• 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

Cabbage said:
What do you mean they will "learn"? Looks to me like some of them have already mastered it. Of course, it's your prerogative to maintain your ignorant belief that only liberals stoop to such disruptive behaviors; I can't teach you if you won't listen! LOL!



https://www.rawstory.com/2018/10/tr...porting-brett-kavanaugh/#.W7Zqfj9DoZE.twitter
Click to expand...

You’re making my point, which is precisely that liberals are NOT the only ones who can be violent. This guy is a second rate knockoff of James Hodgkinson, but he won’t be the last if norms of civility are dissolved. They cannot be dissolved for one side and not the other. They should be maintained for everyone, for all our sake. And that is why this enthusiasm to tear them down for some imagined short term partisan benefit is so wrong.
 
Ziggurat said:
You’re making my point, which is precisely that liberals are NOT the only ones who can be violent.
Click to expand...

That point didn't need to be made, as it is obvious.

Your point, on the other hand, was that liberals were to blame for such behavior, and conservatives would inevitably "learn" to engage in such depravity. I quote, " Your opponents will learn from you. This isn't a tactic that you can confine to your side," and "it's still surprising how often the left proposes new rules that they would immediately regret if they're actually forced to live under them."

That's absurdly ignorant and naive. There's no need for conservatives to learn: They're already there, and they've been there for decades (surely you remember Timothy Mcveigh). Some groups of liberals, too, no doubt. See, I'm observant enough to recognize the faults of my own side.

It's a shame you have such difficulty.
 
Last edited:
Cabbage said:
That point didn't need to be made, as it is obvious.

Your point, on the other hand, was that liberals were to blame for such behavior, and conservatives would inevitably "learn" to engage in such depravity. I quote, " Your opponents will learn from you. This isn't a tactic that you can confine to your side," and "it's still surprising how often the left proposes new rules that they would immediately regret if they're actually forced to live under them."

That's absurdly ignorant and naive. There's no need for conservatives to learn: They're already there, and they've been there for decades (surely you remember Timothy Mcveigh). Some groups of liberals, too, no doubt. See, I'm observant enough to recognize the faults of my own side.

It's a shame you have such difficulty.
Click to expand...


There are conservatives groups out there trying to shut down speakers events because they are too liberal? There are conservatives groups out there trying to shut down free speech?

There will be if the left continues the insanity.

DoYYhGyVsAAJF6F.jpg

DoYYGFNU0AAV7PB.jpg
 
Oh dear God come down off the cross, use the wood to build a bridge, and use the bridge to get over it.

I can understand being a sore loser, but how the hell are the Republicans being such sore winners?
 
One of the things that can be learned from the Kavanaugh hearing is it isn't over. Grassley is still trying to get the truth out of Ford and her lawyers. He said he's willing to go through the whole thing again. He wants the marriage therapy notes and everything to do with the polygraph. He has a witness who said Ford lied about never helping anyone (McLean) with taking a polygraph. I'm sure he wants to pursue her stupid claim about needing a 2nd front door due to her traumatic experience in 1982, or possibly some other year. I hope he asks her if she's ever been hypnotized or has practiced self-hypnosis to "recover" memories.
 
Ziggurat said:
You’re making my point, which is precisely that liberals are NOT the only ones who can be violent. This guy is a second rate knockoff of James Hodgkinson, but he won’t be the last if norms of civility are dissolved. They cannot be dissolved for one side and not the other. They should be maintained for everyone, for all our sake.
Click to expand...
The norms of civility have already been dissolved. They've been gone now for years. And the ones who dissolved civility were the republicans.

They were gone when the republicans decided their only job was to oppose Obama, and when they decided not to consider Garland for the supreme court, ending any pretext of bipartisanship. They were gone when the Trump talked about a 'second amendment' solution to a possible Clinton presidency, and with the labeling of neonazis as 'fine people'. They were gone when the republicans started voter suppression and gerrymanding to hinder democracy for selected voters, yet yet seem quite happy with a president who was installed with the assistance of a hostile foreign power. And they were gone when the republicans worked to whitewash the history of a probable rapist in order to get him confirmed to the supreme court.

And now, with all the dirty tricks the republicans have pulled, with the calls to violence, NOW you complain about a 'lack of civility'? Frankly, I think republicans complaining about lack of civility is a lot like a bully complaining because the victim decided to actually fight back for once.

And lest you think I'm sort of left-wing liberal democrat, I'm not. I'm actually a Canadian who tends to vote for candidates on the right-side of the political spectrum. I am however able to recognize the difference between decent, well-thought out conservatism and the type of junk that the current republican party keeps spewing.
 
Segnosaur said:
The norms of civility have already been dissolved.
Click to expand...

Only some of them have been. A lot more could be. Is that actually hard to understand?

They were gone when the republicans decided their only job was to oppose Obama, and when they decided not to consider Garland for the supreme court, ending any pretext of bipartisanship.
Click to expand...

That's... not what civility means. It doesn't mean bipartisanship which, whatever its values, is still something different.

They were gone when the Trump talked about a 'second amendment' solution to a possible Clinton presidency
Click to expand...

In this context, it's quite remarkable that James Hodgkinson doesn't warrant a mention by you.
 
Cabbage said:
That point didn't need to be made, as it is obvious.
Click to expand...

It should be obvious, but people like Craig4 keep acting like they don't know it. Seriously, your entire response is ignoring what Craig4 said, as if I've been talking in a vacuum.
 
Ziggurat said:
Only some of them have been. A lot more could be. Is that actually hard to understand?



That's... not what civility means. It doesn't mean bipartisanship which, whatever its values, is still something different.



In this context, it's quite remarkable that James Hodgkinson doesn't warrant a mention by you.
Click to expand...

James Hodgkinson was a lone nut. What he did was a terrible thing, but he was not the Presidential nominee[1] of the Democratic Party.

Trump suggested violence if Hillary was elected. That is bloody dangerous.

I don't see Hodgkinson as an important member of the Democratic Party, influencing others to join his terrible approach. (The same applies to Gerald Lee Loughner. Another terrible act, but done by a lone actor with little influence on others, relative to a Presidential nominee.)

[1] My timing might be off and Trump might not have been the official nominee yet. The basic point stands.
 
Jesus Christ can discussions even see the bottom of the barrel from where they've dug themselves to?

"You can't say this unless you also say this, you can't bring up this unless you also bring up that, you're responsible for explaining every action from every member of your tribe, whatabout this, whatabout that, but your side did this, but when this happened your side said this..."
 
JoeMorgue said:
Jesus Christ can discussions even see the bottom of the barrel from where they've dug themselves to?

"You can't say this unless you also say this, you can't bring up this unless you also bring up that, you're responsible for explaining every action from every member of your tribe, whatabout this, whatabout that, but your side did this, but when this happened your side said this..."
Click to expand...


I think a lot of Americans are ready for a more centrist party. One that represents the core values of our past, and recognizes the civil rights we all have come to enjoy. These things can happen quickly with the right funding and representation.
 
phiwum said:
I don't see Hodgkinson as an important member of the Democratic Party
Click to expand...

Go back to Craig4's post. What he's advocating doesn't require important members of the Democratic party to carry out.
 
River said:
I think a lot of Americans are ready for a more centrist party. One that represents the core values of our past, and recognizes the civil rights we all have come to enjoy. These things can happen quickly with the right funding and representation.
Click to expand...

I agree, we already have a center-right party: The Democratic Party.
 
Maybe, just maybe, we don't worry so much about where everything is on the arbitrary line between left and right.
 
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