Lessons to be learned from the Kavanaugh Hearing

[JoeMorgue]

500 law professors weighed in on the meaning of Boofing? I find that unlikely.

But seriously, what do you think that letter actually means other than that you can find 500 liberal law professors?

See? You're demanding evidence out of one side of your mouth while already pre-dismissing any evidence you do get as either bias or a politically motivated attack.

You're already decided that anyone who is against Kavanaugh is motivated by greed or ideology because being against Kavanaugh by definition makes them ideological.

 

[theprestige]

We will have to come to a demonstrable agreement on the meaning of the slang term 'BULLCRAP'.

As long as it's based on a claim to universal experiences that vary for each individual, I'm in.

 

[Belz...]

First off, equating the use of slang to rape is pathetic.

No one's equating anything. I'm extrapolating your constant excuses on this to something else. You've been consistently partisan for years here, so it's not a stretch.

And it's the height of hypocrisy to accuse me of crossing a line when you call me a denier of demonstrated rape.

Spare me the fake outrage.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

500 law professors weighed in on the meaning of Boofing? I find that unlikely.

But seriously, what do you think that letter actually means other than that you can find 500 liberal law professors? Nothing. It means absolutely nothing other than that. And while being a liberal certainly suffices to oppose a conservative nominee, that's not enough to get a conservative to oppose a conservative nominee.

I'm starting to feel really sorry for you.
You can dismiss the opinion of 500 imminently qualified professionals with the wave of your hand, because they might have a different ideology than you?

 

[Belz...]

I'm starting to feel really sorry for you.
You can dismiss the opinion of 500 imminently qualified professionals with the wave of your hand, because they might have a different ideology than you?

Well that's the standard of 'doubt' that Ziggurat is employing right now: if you can think of any explanation that would discount the claim or the evidence, then you must discount it. I think he forgot to include the 'reasonable' part of the standard.

 

[Thermal]

As long as it's based on a claim to universal experiences that vary for each individual, I'm in.

Nah, subjectivity of meaning is the thing now. Its boofin.

 

[theprestige]

Nah, subjectivity of meaning is the thing now. Its boofin.

Boof to that.

 

[acbytesla]

BULLCRAP.! I'm a few years older than Kavanaugh it didn't even exist in 1980.

Then you were living in a cave.

 

[Ziggurat]

I'm starting to feel really sorry for you.
You can dismiss the opinion of 500 imminently qualified professionals with the wave of your hand, because they might have a different ideology than you?

I can dismiss the opinion of any number of people because, get this, it's just opinion, and argument ad populum is a fallacy even when you try to combine it with argument from authority.

And I presume you mean eminently qualified and not merely imminently qualified, but Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic & Institutional Rights proved rather conclusively that law school professors are not in fact always eminently qualified.

 

[acbytesla]

Seriously. These were not obscure terms.

Eta: FFFF could have very well meant 'Farewell, Famously Fine Friend'. Can you prove that's not how Kavanaugh meant it? Huh? HUH!?

It could have and monkeys also fly out of my arse

Is that what you think a sexist frat boy surrounded by other guys 7 hours a day would use those letters for?

What do you think 'Renate alumni' meant?

Prove to what standard? Beyond a reasonable doubt or 'more likely?

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Zig, do you really feel so much under siege that considering Kavanaugh's flaws would cause the end of the US as you know it?

I know that many Conservatives weigh the chance that Kavanaugh might have assaulted a women in his youth (given his heavy drinking), and that they'd rather not be the party who voted a predator to the highest court.
The risk is just not worth the payoff - unless you believe this is the last time Republicans have a chance to get a SCOTUS majority.

 

[varwoche]

Then you were living in a cave.

While I don't believe Kavanaugh's explanations of the terms, nonetheless I was living in the same cave as theprestige.

 

[theprestige]

Then you were living in a cave.

I think the more rational explanation is that you're not actually an authority on universal experiences among American schoolchildren.

ETA: But if you *are* actually such an authority, you should probably notify Congress so they can hear your expert testimony and put this matter to rest.

 

[Imhotep]

It could have and monkeys also fly out of my arse

Is that what you think a sexist frat boy surrounded by other guys 7 hours a day would use those letters for?

What do you think 'Renate alumni' meant?

Prove to what standard? Beyond a reasonable doubt or 'more likely?

Obviously people can go through any number of rationalizations, some even quite reasonable. At the end of the day it's you and your opinion of the man, his honesty, his integrity. What's frustrating is to see these "opinions" play out exactly along party lines.

 

[Belz...]

While I don't believe Kavanaugh's explanations of the terms, nonetheless I was living in the same cave as theprestige.

What were the two of you doing in there?

 

[Thermal]

It could have and monkeys also fly out of my arse

Is that what you think a sexist frat boy surrounded by other guys 7 hours a day would use those letters for?

What do you think 'Renate alumni' meant?

Prove to what standard? Beyond a reasonable doubt or 'more likely?

I see I omitted the /s in my post. My bad.

Can I eta a /FFFF, meaning Fault For Fleeting Forgetfulness?

Boofin' in the Devil's T,
Thermal

 

[acbytesla]

Obviously people can go through any number of rationalizations, some even quite reasonable. At the end of the day it's you and your opinion of the man, his honesty, his integrity. What's frustrating is to see these "opinions" play out exactly along party lines.

I agree. I just don't think character and integrity counts at all for the Republican party. It's all about winning. And don't say the Democrats act the same way. One only needs to look at Al Franken to see the difference.

 

[Ziggurat]

Zig, do you really feel so much under siege that considering Kavanaugh's flaws would cause the end of the US as you know it?

Do you really feel that Kavanaugh's confirmation is such a threat that you have to straw man any arguments in his favor?

I know that many Conservatives weigh the chance that Kavanaugh might have assaulted a women in his youth (given his heavy drinking), and that they'd rather not be the party who voted a predator to the highest court.
The risk is just not worth the payoff - unless you believe this is the last time Republicans have a chance to get a SCOTUS majority.

You're pushing a standard where accusations without any evidence to support them are enough to derail a nomination. You might think that you can apply this standard to only conservative nominees, but 1) I won't have a part in that, and 2) if it works this time, it will be tried against every single nominee from now on, including liberal ones.

 

[acbytesla]

I think the more rational explanation is that you're not actually an authority on universal experiences among American schoolchildren.

ETA: But if you *are* actually such an authority, you should probably notify Congress so they can hear your expert testimony and put this matter to rest.

Nope. I just am not willing to lie. I guess if you were home schooled, you wouldn't have heard those terms. But living in the life of hard partying guy centric world of jocks, you would have known them well.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Do you really feel that Kavanaugh's confirmation is such a threat that you have to straw man any arguments in his favor?



You're pushing a standard where accusations without any evidence to support them are enough to derail a nomination. You might think that you can apply this standard to only conservative nominees, but 1) I won't have a part in that, and 2) if it works this time, it will be tried against every single nominee from now on, including liberal ones.

It's not about standards, it's about strategy: for the benefit of the Party, and of the entire Judicial System, it is better at this point to drop Kavanaugh than have the shadow of a deeply flawed candidate hanging over every federal election for the next 30 years.