[Big Steve-3]

Now we have a significant portion of the population who see now and will always see his decisions in the light of these allegations and the overtly partisan way in which his appointment was handled.

And a significant portion of the population will consider how lucky the Court is to have Kavanaugh, despite the disgusting treatment and completely baseless accusations thrown at him by the hateful left during his confirmation.

[Big Steve-3]

Same thing. He has no business on the court. Never did.,

Why not?

[Pants-of-dog]

Yes, I am sure that a large percentage of the population are perfectly fine with having an alleged rapist and alcoholic on the SCOTUS.

[Big Steve-3]

Yes, I am sure that a large percentage of the population are perfectly fine with having an alleged rapist and alcoholic on the SCOTUS.

Nothing was presented to support those allegations.

Nothing.

[Pants-of-dog]

....except the testimony of his accusers.

[Big Steve-3]

....except the testimony of his accusers.

Those were the accusations.

Nothing supported those claims.

Nothing.

Remember, there was also testimony, in the form of statements from the accuser's "witnesses". You remember them, right? The people who essentially said they didn't know Ford was talking about?

Ford couldn't remember the date or location of the alleged attack. She couldn’t remember how she got to the house party where she says she was assaulted. She couldn't remember how she got home. All four witnesses to the party named by Ford have denied any recollection of what she describes.

It's foolish to believe Ford and her fantastic, if not completely untrue, account of what happened.

[Pants-of-dog]

Those were the accusations.

Nothing supported those claims.

Nothing.

Remember, there was also testimony, in the form of statements from the accuser's "witnesses". You remember them, right? The people who essentially said they didn't know Ford was talking about?

Ford couldn't remember the date or location of the alleged attack. She couldn’t remember how she got to the house party where she says she was assaulted. She couldn't remember how she got home. All four witnesses to the party named by Ford have denied any recollection of what she describes.

It's foolish to believe Ford and her fantastic, if not completely untrue, account of what happened.

Yeah, we already discussed all this.

Please reread my previous replies to you about this.

[Big Steve-3]

Yeah, we already discussed all this.

Please reread my previous replies to you about this.

I know. You believe her because she's a woman.

You have no logical reason for believing her, though.

[Pants-of-dog]

I know. You believe her because she's a woman.

You have no logical reason for believing her, though.

That is not what I said.

And I explained why it makes sense to believe her.

The number of false rape claims is miniscule compared to the number of rapes that never get investigated.

[Big Steve-3]

That is not what I said.

And I explained why it makes sense to believe her.

The number of false rape claims is miniscule compared to the number of rapes that never get investigated.

That doesn't matter.

If she's going to accuse someone of raping her, she needs to be able to support he allegations. Without that, it's stupid to believe what she says.

[colliric]

You believe her because she's a woman.

Sometimes I wonder if @Pants-of-Dog is just plain Misandric.

No way he/she would believe the man if this situation was reversed. No way at all.

He/she'd be supporting the female judge all the way.

[Big Steve-3]

Sometimes I wonder if @Pants-of-Dog is just plain Misandric.

Certainly fits the definition.

[Pants-of-dog]

That doesn't matter.

Since you are accusing her of making a false rape claim, then it is relevant.

If she's going to accuse someone of raping her, she needs to be able to support he allegations. Without that, it's stupid to believe what she says.

The same can be said for your allegations that she is making a false claim.

Sometimes I wonder if @Pants-of-Dog is just plain Misandric.

No way he/she would believe the man if this situation was reversed. No way at all.

He/she'd be supporting the female judge all the way.

You seem to spend a weird amount of time thinking about me.

Do you have anything to say about the actual topic?

[Big Steve-3]

Since you are accusing her of making a false rape claim, then it is relevant.

The same can be said for your allegations that she is making a false claim.

Hey, if her allegations are true, let's see some evidence. Let's see some actual proof.

Shit, I'd even be willing to settle for witnesses who actually knew what the fuck she was talking about!

LOL!

[Pants-of-dog]

Do you have any evidence that she is lying?

Yes or no?

[Drlee]

Thanks to Indy we have proof of my assertion. He has simply doubled down on it.

He drank the cool aid. He is spouting Rush Limbaugh talking points one after the other. He simply does not understand (or cannot) that there were any number of fine conservative judges who would have eagerly filled Kavanaugh's place.

This was not a contest between the "left"* and the "right". There was never any doubt that Trump was going to appoint a conservative judge and that a conservative judge would be confirmed. None at all. The only question was which judge. But for purely political reasons (wanting to make the democrats look weak and appealing to the misogynist wing of the Trump coalition they forced Kavanaugh on the American people.

This is not about his judicial position. With one exception I agree with his votes this session on the court. I would value him as a friend. I don't think he liked at all being used by both sides. This is a brilliant man. He knew what the republicans were doing and I suspect it left a nasty taste in his mouth. In other words, I think he is an honorable man. And undoubtedly a perspicacious one.

But what Indy and so many do not understand is that there was a good third option. That option was to find a Supreme Court justice who does not carry this baggage. Likening a confirmation hearing to a trial is wrongheaded. That is not the point at all. It is a job application to spend a lifetime representing the interests of all Americans with regard to the legal system; specifically the interpretation of the constitution. And this time the process failed a great many Americans.

So while I am fine with his view of the law, his impeccable legal chops and no doubt perfectly acceptable personal standards these days, he, like Thomas, was needlessly controversial. Imagine the other fine conservative judges who could have breezed through without this divisive nonsense. And that is what senate confirmation is all about.

[QatzelOk]

Yeah, we already discussed all this.

Please reread my previous replies to you about this.

Does anyone actually GO BACK and read what has previously been written and argued when someone asks them to?

Or does the fact that your previous 'replies' haven't changed your interlocator's narrative at all meant that either
A) your replies were weak and meaningless
or B) your interlocator is unresponsive to reason

Personally, I find it a sign of laziness that you ask people to "re-read" instead of being more pro-active yourself by "re-writing" what you have previously said but in another way using different structures... that might reach your interlocator more effectively and change their narrative.

[colliric]

I'm going to watch this, to see who he named.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/uncategorized/ ... /11124463/

I bet he names:

Spoiler: show

Director Joel Schumacher...

https://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry ... ri18n=true

Dude's a freak. Had Jimmy Savile vibes for years. No Spielberg, but powerful enough to cause trouble, so it's understandable Corey's had to be "careful" about it.

[Rich]

Its frankly amazing the left bringing up these totally unsubstantiated claims from 30 years ago, while Joe Biden's creepy behaviour has been done in the full glare of the cameras. And this is the same Joe Biden that went round the colleges lecturing young men on respecting women's boundaries. This is the same man that has supported campus Kangaroo courts. I say supported, because I can't be bothered to keep up with what Biden is saying this week that was the opposite of last week.

[QatzelOk]

Its frankly amazing the left bringing up these totally unsubstantiated claims from 30 years ago, while Joe Biden's creepy behaviour has been done in the full glare of the cameras. And this is the same Joe Biden that went round the colleges lecturing young men on respecting women's boundaries. This is the same man that has supported campus Kangaroo courts. I say supported, because I can't be bothered to keep up with what Biden is saying this week that was the opposite of last week.

Sadly for Biden, it turns out that it is women who are spreading the coronavirus. If men want to be totally safe, they just have to stick to man-on-man encounters, and only deal with women through the safe distance of a drive-thru window at Wendy's.

Power and money reclaimed.