Re: We are all Slave now.
 

And the 1904 World's Fair was in St. Louis, but I was talking about the more recent decision by Republican Senators to vote to confirm him *after* it became clear that he was a liar with an injudicious temperament and a history of treating women poorly. I've only said this about three times. If you don't have a response, you don't have to respond.

If Republican Senators -- not the Senate, but Republican Senators -- try to distract you by saying something dumb, you are under no "obligation," to use your word, to go along with it.

This is such horseshit. You said, "it's not a crime to be a douchebag." To which I said, the issue is not whether Kavanaugh committed a crime, but whether he should be on the Court. To which your response is, no, the real issue is how the Democratic Senators used their five-minutes to question him? Jesus Christ on a shingle.

The use of the passive tense was all your own.

At the idea that the media is a permanent feedback loop with the Democratic Party, after more than two years in which Trump has utterly dominated coverage, to the point that media just runs his appearances live -- something that, you might not have noticed, doesn't happen for members of the Democratic Party -- that has to rank among the blithest, most ignorant things you have said here in a long time. Congratulations -- it's a very high bar, but you hit it!

Yes, it was absolutely the Democratic Party which wanted to take the focus off of the narrow questions of whether Kavanaugh tried to rape Dr. Blasey Ford and lied about it repeatedly and whether that should have disqualified him from the Court. That makes total and complete sense. The media wouldn't have reported on other issues *at all* but were powerless to resist Chuck Schumer's directives. Brilliant.

Grasping is a fair choice of words.

Yes, respecting Dr. Blasey Ford's wishes not to have her life ruined.

"That's how these things work." So worldly and ignorant all at once. Someone connected with Senate Democrats learned about it via Feinstein and leaked it, and someone told you is was Schumer. Whatever.

Suppose that you're right. So what? It's a pointless bit of power worship, calling Schumer out for misplaying a hand that he *never* could have won. Because at the end of the day, Susan Collins and Jeff Flake and every other Republican Senator besides Lisa Murkowski heard a credible witness credibly explain that Kavanaugh tried to rape her, heard Kavanaugh lie about it indignantly, and decided that were OK with that. That was their choice -- not Schumer's and not Harry Reid's. Democrats did not have the votes to stop the Republicans from doing something that they wanted to do, and in this case they wanted to put a lying jackass with a history of sexual abuse on the Supreme Court.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

In other words, your notional commitment to laugh at Republicans' cheap appeals to emotionalism is illusory. Got it.

In this case, Kavanaugh was clearly lying before Dr. Blasey Ford came forward. So by your principles (and I use that term loosely), Democrats were licensed to engage in whatever effective form of reply was necessary, without limitation of any kind. By your reasoning, the "carnival" was completely justified.

If it isn't obvious, I disagree. I don't think anyone (Democratic, Republican or Libertarian) should be confirmed to the Supreme Court if they lie or otherwise display the sort of injudicious behavior that Kavanaugh did. I'm sorry that you disagree.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

Nikki Haley did a better job of getting out of the Trump Administration with an intact reputation than just about anyone else.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

What about the Democratic Senators?

“Not only do women like Dr. Ford, who bravely comes forward, need to be heard, but they need to be believed... I just want to say to the men in this country: Just shut up and step up. Do the right thing for a change.” - Senator Hirono

Look, Graham takes the cake for preposterous outbursts. But this right here? this was downright dangerous. This is a senator saying, "You must believe this accusation. If you do not, you are 'not doing the right thing.'"

"Shut up and don't be a skeptic" isn't a directive of any smart person, anywhere, ever. It's something you'll typically only find in megachurches.

Correction: A permanent fawning feedback loop.

Interesting word choice here.

I heard the allegations and did not hear that this proven to be an attempted rape. I know I'm not supposed to ever cite Maher, Harris, or even Larry Charles, a friend of both, because they're heretics, but they dealt with this issue on Harris's podcast last week. Maher and Charles went out on the third rail and noted there is no proof it was an attempted rape. There was testimony it was a sexual assault. And yet, here you are, skipping over that and asserting that which can never be proven. And why would you do that? Why would you assert an attempted rape where we already had a statement confirming a sexual assault? Why would you do that when you know we can never know what would have happened had the incident persisted. That would assert a charge that can't be proven and would be precluded as more prejudicial than probative.

It seems a lot of people in this debate, on both sides, have been doing that a lot. Maybe there's a flu going around that's causing people to play fast and loose with synonyms. Maybe this is what caused me to loosely use "censorship" a few weeks back. Thankfully, you did not have this flu then, and took it upon yourself to correct me.

For the tenth time, I did not hear that Schumer leaked it. I heard that it was leaked to him, and he orchestrated the timing of Feinstein's further release of it. I heard he wanted to hold it to buy time to try to push a vote off until after the election.

You need to see a doctor about that flu.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

Correct. If he was lying, they're entitled to meet the tactic. And he's then licensed to rebut their tactics with whatever means are necessary.

If one side refuses to use artifice, the other may not. This rarely occurs in today's partisan atmosphere.

I don't think a liar should be on the Court either. But that's a different question from whether I think a person in Kavaanuagh's shoes is licensed to lie. He is. But when he does so, if he succeeds, he takes the bench with an asterisk next to his name in my book.

I think he's a damaged figure, a justice in name only.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

So far - https://www.businessinsider.com/nikk...rce=reddit.com

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

You'll not be surprised that I think you're interpreting that ridiculously.

Given the scant investigation, I don't know how you'd expect to be able to say. I certainly didn't hear anything to make me conclude it wasn't attempted rape.

There's a credible allegation. The evidence on the other side is a guy who lied repeatedly in his testimony to the committee, this time and before. In those circumstances, what do you do?

I go with the person who isn't an established liar.

Because the testimony was that it was an attempted rape.

But regardless, why is this a distinction you think matters?

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

1. No. The testimony I heard would only support a charge of sexual assault.

2. Why do criminal codes think the distinction matters?

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

Well, actually, real Maryland lawyers apparently think that Ford’s sworn testimony could be pursued as attempted rape.*

But I’m sure that Bill Maher knows better.

*Which was just a misdemeanor in 1982, believe it or not.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

Intent. Prove intent to rape based on those facts. Seeing him in worst light, on available facts, I can’t prove anything beyond intent to pull off a swimsuit.

The only person who knows if this was an attempted rape is Kavanaugh.

I can say all day long that he not only attempted, but succeeded in committing a sexual assault (as well as a general battery). I can’t say he attempted rape. That I just don’t know. And none of the rest of us can know.

So when you say it, you’re offering an opinion. Which you can do. And when you do, someone might remind you it’s an opinion and not a proven fact.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

What about them? We were talking about something dumb that Republican Senators said.

Yes. The media has spent the last two years fawning over Democrats. That's exactly it.

Of course, the question is not whether it was "proven." The question is whether he should be on the Supreme Court. If you believe her story, then it is almost impossible to believe that he wasn't lying. Republicans like Susan Collins say they believe her when she says she was raped, but it wasn't him. That's not even remotely plausible.

And, look, if you are parsing the difference between sexual assault and attempted rape, whatever. She said she felt he was trying to rape her. So I said, attempted rape. He is not ever going to be charged with a crime, so the business of parsing the elements of different crimes is just another way of pretending that this is about proving a crime instead of evaluating his fitness to serve on the Court.

Feinstein didn't release it. She abided by Dr. Blasey Ford's request that she not do that. Someone else -- clearly, a Senator or staffer on the Democratic side -- leaked it. Why you think Schumer orchestrated anything is beyond me.

I don't understand what you mean here, unless you are simply trying to signal disagreement without actually saying anything.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

Well, some lawyers here "think so" too. So what? The problem from the start is there was/is no clear standard of what makes one unfit to be a Judge. Say he did do it, that doesn't mean he can't be a judge, does it? Objectively, not based upon how you or I feel, but is there some rule? Nope.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

You realize you’re saying you may use words with very specific meanings loosely here, but when others do, regarding far less grievous charges, as I did in accusing Klein of censorship, you may force strict adherence to the narrowest meaning. Just a little double standard at work here?

And Ford did not say she was raped. Swetnick said that, and no senator commented on her allegations.

I’m saying you should eat your own cooking and observe discipline in throwing around words with very discrete meanings.

It gets back to my problem with the term “rape culture.” The Left and Right seem to think it’s okay to fudge by overstatement here and there, and it’s why no one trusts the media anymore.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

Dude. You’re sounding an awful lot like a hair-splitting pettifogger here. If some prospective member of The Podunkville Country and Lawn Club just misses me with a swing of his Big Bertha at the 19th Hole Men’s Grille, I think the club president might consider it to be attempted assault - and the membership committee can reasonably call it “attempted assault” - even though only God knows if the duffer intended to brain me or was just roughhousing.

You know I love you like that guy who has great booze but who makes you listen to his unreleased collection of unreleased jam band drum solos, but come on.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

I was simply responding to Sebby’s quibble with the term “attempted rape.” I have my own opinions on what makes one unfit to be a justice on the Supreme Court, but those reasonable and carefully considered opinions are Not Relevant. The only standards that matter are determined by 51 votes to confirm.