Kavanaugh

Other discussions not related to the Permanent Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

User avatar
moda0306
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8151
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:05 pm
Location: Minnesota

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by moda0306 » Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:24 am

pugchief wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 7:18 am
Maddy wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 7:03 am
moda0306 wrote:
Fri Oct 05, 2018 11:48 am
She's not asking anyone to believe her wholeheartedly without evidence. She's just asking that her testimony be given as evidence to his character.

If he did what she claims, I think she has every right to come forward whenever she pleases.
Nobody's questioning her right to come forward. Nor has anyone denied her the opportunity to have her evidence considered. (Lordy, how much more attention could she have garnered?)

What you are actually contending, it seems to me, is that she had a right to be believed. Nobody has that right, no matter what's being alleged and no matter when the allegation is made.

Here, the timing of the revelation, the complete absence of corroboration, and the flat-out refuting of her testimony by multiple witnesses (including those she identified) bears strongly on her credibility and raises the unmistakable inference of an ulterior, political, motive. The suggestion that she is entitled, despite all that, to be believed (presumably because she is a woman and because the allegation resonates of "cultural oppression") is just nutty.
Exactly. Whatever happened to 'innocent until proven guilty' ?
This isn't a jury trial to throw a man in a cage for the rest of his life.

If that were the case I could understand all the flatulating melodrama.

This is a process (that has been neutered into mostly a faux show anyway) to put a man in one of the most powerful positions in the world. For life. When another person could easily be chosen.

Let's lose the f'kin melodrama.

Those of us who are concerned more with Kavanaugh's terrible position on executive privilege and the 4th Amendment have more clout on that argument than those who decided to care about it for a couple weeks in a very unique case.
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 2242
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by Xan » Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:38 am

Senator Collins addressed that point. Moda, the video is well worth watching. You can crank it up to 2x speed. Really most of the speech isn't about the allegations but about judicial philosophy. It's interesting.

Edit: here's the full transcript:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/05/us/p ... naugh.html
Some argue that because this is a lifetime appointment to our highest court, the public interest requires that doubts be resolved against the nominee. Others see the public interest as embodied in our long-established tradition of affording to those accused of misconduct a presumption of innocence. In cases in which the facts are unclear, they would argue that the question should be resolved in favor of the nominee.

Mr. President, I understand both viewpoints. This debate is complicated further by the fact that the Senate confirmation process is not a trial. But certain fundamental legal principles—about due process, the presumption of innocence, and fairness—do bear on my thinking, and I cannot abandon them.

In evaluating any given claim of misconduct, we will be ill served in the long run if we abandon the presumption of innocence and fairness, tempting though it may be. We must always remember that it is when passions are most inflamed that fairness is most in jeopardy.

The presumption of innocence is relevant to the advice and consent function when an accusation departs from a nominee’s otherwise exemplary record. I worry that departing from this presumption could lead to a lack of public faith in the judiciary and would be hugely damaging to the confirmation process moving forward.

Some of the allegations levied against Judge Kavanaugh illustrate why the presumption of innocence is so important. I am thinking in particular not of the allegations raised by Professor Ford, but of the allegation that, when he was a teenager, Judge Kavanaugh drugged multiple girls and used their weakened state to facilitate gang rape. This outlandish allegation was put forth without any credible supporting evidence and simply parroted public statements of others. That such an allegation can find its way into the Supreme Court confirmation process is a stark reminder about why the presumption of innocence is so ingrained in our American consciousness.
User avatar
pugchief
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2747
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 2:41 pm
Location: suburbs of Chicago, IL

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by pugchief » Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:41 am

moda0306 wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:24 am
pugchief wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 7:18 am
Maddy wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 7:03 am

Nobody's questioning her right to come forward. Nor has anyone denied her the opportunity to have her evidence considered. (Lordy, how much more attention could she have garnered?)

What you are actually contending, it seems to me, is that she had a right to be believed. Nobody has that right, no matter what's being alleged and no matter when the allegation is made.

Here, the timing of the revelation, the complete absence of corroboration, and the flat-out refuting of her testimony by multiple witnesses (including those she identified) bears strongly on her credibility and raises the unmistakable inference of an ulterior, political, motive. The suggestion that she is entitled, despite all that, to be believed (presumably because she is a woman and because the allegation resonates of "cultural oppression") is just nutty.
Exactly. Whatever happened to 'innocent until proven guilty' ?
This isn't a jury trial to throw a man in a cage for the rest of his life.

If that were the case I could understand all the flatulating melodrama.

This is a process (that has been neutered into mostly a faux show anyway) to put a man in one of the most powerful positions in the world. For life. When another person could easily be chosen.

Let's lose the f'kin melodrama.

Those of us who are concerned more with Kavanaugh's terrible position on executive privilege and the 4th Amendment have more clout on that argument than those who decided to care about it for a couple weeks in a very unique case.
So you're saying that since this isn't an actual jury trial, innocence until proven guilty doesn't apply?! Sorry, the job or its tenure is irrelevant. And, you think your position on that is more valid because of your concerns on the 4th amendment? Sorry, irrelevant again.

edit: While typing this, Xan posted the above quote from Sen. Collins, which I had not yet heard/read, and apparently she agrees with me.
User avatar
moda0306
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8151
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:05 pm
Location: Minnesota

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by moda0306 » Sat Oct 06, 2018 11:22 am

pugchief wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:41 am
moda0306 wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:24 am
pugchief wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 7:18 am

Exactly. Whatever happened to 'innocent until proven guilty' ?
This isn't a jury trial to throw a man in a cage for the rest of his life.

If that were the case I could understand all the flatulating melodrama.

This is a process (that has been neutered into mostly a faux show anyway) to put a man in one of the most powerful positions in the world. For life. When another person could easily be chosen.

Let's lose the f'kin melodrama.

Those of us who are concerned more with Kavanaugh's terrible position on executive privilege and the 4th Amendment have more clout on that argument than those who decided to care about it for a couple weeks in a very unique case.
So you're saying that since this isn't an actual jury trial, innocence until proven guilty doesn't apply?! Sorry, the job or its tenure is irrelevant. And, you think your position on that is more valid because of your concerns on the 4th amendment? Sorry, irrelevant again.

edit: While typing this, Xan posted the above quote from Sen. Collins, which I had not yet heard/read, and apparently she agrees with me.
Some level of evidence is probably appropriate for a Supreme Court Nomination. I wouldn't presume to know exactly what. But a few things I do know...

- Kavanaugh is terrible on the 4th Amendment.

- How the powerful treat the masses visavis the 4th amendment and executive power is millions (well, probably more) of times of more importance than how they treat one of their own (another powerful government careerist) in a job interview.

- The knuckle-dragging pro-Trump wing of "the right" is showing again what cucks to power they are... not that this is a surprise... their "anti-establishment" bonafides were pretty much nonexistent anyway. This just serves as a reminder.

This should barely be a part of the national conversation. I agree with the somewhat corny speech by Ben Sasse... This should be about drilling into the principles at stake. Those that are pretending to care about due process as it pertains to a job interview when you hear nary a peep from them on the topic otherwise unless it's their jingo-clown-fascist president being investigated are obviously just cucks to right-leaning power, not principled civil-libertarians.
User avatar
pugchief
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2747
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 2:41 pm
Location: suburbs of Chicago, IL

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by pugchief » Sat Oct 06, 2018 11:49 am

You do realize that phrases like 'knuckle dragging' that you have repeated in quite a few posts in this thread, and other phrases like it, is one of the reasons Trump is in the WH in the first place?
User avatar
moda0306
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8151
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:05 pm
Location: Minnesota

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by moda0306 » Sat Oct 06, 2018 1:15 pm

pugchief wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 11:49 am
You do realize that phrases like 'knuckle dragging' that you have repeated in quite a few posts in this thread, and other phrases like it, is one of the reasons Trump is in the WH in the first place?
That's funny you would admit to a whole section of the country being so immature as to elect such a clown because some people called them names.

Many types of people get called names.

Only one group has chosen to earn their nickname by electing a stroked-out jingo-clown to head the most powerful killing machine in the history of the world as a backlash. Not just that, but defend him at every turn, no matter what ridiculous thing he does. When feminazis elect Rosie O'Donnel or Kathy Griffin to President I'll unleash a similar barrage of insults towards them.

BTW I give derogatory names to a lot of types of people. Some of my friends are knuckle-dragging trumpists. Some are feminazis. Some are establishment-left or establishment-right power-cucks who will defend anyone with the right letter behind their names. Some (usually the kindest/best ones) don't care for politics and don't like to aggressively defend slimeballs of any sort so I don't have nasty nicknames for them. Few are bitter quasi-anarchists like myself who distrust-dislike anyone who thinks they're important/powerful, but I'm working on them. ;)

As a side-car to good logic/arguments and sound facts, I find solid ad-hominem banter to actually contribute to a half-derailed conversation... not be a detriment to it. When moral outrage is being tossed around like a football over job interview norms for a powerful and anti-freedom judge, I'll feel free to use similar moralist language towards things that are actually important... such as the voting patterns of the 25% of this country who seem to only care about the civil liberties of massively powerful conservatives.
User avatar
Mountaineer
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3756
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:54 am

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by Mountaineer » Sat Oct 06, 2018 2:12 pm

moda0306 wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 1:15 pm
pugchief wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 11:49 am
You do realize that phrases like 'knuckle dragging' that you have repeated in quite a few posts in this thread, and other phrases like it, is one of the reasons Trump is in the WH in the first place?
That's funny you would admit to a whole section of the country being so immature as to elect such a clown because some people called them names.

Many types of people get called names.

Only one group has chosen to earn their nickname by electing a stroked-out jingo-clown to head the most powerful killing machine in the history of the world as a backlash. Not just that, but defend him at every turn, no matter what ridiculous thing he does. When feminazis elect Rosie O'Donnel or Kathy Griffin to President I'll unleash a similar barrage of insults towards them.

BTW I give derogatory names to a lot of types of people. Some of my friends are knuckle-dragging trumpists. Some are feminazis. Some are establishment-left or establishment-right power-cucks who will defend anyone with the right letter behind their names. Some (usually the kindest/best ones) don't care for politics and don't like to aggressively defend slimeballs of any sort so I don't have nasty nicknames for them. Few are bitter quasi-anarchists like myself who distrust-dislike anyone who thinks they're important/powerful, but I'm working on them. ;)

As a side-car to good logic/arguments and sound facts, I find solid ad-hominem banter to actually contribute to a half-derailed conversation... not be a detriment to it. When moral outrage is being tossed around like a football over job interview norms for a powerful and anti-freedom judge, I'll feel free to use similar moralist language towards things that are actually important... such as the voting patterns of the 25% of this country who seem to only care about the civil liberties of massively powerful conservatives.
Moda you Dorkmeister ;) , YMMV, but my experience is that labeling rarely, if ever, achieves the results intended by the labeler. Usually plain polite English works better.
Rev 22:6-21
User avatar
Cortopassi
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1459
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 2:28 pm
Location: Illinois

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by Cortopassi » Sat Oct 06, 2018 2:46 pm

Voting right now....
User avatar
pugchief
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2747
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 2:41 pm
Location: suburbs of Chicago, IL

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by pugchief » Sat Oct 06, 2018 3:01 pm

moda0306 wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 1:15 pm
pugchief wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 11:49 am
You do realize that phrases like 'knuckle dragging' that you have repeated in quite a few posts in this thread, and other phrases like it, is one of the reasons Trump is in the WH in the first place?
That's funny you would admit to a whole section of the country being so immature as to elect such a clown because some people called them names.

Many types of people get called names.

Only one group has chosen to earn their nickname by electing a stroked-out jingo-clown to head the most powerful killing machine in the history of the world as a backlash. Not just that, but defend him at every turn, no matter what ridiculous thing he does. When feminazis elect Rosie O'Donnel or Kathy Griffin to President I'll unleash a similar barrage of insults towards them.

BTW I give derogatory names to a lot of types of people. Some of my friends are knuckle-dragging trumpists. Some are feminazis. Some are establishment-left or establishment-right power-cucks who will defend anyone with the right letter behind their names. Some (usually the kindest/best ones) don't care for politics and don't like to aggressively defend slimeballs of any sort so I don't have nasty nicknames for them. Few are bitter quasi-anarchists like myself who distrust-dislike anyone who thinks they're important/powerful, but I'm working on them. ;)

As a side-car to good logic/arguments and sound facts, I find solid ad-hominem banter to actually contribute to a half-derailed conversation... not be a detriment to it. When moral outrage is being tossed around like a football over job interview norms for a powerful and anti-freedom judge, I'll feel free to use similar moralist language towards things that are actually important... such as the voting patterns of the 25% of this country who seem to only care about the civil liberties of massively powerful conservatives.
I'm pretty sure is not being called deplorables that pissed off middle America, it that the Elite, particularly to the left of the aisle, actually thinks of them in this way, and that they were tired of no one caring about their plight. Diversity and globalization just don't rank real high on an out of work small town laborer's list of priorities.
User avatar
moda0306
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8151
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:05 pm
Location: Minnesota

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by moda0306 » Sat Oct 06, 2018 4:26 pm

pugchief wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 3:01 pm
moda0306 wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 1:15 pm
pugchief wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 11:49 am
You do realize that phrases like 'knuckle dragging' that you have repeated in quite a few posts in this thread, and other phrases like it, is one of the reasons Trump is in the WH in the first place?
That's funny you would admit to a whole section of the country being so immature as to elect such a clown because some people called them names.

Many types of people get called names.

Only one group has chosen to earn their nickname by electing a stroked-out jingo-clown to head the most powerful killing machine in the history of the world as a backlash. Not just that, but defend him at every turn, no matter what ridiculous thing he does. When feminazis elect Rosie O'Donnel or Kathy Griffin to President I'll unleash a similar barrage of insults towards them.

BTW I give derogatory names to a lot of types of people. Some of my friends are knuckle-dragging trumpists. Some are feminazis. Some are establishment-left or establishment-right power-cucks who will defend anyone with the right letter behind their names. Some (usually the kindest/best ones) don't care for politics and don't like to aggressively defend slimeballs of any sort so I don't have nasty nicknames for them. Few are bitter quasi-anarchists like myself who distrust-dislike anyone who thinks they're important/powerful, but I'm working on them. ;)

As a side-car to good logic/arguments and sound facts, I find solid ad-hominem banter to actually contribute to a half-derailed conversation... not be a detriment to it. When moral outrage is being tossed around like a football over job interview norms for a powerful and anti-freedom judge, I'll feel free to use similar moralist language towards things that are actually important... such as the voting patterns of the 25% of this country who seem to only care about the civil liberties of massively powerful conservatives.
I'm pretty sure is not being called deplorables that pissed off middle America, it that the Elite, particularly to the left of the aisle, actually thinks of them in this way, and that they were tired of no one caring about their plight. Diversity and globalization just don't rank real high on an out of work small town laborer's list of priorities.
Well usually names do carry some actual weight of how people actually think of others. My conservative friends who've used the n-word certainly don't have egalitarian views towards race. But like I said, only one group has decided to lash out by voting for a bombastic clown.

Diversity and globalization don't help these people. But neither do corporate tax cuts and the military industrial complex. And free healthcare, tax-credits, and other safety nets sure as f'k DO help them, yet they eschew those options in favor of a bombastic clown because they see themselves as temporarily embarrassed millionaires rather than the working-class that they (and most of us) are.

But I really don't care for the culture war. I'm from a blue family in a red-as-fk county in a blue state. I shoot guns and drive a Prius. I sit in both city and rural culture a bit and I see what many others seem not to... that there IS general anxiety about the economy, because our version of capitalism is a flawed system leaving folks feel stressed as hell even when they're successful... this anxiety and alienation leads (yes) to some actual economic analysis but more-so (IMO) to them settling into their cultural resentments. It's city vs rural. Nativist vs Cosmopolitan. If we really want to get reunited around economic grounds, we'd leave that framework behind, AND align on our true battle-lines that matter of Labor Vs. Capital.

You don't even have to be for socialist or even liberal policies to see that THIS is nature of the economic dilemma we have, and when every college grad with some stock in a Roth IRA and a redneck with a towing business think they're owners of the means of production in any meaningful sense, then get in a pissing match over gun policy or religion or immigration, we're never going to get anywhere. We'll keep rearranging the deck-chairs on the titanic while the REAL owners of the world rake in more and more wealth while the world turns into ever-more a warming pile of garbage and angry cultural resentments.

Our world economy and domestic economy have both grown SO much... exponential growth into perpetuity is probably impossible on a planet with limited resources. Even if tax cuts DID work for these saps, it would be because the economy actually has to grow in size for these rural, hard-working-but-underpaid folks to have anything close to a decent life. That's unsustainable, and even if it weren't, it still says a TON more about the nature of labor interests vs capital interests than it does about the "success" of tax cuts and regulation cuts.
User avatar
Kriegsspiel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1695
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by Kriegsspiel » Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:04 pm

No matter what happens, I think we can all come together as Americans and agree that everything is shitty and people who don't agree with my side are dumbasses.
User avatar
Maddy
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 849
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2015 8:43 am

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by Maddy » Sun Oct 07, 2018 6:58 am

moda0306 wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 4:26 pm

Diversity and globalization don't help these people. But neither do corporate tax cuts and the military industrial complex. And free healthcare, tax-credits, and other safety nets sure as f'k DO help them, yet they eschew those options in favor of a bombastic clown because they see themselves as temporarily embarrassed millionaires rather than the working-class that they (and most of us) are.

But I really don't care for the culture war. I'm from a blue family in a red-as-fk county in a blue state. I shoot guns and drive a Prius. I sit in both city and rural culture a bit and I see what many others seem not to... that there IS general anxiety about the economy, because our version of capitalism is a flawed system leaving folks feel stressed as hell even when they're successful... this anxiety and alienation leads (yes) to some actual economic analysis but more-so (IMO) to them settling into their cultural resentments. It's city vs rural. Nativist vs Cosmopolitan. If we really want to get reunited around economic grounds, we'd leave that framework behind, AND align on our true battle-lines that matter of Labor Vs. Capital.

You don't even have to be for socialist or even liberal policies to see that THIS is nature of the economic dilemma we have, and when every college grad with some stock in a Roth IRA and a redneck with a towing business think they're owners of the means of production in any meaningful sense, then get in a pissing match over gun policy or religion or immigration, we're never going to get anywhere. We'll keep rearranging the deck-chairs on the titanic while the REAL owners of the world rake in more and more wealth while the world turns into ever-more a warming pile of garbage and angry cultural resentments.

Our world economy and domestic economy have both grown SO much... exponential growth into perpetuity is probably impossible on a planet with limited resources. Even if tax cuts DID work for these saps, it would be because the economy actually has to grow in size for these rural, hard-working-but-underpaid folks to have anything close to a decent life. That's unsustainable, and even if it weren't, it still says a TON more about the nature of labor interests vs capital interests than it does about the "success" of tax cuts and regulation cuts.
I doubt the "redneck with a towing business" gives much thought to whether or not he's a meaningful owner of the means of production. His very real accomplishments in life are not a pitiful joke, as they apparently are to you. His choice of job and lifestyle may well represent considered decisions about how best to spend his 90-some years on this planet. His rejection of free health care and social safety nets just might reflect a principled set of values, and not ignorance or stupidity. In fact, I'll give you ten-to-one odds he's a lot happier with his life than you are with yours. Just sayin' (as one of those fuzzy-headed women who are too oppressed to understand how bad they have it).
Post Reply