WWTBAM Bored

What's wrong with it? It's called fucking history and how YOU apply the same rigorous standards that YOU so conveniently ignore for those with whom you agree. Grow the fuck up.

Plus, the Kavanaugh thread is rife with whataboutism. Sauce, whatabout those who have been groped, etc. Has nothing to do with THIS case.

The fundamental logical flaw with whataboutism is that calling someone a hypocrite doesn't impact their current point at all. The usual rhetorical problem with whataboutism is that far too often, the past situation is not in fact comparable, and differs in material particulars, from the present situation. So it's really an effort to change the subject without responding to the present situation.

To use the most recent example, in my view the evidence with respect to Rep. Ellison is much less persuasive. The claim is that the victim's computer has a video recording the alleged abuse. The victim (Rep. Ellison's former girlfriend), however, says that she will not release the video, which (to my mind, at least) calls into serious question whether it exists. She also claimed physical abuse at a medical appointment (to treat anemia), but the physician's notes documented a lack of physical injuries requiring treatment. As far as I know, no one else has come forward alleging that Rep. Ellison engaged in similar behavior. And most importantly, Rep. Ellison isn't interviewing for a lifetime appointment.

The lack of additional complaining witnesses are the only way in which I see the two situations as similar. But none of this really matters. Even if I were being a hypocrite about Rep. Ellison (and I don't think I am because the evidence is quite different), that doesn't mean diddlysquat with respect to Judge Kavanaugh's appointment. --Bob

Beebs52 wrote:Plus, the Kavanaugh thread is rife with whataboutism. Sauce, whatabout those who have been groped, etc. Has nothing to do with THIS case.

Most of that does have to do with this case. It's an effort to illustrate that Dr. Blasey Ford's failure to go public earlier doesn't undercut her credibility (in this case) because it's common for victims in similar circumstances to remain silent for long periods of time. --Bob

Lifetime appointment trumps anything else? Plus, you're wrong in your evaluation. You're a GUY. You are automatically wrong. Hmmm

Plus, your logical flaw is bullshit. Your definition is pieeee in the sky.

in my view the evidence with respect to Rep. Ellison is much less persuasive

Really?

What evidence do you know of that is persuasive in the Dr. Ford allegation??

Oh, the notes of the Psychologist!
The notes indicated she said there were 4 people in the room. No names of anyone (unless I missed that). Now she says it was Judge and Kavanaugh.

And a friend that says she remembers some gossip.

Other than that, what other evidence is there that this event ever even took place?

And I still contend that even if it did take place as described, if everyone was defined by what they did in high school, we'd all be in a heap load of trouble.

Oh, and BTW:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/18/politics ... index.html

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

in my view the evidence with respect to Rep. Ellison is much less persuasive

Really?

What evidence do you know of that is persuasive in the Dr. Ford allegation??

Oh, the notes of the Psychologist!
The notes indicated she said there were 4 people in the room. No names of anyone (unless I missed that). Now she says it was Judge and Kavanaugh.

And a friend that says she remembers some gossip.

Other than that, what other evidence is there that this event ever even took place?

And I still contend that even if it did take place as described, if everyone was defined by what they did in high school, we'd all be in a heap load of trouble.

Oh, and BTW:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/18/politics ... index.html

Great! Another witness who should be examined under oath.

And if you're willing to give someone a pass on attempted forcible rape just because he was only 17 at the time, then we're never going to agree. But I will point out that he has now denied it, so if it is proven, he's a liar now, not when he was 17. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

in my view the evidence with respect to Rep. Ellison is much less persuasive

Really?

What evidence do you know of that is persuasive in the Dr. Ford allegation??

Oh, the notes of the Psychologist!
The notes indicated she said there were 4 people in the room. No names of anyone (unless I missed that). Now she says it was Judge and Kavanaugh.

And a friend that says she remembers some gossip.


Other than that, what other evidence is there that this event ever even took place?

And I still contend that even if it did take place as described, if everyone was defined by what they did in high school, we'd all be in a heap load of trouble.

Oh, and BTW:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/18/politics ... index.html

Great! Another witness who should be examined under oath.

And if you're willing to give someone a pass on attempted forcible rape just because he was only 17 at the time, then we're never going to agree. But I will point out that he has now denied it, so if it is proven, he's a liar now, not when he was 17. --Bob

For a lawyer you're quite amenable to judging without evidence and jury or judge.

Beebs52 wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Really?

What evidence do you know of that is persuasive in the Dr. Ford allegation??

Oh, the notes of the Psychologist!
The notes indicated she said there were 4 people in the room. No names of anyone (unless I missed that). Now she says it was Judge and Kavanaugh.

And a friend that says she remembers some gossip.


Other than that, what other evidence is there that this event ever even took place?

And I still contend that even if it did take place as described, if everyone was defined by what they did in high school, we'd all be in a heap load of trouble.

Oh, and BTW:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/18/politics ... index.html

Great! Another witness who should be examined under oath.

And if you're willing to give someone a pass on attempted forcible rape just because he was only 17 at the time, then we're never going to agree. But I will point out that he has now denied it, so if it is proven, he's a liar now, not when he was 17. --Bob

For a lawyer you're quite amenable to judging without evidence and jury or judge.

I haven't judged anything. Flock keeps saying that he's okay with Kavanaugh's nomination "even if [the incident] did take place as described." If the incident "did take place as described," it was attempted forcible rape, and I'm not okay with confirming a nominee who attempted forcible rape, even at age 17. I think most people wouldn't be. I think it's outrageous that flock would be. I think it's outrageous that anyone would be. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

Beebs52 wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:Great! Another witness who should be examined under oath.

And if you're willing to give someone a pass on attempted forcible rape just because he was only 17 at the time, then we're never going to agree. But I will point out that he has now denied it, so if it is proven, he's a liar now, not when he was 17. --Bob

For a lawyer you're quite amenable to judging without evidence and jury or judge.

I haven't judged anything. Flock keeps saying that he's okay with Kavanaugh's nomination "even if [the incident] did take place as described." If the incident "did take place as described," it was attempted forcible rape, and I'm not okay with confirming a nominee who attempted forcible rape, even at age 17. I think most people wouldn't be. I think it's outrageous that flock would be. I think it's outrageous that anyone would be. --Bob

There has not been any forcible rape proven. There won't be either and you know it.

Beebs52 wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:

Beebs52 wrote:
For a lawyer you're quite amenable to judging without evidence and jury or judge.

I haven't judged anything. Flock keeps saying that he's okay with Kavanaugh's nomination "even if [the incident] did take place as described." If the incident "did take place as described," it was attempted forcible rape, and I'm not okay with confirming a nominee who attempted forcible rape, even at age 17. I think most people wouldn't be. I think it's outrageous that flock would be. I think it's outrageous that anyone would be. --Bob

There has not been any forcible rape proven. There won't be either and you know it.

Attempted. And I know no such thing. Neither do you. I haven't prejudged the evidence (as you have) because I haven't yet heard it. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote: And if you're willing to give someone a pass on attempted forcible rape just because he was only 17 at the time, then we're never going to agree.

The prisons are full of people who weren't given a pass on violent crimes when they were only 17 at the time. Of course, most of them weren't wealthy white boys at fancy prep schools.

“If the FBI were to find strong evidence implicating Kavanaugh in a crime, Democrats would oppose him. If there were a muddled mix of accusations and memories, Democrats would oppose him. If Kavanaugh were completely vindicated, Democrats would oppose him.

silverscreenselect wrote:

Bob78164 wrote: And if you're willing to give someone a pass on attempted forcible rape just because he was only 17 at the time, then we're never going to agree.

The prisons are full of people who weren't given a pass on violent crimes when they were only 17 at the time. Of course, most of them weren't wealthy white boys at fancy prep schools.

Let's throw all wealthy white boys who go to fancy prep schools in jail!

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:

Bob78164 wrote: And if you're willing to give someone a pass on attempted forcible rape just because he was only 17 at the time, then we're never going to agree.

The prisons are full of people who weren't given a pass on violent crimes when they were only 17 at the time. Of course, most of them weren't wealthy white boys at fancy prep schools.

Let's throw all wealthy white boys who go to fancy prep schools in jail!

Do you really believe that wealthy white boys don't get a better break from the justice system than minorities do? Or do you think that's just a coincidence?

silverscreenselect wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:
The prisons are full of people who weren't given a pass on violent crimes when they were only 17 at the time. Of course, most of them weren't wealthy white boys at fancy prep schools.

Let's throw all wealthy white boys who go to fancy prep schools in jail!

Do you really believe that wealthy white boys don't get a better break from the justice system than minorities do? Or do you think that's just a coincidence?

Let's throw everyone who works in the justice system in jail!

What about wealthy white girls? Should they all go to jail too?