Page 7 of 9

Re: Kavanaugh

Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2018 10:03 am
by moda0306
Kriegsspiel wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 7:06 pm
https://dailycaller.com/2018/10/12/prot ... apologize/

On one hand:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

And on the other:
If you want a vision of the future, imagine feminist pussyhatters shrieking in your face- forever.
That, and Trumpist MAGA-hatters complaining about powerless shrieking libs, brown people and "thu librul Mediuh" while the country is robbed out from under them by the uber-wealthy.

And the other 60% of the population that's level-headed, chained to a sinking ship.

Re: Kavanaugh

Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2018 11:10 am
by jacksonM
Kbg wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 2:59 pm
jacksonM wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 1:53 pm
Kbg wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 12:38 pm
I spent most of my professional life in the military, and personally I am pretty positive on the younger generation. I've spent a lot of time with the younger crowd in that environment and a church environment. They are more team and group oriented than the baby boomers and to me hearken back to a more community oriented perspective that existed in generations previous to the boomers. What I think we are seeing right now is the last narcissistic thrashing of the outgoing boomer generation (left and right) since they have taken over all the major levers of power from the WW 2 generation. The boomers have always been very "it's all about me." I think it will be good in may ways when they leave the scene. (And I'm right on the tail end of the boomers.)

Whether you like FDRs all we have to fear is fear itself or Reagan's it's morning in America again, being positive has always been a winning political approach in the US. The first party to get out of attack mode and back to laying out a positive vision for America is going to do very well I think. Most everyone I know is really getting sick of this stuff.
Well, I'm on the front-end of the baby boomer generation (1949) so thanks for the "positive vision" you are putting forth.

I know this will sound narcissistic but I plan on disappointing you by living to be 100.

And for the record, as a late baby boomer you must have missed the hippie movement with its emphasis on communal living.
J.M.,

I'm one too and I hope you do live to 100. But I don't take back a single word of what I wrote. Hippie was full on when I was in elementary school. I think there were some great communal efforts that were attempted, but ultimately a self-oriented focus on free love and drugs that went along with a lot of the hippie movement ended up being self-defeating in the end. Community extends way beyond a small farm in a backwoods somewhere and ultimately plays out at a societal level. One of my favorite statistics illustrating my point...millennials have half the crime rate as baby boomers did for equivalent age groups. Boomers also have the largest divorce rate of any US generation. They also have abysmally low retirement and regular savings rates comparatively. The characterization of boomers being one if not the most selfish generation ever is no news flash on my part.
I'm still raising a 22 year old millenial. She was adopted so she she's not infected with my baby boomer genes. On one hand I could commend her for the minimalist lifestyle she is leading. She doesn't drive a car but walks to work every day to her part time job that provides her with all the money she needs or wants. She also has a strong sense of community and carries on a rich social life but it's almost 100 percent online from the comfort of her bedroom.

On the other hand I wonder if she is ever going to be able to leave home and take care of herself.

Update: 25 things we did as kids that would get someone arrested today. I did all 3 of them. https://www.theorganicprepper.com/the-l ... ted-today/

Re: Kavanaugh

Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2018 2:03 pm
by Maddy
jacksonM wrote:
Sat Oct 13, 2018 11:10 am

I'm still raising a 22 year old millenial. She was adopted so she she's not infected with my baby boomer genes. On one hand I could commend her for the minimalist lifestyle she is leading. She doesn't drive a car but walks to work every day to her part time job that provides her with all the money she needs or wants. She also has a strong sense of community and carries on a rich social life but it's almost 100 percent online from the comfort of her bedroom.

On the other hand I wonder if she is ever going to be able to leave home and take care of herself.
Just curious-- Why would you "commend" her for a lifestyle that requires you to subsidize it, and that might cause her to be permanently handicapped as a result? No offense meant, but since you seem to be aware of the problem, it seems like a natural question.

Re: Kavanaugh

Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2018 2:51 pm
by jacksonM
Maddy wrote:
Sat Oct 13, 2018 2:03 pm
jacksonM wrote:
Sat Oct 13, 2018 11:10 am

I'm still raising a 22 year old millenial. She was adopted so she she's not infected with my baby boomer genes. On one hand I could commend her for the minimalist lifestyle she is leading. She doesn't drive a car but walks to work every day to her part time job that provides her with all the money she needs or wants. She also has a strong sense of community and carries on a rich social life but it's almost 100 percent online from the comfort of her bedroom.

On the other hand I wonder if she is ever going to be able to leave home and take care of herself.
Just curious-- Why would you "commend" her for a lifestyle that requires you to subsidize it, and that might cause her to be permanently handicapped as a result? No offense meant, but since you seem to be aware of the problem, it seems like a natural question.
Was just looking to put some positive spin on it. At least her carbon footprint is very low.

Re: Kavanaugh

Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2018 3:58 pm
by Maddy
jacksonM wrote:
Sat Oct 13, 2018 2:51 pm
Maddy wrote:
Sat Oct 13, 2018 2:03 pm
jacksonM wrote:
Sat Oct 13, 2018 11:10 am

I'm still raising a 22 year old millenial. She was adopted so she she's not infected with my baby boomer genes. On one hand I could commend her for the minimalist lifestyle she is leading. She doesn't drive a car but walks to work every day to her part time job that provides her with all the money she needs or wants. She also has a strong sense of community and carries on a rich social life but it's almost 100 percent online from the comfort of her bedroom.

On the other hand I wonder if she is ever going to be able to leave home and take care of herself.
Just curious-- Why would you "commend" her for a lifestyle that requires you to subsidize it, and that might cause her to be permanently handicapped as a result? No offense meant, but since you seem to be aware of the problem, it seems like a natural question.
Was just looking to put some positive spin on it. At least her carbon footprint is very low.

Maybe I shouldn't have been so nosy. I think there are a lot of parents in the same boat, but I suspect most are in denial about the probable consequences of enabling the delaying of adulthood. Considering your honesty and forthrightness about that risk, I guess I was hoping you could shed some light on why a parent would allow that potentially detrimental situation to persist. If you don't want to expand, that's fine. And I realize you may not be the only parent calling the shots.

Re: Kavanaugh

Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2018 10:39 am
by jacksonM
Maddy wrote:
Sat Oct 13, 2018 3:58 pm
jacksonM wrote:
Sat Oct 13, 2018 2:51 pm
Maddy wrote:
Sat Oct 13, 2018 2:03 pm


Just curious-- Why would you "commend" her for a lifestyle that requires you to subsidize it, and that might cause her to be permanently handicapped as a result? No offense meant, but since you seem to be aware of the problem, it seems like a natural question.
Was just looking to put some positive spin on it. At least her carbon footprint is very low.

Maybe I shouldn't have been so nosy. I think there are a lot of parents in the same boat, but I suspect most are in denial about the probable consequences of enabling the delaying of adulthood. Considering your honesty and forthrightness about that risk, I guess I was hoping you could shed some light on why a parent would allow that potentially detrimental situation to persist. If you don't want to expand, that's fine. And I realize you may not be the only parent calling the shots.
Answered your question but deleted it and sent it to you as a PM.

Re: Kavanaugh

Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2018 10:49 pm
by boglerdude
> deleted it and sent it to you as a PM

Lame.

Re: Kavanaugh

Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 11:32 am
by Maddy
I"ll just say that having learned a little bit about the circumstances, I can only feel respect for Jackson's choices. 'Nuff said.

Re: Kavanaugh

Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2018 12:35 pm
by Kriegsspiel
Here's a situation that ties together a few different threads of the zeitgeist.

A beneficial takeaway from the Kavanaugh debacle was the need to preserve rape evidence if one wants to put away rapists. I keep an eye on the European mass immigration situation.
Image

Evidently an 18 year old German girl was raped by up to 15 Muslims over 4 hours in Freiburg. The Polizei were able to arrest the suspects due to preserved evidence brought by the girl. All detainees were previously known to the Polizei due to earlier crimes. NPCs immediately execute "Crimes like this should not serve to condemn refugees" script. A particularly egregious NPC announced he was sick of groups like AfD "politically exploiting our grief" and scheduled his own rally, titled "My horror is no excuse for your hate."

Image

Re: Kavanaugh

Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2018 4:34 pm
by Kriegsspiel
About that evidence...
Every year since 1989, in about 25 percent of the sexual assault cases referred to the FBI where results could be obtained, the primary suspect has been excluded by forensic DNA testing. Specifically, FBI officials report that out of roughly 10,000 sexual assault cases since 1989, about 2,000 tests have been inconclusive, about 2,000 tests have excluded the primary suspect, and about 6,000 have "matched" or included the primary suspect... these percentages have remained constant for 7 years, and the National Institute of Justice's informal survey of private laboratories reveals a strikingly similar 26 percent exclusion rate.
- Peter Neufeld & Barry C. Scheck, co-founders of the Innocence Project

Re: Kavanaugh

Posted: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:36 am
by dualstow
Kriegsspiel wrote:
Sat Oct 27, 2018 12:35 pm
A particularly egregious NPC
I had to look that up the other day because I got called one. O0
So that's non-player character? Like someone who doesn't have their own opinion?

Re: Kavanaugh

Posted: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:42 am
by Tyler
dualstow wrote:
Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:36 am
I had to look that up the other day because I got called one. O0
So that's non-player character? Like someone who doesn't have their own opinion?
An NPC is a computer-controlled character in a game that follows a script designed to advance a particular storyline. Talk to them a few times and they simply repeat the same pre-programmed talking points. The NPC meme basically points out that many people in the real world act the same way, and in a larger sense plays on the idea that you may be one of only a handful of "live" players in some giant simulation.

Re: Kavanaugh

Posted: Sun Oct 28, 2018 11:53 am
by dualstow
That's a good explanation, Tyler, thank you. I remember a non-computer idea of non-player characters from playing D&D circa 1980 -- oops, did I just say that out loud -- and it sounds similar.

Re: Kavanaugh

Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2018 8:29 am
by Maddy
moda0306 wrote:
Sat Sep 22, 2018 7:59 am
And what do you think she wants? Besides death threats and public shaming by 30% of the population, that is?
Just as predicted:
Christine Blasey Ford, the California psychology professor who accused Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct 36 years ago, received a $1 million windfall and is receiving several requests for book deals after her testimony.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018 ... ok-offers/

A very, very lucrative public shaming--but then we knew this was coming.

Re: Kavanaugh

Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2018 9:01 pm
by boglerdude
Breitbart commenters are always so mad. lolz

Re: Kavanaugh

Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2018 11:13 am
by moda0306
On a slightly related note, Harvey Weinstein has an accuser who was 16 at the time, 16 years ago.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/lawsuit-alle ... 45622.html

Also somewhat related to Kavanaugh, I haven't heard from any liberal (either personally, online or in "thu mediuh") defending Weinstein or question the womens' claims simply because they either have some to potentially gain or the allegations are from several years ago or more. Maybe there have been some in Hollywood that are fans of the dude. I think I heard that Tarantino tried to defend him somewhat.

It's probably because I think people with actual leftist civic values have little real loyalty to "Hollywood," on average, and conservatives don't see this because "Hollywood" has very hammy (and perhaps often genuine) loyalty to leftist civic values.

Re: Kavanaugh

Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2018 12:28 pm
by jacksonM
moda0306 wrote:
Thu Nov 01, 2018 11:13 am
On a slightly related note, Harvey Weinstein has an accuser who was 16 at the time, 16 years ago.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/lawsuit-alle ... 45622.html

Also somewhat related to Kavanaugh, I haven't heard from any liberal (either personally, online or in "thu mediuh") defending Weinstein or question the womens' claims simply because they either have some to potentially gain or the allegations are from several years ago or more. Maybe there have been some in Hollywood that are fans of the dude. I think I heard that Tarantino tried to defend him somewhat.

It's probably because I think people with actual leftist civic values have little real loyalty to "Hollywood," on average, and conservatives don't see this because "Hollywood" has very hammy (and perhaps often genuine) loyalty to leftist civic values.
Remembering when and where it took place does help to make it more believable.
The accuser, identified as Jane Doe, alleges that Weinstein assaulted her at his New York City apartment in 2002, just days after they'd met at an event involving her modeling agency.

Re: Kavanaugh

Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2018 12:49 pm
by moda0306
jacksonM wrote:
Thu Nov 01, 2018 12:28 pm
moda0306 wrote:
Thu Nov 01, 2018 11:13 am
On a slightly related note, Harvey Weinstein has an accuser who was 16 at the time, 16 years ago.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/lawsuit-alle ... 45622.html

Also somewhat related to Kavanaugh, I haven't heard from any liberal (either personally, online or in "thu mediuh") defending Weinstein or question the womens' claims simply because they either have some to potentially gain or the allegations are from several years ago or more. Maybe there have been some in Hollywood that are fans of the dude. I think I heard that Tarantino tried to defend him somewhat.

It's probably because I think people with actual leftist civic values have little real loyalty to "Hollywood," on average, and conservatives don't see this because "Hollywood" has very hammy (and perhaps often genuine) loyalty to leftist civic values.
Remembering when and where it took place does help to make it more believable.
The accuser, identified as Jane Doe, alleges that Weinstein assaulted her at his New York City apartment in 2002, just days after they'd met at an event involving her modeling agency.
I guess those couple details explain the deafening silence of would-be-librul-Weinstein-supporters, vs how'd they'd be if this woman (or others) couldn't remember the exact day or party-house... perhaps something more similar to the bombastic display by Trumpists/conservatives to feign concern for due process and smear a likely assault victim.

There are a lot of things I remember where I couldn't give you the exact day or location, but could replay you what happened almost moment by moment. But of course memories fade... and a judge who's a disaster for the 4th Amendment & due process deserves better due-process than that in his job interview for a lifetime appointment to one of the most powerful positions in the world.

Re: Kavanaugh

Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2018 4:15 pm
by Kriegsspiel
I didn't follow the Weinstein stuff too closely, but from what I heard, he didn't exactly rape rape them; he told them he'd put them in a movie if they blew him or something along those lines. Or maybe that was just one, and the others he just asked them to, and they did it, without a threat? Correct?

I guess I could go look this up.

Re: Kavanaugh

Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2018 5:40 pm
by dualstow
Kriegsspiel wrote:
Thu Nov 01, 2018 4:15 pm
I didn't follow the Weinstein stuff too closely, but from what I heard, he didn't exactly rape rape them; he told them he'd put them in a movie if they blew him or something along those lines. Or maybe that was just one, and the others he just asked them to, and they did it, without a threat? Correct?

I guess I could go look this up.
He rape raped some women.

Re: Kavanaugh

Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2018 7:02 pm
by Kriegsspiel
K.

Re: Kavanaugh

Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2018 7:17 pm
by Kriegsspiel
Hmm, it looks like some of the Weinstein allegations are very old too. A May 2018 article says that a grand jury is hearing evidence, I'm wondering what kind of evidence they'd have other than the women's statements, and his?
The Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus Vance, had been under enormous public pressure to bring a criminal case against Weinstein.

A grand jury has been hearing evidence in the case for weeks.

In March, Andrew Cuomo, the New York governor, took the extraordinary step of ordering the state’s attorney general to investigate whether Vance acted properly in 2015 when he decided not to prosecute Weinstein over a previous allegation of unwanted groping, made by an Italian model. That investigation is in its preliminary stages.
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/m ... ct-charges
Lack of prosecutable evidence?
Prosecutors in New York City abandoned part of their sexual assault case against Harvey Weinstein on Thursday after evidence surfaced that a police detective coached a witness to stay silent about evidence that cast doubt on the account of one of his earliest accusers.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/a ... al-charge/
Mmmm.

BTW dualstow, this was the one I was referencing.
The woman also told the detective — identified by Weinstein’s lawyer as Nicholas DiGaudio — that sometime after Evans’ office meeting with Weinstein, she suggested what happened was consensual, according to the letter. Weinstein had promised to get her an acting job if she agreed to perform oral sex, and she agreed, it said.

Re: Kavanaugh

Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2018 9:27 pm
by jacksonM
moda0306 wrote:
Thu Nov 01, 2018 12:49 pm
jacksonM wrote:
Thu Nov 01, 2018 12:28 pm
moda0306 wrote:
Thu Nov 01, 2018 11:13 am
On a slightly related note, Harvey Weinstein has an accuser who was 16 at the time, 16 years ago.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/lawsuit-alle ... 45622.html

Also somewhat related to Kavanaugh, I haven't heard from any liberal (either personally, online or in "thu mediuh") defending Weinstein or question the womens' claims simply because they either have some to potentially gain or the allegations are from several years ago or more. Maybe there have been some in Hollywood that are fans of the dude. I think I heard that Tarantino tried to defend him somewhat.

It's probably because I think people with actual leftist civic values have little real loyalty to "Hollywood," on average, and conservatives don't see this because "Hollywood" has very hammy (and perhaps often genuine) loyalty to leftist civic values.
Remembering when and where it took place does help to make it more believable.
The accuser, identified as Jane Doe, alleges that Weinstein assaulted her at his New York City apartment in 2002, just days after they'd met at an event involving her modeling agency.
I guess those couple details explain the deafening silence of would-be-librul-Weinstein-supporters, vs how'd they'd be if this woman (or others) couldn't remember the exact day or party-house... perhaps something more similar to the bombastic display by Trumpists/conservatives to feign concern for due process and smear a likely assault victim.

There are a lot of things I remember where I couldn't give you the exact day or location, but could replay you what happened almost moment by moment. But of course memories fade... and a judge who's a disaster for the 4th Amendment & due process deserves better due-process than that in his job interview for a lifetime appointment to one of the most powerful positions in the world.
I get that you think liberals are more pure of heart than Trumpists/conservatives but I really don't get your comparison between Weinstein and Kavanaugh. Other than the fact that they've both been accused of sexual misconduct what do they have in common?

Re: Kavanaugh

Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2018 5:29 am
by Kriegsspiel
In the first article I linked to it mentions a few that are outside the statute of limitations. Which is one of the main "actionable" items that has been reinforced over the past couple months. If you want the rapists put away, don't save reporting for a distant day.

Re: Kavanaugh

Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2018 7:09 am
by dualstow
Oh yeah, there is no doubt that there was also a lot of that old school sleep your way into films stuff going on. I remember Howard Stern asking him about it and Weinstein said, “I was born to late. That was in the 60s, blah blah blah.” Howard later replayed that during the inchoate phase of #metoo and said, “I just knew he was lying!” ;)

But, then the real rape allegations came to light and it wasn’t so funny anymore.
Kriegsspiel wrote:
Thu Nov 01, 2018 7:17 pm
BTW dualstow, this was the one I was referencing.
The woman also told the detective — identified by Weinstein’s lawyer as Nicholas DiGaudio — that sometime after Evans’ office meeting with Weinstein, she suggested what happened was consensual, according to the letter. Weinstein had promised to get her an acting job if she agreed to perform oral sex, and she agreed, it said.