20
   

Poor Kavanaugh wants to run for SC judge

 
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 24 Oct, 2018 06:06 pm
@Blickers,
Blickers wrote:
I don't. The lady specified that she did not want to come forward to reveal her identity to the public, because of what happened to Anita Hill and others. Feinstein honored that. Only when Prof Ford's name got out anyway did she say she would testify.
Her identity got out because the Democrats leaked it. So they weren't honoring her desire to remain anonymous. They were waiting to spring it at a moment when it would cause a pointless delay.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Wed 24 Oct, 2018 06:09 pm
@Blickers,
Blickers wrote:
A. The lady contacted her representative when she found out that Kavanaugh was on a list of 20 finalists. That's not holding off for the last second.
Not on her part. However, the behavior of Democratic politicians was quite different.

Blickers wrote:
B. There is no "last second", the committee can take as long as they want.
The investigation was concluded, the debate was concluded, closing arguments were concluded, and people were about to cast the final vote. That's the last second.

Blickers wrote:
Hell, the Republicans unconstitutionally failed to act at all on Merrick Garland's nomination at all for over a year, even though the Constitution requires them to "advise and consent" on these appointments. There was absolutely no reason not to take a little extra time to investigate the allegations.
That was payback for what the Democrats did to Bush in 2007-08.

The Democrats weren't getting revenge for anything here. They were just trying to delay the confirmation for no reason.

Blickers wrote:
"Youthful indiscretion"? Rape is probably the most serious crime after murder. If there was a question if Kavanaugh murdered somebody while in school, do you think that should be considered in his nomination for a Supreme Court seat?
He has lived a responsible life as an adult. So yes, youthful indiscretions are no reason to keep someone off the Supreme Court.

Blickers wrote:
Clinton went through both impeachment and conviction proceedings, so unless some new info comes forth, the matter is over. For several months you have tried to claim that nobody can ever be removed from office because Bill Clinton was not removed from office, and it is getting tiresome. Clinton had his Congressional version of a Grand Jury, (the impeachment) and had to face the Senate version of a trial, (conviction). They decided not to convict. Legally, the matter is done and it is time to move on to new matters.
Any other officeholder or appointee who is suspected of wrongdoing thereby gets the same process. We don't throw out the process because you don't agree with the verdict in the Clinton case.
The Republicans are not going to let the Democrats set up a system where they alone are above the law.

If the Democrats get to be above the law, so do the Republicans.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Oct, 2018 06:52 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:

Her identity got out because the Democrats leaked it. So they weren't honoring her desire to remain anonymous. They were waiting to spring it at a moment when it would cause a pointless delay.


I agree, but why on earth would she think she could make such a claim to a US Senator and maintain confidentiality?
0 Replies
 
Blickers
 
  3  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2018 12:30 am
@oralloy,
Quote oralloy:
Quote:
Her identity got out because the Democrats leaked it. So they weren't honoring her desire to remain anonymous.

Irrelevant. Dr. Ford did not want to testify, but once her story was leaked she was willing to testify. You overlook the pain a rape or attempted rape survivor goes through when giving evidence, simply brushing it aside as a matter of small importance.

Quote oralloy:
Quote:
They were waiting to spring it at a moment when it would cause a pointless delay.
You just betrayed yourself. You consider it "pointless" to spend a few weeks investigating whether the Supreme Court nominee you are confirming got on top of a woman forcefully in high school and attempted to rape her while his confederate pinned her arms to the bed.

This attitude pervaded the whole of the GOP Senate except for three at most.



maxdancona
 
  0  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2018 04:43 am
@Blickers,
Geez Blickers, stop infantalizing Dr. Ford. She is not a scared little girl. She is an intelligent, educated and accomplished person with a successful career.

She had right to to testify. She had the right to not testify. She new exactly what the stakes were. She knew what she wanted to accomplish.

At least acknowledge that Dr. Ford is an intelligent adult.
Blickers
 
  5  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2018 10:23 am
@maxdancona,
So intelligent people don't go through emotional pain and trauma when testifying about rape?

It's not like people get off rape charges frequently because the victim can't bring themselves to go to court?
maxdancona
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2018 12:43 pm
@Blickers,
The only reason for Dr. Ford to testify was a last ditch attempt to prevent Kavanaugh from being confirmed in a political process. She chose to be a part of this highly political process putting herself in this national partisan fight.

She was not a victim of this process. She willingly chose to be a part of this very public political fight. She was a victim 35 years ago in high school. She chose to be in these hearings.

Blickers
 
  3  
Reply Wed 31 Oct, 2018 01:28 am
@maxdancona,
Quote max:
Quote:
The only reason for Dr. Ford to testify was a last ditch attempt to prevent Kavanaugh from being confirmed in a political process. She chose to be a part of this highly political process putting herself in this national partisan fight.


Which is not an answer to my question, which was:
Quote:
It's not like people get off rape charges frequently because the victim can't bring themselves to go to court?

Not going to get an answer to that question, will I Max? You are going to try to dismiss the pain of publicly recounting a rape scene happening to the victim and hope the female half of the electorate ignores it as well.

The Republicans held off on considering a Supreme Court nominee for a full year, now they act they CAN'T disrupt the orderly process of confirming a Supreme Court nominee for even two or three weeks to find out if the nominee and a confederate started to forcibly rape a girl in high school before she escaped.

glitterbag
 
  4  
Reply Wed 31 Oct, 2018 01:40 am
@Blickers,
The painful truth is: its not that they don't believe her......it's that they don't care.
maxdancona
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 31 Oct, 2018 04:38 am
@Blickers,
Quote:
It's not like people get off rape charges frequently because the victim can't bring themselves to go to court?


That is not even grammatically a question. It is a sarcastic statement with a question mark incorrectly typed on the end. But as nonsensical as it is, I will attempt to "answer" it anyway.

There was no court in this story. There were no rape charges.

This was a political game. One side wanted Kavanaugh to be on the Supreme court. The other side wanted Kavanaugh to be blocked. The rules to the game are that politicians vote and majority wins. Everyone understands how this works, and the rules were followed perfectly. They took a vote, and the Kavanaugh side won.

Before Dr. Ford became public, the Democrats were desperate to stop Kavanaugh from being confirmed. They set up the Dr. Ford story in the best way they knew how to provide public pressure on the other side. Dr. Ford was a big part of this... and she knew exactly what she was doing.

This was a political game. The Democrats were trying to stop Kavanaugh. The Republicans were trying to confirm Kavanaugh. The Democrats knew exactly what they were doing. The Republicans knew exactly what they were doing.

Dr. Ford was part of a last ditch attempt to stop Kavanaugh from being confirmed. She knew exactly what she was doing.


maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Oct, 2018 04:42 am
@glitterbag,
It's politics... of course they don't care. The left doesn't care either.

Again I will point out that Bill Clinton was accused of rape (I am talking about Juanita Broaddrick, not Lewinsky). Hillary Clinton didn't "believe women". There were several women accusing Bill. She attacked them as being part of a "vast, right-wing conspiracy". Hillary shut down women who were talking about being raped because it was politically expedient, and the left is still cheering for her.

The left is awfully hypocritical on this issue.
glitterbag
 
  7  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2018 09:59 am
@maxdancona,
Yeah Max, so I think you are missing the point. When I said "they don't care", I mean that NO ONE cares. It's complicated..especially if you admire someone and then you have to deal with the awful situation that MAYBE they take advantage of vulnerable people. Think about it, I mean, really, HOLY ****, how could you or I or either party be wrong. If someone was creepy around women, we would know, RIGHT....If someone was creepy around children..well, how could any of us miss that, RIGHT.

Welllllll... if I remember correctly you hint that a female cousin, or aunt, or mom's friend or someone female was inappropriate with you,,,,And I also seem to remember that you bring this up whenever girls or women audaciously mention their own assaults.....but not to commensurate or share the pain, but to remind everyone that assaults on girls is no big deal because some woman have assaulted boys.....and now of course people on the left and right have done terrible things.


So, I don't defend Bill Clinton or John Edwards or Newt Gingrich or Nelson Rockefeller, or Bill Farenhold or John Conyers or Tim Murphy or Joe Barton or Trent Frank or any of the other congressional members who have been found to engage in unsavory, predatory behaviour.

But, thanks again for reminding me of the allegations against Bill Clinton. Who knows. I could have had a stroke that wiped out my long term memory.

PS: In the future, when you direct remarks toward me, kindly zip it before you act all steamed and blame me for reading remarks you directed at me...If you don't like it, take you own advice and just skip right on by.
wmwcjr
 
  3  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2018 11:08 am
@glitterbag,
https://media.giphy.com/media/jShr8wkP38XTO/giphy.gif
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2018 04:15 pm
@glitterbag,
Quote:
Welllllll... if I remember correctly you hint that a female cousin, or aunt, or mom's friend or someone female was inappropriate with you,,,,And I also seem to remember that you bring this up whenever girls or women audaciously mention their own assaults.....but not to commensurate or share the pain, but to remind everyone that assaults on girls is no big deal because some woman have assaulted boys.....and now of course people on the left and right have done terrible things.


I had toys and other objects shoved inside of me which I accepted because of emotional and physical abuse. I do not consider this "inappropriate". I consider it rape.

I mentioned this in two threads (as part of a discussion on MeToo and on a separate thread) for the purpose of expressing my feeling that current political movements exclude us... something that is felt by many male survivors and some female survivors. I am expressing my dismay on the politicization of rape, I have never attacked other survivors male or female

This is deeply painful and personal... it is not political.

I don't feel it is appropriate for you to bring this up to use in a political argument.
glitterbag
 
  2  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2018 06:15 pm
If I were a glutton for punishment I would read the post above. For the time being I'm going to skip it. Just not in the mood, doesn't matter what the topic is, I'm going to pass.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2018 08:56 pm
@glitterbag,
Who are you kidding?

You read it.

You just don't know how to respond. (Hint: Regrets may be in order)

You would have been better off making like you haven't been back to this thread.
0 Replies
 
Blickers
 
  2  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2018 11:00 pm
@maxdancona,
Quote Blickers:
Quote:
It's not like people get off rape charges frequently because the victim can't bring themselves to go to court?


Quote max:
Quote:
There was no court in this story. There were no rape charges.

This was a political game. One side wanted Kavanaugh to be on the Supreme court. The other side wanted Kavanaugh to be blocked. The rules to the game are that politicians vote and majority wins. Everyone understands how this works....
....And blah blah blah. You still didn't answer the question, which is WHY do you discount Dr. Ford's fear of coming public with the details of her attempted rape by a man who had just made the short list of possible Supreme Court justices?

About that, we have heard not a single word. Nor are we going to, because you have no adequate answer.

The entire Republican attitude from the start has been, who is THIS WOMAN to get in the way of Kavanagh's getting this job? As the Republicans see it, Trump gave the guy the job, the rest is just rubber stamp, if the old hag balks we can just sneer like Finn and pretend she's so out of line she should be ashamed of herself.

For at least a decade the public has been educated in the trauma the rape victim suffers after the act, causing many of them to be unable to appear in court. As you said, the Senate confirmation hearing is not a court, but for Dr. Ford it would be similar to a court in that she would be questioned by pro-Kavanagh Senators who would ask her questions trying to trip her up. You don't think that is difficult for a survivor of attempted rape?

Well, baloney. Check out the facts:
Quote:

In the space of just over a year, two women in Greater Manchester have killed themselves because of their experiences as complainants in sexual offences cases. The challenge this poses to the criminal justice system should be immediately clear: both women acted as servants of justice, yet were so profoundly hurt by that experience that they ended their own lives.

Feminists have spoken of the “second rape” of post-rape interrogation and the criminal trial for many years – but nothing can illustrate the need to better protect of rape witnesses as sharply as these two tragic deaths.

Frances Andrade was a virtuoso violinist whose young life was already marked by abuse before she met schoolmaster Michael Brewer at Chetham’s school of music in Manchester. In February of 2013, he and his former wife were found guilty of indecent assault against Andrade, perpetrated when she was a girl of 14 and 15. The ordeal of giving evidence against these defendants was such that by the time the verdict was issued, Andrade had killed herself.

Meanwhile, in February of this year, Tracy Shelvey jumped from the roof of a car park in Rochdale and killed herself after the man she and six other women had accused of rape was acquitted. Shelvey had given evidence twice, as a first jury had not been able to reach a verdict on all of the counts.
Source

There obviously are very good reasons why a survivor of a very violent attempted rape would not want to re-live the experience. This particular survivor tried to sound the alarm well before Kavanagh was selected, back when he was on a short list of candidates. The job of the Senate committee was to assess if Kavanagh was fit to sit on the Supreme Court-if evidence emerges just before the end, it is up to them to re-examine. Your position-that evidence of an attempted rape suddenly emerging does not bear examination, even if it's evidence of a vicious attempted rape-merely illustrates again how hungry for power conservatives really are. And how little they care to understand the female viewpoint.

0 Replies
 
neptuneblue
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 2 Nov, 2018 05:31 am
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:
I had toys and other objects shoved inside of me which I accepted because of emotional and physical abuse. I do not consider this "inappropriate". I consider it rape.


Prove it.
maporsche
 
  2  
Reply Fri 2 Nov, 2018 05:40 am
@neptuneblue,
I get the point you're trying to make, but that seems more than bit inappropriate.
neptuneblue
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Nov, 2018 05:41 am
@maporsche,
Then apparently you don't get the point.
 

Related Topics

Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
GOP Empire Strikes Back - Discussion by parados
Government School Indoctrination - Discussion by H2O MAN
The Democrats will win again in 2016 - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Romney 2012? - Discussion by snood
Can Obama Lose? Will he be a one-term president? - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Obama care 2014 - Discussion by wts
The 'I voted' thread! - Question by Cycloptichorn
 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 06/25/2019 at 12:26:33