• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Lessons to be learned from the Kavanaugh Hearing

JoeMorgue said:
Well the problem is right now there are no adults in this metaphor just two kids fighting over a toy except the toy is a sexual predator on the Supreme Court and the kids are one of if not the most powerful governing bodies in the world.

There is no neutral. There is no default. There is no status quo. There is no "don't make a decision" to invoke here. Either a sexual predator goes on the Supreme Court or he doesn't.
Click to expand...

Yeah. The toy in my sloppy metaphor was supposed to represent the Supreme Court justiceship.
 
johnny karate said:
Yeah sorry, didn't click on your garbage links and have no intention to do so.
Click to expand...

Well, since accusations with no credible evidence seems to be the standard in this thread, I thought I'd join the party.

:D

Untitled-e1537463483404.jpg
 
Last edited:
Cavemonster said:
I think even if I accepted it as true, it wouldn't say much.

Some of Ford's classmates had sex. Ford herself may have had sex.

Yes and?
Click to expand...

I figure she had sex. I was talking about the news source. That they would publish that says a lot.
 
Joecool said:
Well, since accusations with no credible evidence seems to be the standard in this thread, I thought I'd join the party.

:D

[qimg]http://www.shadolsonshow.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Untitled-e1537463483404.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

I m not sure what you think the photo tells us.
 
JoeMorgue said:
And, to be as fair to you as you were to me, I think this obsession with ideological purity is not helping.

Being inconsistent is not a greater sin than being wrong.

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

If our entire discourse is based on nothing but finding inconsistencies in ideologies (i.e. hypocrisy) that's all we're ever gonna do and as good as it often feels, it doesn't accomplish much on any practical level.
Click to expand...

Er, just to be clear: being inconsistent is certainly not a lesser sin than being wrong, since a hypocrite is guaranteed to be wrong. So, hypocrisy is certainly no better than being wrong.

But I'm merely being pedantic here. Feel free to ignore the nerd in the corner.
 
acbytesla said:
I m not sure what you think the photo tells us.
Click to expand...

Joecool, like most conservatives, seems to fear female sexuality and therefore seeks to demonize it.

It's a weird throwback to 1950s-era misogyny and sexism, and yet here we are in 2018, dealing with it from someone who actually think it’s clever.
 
smartcooky said:
Yeah, right, and we can take her word on that :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Yes, I think so. She wrote it under oath and is an attorney. I think it would be churlish to dismiss it without warrant.

Yes, she was hired by one side, not the other. But she behaved well, did her job, and reported her findings.

You and I might doubt her findings, but I haven't seen any clear reason to doubt her integrity.
 
Ziggurat said:
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.
Click to expand...

No one is pushing that standard.
 
phiwum said:
Yes, I think so. She wrote it under oath and is an attorney. I think it would be churlish to dismiss it without warrant.

Yes, she was hired by one side, not the other. But she behaved well, did her job, and reported her findings.

You and I might doubt her findings, but I haven't seen any clear reason to doubt her integrity.
Click to expand...

What was her job, beyond shielding old white men from looking bad by badgering a victim ?
 
Ziggurat said:
Because he was still a Democratic nominee, not a Republican one, and because that sort of personal attack has so far been a tool of the left, not the right. You can expect that to change if this attack on Kavanaugh succeeds.
Click to expand...

LOL, that's just adorably ignorant.

Bill Clinton and Al Franken disagree, to name a couple.

Throw in Barack Obama and the Birther personal attack, to prove just how ridiculously wrong you are.

And let's not forget Pizzagate! LMFAO!!!
 
Last edited:
I don't give a flying rodent's rectum how many times Side A said something wrong about Side B. It doesn't matter. It's not relevant.

The thing being discussed either did or did not happen.

The truth is not a bank account you get to overdraw and add more money to and vice versa. You don't get a freebie because the other side did it too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom