The Unfathomable Depths of Leftists

[Crepitus]

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.

Not a "dangerous sexual predator" but a man with disqualifying flaws.

There are many other eminently qualified candidates who have no such flaws.

Exactly. As I've already said, do we want a man in the position to decide rights for all women when we already know he can't respect the rights of even one?

 

[Papageorgio]

I have independently made up my mind. I don't know her motivations, I don't know her, I don't know Kavanaugh. When there are two people and one said it happened and one said t didn't happen, and I don't know their motivations, why would I believe one over the other?

There are many more now. No longer one on one. People who do not know each other are painting a very similar picture.

Kavanaugh will not be appointed, Trump should nominate someone more conservative, let the Dems whine and cry, then after that person is not confirmed put up an even more conservative judge, by that time the majority of Americans will see the Democrats as the party of no.

And we’ll be back to the old saying “be careful of what you wish for.”

Also, the Democrats have used the rape issue and it will come back to bite them.

Also, the Democrats have used the rape issue and it will come back to bite them

Where did the"Democrats" do that?

Can you show where Dems made these allegations happen?

Lol!

That would be a, “no.”

No that is you got to be kidding. If you aren’t that smart, my telling you isn’t going to help.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

There are many more now. No longer one on one. People who do not know each other are painting a very similar picture.

Kavanaugh will not be appointed, Trump should nominate someone more conservative, let the Dems whine and cry, then after that person is not confirmed put up an even more conservative judge, by that time the majority of Americans will see the Democrats as the party of no.

And we’ll be back to the old saying “be careful of what you wish for.”

Also, the Democrats have used the rape issue and it will come back to bite them.

Also, the Democrats have used the rape issue and it will come back to bite them

Where did the"Democrats" do that?

Can you show where Dems made these allegations happen?

Lol!

That would be a, “no.”

No that is you got to be kidding. If you aren’t that smart, my telling you isn’t going to help.

^That would be a, "no".

 

[Papageorgio]

I have independently made up my mind. I don't know her motivations, I don't know her, I don't know Kavanaugh. When there are two people and one said it happened and one said t didn't happen, and I don't know their motivations, why would I believe one over the other?

There are many more now. No longer one on one. People who do not know each other are painting a very similar picture.

Kavanaugh will not be appointed, Trump should nominate someone more conservative, let the Dems whine and cry, then after that person is not confirmed put up an even more conservative judge, by that time the majority of Americans will see the Democrats as the party of no.

And we’ll be back to the old saying “be careful of what you wish for.”

Also, the Democrats have used the rape issue and it will come back to bite them.

Also, the Democrats have used the rape issue and it will come back to bite them

Where did the"Democrats" do that?

Can you show where Dems made these allegations happen?

Lol!

That's it?

Please if you are as stupid as you are portraying there is no point trying to have a reasonable conversation with you.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

There are many more now. No longer one on one. People who do not know each other are painting a very similar picture.

Kavanaugh will not be appointed, Trump should nominate someone more conservative, let the Dems whine and cry, then after that person is not confirmed put up an even more conservative judge, by that time the majority of Americans will see the Democrats as the party of no.

And we’ll be back to the old saying “be careful of what you wish for.”

Also, the Democrats have used the rape issue and it will come back to bite them.

Also, the Democrats have used the rape issue and it will come back to bite them

Where did the"Democrats" do that?

Can you show where Dems made these allegations happen?

Lol!

That's it?

Please if you are as stupid as you are portraying there is no point trying to have a reasonable conversation with you.

What conversation?

You haven't answered yet.

 

[Correll]

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 the accusation false.

Exactly. Not a minute of testimony has been heard by anyone. There are actually more reasons as to why it may be credible. Liars don't typically ask for their allegations to be scrutinized.

Name the reasons to think it credible.

I just did in the very post you responded to.

Liars don't typically ask for their allegations to be scrutinized.

1. "Not a minute of testimony has been heard from anyone" :

How the hell is that a reason to find it credible?



2. "There are actually more reasons as to why it may be credible."

That is an assertion, not a reason.


3. "Liars don't typically ask for their allegations to be scrutinized."


Perhaps, but then again, this is not a typical situation.

 

[Correll]

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.

Not a "dangerous sexual predator" but a man with disqualifying flaws.

There are many other eminently qualified candidates who have no such flaws.

List the flaws.

The allegations, his history with drinking is all a dark cloud of uncertainty.
The very argument raging at this moment, fool.

I doubt there are even 50 votes to be had for this guy at this time and that is before testimony. Surely a day of sordid details doesn't help.

They should have bailed on Kavanaugh last week.

1. The allegations are unsupported shit.

2. A history of drinking? LOL!!!!

3. The "argument" is nothing but partisan bullshit.

 

[Papageorgio]

Kavanaugh will not be appointed, Trump should nominate someone more conservative, let the Dems whine and cry, then after that person is not confirmed put up an even more conservative judge, by that time the majority of Americans will see the Democrats as the party of no.

And we’ll be back to the old saying “be careful of what you wish for.”

Also, the Democrats have used the rape issue and it will come back to bite them.

Also, the Democrats have used the rape issue and it will come back to bite them

Where did the"Democrats" do that?

Can you show where Dems made these allegations happen?

Lol!

That would be a, “no.”

No that is you got to be kidding. If you aren’t that smart, my telling you isn’t going to help.

^That would be a, "no".

The accusations against Kavanaugh were brought up by a Democratic Senator. I am not saying anyone is lying however just as with the Clinton accusations there are too many unknowns for anyone other then a partisan nut to believe they are 100% true like the left believes.

We have lots of accusations, no timelines of when, stories where others are claiming the don’t remember or were even there.

If you go back to the early 90’s a lot was discovered about false memory syndrome and until we get real proof with places, dates, times and people even admitting being there and witnessing it, this case seems to follow those same patterns. I am not saying anyone is lying, I’m saying memories are liquid and fluid and can’t be trusted. The second women coming forward had to take days to remember details. She fits the FMS profile.

 

[Correll]

It's he said, she said, 30 years after the facts, this is not about conservative doing anything, other than refusing to let themselves be pressured into destroying an innocent man.

You are an asshole.

How does not appointing him to the supreme Court destroy him?

It's not just having his career ruined, but being branded as a rapist in the Public Eye, and made into a target to the vile dregs of society, ie liberals.

You mean like the right did to Bill Clinton?

Wow. Everything in that statement was wrong.


Bill Clinton was not innocent, and his career was not ruined, and he is still a hero to the dregs of society, ie liberals.

Clinton was not innocent? Who did he rape? Who did he sexually assault?

He sexually harassed Paula Jones, as you well know, among others.

As to rape, the accusation against him by Juanita Brodrick was far more credible than any of the shit you libs have today.



STOP PLAYING STUPID.

 

[Olde Europe]

^That would be a, "no".

The accusations against Kavanaugh were brought up by a Democratic Senator.

So, that's not just a "no", that's "Hell NO!!!"

That's barely hidden behind fake equitable judgment (I don't say anyone is lying), as it was done for centuries, the fierce determination to give him the job to lord over women for the rest of his life, that is, in effect giving his account, for no reason whatsoever, the benefit of the doubt, while dismissing her account without even the spine to say so outright. That, in turn, exposes the lie behind the whole charade.

 

[Correll]

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.

Not a "dangerous sexual predator" but a man with disqualifying flaws.

There are many other eminently qualified candidates who have no such flaws.

Exactly. As I've already said, do we want a man in the position to decide rights for all women when we already know he can't respect the rights of even one?

The accusations are completely unproven. You have no justification for acting as though they are "facts".

 

[Correll]

^That would be a, "no".

The accusations against Kavanaugh were brought up by a Democratic Senator.

So, that's not just a "no", that's "Hell NO!!!"

That's barely hidden behind fake equitable judgment (I don't say anyone is lying), as it was done for centuries, the fierce determination to give him the job to lord over women for the rest of his life, that is, in effect giving his account, for no reason whatsoever, the benefit of the doubt, while dismissing her account without even the spine to say so outright. That, in turn, exposes the lie behind the whole charade.

Your words are insane.

 

[hadit]

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.

Not a "dangerous sexual predator" but a man with disqualifying flaws.

There are many other eminently qualified candidates who have no such flaws.

You're automatically assuming the accusations have merit. By all accounts, Kav is a very good judge.

You're automatically assuming the accusations have merit. By all accounts, Kav is a very good judge.

You're automatically assuming they have no merit at all. There seems to be quite a few now.

Kavanaugh can both be a very good and competent judge and have a very problematic history as a young man. Both can be true.

The point is, why elevate a man with such questions surrounding him when there are many others with equal qualifications without such questions surrounding them?

The point of this process is to shake out his past and see what comes out. We've seen what comes out. What else will fall out maybe later?

And it means nothing to you that, even if he had problems as a boy, by all accounts he's been an exemplary adult? You're determined that things you're accused of at 17 are to forever dog you and you can never overcome them, no matter what? If that's the standard you want, Obama should never have been president, given his life as a young man.

I would never hire someone to represent me or my business with questions like this surrounding them. Too many unknowns.

Obama never had questions like this surrounding his youth.

He abused drugs and had racist attitudes. The Kavenaugh standard would eliminate him for any high level position.

 

[hadit]

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.

Not a "dangerous sexual predator" but a man with disqualifying flaws.

There are many other eminently qualified candidates who have no such flaws.

Exactly. As I've already said, do we want a man in the position to decide rights for all women when we already know he can't respect the rights of even one?

Cite some of his plethora of judicial decisions that support that claim. Those are the only things we can at this point KNOW about his judicial temperament. This other stuff we simply don't know for sure, despite your glib assurences.

 

[hadit]

One has to wonder what excuses, delays and conditions would instantly be demanded if the president were to announce a three day FBI investigation into all this.

Then, of course, there would be the inevitable denunciation of the FBI as an investigative body should they fail to find credible supporting evidence.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

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 the accusation false.

Exactly. Not a minute of testimony has been heard by anyone. There are actually more reasons as to why it may be credible. Liars don't typically ask for their allegations to be scrutinized.

Name the reasons to think it credible.

I just did in the very post you responded to.

Liars don't typically ask for their allegations to be scrutinized.

1. "Not a minute of testimony has been heard from anyone" :

How the hell is that a reason to find it credible?



2. "There are actually more reasons as to why it may be credible."

That is an assertion, not a reason.


3. "Liars don't typically ask for their allegations to be scrutinized."


Perhaps, but then again, this is not a typical situation.

Not having heard any testimony is a reason that you cannot objectively state that she is not credible. You simply don't know what she has to say.

Given the fact that she definitively identified Kavanaugh, came foreward in spite of the peril to her and her family in doing so and her willingness to have her claims scrutinized all strengthen her credibility. What weakens her credibility in your opinion?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

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.

Not a "dangerous sexual predator" but a man with disqualifying flaws.

There are many other eminently qualified candidates who have no such flaws.

List the flaws.

The allegations, his history with drinking is all a dark cloud of uncertainty.
The very argument raging at this moment, fool.

I doubt there are even 50 votes to be had for this guy at this time and that is before testimony. Surely a day of sordid details doesn't help.

They should have bailed on Kavanaugh last week.

1. The allegations are unsupported shit.

2. A history of drinking? LOL!!!!

3. The "argument" is nothing but partisan bullshit.

The argument is reality and soon to be testimony in the record.

Do you think there are 50 votes at this point?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Where did the"Democrats" do that?

Can you show where Dems made these allegations happen?

Lol!

That would be a, “no.”

No that is you got to be kidding. If you aren’t that smart, my telling you isn’t going to help.

^That would be a, "no".

The accusations against Kavanaugh were brought up by a Democratic Senator. I am not saying anyone is lying however just as with the Clinton accusations there are too many unknowns for anyone other then a partisan nut to believe they are 100% true like the left believes.

We have lots of accusations, no timelines of when, stories where others are claiming the don’t remember or were even there.

If you go back to the early 90’s a lot was discovered about false memory syndrome and until we get real proof with places, dates, times and people even admitting being there and witnessing it, this case seems to follow those same patterns. I am not saying anyone is lying, I’m saying memories are liquid and fluid and can’t be trusted. The second women coming forward had to take days to remember details. She fits the FMS profile.

The accusations against Kavanaugh were brought up by a Democratic Senator

No.
The allegations were made by Ford. They were released only when she decided she was ready to go public.

The "Democrats" are not behind any of it.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

^That would be a, "no".

The accusations against Kavanaugh were brought up by a Democratic Senator.

So, that's not just a "no", that's "Hell NO!!!"

That's barely hidden behind fake equitable judgment (I don't say anyone is lying), as it was done for centuries, the fierce determination to give him the job to lord over women for the rest of his life, that is, in effect giving his account, for no reason whatsoever, the benefit of the doubt, while dismissing her account without even the spine to say so outright. That, in turn, exposes the lie behind the whole charade.

Almost as if allegations of this nature are of no consequence to an accomplished man of kavanaugh's pedigree.

I'm sure no women will notice this just weeks before the elections.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

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.

Not a "dangerous sexual predator" but a man with disqualifying flaws.

There are many other eminently qualified candidates who have no such flaws.

Exactly. As I've already said, do we want a man in the position to decide rights for all women when we already know he can't respect the rights of even one?

The accusations are completely unproven. You have no justification for acting as though they are "facts".

Seems like an investigation may shed some light on the "facts".