bad Breitbart

Discussion of the recent unfolding of history.

bad Breitbart

Postby Jakob » Fri Sep 28, 2018 9:09 pm

The tide really swings to the left now, the ugly old republican guard shows its face.

Look at this.

I certainly sympathized with Dr. Ford, and she did change my mind about one thing. I no longer believe she was part of a grand plan to destroy Kavanaugh. Rather, I do believe she wanted to remain anonymous, I do believe she is a victim of the Senate Democrats who re-victimized a woman who has already been damaged in some terrible way.

But was she a credible witness, believable…?

Not even close.

Even what Dr. Ford remembers doesn’t add up.

According to Dr. Ford: She attended a house party miles from her home. She had one beer. There were four or five other people at the party, including her best friend, Leland Ingham Keyser. Brett (Kavanaugh) and Mark (Judge) were already drunk and belligerent. She went upstairs to use the bathroom. Suddenly she was attacked from behind and shoved into a bedroom. Brett and Mark turned the music up so no one would hear her scream as they attempted to rape her. She got away. Locked herself in a bathroom. She waited until it was safe; until she heard Brett and Mark “ping pong” off the walls down the stairs. After it was safe, she ran down the stairs and left the house. She cannot remember who drove her to the party or how she got home.

In a suburban home in Maryland there was no downstairs bathroom?
She didn’t hear two very drunk and belligerent boys try to sneak up on her?
Why was music already on in a room no one was using?
Wouldn’t blasting the music ensure someone came upstairs to see what was going on, especially whoever’s house it was? This is completely counterintuitive to criminal behavior.
After she locked herself in the bathroom, Brett and Mark didn’t try to get at her? Didn’t jiggle the doorknob? Didn’t try to claim they were kidding? All tuned up for a rape, they just gave up and went downstairs like nothing happened?
She left without telling her best friend?
She left without WARNING her friend there were two rapists in the house?
No one asked why she was leaving or found it strange enough to ask her the following day why she just vanished from the party?
She can remember how many beers she had (one) but not whose house she was in, how she got home, the date, the place, how many people were there (sometimes it’s 4, or 5 or 6), or anything solid?
The only way her story adds up is if you are trying to weave the stuff of Kafka, where the accused cannot grab hold of something to clear himself, not even with an alibi because there is no where or when. In this respect, it is all a tad too neat.

These is rather a Kafkaesque interrogation. That bathroom comment, the lack of understanding of the victim, who would naturally run off as quickly and quietly as possible - it's exactly coinciding with Pluto turning direct, the power is changing. Trump remains untarnished in my eyes because his winning ethics has been to stand by people until they betray him personally, and perhaps he figures we might as well take our losses on the midterms and have a long term win with a seat on the highest legal office. I don't know what kind of win Kavanaugh is, but I do know that he will be indebted to Trump. This is truly harsh politics, Pluto in Capricorn culminates.
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6093
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: bad Breitbart

Postby Mr Reasonable » Sat Sep 29, 2018 10:13 am

I think it's interesting that Kavanaugh worked so hard with Ken Starr to impeach Clinton for lying about a blowjob, but now holds a view of executive power that sees it as significantly more expansive than most people in the legal world would hold. In his days working for Starr, lying about a blowjob was impeachable. But now he thinks that the president should basically be above the law. I could care less about whether or not he dry humped a girl in high school. I'm concerned that he's a political extremist seeking a lifetime nomination to a position that requires one to make decisions independent of politics. If a guy says he's got a logical method of legal interpretation...say he's a textualist or an originalist or a this or that, and that that's the way he decides cases, then that's great. Now if you go back and read his decisions on 100s of cases as to be sure you've got an adequate sample and you find that 90 percent of the time his decisions are leaning in one direction politically, then you should find that as a reason to take pause.

I explained it like this to someone the other day. Let's say you run a restaurant, and at the end of each shift you collect money from waiters and you always round up or down to the nearest dollar when cashing them out. Maybe today you end up 5 bucks short because most of them were rounded one way, and then tomorrow you should end up a few bucks over because it's rounding the other way. But, because you're applying the same principle equally every day, over time you should be relatively even on the money because half the time it should round up and the other half the time it rounds down. SO...if you just keep checking your account and every day it's 5 short, and the manager keeps telling you it's the rounding, and a year goes by and you've been 5 short each day and he keeps telling you it's the rounding, then you know he's full of shit because it should be over as often as it is short over a long enough period of time.

People don't understand shit like this. It doesn't matter if the guy dry humped a girl 20 years ago. What matters is that he thinks American's gun rights are too restrictive. They're not. He thinks that the president should be above the law in more circumstances than almost any one else thinks he should. He shouldn't. He thinks that Christians are under attack and that religious, "rights" ought be given credence to the extent that they, in the view of many might encroach on the rights of others. He thinks that there are times where a person's rights as an individual to do what they want with their body should be interfered with by the state.

Shit man. I don't agree with those things. Those are good enough reasons not to appoint the guy. A group of think tanks determined that he is, on most major issues either the most, or the second most conservative judge in the federal judiciary. That's great if you agree with his politics. But it's not great if you think that we ought have balanced people on the Court who aren't defined by their drivenness toward an ideology.

Of course there will be conservative and liberal justices. No one can be perfectly separated from their politics. But usually we don't go after justices because they're the most liberal people or the most conservative people that we can find. Being the most conservative or liberal federal judge should be looked at by a reasonable person as good cause for making sure someone doesn't get to sit on the supreme court. They're lifetime appointments, they get the final say on interpretations of the law. We should take seriously the idea of filling the court with reasonable people who are at least capable of feigning some ability to be objective and consistent in their interpretations and we should be frightened by the idea that it might end up staffed with agenda driven ideologues who by their own peers have been deemed to have radical views on issues that they'll be making decisions about.
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 25538
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: bad Breitbart

Postby Jakob » Sat Sep 29, 2018 12:36 pm

Thats a risky statement man.

The president was lawfully elected on a conservative agenda, so it speaks to reason that he gets to pick conservative judges. The only lawfully relevant issue here is whether or not he is disqualified for the job by what he is being accused of now. If you say thats not the case, he should be sworn in.
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6093
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: bad Breitbart

Postby Mr Reasonable » Sun Sep 30, 2018 12:06 am

What about the idea that the right wing spent a year obstructing Obama's nominee until he was out of office and is now complaining that their guy is being delayed? The one they obstructed was significantly less controversial and had a record that demonstrated far less bias. Extremists, of either persuasion so against the ideal of an unbiased judiciary. We don't want the courts involved in politics, we want them to interpret laws fairly and according to a logical method of interpretation.

I'm fine if those methods produce decisions about which I disagree on the social consequences, but that's different than knowing full well that those methods will be distorted for political purposes and thereby ensure that I disagree with 90 percent of the decisions. The idea is that the court should be fair and as absent politics as can reasonably be expected. Stacking a court with partisan judges is bad for democracy. Not to mention the ethical issue of a president who, if you believe that where there's smoke there's fire...is probably going to end up as a party to a case that'll head to this court in the future having a desire to make the guy who's going to be a swing vote in his favor a member of that court.

Wouldn't it be awesome if when you broke the law, you got to choose your own judge?
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 25538
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: bad Breitbart

Postby Mr Reasonable » Sun Sep 30, 2018 7:19 am

From wiki


Merrick Garland
Merrick Garland.jpg
Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Incumbent
Assumed office
February 12, 2013
Preceded by David B. Sentelle
Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Incumbent
Assumed office
March 20, 1997
Appointed by Bill Clinton
Preceded by Abner J. Mikva
Personal details
Born Merrick Brian Garland
November 13, 1952 (age 65)
Chicago, Illinois, U.S.
Spouse(s) Lynn Rosenman (m. 1987)
Children 2 daughters
Education Harvard University (BA, JD)
Merrick Brian Garland (born November 13, 1952) is the Chief United States Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. He has served on that court since 1997.

A native of the Chicago area, Garland graduated summa cum laude from Harvard College and graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School. After serving as a law clerk to Judge Henry J. Friendly of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and Justice William J. Brennan, Jr. of the Supreme Court of the United States, he practiced corporate litigation at Arnold & Porter and worked as a federal prosecutor in the United States Department of Justice, where he played a leading role in the investigation and prosecution of the Oklahoma City bombers.

On March 16, 2016, President Barack Obama nominated Garland to serve as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, to fill the vacancy created by the death of Antonin Scalia. The Senate refused to hold a hearing or vote on this nomination made during the last year of Obama's presidency, with the Republican majority insisting that the next elected President should fill the vacancy. Senate Republicans' unprecedented refusal to consider the nomination was highly controversial. Garland's nomination lasted 293 days and expired on January 3, 2017, with the end of the 114th Congress.
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 25538
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: bad Breitbart

Postby Jakob » Wed Oct 03, 2018 10:43 am

I never objected to the Democrats resisting Kavanaugh. I don't care about Kavanaugh, but as you know I see the dmc as genocidal so I won't care if they lose on anything. I'll smile in fact.

Notwithstanding that i read the absolutely horrible news that Kavanaugh has, in his life, once tossed ice on someone. Surely this constitutes a Russian coup and warrants death by lynching.
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6093
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: bad Breitbart

Postby Mr Reasonable » Wed Oct 03, 2018 3:26 pm

Again, it's not about right/left politics. It absolutely shouldn't be. That's why Kavanaugh is a bad nominee. I don't care what he's done. He surely hasn't been as much a criminal as me. Hypocrisy, throwing ice, possibly a little too much coercion in his getting laid game. None of that bothers me really.

It's his radical politics. I don't like the kind of people who say things like, "taxation is theft" or "everything is white genocide" or "every white person is a bigot" or "you have to call men women and vice versa if they ask you to". I think all those people screaming all that shit are well...kind of dumb. Extremism...it's necessarily incorrect about a lot of things and not the most effective way to have the kind of world I'd like to see.

If the whole country wants to make a law that says you have to date a tranny or get charged with a hate crime, then so be it. If people get tired of it they can vote in new lawmakers. Same if they want to make a law that starves the poor. The right and left wing get their chances at lawmaking and representative democracy that way.

But to appoint a guy to a position where the primary qualification is to be unbiased...and for that guy to publicly lose his shit talking about Clinton conspiracies and "leftists"...well I mean...he kind of just farted at the job interview. So you don't hire him. Kavanaugh can't even keep up appearances of being politically unbiased after 15 minutes of questioning...which by the way isn't nearly as harsh or consequential as the kind of shit defendants went through standing in front of his bench a million times.

Maybe we're agreeing to disagree here.

Do you think that the judicial branch of government should be stacked with partisans who put politics over a cold and disinterested interpretation of the constitution?
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 25538
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: bad Breitbart

Postby barbarianhorde » Wed Oct 03, 2018 6:44 pm

"A man who dated Brett Kavanaugh’s primary accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, for six years claims she had no fear of flying, no fear of small spaces or rooms with single exits, and once used her psychology training to prepare a friend for a polygraph examination, according to a Tuesday Fox News report."

- bad Breitbart
It is true that liberty is precious; so precious that it must be carefully rationed.
~ Владимир Ильич Ульянов Ленин

THE HORNED ONE
User avatar
barbarianhorde
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1362
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 2:26 pm
Location: the cupboard by your kn knees

Re: bad Breitbart

Postby Jakob » Wed Oct 03, 2018 6:58 pm

Mr Reasonable wrote:Again, it's not about right/left politics. It absolutely shouldn't be. That's why Kavanaugh is a bad nominee. I don't care what he's done. He surely hasn't been as much a criminal as me. Hypocrisy, throwing ice, possibly a little too much coercion in his getting laid game. None of that bothers me really.

It's his radical politics. I don't like the kind of people who say things like, "taxation is theft" or "everything is white genocide" or "every white person is a bigot" or "you have to call men women and vice versa if they ask you to". I think all those people screaming all that shit are well...kind of dumb. Extremism...it's necessarily incorrect about a lot of things and not the most effective way to have the kind of world I'd like to see.

But thats just your personal politics, to call him a radical. I see Pelosi as an ultra radical maniac but you won't agree.

If the whole country wants to make a law that says you have to date a tranny or get charged with a hate crime, then so be it. If people get tired of it they can vote in new lawmakers.

And that is exactly what is happening. Trump and by extension his nominees are a response to radical politics from the left.
And thats from my perspective. Politics is the agreement to disagree, I think.

But to appoint a guy to a position where the primary qualification is to be unbiased...and for that guy to publicly lose his shit talking about Clinton conspiracies and "leftists"...well I mean...he kind of just farted at the job interview. So you don't hire him. Kavanaugh can't even keep up appearances of being politically unbiased after 15 minutes of questioning...which by the way isn't nearly as harsh or consequential as the kind of shit defendants went through standing in front of his bench a million times.

Thats a decent argument - on the other hand I like someone who doesnt keep up appearances, but shows a true face.

Maybe we're agreeing to disagree here.

Do you think that the judicial branch of government should be stacked with partisans who put politics over a cold and disinterested interpretation of the constitution?

I think all of the judges sitting there so far are unambiguously partisan, even though they might not give a radical appearance. I think that already defeats your argument for disinterestedness. Philosophically I think the only truth that is out there is interest, valuing standards, perspective, I've been talking about that a lot. I don't think the Constitution can be taken objectively, neutrally, I think it must be an object of passion and I think that it is for all judges worth their salt.
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6093
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: bad Breitbart

Postby Mr Reasonable » Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:10 pm

No. Pelosi is a radical too. My point it that it's not just about personal politics. Pelosi is as incapable of being unbiased as Kavanaugh. So you wouldn't put her on the court either if your aim was to have an unbiased judiciary. People who say, "left wing conspiracy", or "right wing conspiracy" are clearly biased. People who vote either left or right 90 to 100 percent of the time no matter the issue or election at stake are clearly biased. I don't think that me thinking that is a matter of my own personal politics. Extremism exists. There's a political spectrum. The closer you are to the center, the more likely it seems that you're applying reason and analysis to the formation of your opinions as opposed to just adhering to a party line. The right isn't right 100 percent of the time, and neither is the left. The problem is that half the country thinks that the right is always right, and the other half thinks that the left is always right. Both sides are wrong about that. This is why we should have an unbiased judiciary. I don't want it to be made a law that I have to call a tranny by whatever pronoun they tell me too, and I don't want it to be made a law that anyone who wants can buy a machine gun. People's rights have to be balanced, and a complete absence of gun control would be total chaos. So when these cases make it to the court, we don't want radical leftists, or radical right wingers deciding them. Am I making any sense here?
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 25538
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: bad Breitbart

Postby Mr Reasonable » Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:13 pm

Also John Roberts is not as reliably partisan as one might expect. And Bush appointed him. He's a good judge.
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 25538
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: bad Breitbart

Postby Jakob » Sun Oct 07, 2018 6:00 pm

I love speaking with authority and happily do so were I know my way but I have none where it concerns the Supreme Court and its history. All I can say is that in the week that followed the hearing I have found out about Kavanaugh that he actually seems respectable as a neutral lawman, and the Senator from Maine succeeded quite well in convincing me that, whereas conservative, he is well within the mainstream of the judicial system itself.

It is strange, this person thinks Roe v Wade is actually very radically left.

Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6093
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: bad Breitbart

Postby Jakob » Sun Oct 07, 2018 6:13 pm

Mr Reasonable wrote:Also John Roberts is not as reliably partisan as one might expect. And Bush appointed him. He's a good judge.

Some say the same will go for Kavanaugh. But judging by the way this went down some change is indeed in the air.



Id think these shrieks made many honest hearts that were against Trump until now shrink in shame, because these people are clearly hired terrorists. Very cheap and dirty tactics. Only not that cheap really, hundreds of billions go into it.
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6093
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: bad Breitbart

Postby Mr Reasonable » Mon Oct 08, 2018 2:56 am

Do you think a legal right to abortion is a radical leftist policy?
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 25538
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: bad Breitbart

Postby Jakob » Mon Oct 08, 2018 11:47 am

Mr Reasonable wrote:Do you think a legal right to abortion is a radical leftist policy?

Its a technical issue. If the majority that considers itself right is against it being legal, then legalization is by definition a leftist policy, and federal across the board legalization is of course the most radical form.

It is of course an outlandishly dumb idea that the developed creature in the womb doesn't feel any pain, so to me late stage abortion is clearly a savage form of murder. I do firmly believe people that commit these abortions belong in the psych-ward.

I could go along with legal abortion up to three weeks after the conception, but maybe just once a lifetime for every woman. I don't think the suffering of the creature is very substantial then yet. But it still is the termination of a human life.
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6093
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: bad Breitbart

Postby Jakob » Mon Oct 08, 2018 1:26 pm

I used to be quite leftist twenty years ago. But I've traveled the first, second and third world and took in every political view I could find, and now I believe now that what is now called liberalism is a collective insanity of clumped together incomplete human beings, always leading to tremendous cruelties. I mean this completely honestly. I suffer deeply when I read something like this, published in an actual newspaper.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/07/opin ... %2Fopinion

How could this happen? What is wrong with these people?
It really hurts man. We will fight to the bitter end against this, and I recommend you, as a liberal, start looking at your own side. It will be very bad if people like you keep complacently gong along with this.
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6093
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: bad Breitbart

Postby Mr Reasonable » Mon Oct 15, 2018 10:24 am

You have to think about this man, the GOP is losing court battles where they've gerrymandered the maps all over the place. Kavanaugh flew to Florida to meet Jeb Bush, George W's brother, who was then governor of the state to "help out" with the recount, which ended in the Supreme court deciding the election and Bush becoming president. During his tenure the deficit went through the roof. We went to war in the middle east over weapons of mass destruction, and Dick Cheney made 100 million in halliburton stock. With the gerrymandered majority in the congress, they've struck down parts of the civil rights act and allowed states to impose restrictive voting laws. A republican in Georgia today snatched a cell phone from a constituent's hand on a college campus when asked about a specific instance of this in his state. Trump lost the popular vote.

Right now in Georgia they're using a new law that requires an "exact match" on voter registrations etc. This has been taken to an extreme as in, an extra space between two words in an address, or a missing hyphen can result in someone's registration being held back and that person being unable to vote in the upcoming election. The guy enforcing the law in one state office is running for a higher office. The race is very close. Over 50000 people's registration is being held up on a technicality, and you guessed it...the majority of them are registered with the party that opposes him.

Whether you or I disagree with a particular political ideal isn't...well...shouldn't be relevant here. I think that people should be governed by leaders that they choose. If the whole world decides it wants to go to hell in a handbasket, then they have the right. If that's not the case, or if that's not how it should be, then what's the alternative?
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 25538
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself


Return to Current Events



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users