Godstud wrote:@blackjack21 I forgot that you're just totally ignorant about most things, since you question Canadians ability to know what's going on in American politics when we're inundated with American news and TV on a daily basis. American education is sub-par, and not Canadian education. We don't have a Betsy DeVos ruining our system, because we have people who care about education.
The problem is not Betsy DeVos. It is people like Senator Gillibrand calling for an FBI investigation. What would they investigate? It is not a federal offense. Ford could make it a federal offense by claiming that Kavanaugh raped her in a post office or a federal prison, or in a federally administered maritime area. So far, she has not. Yet, Stormsmith asserts, with absolutely no cited authority whatsoever, that it is a federal offense. I cited all the areas of Title 18 of the United States code that deal with sex crimes. That demonstrates that you Canadians are clearly either misinformed or poorly educated, because you make assertions about the law in other countries and cannot cite the law. Yet, it can be cited for you and demonstrate that your are emphatically wrong.
Drlee wrote:What was the state of the country 30 years ago? Were we as enlightened then about appropriate behaviors?
The term "date rape" for example, was not even well known until about 1990. This was not discussed much. That is not to say that forcing yourself on a drunk woman was ever right. It is to say that there was a time when men really did not think about it much. Horrible? Sure. At the same time we used to jail homosexuals. Times change.
Young girls were encouraged to be just like the guys. So they went to the parties and drank copious amounts of alcohol too. These are the sorts of jeans women wore back in the late 1970s and early 1980s.
This isn't about enlightenment. Today's zeitgeist isn't enlightenment. It's a product of women finding that what they were encouraged to do has not made them happy people. Feminism is a path to misery for most women, because women are not men. They cannot find happiness acting like men, or pretending that they react the same way to things as men.
Drlee wrote:Do we believe in the laws of evidence? Do we actually believe that a person is innocent until proven guilty? We used to. And this belief shielded a lot of bad behavior. Choose your poison.
We are literally being asked to consider whether someone is suitable to sit on the Supreme Court on the basis of how he is alleged to have behaved at a high school party while 17 years old. What is alleged now wouldn't have been prosecuted in 1982. It probably wouldn't involve calling the police.
Drlee wrote:What does disturb me is the Republican Party's obvious attempt to cover it up.
The Democrats had this letter for months, and went straight through the hearings and never so much as asked a single question. How do you construe that to mean the Republican party is trying to cover it up? Ford gave an interview to the Washington Post on the grounds that it not be published, while ostensibly telling Anna Eshoo that she wanted her comments to remain confidential. Nobody who wants to remain anonymous goes to the Washington Post. She's a college professor, not some ding bat bar floozy. We have to assume that she knows exactly what she's doing, because she's purporting to be among the best and brightest of women in the United States. We have to assume the same of Anna Eshoo and Dianne Feinstein.
Drlee wrote:Their attempt to make it impossible for the woman to testify.
The Democrats decided not to bring the story up until after the hearings as a deliberate attempt at delaying the vote. Ford has been invited to testify. It is she who is trying to lay all sorts of conditions, such as requesting the FBI investigate a non-federal crime that is about 30 years passed the statute of limitations. By what authority would they do this? She wants Kavanaugh to testify first. In what sort of criminal accusation proceeding in Western Civilization over the last 1000 years has a defendant been required to defend allegations without hearing them first? All the instances that come to mind are ecclesiastical courts, star chambers, dictatorships and communist party shit. Do you have any reputable examples within the last 1000 years of Western justice where such a procedural irregularity was allowed? Ford is demanding that Kavanaugh not be present in the room when she makes her statements. The constitution of the United States indicates clearly that a defendant has the right to confront their accuser. Exactly what part of Ford's demands do you think are fair?
Drlee wrote:Their denying release of documents that may show this guy lying to congress.
They want access to Bush administration emails that Kavanaugh did not author, but did receive. It's privileged executive department information and is not germane to Kavanaugh's judicial reasoning. What other documents could you possibly be talking about?
Drlee wrote: I can see absolutely no reason to rush on this nomination.
There is no rush. We've been hearing about this since July. The Democrats just want to delay it until after the mid-terms with the vague hope that if they can retake the Senate, they can block his confirmation. The Supreme Court convenes in October. There's nothing unreasonable about wanting to complete the process. The Democrats indicated early on that they would do anything in their power to block the confirmation proceedings. This is all they have left.
Drlee wrote:They held up (in an act of political chicanery that is disgusting IMO) an Obama nominee for nearly a year so they could subvert the intention of the constitution but now they have to move in a few days?
What they did is no different from what previous Congresses did to other presidents late in their last term in office. President Trump is in the second year of his first term.
Drlee wrote:Pure political fear on their part that after the election they will have lost their majority. No excuse.
The Republican party is in the process of purging lily livered losers like Jeff Flake and Bob Corker. So they have reasons to be apprehensive. However, they have the majority now, and there is no question about Kavanaugh's judicial abilities.
"We have put together the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics."
-- Joe Biden