Kavanaugh/Ford Hearing

[SMuser69]

The movement seemed to become a double edged sword as time went by. Initially things were hunky dory. Weinstein seeing any form of justice is a good thing and seems impossible to argue against. Public perception started to take a hit with the Aziz Ansari accusation. Then the Enzo Amore firing put a spotlight on what many believe is accusations being used as a tool. Then Argento made the news again and those claiming allegiance to the movement stumbled over each other with absurd hypocrisy and blatant sexism. Really undermined the legitimacy of the movement which then seemed to have disappeared from the news. The lack of real justice for victims makes me wonder how history will remember the movement. I'd love to be more positive about it but recent results aren't really allowing me to.

It'll go down in history like the salem witch trials or mcarthyism. The shame is it clearly shows weakness of libel and slander laws in the internet age since accusation exists forever on the internet even after it's been debunked.

 

[curvyredhead]

It'll go down in history like the salem witch trials or mcarthyism. The shame is it clearly shows weakness of libel and slander laws in the internet age since accusation exists forever on the internet even after it's been debunked.

To be clear, are you saying that YOU are equating people calling out there abusers and some people standing by them -- to hundreds of people (in a relatively small area) accused of crimes that not only did they not commit, but shouldn't have been crimes, to begin with. With many being murdered. Basically equating the MeTo movement with mass hysteria. Because, that is how the witch trials are looked at today, mass hysteria based on unfounded evidence, for crimes that should not be crimes.
Or is that just how you think history will equate it.

I am trying to figure out if you are horrible human, or if you think we as a collective society are horrible humans.

Cuz IMO its pretty horrible to think that people calling out there abusers is mass hysteria based on unfounded evidence, for crimes that should not be crimes.

Maybe I am missing something.

 

[Poison_Ivy21]

Pretty weird to compare MeToo to a witch hunt. Since the salam witch trials resulted in the gruesome murders of mostly women. Women who were most likely doctors, trying to help other women survive.

Considering our President has been accused multiple times and now Kav has been confirmed...you guys really think accusations are ruining men’s lives? Statistics put out by the department of justice tell use that false reports happen at the same rate for all felonies. You’re no more likely to be falsely accused of rape than you are of murder or aggravated assault. I know it’s very easy for the misogynists here to believe that women are just a bunch of lying whores but it’s simply not true. Most people aren’t willing to fuck up their own lives by throwing around false accusations.

 

[SMuser69]

To be clear, are you saying that YOU are equating people calling out there abusers and some people standing by them -- to hundreds of people (in a relatively small area) accused of crimes that not only did they not commit, but shouldn't have been crimes, to begin with. With many being murdered. Basically equating the MeTo movement with mass hysteria. Because, that is how the witch trials are looked at today, mass hysteria based on unfounded evidence, for crimes that should not be crimes.
Or is that just how you think history will equate it.

I am trying to figure out if you are horrible human, or if you think we as a collective society are horrible humans.

Cuz IMO its pretty horrible to think that people calling out there abusers is mass hysteria based on unfounded evidence, for crimes that should not be crimes.

Maybe I am missing something.

You can call out abusers and stand up for people without #metoo.

You can call out police abuse without Blacklivesmatter

You can believe in animal rights without PETA

You can believe in environmental protection without Greenpeace

You can believe in equality without Feminism

You will always be you as an individual, the problems is there are times when even a good intention of a group gets warped by the extremes and you have to walk away before it's too late. I make these equations because all these groups might has started one way and may have people in those group that believe in the original good intentions but the messaging or the direction of the groups became extreme or hostile or twisted.

I do think when you give up your individuality to a collective think there's complete risk. What we see in #metoo is accusers applying standards on others that they can't even hold themselves to. Asia Argento is merely the first high level person to break under those standards. When you are part of #metoo you allow Rose McGowan or Asia Argento or whoever is the mouthpiece of the month to speak FOR YOU.

 

[curvyredhead]

Why bother quoting me if you're not going to answer my question?

 

[Poison_Ivy21]

Shocker, the group with the most power doesn’t like when the rest of us come together and call out injustices.

 

[JoleneBrody]

#metoo is not a group or an organization, it’s a hashtag which grew into what could be called a movement. Everyone and anyone is welcome to use it. That’s the point, it’s a way for people to share their stories in one easy to locate way.

Bothered by it? GOOD. It should bother you. Now, maybe grow up enough to direct your discomfort in the direction that is helpful instead of flinchy reactionary defensiveness.

 

[abercrombiesucks]

I was mostly just curious if the movement is doing more harm than good for their own cause. Wasn't trying to trigger the defensiveness from either side. Just fascinated by the long term ramifications that seemingly minor happenings can have.

 

[JoleneBrody]

I was mostly just curious if the movement is doing more harm than good for their own cause. Wasn't trying to trigger the defensiveness from either side. Just fascinated by the long term ramifications that seemingly minor happenings can have.

You sparked discussion, it’s ok.

Personally, I think not. The world is changing and the people in power do not actually reflect the views of the population by a good percentage anymore. That’s what some may call a death rattle.

 

[Deleted member 37064]

The movement seemed to become a double edged sword as time went by. Initially things were hunky dory. Weinstein seeing any form of justice is a good thing and seems impossible to argue against. Public perception started to take a hit with the Aziz Ansari accusation. Then the Enzo Amore firing put a spotlight on what many believe is accusations being used as a tool. Then Argento made the news again and those claiming allegiance to the movement stumbled over each other with absurd hypocrisy and blatant sexism. Really undermined the legitimacy of the movement which then seemed to have disappeared from the news. The lack of real justice for victims makes me wonder how history will remember the movement. I'd love to be more positive about it but recent results aren't really allowing me to.

Unfortunately, this is how many things/movements happen. they start out with good intent. But, then it morphs into self-serving bastardizations of what it was intended to be and they'd happily behead then burn anyone at the stake for merely being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

 

[abercrombiesucks]

Yeah, I hear the road to hell is paved with good intentions unfortunately.

 

[Deleted member 37064]

Shocker, the group with the most power doesn’t like when the rest of us come together and call out injustices.

I have zero issues when people call out injustices. What I dislike is blanket statements, and when people refuse to look at themselves in the mirror.

We're all in this together. Every demographic has been subjected to some level of injustice throughout the history of the world, as well as in various locales. To continually hold one demographic to blame for all the world's ills is absurdly stupid. I'm no more guilty of shit going down the way it has than you are.

 

[curvyredhead]

We're all in this together.

Bahahahaha

Every demographic has been subjected to some level of injustice throughout the history of the world, as well as in various locales.

Bahahahahaha

To continually hold one demographic to blame for all the world's ills is absurdly stupid.

Who is blaming all world's ills on one demographic?
Please be as specific as possible, no blanket statements, Thank you.

 

[Deleted member 37064]

Bahahahaha



Bahahahahaha



Who is blaming all world's ills on one demographic?
Please be as specific as possible, no blanket statements, Thank you.

You, @THE MOLLIE MARIE and @Poison_Ivy21 think my post is funny? Care to explain why?

 

[curvyredhead]

I believe I asked you a question first sir.

 

[Deleted member 37064]

I believe I asked you a question first sir.

Based upon your response, and the others, I feel it's a waste of time to even discuss this further.

 

[curvyredhead]

k

 

[Bocefish]

The only people who really have any room to still be mad about Obama are the black community

The Syrians and Crimeans might have something to say about that along with people that had their health care plans decimated... Obama led from behind and his spineless ways contributed to the death toll in Syria climbing into the hundreds of thousands, triggering a flood of refugees greater than any the world had seen since the 1940s.

 

[Bocefish]

I find it ridiculous that Collins, the person that demanded Al Frankin resign after the allegations about him came out (which compared to Kavanaugh was mild), believed and supported Kavanaugh.

Once again, Al Frankin was caught on tape. Collin's decision was ultimately based on the FBI investigation report.

 

[dilligaf0]

Once again, that tape was over a year old of the same skit with the same lying bitch. She didn't complain then. Only after Frankin was digging into Sessions lying under oath did she come forward since she's a dedicated "trumpette".

 

[HiGirlsRHot]

Once again, that tape was over a year old of the same skit with the same lying bitch. She didn't complain then. Only after Frankin was digging into Sessions lying under oath did she come forward since she's a dedicated "trumpette".

Ah I get it we should believe all women, who are liberal, but none who are conservative. Now that's a terrific system.

Actually, there were 7 women who accused Franken of groping him and/or making lewd comments. I didn't check all of their political affiliations but I'm willing to bet they weren't all "Trumpettes" Nice, sexist term btw.

 

[justjoinedtopost]

The whole Al Franken thing was pathetic. Staged virtue signalling at best. Sort of like that little scene with Flake at the elevator the other day... absurd theatrics.

On the one hand it is funny watching these empty vessels carry out their little charade, exchanging their last few shreds of credibility for blatant hypocrisy. But it is no-where near funny enough to offset the fact that this fraud they attempted to pull appears to be exactly what happened with the whole Russian collusion thing.

Liars.

 

[dilligaf0]

First, trumpette is a term I use for any fool blindly following trump (male or female). "ette" denotes a small trump.
Second, Kavanaugh had at least 3 accusers.
Any accusers should be interviewed to see if there's any validity to the claim. You're saying to ignore them instead of looking into it. That's sexist.

 

[Deleted member 37064]

This whole Kavanaugh, Franken, Ellison BS is showing why party politics is so fucked up.

When one side sees the other side with their hand in the cookie jar, they cry foul and point fingers. Yet, when they're caught they deny and deflect.

If you can't see that, you're too fucking stupid and have fallen prey to the party line politics. You should be barred from voting because you blindly and ignorantly vote down party lines. BLUE this! RED that!

FUCK OFF!

Do your research, vote based upon what the candidate has done or not done regardless of what party they are in. The is politics, not a god damned fucking football game.

 

[Bocefish]

Once again, that tape was over a year old of the same skit with the same lying bitch. She didn't complain then. Only after Frankin was digging into Sessions lying under oath did she come forward since she's a dedicated "trumpette".

Do you not realize that you are doing the shit Trump is doing?

Kavanaugh had at least 3 accusers.
Any accusers should be interviewed to see if there's any validity to the claim. You're saying to ignore them instead of looking into it. That's sexist.

How is that sexist?

Did the FBI not interview the right people?

Do you not think Kavanaugh was vetted over and over again with each position he's had over the years?

In 3 weeks most people will have forgotten all about the little circus anyway.

 

[MDouble00]

Do your research, vote based upon what the candidate has done or not done regardless of what party they are in. The is politics, not a god damned fucking football game.

I live in a state that is predominately "red". The thing is that even if you "ForceTen", or the average person votes the issue or the candidate. The bulk of the electorate is not going to be that balanced or fair. I literally watched my state vote against the "Red Side Campaign Issues" as it related to our State, but for every National issue including what gave the balance of the Supreme Court to the red side issues the state contradicted itself. So as it stood the people understood enough to know they didn't want something state wide, but they voted against it on a national level. Fucked up right?

That is because unfortunately where policy and issues on a state ballot can be easily reviewed. Those same issues at a national level are only seen in candidates. So if you vote no on every policy issue, but then choose to elect people via a straight ballot or predominately in favor of one party. You have a very good chance of contradicting yourself or your own personal belief structure. Because where you are conflicted on specific policies or are fully against something. That party leaning candidate that you voted for is going to have the same dilemma but in the eyes of self preservation and party control vote with the party they are in. Same reason that Susan Collins gave a 4 hour speech about how she was conflicted, but at the end of the day voted party line as she tends to do. Give the appearance that you are conflicted, but still vote one way 90+% of the time.

There are legitimate issues with Voting Districts, and representative demographics that for the last several years has been heavily influenced. The "Blue" side has largely ignored this and the "Red' side has attacked this in a way that precisely leads us to this very debate of should Kavanaugh have been appointed.

I mostly lean left strictly because of social issues. So yeah I'm concerned about the shift in ideology/balance of our highest court when it will weigh over the world I see and live in for the next 30+ years of my life. I also understand that some people fully have wanted this and can't wait.

So to the people in this thread If you are truly comfortable with the possibility that every issue can now be decided on party narrative alone congratulations. May you, or a family member or a close friend never get screwed or wronged to the point that what affects you is just a matter of party lines.

I had no problem with Gorsich, but I also had no problem with Garland. I do have issue with the thought that our highest court can be controlled and manipulated purely on a party whim. Especially when so much of this is driven by a leaning that at it's core is turning a blind eye to someone *cough* Trump *cough* that is the antithesis of their supposed principles.

Also if it wasn't clear I have no problem with Gorsich or any other potential right leaning justice. And I would have similar concerns in a hypothetical situation where McConnell didn't fuck over Obama's extra pick or that fantasy scenario where we would all be quiet if Hillary won. Because I would have similar concerns if the extra vote was super left leaning. Probably to a lesser extent since being liberal on most social issues it's less likely to see shit done against gays, women's contraceptive choices and so forth.

Kavanaugh was already appointed to a life term court, as it stands with the questions and character issues around him at most he wouldn't be on the highest court, so he's at level 72 on his power index instead of say 85. The chances his life was going to be totally ruined are fairly slim. Trump and the Republican side could have withdrawn Kavanaugh for the optics he presents and put a different candidate forward. The balance would be the same, but the blatant party line war would likely be less visceral and reactionary. Also, Kavanaugh would still be living his almost best life for those so concerned about his well being.

I'm going to stop because even I'm definitely in full rant mode and need to break myself.

 

[dilligaf0]

I live in a state that is predominately "red". The thing is that even if you "ForceTen", or the average person votes the issue or the candidate. The bulk of the electorate is not going to be that balanced or fair. I literally watched my state vote against the "Red Side Campaign Issues" as it related to our State, but for every National issue including what gave the balance of the Supreme Court to the red side issues the state contradicted itself. So as it stood the people understood enough to know they didn't want something state wide, but they voted against it on a national level. Fucked up right?

That is because unfortunately where policy and issues on a state ballot can be easily reviewed. Those same issues at a national level are only seen in candidates. So if you vote no on every policy issue, but then choose to elect people via a straight ballot or predominately in favor of one party. You have a very good chance of contradicting yourself or your own personal belief structure. Because where you are conflicted on specific policies or are fully against something. That party leaning candidate that you voted for is going to have the same dilemma but in the eyes of self preservation and party control vote with the party they are in. Same reason that Susan Collins gave a 4 hour speech about how she was conflicted, but at the end of the day voted party line as she tends to do. Give the appearance that you are conflicted, but still vote one way 90+% of the time.

There are legitimate issues with Voting Districts, and representative demographics that for the last several years has been heavily influenced. The "Blue" side has largely ignored this and the "Red' side has attacked this in a way that precisely leads us to this very debate of should Kavanaugh have been appointed.

I mostly lean left strictly because of social issues. So yeah I'm concerned about the shift in ideology/balance of our highest court when it will weigh over the world I see and live in for the next 30+ years of my life. I also understand that some people fully have wanted this and can't wait.

So to the people in this thread If you are truly comfortable with the possibility that every issue can now be decided on party narrative alone congratulations. May you, or a family member or a close friend never get screwed or wronged to the point that what affects you is just a matter of party lines.

I had no problem with Gorsich, but I also had no problem with Garland. I do have issue with the thought that our highest court can be controlled and manipulated purely on a party whim. Especially when so much of this is driven by a leaning that at it's core is turning a blind eye to someone *cough* Trump *cough* that is the antithesis of their supposed principles.

Also if it wasn't clear I have no problem with Gorsich or any other potential right leaning justice. And I would have similar concerns in a hypothetical situation where McConnell didn't fuck over Obama's extra pick or that fantasy scenario where we would all be quiet if Hillary won. Because I would have similar concerns if the extra vote was super left leaning. Probably to a lesser extent since being liberal on most social issues it's less likely to see shit done against gays, women's contraceptive choices and so forth.

Kavanaugh was already appointed to a life term court, as it stands with the questions and character issues around him at most he wouldn't be on the highest court, so he's at level 72 on his power index instead of say 85. The chances his life was going to be totally ruined are fairly slim. Trump and the Republican side could have withdrawn Kavanaugh for the optics he presents and put a different candidate forward. The balance would be the same, but the blatant party line war would likely be less visceral and reactionary. Also, Kavanaugh would still be living his almost best life for those so concerned about his well being.

I'm going to stop because even I'm definitely in full rant mode and need to break myself.

Well said and what follows doesn't apply to you.
I've repeatedly said that I was bothered by the accusations and the lack of a thorough investigation into all the accusations, but I was bothered very much by Kavanaugh's demeanor during the hearing. Combative, political and argumentative are not good qualities in a (supposedly neutral) Supreme court Justice.
Anyone that refuses to try to understand someone else's opinion isn't worth my time. Spend your energy trying to impeach President Hillary Clinton since you act like she was elected.

 

[JoleneBrody]

Ah I get it we should believe all women, who are liberal, but none who are conservative. Now that's a terrific system.

Actually, there were 7 women who accused Franken of groping him and/or making lewd comments. I didn't check all of their political affiliations but I'm willing to bet they weren't all "Trumpettes" Nice, sexist term btw.

Franken needed to go. He made his bed. Kav needed to go too. All these fuckers gotta go!

 

[Deleted member 37064]

I live in a state that is predominately "red". The thing is that even if you "ForceTen", or the average person votes the issue or the candidate. The bulk of the electorate is not going to be that balanced or fair. I literally watched my state vote against the "Red Side Campaign Issues" as it related to our State, but for every National issue including what gave the balance of the Supreme Court to the red side issues the state contradicted itself. So as it stood the people understood enough to know they didn't want something state wide, but they voted against it on a national level. Fucked up right?

That is because unfortunately where policy and issues on a state ballot can be easily reviewed. Those same issues at a national level are only seen in candidates. So if you vote no on every policy issue, but then choose to elect people via a straight ballot or predominately in favor of one party. You have a very good chance of contradicting yourself or your own personal belief structure. Because where you are conflicted on specific policies or are fully against something. That party leaning candidate that you voted for is going to have the same dilemma but in the eyes of self preservation and party control vote with the party they are in. Same reason that Susan Collins gave a 4 hour speech about how she was conflicted, but at the end of the day voted party line as she tends to do. Give the appearance that you are conflicted, but still vote one way 90+% of the time.

There are legitimate issues with Voting Districts, and representative demographics that for the last several years has been heavily influenced. The "Blue" side has largely ignored this and the "Red' side has attacked this in a way that precisely leads us to this very debate of should Kavanaugh have been appointed.

I mostly lean left strictly because of social issues. So yeah I'm concerned about the shift in ideology/balance of our highest court when it will weigh over the world I see and live in for the next 30+ years of my life. I also understand that some people fully have wanted this and can't wait.

So to the people in this thread If you are truly comfortable with the possibility that every issue can now be decided on party narrative alone congratulations. May you, or a family member or a close friend never get screwed or wronged to the point that what affects you is just a matter of party lines.

I had no problem with Gorsich, but I also had no problem with Garland. I do have issue with the thought that our highest court can be controlled and manipulated purely on a party whim. Especially when so much of this is driven by a leaning that at it's core is turning a blind eye to someone *cough* Trump *cough* that is the antithesis of their supposed principles.

Also if it wasn't clear I have no problem with Gorsich or any other potential right leaning justice. And I would have similar concerns in a hypothetical situation where McConnell didn't fuck over Obama's extra pick or that fantasy scenario where we would all be quiet if Hillary won. Because I would have similar concerns if the extra vote was super left leaning. Probably to a lesser extent since being liberal on most social issues it's less likely to see shit done against gays, women's contraceptive choices and so forth.

Kavanaugh was already appointed to a life term court, as it stands with the questions and character issues around him at most he wouldn't be on the highest court, so he's at level 72 on his power index instead of say 85. The chances his life was going to be totally ruined are fairly slim. Trump and the Republican side could have withdrawn Kavanaugh for the optics he presents and put a different candidate forward. The balance would be the same, but the blatant party line war would likely be less visceral and reactionary. Also, Kavanaugh would still be living his almost best life for those so concerned about his well being.

I'm going to stop because even I'm definitely in full rant mode and need to break myself.

And I live in a predominately "Blue" state. The difference is that I'm much more of a centrist, and is why I have issues with extremes from both parties. I think they're both corrupt, and are self-serving. Thus, why I mentioned what I did about the finger pointing and shaming of the others. As I mentioned earlier in this thread, Keith Ellison who is a high-ranking DNC official and running for state attorney general is being accused of physical abuse from his ex-girlfriend with medical records and supposedly a tape showing it. There are others who have come forward as well. But, this is not being talked about and is largely ignored by the DNC.
You see the hypocrisy? Yes, it's a Federal judicial appointment compared to a state elected position. But, again, they are both very high ranking positions and one holds a co-chair position within the party which is accusing the other of shameful events. Now, if the parties were reversed, you and many others here would probably feel differently. Why? Because of the "Balance of power" that people are concerned about when their party doesn't have majority rule. (I'll probably get a few negative rating for that. But, IDGAF.)
If it isn't clear, I am very much a centrist. I believe in personal liberties, and rights for EVERYONE. I believe that every citizen should have the same basic rights and protections regardless of their demographics. I believe that our Gov't is supposed to be neutral, and not politically aligned. Nor should there be loyalties to businesses, organizations (including non-profits), or rich and powerful people such as celebrities, millionaires, etc. I believe that anyone should be listened to and heard equally. Not the pandering that those self-serving individuals have who sit in Gov't chairs. Why is it nearly every Senator and Representative significantly increase their wealth when they are in that position? Also, why is it that they continue to get paid after they leave? Why are they above the law?

To many here, it may appear that I lean right. In some ways, I do. But, I am far more concerned about equalities of all and why I raise concerns and flags about the faults of both parties. Neither party has our best interest at heart. They are both corrupt, and there truly is little difference between the parties once you lift the curtain and see who's pulling the strings and levers. However, far too many fail to see this, and continue with the extreme polarization they do.

 

[justjoinedtopost]

A fascinating episode. Watching the info in real time people were digging up on Ford/Kavanaugh, and the back and forth letters with Grassley...just fascinating.

Nor should there be loyalties to businesses, organizations (including non-profits), or rich and powerful people such as celebrities, millionaires, etc.

Or governments. Like RUSSIARUSSIARUSSIARUSSIARUSSIARUSSIARUSSIARUSSIARUSSIARUSSIARUSSIA. Or the EU. Or China.

meh. Que sera, sera....