the proper position to take.

I need proof, I am unwilling to take to word of one over the other. She named four people at the party, one is her friend, and none remember the party or even being there. I am not going to say she made it up, nor am I willing to say he is lying. There is nothing to back her story, that is a problem for me.

You both don't seem to understand the question put before you.

There is no "proof" to be had in the traditional sense, no rape kit, no DNA evidence, and failing memories after a long time. So, the purpose of this exercise is different, as are the deliberations involved.

There are basically two options.

First, the incident did actually happen. It is supremely easy to explain Kavanaugh's behavior, that is, lying about it: He wants that seat on the Supreme Court ("I'm not going anywhere."), and lying about being a sexual assaulter is the way to get there.

Second, it didn't happen. Explain, how Ford got to the point of making the allegation she did. Make a case as convincing as the explanation for Kavanaugh's denials above. What does she have to gain not by making any accusation, but the accusation she actually did make. If you can't, you should lean towards Ford's position, because her account is the more plausible one.

....

Oh, and BTW, "We need proof!" is the way how assault in private, without witnesses, went unpunished for times immemorial, how the perpetrators went on to their next exploit, and how women's reputations were tarnished. Time's up for that kind of self-serving (from a male perspective), fake-equitable procrastination. In Kavanaugh's case we actually have at least two independent accusations of assault, and for neither is there any evidence even hinting at a political plot bringing it to life.

I understood the question just fine and I gave my opinion. I don't have to disprove the allegation. I have no way of knowing what motivates her.

 

[Papageorgio]

Really. I am sympathetic to all that you say but in the absence of any objective proof I believe it is the proper position to take.

I need proof, I am unwilling to take to word of one over the other. She named four people at the party, one is her friend, and none remember the party or even being there. I am not going to say she made it up, nor am I willing to say he is lying. There is nothing to back her story, that is a problem for me.

You both don't seem to understand the question put before you.

There is no "proof" to be had in the traditional sense, no rape kit, no DNA evidence, and failing memories after a long time. So, the purpose of this exercise is different, as are the deliberations involved.

There are basically two options.

First, the incident did actually happen. It is supremely easy to explain Kavanaugh's behavior, that is, lying about it: He wants that seat on the Supreme Court ("I'm not going anywhere."), and lying about being a sexual assaulter is the way to get there.

Second, it didn't happen. Explain, how Ford got to the point of making the allegation she did. Make a case as convincing as the explanation for Kavanaugh's denials above. What does she have to gain not by making any accusation, but the accusation she actually did make. If you can't, you should lean towards Ford's position, because her account is the more plausible one.

....

Oh, and BTW, "We need proof!" is the way how assault in private, without witnesses, went unpunished for times immemorial, how the perpetrators went on to their next exploit, and how women's reputations were tarnished. Time's up for that kind of self-serving (from a male perspective), fake-equitable procrastination. In Kavanaugh's case we actually have at least two independent accusations of assault, and for neither is there any evidence even hinting at a political plot bringing it to life.

I don’t know Ford or her motivations, nor do you. I am not going to make assumptions on her motivations, I am unclear as to what they are. I personally know people that have gone through these issues and it is not pretty and it is not always as it seems. It is a cautious road we all need to take because we have no clue and I mean no clue what, if or why. So I side with caution, I leave politics out of it and I wait. I don't want to see a woman's sexual abuse ignored or minimized, nor do I wish to see a man's reputation ruined by an unfounded accusation.

 

[Tehon]

Oh, and BTW, "We need proof!" is the way how assault in private, without witnesses, went unpunished for times immemorial, how the perpetrators went on to their next exploit, and how women's reputations were tarnished.

And sometimes it worked the other way and innocent people were prosecuted without proof.

Emmett Till - Wikipedia

 

[Olde Europe]

I understood the question just fine and I gave my opinion. I don't have to disprove the allegation. I have no way of knowing what motivates her.

You still don't understand the question. Neither, sadly, does Papageorgio.

This is not about prosecution, which follows its own procedures, and neither is Kavanaugh's hearing about prosecution. It is how we can evaluate the veracity of claims, that is, by looking into the plausible motivations behind them to get to a tentative conclusion as to which option is the more likely one without having all the evidence (or even conclusive proof) at our disposal. You know, you may even use your common sense and some logic on your own to get there.

Pointing out that your thinking stands in a tradition of dismissing women (we need proof to take you seriously!) is just to demonstrate how old that lazy procrastination actually is, and how much damage it has done over centuries.

 

[Papageorgio]

Oh, and BTW, "We need proof!" is the way how assault in private, without witnesses, went unpunished for times immemorial, how the perpetrators went on to their next exploit, and how women's reputations were tarnished. Time's up for that kind of self-serving (from a male perspective), fake-equitable procrastination. In Kavanaugh's case we actually have at least two independent accusations of assault, and for neither is there any evidence even hinting at a political plot bringing it to life.

'Guilty until proven innocent': life after a false rape accusation

Wrongfully Convicted of Rape, a New Jersey Man Finds More Punishment After Prison

Now, I am not making light of what Ford has said, however we should call a man guilty just by the accusations, we need more.

 

[Olde Europe]

'Guilty until proven innocent': life after a false rape accusation

Wrongfully Convicted of Rape, a New Jersey Man Finds More Punishment After Prison

Now, I am not making light of what Ford has said, however we should call a man guilty just by the accusations, we need more.

Yeah, the justice system is fallible. And the minuscule number of falsely accused and convicted men determine your thinking, not the millions of women failed by that same justice system, so much so that the conviction rate for rape ranges in the low single digits. It so frightens you, you cannot even independently make up your mind to assess the veracity of competing claims, which, quite obviously, doesn't get anyone into prison.

SMH.