BREAKING: What does Collins actually think?

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 10, 2018

You'll see no journalist ask:
In today's hard-copy New York Times, subscribers are treated to a fairly typical non-discussion discussion.

The entertaining non-discussion consumes the top half of page A11. Hard-copy headline included, Kelly Virella introduces the feature like this:
VIRELLA (10/10/18): How Did People React to the Kavanaugh Confirmation? 40,000 Told Us

After the Senate’s confirmation of Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court on Saturday, we asked women across the country to tell us how they were reacting.

We heard from 40,000 people.

Many of the women—lawyers, teachers, home-schoolers, military spouses—expressed anger and bitterness over the nomination fight and those on the other side of the political divide. They also told us what lessons from this confirmation they will pass down to the next generation.

We asked, If you were to pass down one lesson to your son or daughter from the Kavanaugh nomination and hearings, what would it be? Here is a selection of their responses, edited and condensed for clarity.
The Times provides eleven of the 40,000 reactions. In truth, the eleven reactions were "edited and condensed" for near-perfect uselessness.

On balance, the feature is a standard journalistic non-presentation presentation. Nothing of value can be learned from a big pile of piffle like this.

Yes, a presentation of this type can be fun for browsing purposes. But it tells us nothing of value. Primarily, it serves an entertainment purpose.

In this feature, the Times presents reactions from eleven women, out of 40,000 such respondents. (These women are identified in the hard-copy headline as "people.")

For what it's worth, two of the women seem to say, in so many words, that they think Christine Blasey Ford was lying in her allegation against Brett Kavanaugh and Mike Judge.

We wonder how those women reached that conclusion—but needless to say, they weren't asked. This is largely an entertainment feature. It isn't a search for the logic of a situation, and it isn't a search for the likely or probable truth.

It isn't a search for the actual thinking of actual voters. On the whole, it's a pile of journalistic pretense.

Why did the women from Texas and Arkansas seem to say that Blasey Ford was lying? The New York Times didn't ask! But then, someone else will never be asked to explain her conclusion about what Blasey Ford said.

That person is Susan Collins. For reasons which won't be pursued any further, Collins said the following in her speech on the Senate floor:
COLLINS (10/5/18): Mr. President, I listened carefully to Christine Blasey Ford's testimony before the Judiciary Committee. I found her testimony to be sincere, painful and compelling. I believe that she is a survivor of a sexual assault and that this trauma has upended her life.
Collins says she found Blasey Ford's testimony to be be sincere. Presumably, that means that Collins doesn't believe that Blasey Ford was lying.

It's also important to understand this—Collins didn't say that she thinks Blasey Ford's allegation is false. She seems to have said that the allegation actually could be true.

Collins merely said that the accusation can't meet a reasonable standard of proof. After rattling off a pile of remarkably thin "evidence," Collins went on to say this:
COLLINS: Mr. President, the Constitution does not provide guidance on how we are supposed to evaluate these competing claims. It leaves that decision up to each senator. This is not a criminal trial, and I do not believe that claims such as these need to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Nevertheless, fairness would dictate that the claims at least should meet a threshold of "more likely than not" as our standard.

The facts presented do not mean that Professor Ford was not sexually assaulted that night or at some other time, but they do lead me to conclude that the allegations fail to meet the "more likely than not" standard. Therefore, I do not believe that these charges can fairly prevent Judge Kavanaugh from serving on the court.
Translated, that seems to mean this:

According to Collins, it's possible that Blasey Ford actually was assaulted "that night." (No night was ever specified.) It's also possible that she was assaulted by Kavanaugh and Judge, just as she said. It's just that the allegation can't meet the threshold of being "more likely than not."

Does Collins' presentation make sense? In her testimony, Blasey Ford made her claim against Kavanaugh with a "degree of certainty" of "one hundred percent," and Collins believes that the claim is sincere. That said:

If Collins believes Blasey Ford isn't lying, in what other way could her claim be untrue? Presumably, Collins believes that Blasey Ford may have misidentified her attackers. She says it's more likely than not!

Is that what Senator Collins believes? Amazingly but predictably, no one is going to ask!

No one is going to ask about that because that's not what our journalists do. Rational animals though they may be, they tend, like Hughes, to keep it simple, and they tend to defer to authority figures and to power structures.

If Collins believes Blasey Ford is sincere, on what possible basis does she doubt the truth of her charge? No one is going to ask about that! Tomorrow, we'll discuss many other questions which didn't get asked as the rational animals in our upper-end press corps pretended to sort out this charge.

The Times burned the top half of today's page A11 with some fairly typical piffle. It's there so we can enjoy a good browsing session, in which we hate some people for their remarks while falling in love with some others.

What do Republican senators think about what Blasey Ford said? Ten thousand questions went unasked in this, the biggest recent public discussion in this, our rational world.

Tomorrow: What do Republican senators think? Why didn't journalists ask?

85 comments:

  1. "The Times provides eleven of the 40,000 reactions. In truth, the eleven reactions were "edited and condensed" for near-perfect uselessness."

    Yeah, Goebbels would be proud - what else is new?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I see Donald the Great Big Con Man is going to replace Nikki Haley with someone from Goldman Sachs.
      You, as opposed to DavidinCal (who is into Trump for the bigotry), must be absolutely furious.
      First question, where are you going to set-up the protests, Mar a Lago, the White House, in front of Trump Towers?

      Delete
    2. Why would I be furious, dear butthurt dembot? I'd love it.

      If smart people switch teams and start working for Donald The Superior - so much the better.

      Comprende?

      Delete
    3. "If you aren't kissing Establishment Elite ass, you aren't trying."

      Actual quote from Donald J. Trump

      Delete
    4. That's quite the Putinesque response, 1:05.

      Delete
    5. No worries, Vladdie.

      Delete
    6. My testimony on how i won £4,000,000 with the great help of Dr gbojie powerful lottery spell: Call him +2349066410185

      It's unbelievable how fortunate I feel after finding your website. For the past 14 years, I have been looking for a way on how i will win lottery. Money situation was one of the biggest problem to me. I had a huge amount of debt and I didn't know what to do. Out of complete and total desperation, I contacted many of those so-called individuals who promised powerful magic to win the lottery, witchcraft or black magic. None of them worked and none were as wonderful, affectionate and warm as Dr gbojie has been. He is definitely different from the others and I felt immediate hope and strength from hearing about the promises he had to offer. He carries an air of purity and divine strength that is as pure as fresh snow on the ground. I requested Dr gbojie most powerful spells and I was relieved right away that I had someone to solve my problems for me. His spells worked wonders,i won (Four Million pounds) my money troubles resolved itself after winning the lottery. My life change over night,i now have my own house and two cars,also i am free from my debts. Dr gbojie, I have no idea what I would have done without you being there to help me out. If you are there and you need a powerful magic to win the lottery,Dr. gbojie is the right person you need to trust and work with,i promise you that you will also win and share your own testimony. You can contact him via email:

      gbojiespiritualtemple@gmail.com Call or text him +2349066410185

      website : http://gbojiespiritualtemple.website2.me









































      My testimony on how i won £4,000,000 with the great help of Dr gbojie powerful lottery spell: Call him +2349066410185

      It's unbelievable how fortunate I feel after finding your website. For the past 14 years, I have been looking for a way on how i will win lottery. Money situation was one of the biggest problem to me. I had a huge amount of debt and I didn't know what to do. Out of complete and total desperation, I contacted many of those so-called individuals who promised powerful magic to win the lottery, witchcraft or black magic. None of them worked and none were as wonderful, affectionate and warm as Dr gbojie has been. He is definitely different from the others and I felt immediate hope and strength from hearing about the promises he had to offer. He carries an air of purity and divine strength that is as pure as fresh snow on the ground. I requested Dr gbojie most powerful spells and I was relieved right away that I had someone to solve my problems for me. His spells worked wonders,i won (Four Million pounds) my money troubles resolved itself after winning the lottery. My life change over night,i now have my own house and two cars,also i am free from my debts. Dr gbojie, I have no idea what I would have done without you being there to help me out. If you are there and you need a powerful magic to win the lottery,Dr. gbojie is the right person you need to trust and work with,i promise you that you will also win and share your own testimony. You can contact him via email:

      gbojiespiritualtemple@gmail.com Call or text him +2349066410185

      website : http://gbojiespiritualtemple.website2.me

      Delete
  2. "Is that what Senator Collins believes? Amazingly but predictably, no one is going to ask!"

    Um, hello, Bob! On CNN’s State of the Union:

    "When asked directly by [Dana] Bash whether it’s possible Kavanaugh had assaulted Ford, Collins was more direct. “I do not believe that Brett Kavanaugh was her assailant,” she said. “I do believe she was assaulted. I don’t know by whom. And I’m not certain when.”"

    Will Somerby's endless dissembling ever stop?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Okay - she was asked if it was "possible," and Collins didn't really respond to that question, instead choosing to say that she did not believe Kavanaugh was the assailant. That's still consistent with her explanation that such a charge should be proven "more likely than not," but it leaves open that Collins believes that it's "possible" Kavanaugh committed the assault. Did Bash follow-up to get an answer to her question?

      Delete
  3. What do you get when you miix Irving Berlin, Nelson Riddle, and Linda Ronstadt?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8B1oIcTh604

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I loved Ronstadt. But she never sang in the Gaelic. Máire Brennan has one of the loveliest voices I've ever heard.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRUuwRsCPUE

      And the tremolo in her voice destroys me in this bit.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TANXVmO8Df4&list=PLzZ38KLcp-iPp9BRu_SH_C9xraCjQZE0u&index=4

      Leroy

      Delete
    2. When did this become a music appreciation blog?

      This is just as certainly spam as the long messages in Arabic and the spellcaster, and the person selling hacking services.

      Can't you guys take this elsewhere? Maybe to email?

      Delete
    3. Just ignore us. We like it here, but sometimes we're bored.

      Leroy

      Delete
  4. "We wonder how those women reached that conclusion—but needless to say, they weren't asked."

    If you have any experience evaluating witnesses, you'll have noticed Ford's testimony was shaped and shaded to push a story she was advised to promote at every opportunity. There were tells. "Let me draw you a picture" of the house, the location of which she changed and others. Several points she was obviously coached to push because Kavanaugh's team had already openly released the details of his defense. The women who believed she lied would not be required to know which points of her testimony differed from her original story, though they might have known. Ford's behavior and odd (obvious) emphasis of certain areas that rang false in her testimony would lead any neutral observer to disbelieve her.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. All witnesses are prepared by their attorneys to present their evidence. Most people who testify before congress are similarly prepared to do so. Why shouldn't she address points that had been of concern to Republicans in her prepared statement? That doesn't make her a liar. But those challenging her have had very little to hang their criticism on, so this kind of nonsense is presented as a reason to disbelieve her and you claim any neutral observer would be swayed by it. If that were the case, no jury would convict anyone accused of a crime because all witnesses go through this preparation.

      Delete
    2. She didn't address points of concern, she departed from her original story in several ways that would align with Kavanaugh's solid defenses against that story. This woman had some motive to lie that might have a little or a lot to do with politics. I tend to believe there was more fraud than misremembering. That doesn't make her unsympathetic because in the end she was used, and she appears to be a fragile person if not an honest one.

      Delete
    3. To the extent that you are considering the woman and her politics, you are blaming the victim and not considering what happened. Even Democrats can be raped, you know. When a Democrat is raped by a Republican, it doesn't make it OK because the two are political "enemies." I believe Republicans are willing to believe that Ford was a Democratic operative because the Republicans dug up exactly such operatives to go after Bill Clinton, among others. The difference is that the paid operatives stories fell apart (or they wouldn't testify to them under oath) and were not "credible" (that word does mean something). The question isn't whether she was "sympathetic" or "fragile" but whether the events she described were committed by Kavanaugh and Judge. There was never any exploration of that question because the White House did not allow the FBI to substantiate the details she provided in her statement. Evidence would have clarified this, including evidence about who leaked her letter and evidence about who she talked to and how she found her way to the Senate hearing. If there was a plan to take down Kavanaugh, the FBI could have proved that too. But the White House didn't let it investigate that.

      Kavanaugh told so many baldfaced lies about his yearbook and his own behavior in high school that he had no credibility whatsoever when he denied Ford's accusations. But even Kavanaugh deserved an investigation, not the partisan "belief" that was heaped on him to put him on the court. He now will be thought of as a sexual predator for the rest of his days, because the FBI didn't exonerate him -- it was forbidden to investigate, so Kavanaugh lives under that shadow. That would be tragic if he were truly innocent, but I don't believe he is. Nothing about his behavior suggests an innocent man, including his repeated failure to request that the FBI investigate Ford's allegations.

      Delete
    4. Decent people do not consider a completely uncorroborated allegation of a 36 year old event, alleged to have taken place in high school, leveled in the midst of a monumental political battle, grounds on which they may ethically view someone as a sexual predator. Decent accused men don't care how indecent people regard them or claim to regard them.

      Delete
    5. Actually, the allegation was not uncorroborated. There were several sources of corroboration of a kind generally accepted in such cases, ranging from people told about the assault long before this political battle, to Kavanaugh's own calendar, to evidence of similar misbehavior at other times and with other people, to Judge's autobiographical novel, to Kavanaugh's own yearbook entries. A decent accused man would have come clean but there is no evidence whatsoever that Kavanaugh is unusually decent, and in fact, his past career and previous behavior suggest he has questionable decency. Would a decent man make up stories about Hillary Clinton murdering Vince Foster, that surely must have been upsetting to Foster's family, setting aside the distress of the Clintons? I have a lot of trouble imagining any decent person doing that kind of thing.

      Delete
    6. You're impressed by made up stories about Brett Kavanaugh but reject very credible allegations about Hillary Clinton murdering Vince Foster?

      Sad.

      Delete
    7. Kavanaugh was assigned the Vince Foster investigation and concluded Foster committed suicide.

      He was accused of "covering up Foster's murder" which was the foundation for Alex Jones and others' opposition to his nomination.

      How did you come by the belief Kavanaugh made up stories about Vince Foster? Maddow said so?

      Delete
    8. Anon 1:07, that is not true. Kavanaugh reopened the Vince Foster investigation. He initiated it by bringing new "leads" from conspiracy activists to Starr.

      This was after Robert Fiske, the original independent counsel, had already concluded it was a suicide. As well as a separate investigation by the National Park Service and even a third investigation by the Government Affairs Senate Committee.

      Paul Begala reported that Kavanaugh insisted on tormenting the Foster family even going so far as to demand and obtain hair samples from Foster's young daughter.

      Yes, the right wing was trying to prove and pro-longed this absurd conspiracy theory that the First Lady was involved in murdering her longtime friend.

      Delete
    9. What was with Kavanaugh's histrionics during the hearings?
      After the multiple Vince Foster and Benghazi investigations, he should be keenly aware that one investigation is never enough.

      Delete
    10. Certainly the Clintons appreciated further investigation after new evidence emerged so this charge of murder would not be left hanging over their heads. There are still doubters so perhaps another investigation is in order.

      Delete
    11. No new evidence emerged, you clown.

      Delete
    12. New "leads"! Surely each new "lead" must be examined and all investigations be open-ended so the accused can obtain the most cleared state possible. Resistance to this favor, means the Clintons must have murdered Foster and Kavanaugh covered up their crime.

      Delete
  5. Can we eliminate a person's career based on a single accusation with no corroborating evidence? That's an impossible standard in partisan politics, where so many are willing to lie. Look at the two men who each separately claimed that they were one who jumped on top of Ford. Or, Julie Swetnick who claimed that she regularly attended parties where gang rapes took place. Regardless of one's personal belief, Ford's unsupported testimony, which lacked specific details, should not decide Kavenaugh's fate. I think that was Collins's point.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, you fucking lying sack of shit treasonous bastard. We should throw judges in prison for repeatedly and with impunity commit perjury under their sworn testimony to the United States Senate. Go fuck yourself you lying sack of shit ghoul.

      Delete
    2. The Supreme Court is his career? Manifest destiny, as it were? He should have been eliminated based on his own testimony.

      Delete
    3. "Can we eliminate a person's career based on a single accusation with no corroborating evidence?"

      Yes. Answered, by the Central Park Five.

      Delete
    4. "We should throw judges in prison"

      I like this idea, dembot.

      But I like Donald The Splendid's idea of locking up a certain California senator, for using, exploiting, and manipulating a mentally deranged woman, even more.

      Do you agree, dembot?

      Delete
    5. You mean Donny Chickenshit, aka, David Dennison, Porn star fucker and all around fraud and tax cheat? Is that who you mean, vodka breath?

      Delete
    6. David,

      Who proposed to "eliminate" Judge Kavanaugh's career based on the Ford accusation? Isn't it reasonable to say that perhaps a different person should be nominated even if there's only, say, a 30% chance that Ford's story is accurate?

      Delete
    7. Meh, you're just being stupid. If you start encouraging innuendos and baseless accusations, you'll just get a whole lot more of them.

      Delete
    8. 1;20,
      And cries of "Lock her up!"

      Delete
    9. These "lock her up" chants are interesting. It is as if Trump is giving permission to express misogynistic feelings, to taunt girls and women. The chant obviously has nothing to do with any crime, just hostility. They never chant "lock him up" toward anyone. This is just about females.

      Delete
    10. Yes, it's not "his career" - it's just the Supreme Court. I would have eliminated the the Supreme Court appointment based on all the lies he told that day and the way he told them. He showed himself to be a haughty liar as well as an unrefined, spoiled turd. Can't we at least pretend to do better for that position? His career would have journeyed on just fine in the slimy swamp from which he was weaned and always thrived.

      Delete
    11. "Lock her up!" or "Yes, we can!" - what the fuck is the difference? Same number of syllables, no different from "Blah, blah, blah!"

      Delete
    12. "Republican" or "Pieces of shit", what's the difference? Same number of syllables, and absolutely without a doubt, the same definition.

      Delete
    13. Precisely, dembot. Or "Democrat" or "Liberal".

      Delete
    14. 11:11,
      Right-wing math strikes again!

      Delete
  6. Who says Collins thinks?

    ReplyDelete
  7. "We wonder how those women reached that conclusion—but needless to say, they weren't asked. This is largely an entertainment feature. It isn't a search for the logic of a situation, and it isn't a search for the likely or probable truth."

    Why weren't reporters asking why there was no investigation? Why didn't Collins protest the fake investigation that was conducted? Why didn't she insist on getting to the bottom of the situation instead of letting Republican colleagues railroad the appointment?

    I don't believe anyone, including Ford, would want Kavanaugh to be denied an appointment without thorough investigation of her accusations. She would want to be sure, as much as anyone else.

    Claiming that Ford herself must provide her own proof is ridiculous. That doesn't happen in criminal situations because the victims of crimes do not have the means to conduct an appropriate investigation. Police do, and the FBI does. The most extreme example of this is expecting a murdered person to prove the guilt of his or her killer. Both Ford and Kavanaugh deserved an investigation.

    Reporters should be asking why no investigation was conducted. We all know the answer to that -- they had the votes and they were afraid of what they would find out. But due process required that Ford's claims be investigated and that didn't happen. That is why women are angry.

    The ratio of 2 out of 11 who found Kavanaugh's denials credible should scare the hell out of Republicans. It means women know that Ford was mistreated by this process and are not sticking with the Republican line, even when they are Republicans. They cannot win elections with 2 out of 11 women supporting them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 8 out of 11 women know Ford and Kavanaugh were mistreated by Democrats, and the Democrats' tactics were unethical as were Ford's. The other 3 lack the intelligence to understand that truth.

      Delete
    2. 7:25,
      Not 11 out of 11?
      Up your troll game. You don't really expect to get compensated for such shitty trolling, do you?

      Delete
    3. Ford's 36 year old allegations would never be investigated or prosecuted further once their lack of corroboration had been established. We haven't done witch hunts in since the 17th century, much as the Democrats would like to bring back guilt and unending investigation by allegation.

      Delete
    4. 7:30,
      Is that why the GOP stopped after one Benghazi investigation?
      Turns out i have the Liberal super-power, called "memory".

      Delete
    5. Don't people know that the witch allegations in Salem were current, not decades old? Further, evidence was presented at those trials, but it was different than evidence we would accept today. Those were actual trials, unlike the farce that played out with Kavanaugh.

      You would think a fine man like that would have welcomed an investigation with the potential to clear his name. Did he perhaps know that his buddy Judge did the assaulting, and was he covering for him? What a wonderful friend! Or did he fear that his own misbehavior would be exposed. Did Republicans fear that their claims of Democratic shenanigans would be exposed as false if there were an actual FBI investigations? What did the Republicans have to fear?

      Delete
    6. typo: current should be contemporaneous (obviously the trials happened a long time ago)

      Delete
    7. So now leftists are defending the Salem witch trials?

      Delete
  8. VIRELLA's first headline said, "How Did People React to the Kavanaugh Confirmation?How Did People React to the Kavanaugh Confirmation?" But, he only asked women. Men probable had a different reaction.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This whole argument about whether Collins and the republicans believed Ford or not is pure unadulterated bullshit.

      The sad fact of the matter is they know with virtual certainty that Ford is telling the truth but just don't give a shit, they don't think it is a serious stain on his biography.

      Of course, like all good lying republicans nowadays, they are just too chickenshit to forthrightly state their real position, so they twist into pretzels trying to have it both ways.

      Just like Captain Chickenshit is claiming he is trying to save pre-existing conditions in the ACA, when the entire republican congress is dedicated to trying to remove the most essential core element in requiring insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions, which is that they don't penalize you with prices that make it unreasonable to people to pay for it.

      GOP - the party of lying fucking cowards

      Delete
    2. It's time for every unfucked brave dembot to move to Canada.

      Delete
    3. mm has some real anger issues! Maybe Dr. Ford can offer some therapy.

      Delete
    4. Meh. Lame copy-paste 'anger'. I'm not impressed. Soros' hard-earned dollars wasted. Sad.

      Delete
    5. If every word were taken as true, and there is no reason it should be, it would not amount to an event that should place a stain on Justice Kavanaugh's biography or that of any high school virgin who had one such drunken moment in his history. Now if it involved an intern in SCOTUS chambers in his 50's or abuses of volunteers, agaisnt which he defended himself by insinuating their social class suggests they are liars, that would be different.

      Delete
    6. Anon, thank you for confirming my perception of the situation. You all don't give a shit if it happened, Duh. Of course if it was no big deal, he wouldn't have lied his ass off about it under oath at his confirmation hearing.

      Delete
    7. Assuming it occurred as described by Ford, Kavanaugh's alleged assault on Ford would have taken place within a high school culture in which boys fantasized about doing inappropriate things with and to girls. These kids talked back and forth to each other about such activities and it was the stuff of their everyday interactions, their culture. The problem isn't only that Kavanaugh tried to enact his Bermuda Triangle in real life while drunk, it is that he and his friends were preoccupied with drinking and sexual activity to the exclusion of other things, that there was apparently no moderating influence on their behavior, that they were enabled in this by a yearbook staff that printed their yearnings, by parents who didn't monitor their activities, and by businesses willing to sell them alcohol. None of this excuses Kavanaugh in the least, but it is what women mean when they talk about rape culture. It is real, and to the extent that adult men brush this off as "nothing," it is being perpetuated so that other young men can assault and hurt young women. This is wrong and it went undiscussed during the hearing because Kavanaugh pretended it didn't exist, and the Senate went along with him.

      This is what I would mean by saying "you all don't give a shit if it happened," and it has little to do with the past and everything to do with the way adult professional athletes treat their wives and girlfriends, the way men think they should treat women after they've had a few drinks, and the way women are treated on dating websites. Until our society addresses this, future Kavanaughs will arise and be rewarded for their youthful misbehavior while women are handicapped going forward into their adult lives by things later chalked up to "lack of self confidence".

      And no one has the guts to wonder why women are so mad about this!

      Delete
    8. Check out the snowflake at 3:45.
      Republicans could only be sometimes accused of projection, if they didn't do it 100% of the time.

      Delete
    9. 5:44 is part of dealing with rape culture advising young women to avoid attending parties at which young, unsupervised, unparented men will be drinking and testosterone poisoned?

      Or does feminism dictate that this "excuses" those males and thus young women should be placed at risk even though in a court of law without witnesses, men who rape them will be acquitted, given that we recognize the evil of a presumption of guilt, played out many times in history?

      Delete
    10. No young woman should expect that if she goes to a party with friends, she will be raped. She said she was not herself drinking. Being drunk is no excuse for assaulting or raping someone.

      I don't know what "feminism" says about this because there are different feminists with opinions and different feminist theories and schools of thought. In past decades, boys who attacked girls were hunted down and beaten by the girl's brothers and father or uncles, without benefit of trial and with full approval of the community. Then the boy was run out of town. But communities don't function like that any more. It is taking the legal system a while to catch up and substitute that kind of vigilante social justice with institutionalized protections for all. We are not a society that wants women to wear burkhas, be always chaperoned, never leave the house, always have a male relative present, be killed if honor is affronted despite these precautions. That isn't America's vision for young women. Men don't seem to be figuring things out, and they have the power. Women's anger will perhaps hurry them up, or they will be replaced by women who understand the issues and have the will to solve the problem.

      Delete
    11. 7:48

      "No young woman should expect that if she goes to a party with friends, she will be raped".

      Why not? Not only should she expect that she will be raped, she should expect that she will be abducted and violently killed. I don't know if you know this but the world is an extremely violent and crazy place. Maybe you grew up in a rich suburb or something. But no, rapes, abductions, violent, sadistic beatings and brutal murders not to mention savage mental and psychological cruelty against women are and always have been a fact of life.

      Your solution is to institutionalize protections for all? That simply is a fantasy that will never work. Think about it. You would like to turn to the government to protect you at all times so you can go to parties with your guard down and be free of any expectation that anything bad could happen to you? Sister, that just ain't the way it works.

      You're going to sit there and wait for society to address it? Government is the solution to this ancient problem? How is society going to address the horrors and atrocities committed against women today as they have been committed throughout the entirety of history? How? Tell me how? What will be the first step? And what will the end be? Society will somehow address all violence against women and then rape and murder and abduction will become a thing of the past because somehow society will have addressed it and at that time you will be able to finally roam free in your short skirt and your high heels drunk as you want because you are free now from any worry or expectation of violence because society has come along and waved it's magic wand, you can explain to me how they did it, but they have come along and freed you from all concern and freed you from the responsibility and expectation of protecting yourself and even freed you from the responsibility of expecting anything to happen to you!? How lucky you are. Women have protected themselves throughout all of him human history from the sadistic, violent sexual acts that men perpetrate against them but you were fortunate enough to come along at a time where society learned how to fix it and that responsibility just went away, the expectation of anything bad happening went away and you are now free to do as you please now that society has fixed the problem so magically and wonderfully and so completely.

      Look dimwit, if you want to be free and not wear a burka, if you want to not be chaperoned and have the freedom to leave the house by yourself and walk the violent streets of this violent world without a male relative present, the price you pay is vigilance, awareness and self-defense at all times of which an expectation of violence, rape and death are a primary component.

      Delete
    12. You need to stop reading comics and spend time with human beings. When was the last time anyone was raped or killed at any social event you attended?

      Delete
    13. What rape? Ford's story sounds more like an obsessive fury against some boy who made out with her but refused to fuck her 36 years ago.

      Sad, of course, but these things do happen.

      Delete
    14. 11:52

      You're the one who said rape culture was real and how you are anxious to have government come along and provide "institutional protections" so you can go to parties, "be drunk" and expect nothing to happen. You can't have it both ways infant.

      Delete
    15. Nicely argued, Dick Trickle. I'm curious about what feminists mean by "institutional protections." I think we just got a hint of it with the Kavanaugh circus. They mean shifting the burden of proof. They've never studied Salem or other examples, or maybe they have and think it sounds super.

      They believe voting in people who would enforce it is a good plan. Got news for you feminist ladies, we're good with lifetime penalties for rapists but you're not going to get your wet dream of a power to imprison men by pointing an accusatory finger.
      Zero men would back you or mothers of sons for that matter.

      Who'd fight for your side, once you've succeeded in bringing about this fantasy of a sex showdown? Beto?

      Better to adjust to the reality so eloquently laid out by Dick. The institutional changes that once worked effectively were women facing reality and protecting themselves from what men actually are and have always been and always will be (ask a few honest ones). Men will rape, kill, abuse, use, hump and dump. Boys will be boys. Predators gonna prey. We have a justice system that requires due process, so women need a strategy. Women are the gatekeepers if they choose to accept the responsibility. If not, too many will be victimized.

      Men are not exempt from facing similar realities of physical exposure to the savage nature of other men and accept them and get on with life, armed if necessary.

      Delete
    16. 11:52 and 10:44,
      Nice. Shoot first, ask questions later.
      Every man is a (unarmed) black man, and every woman is a cop. I like it.

      Delete
    17. The Ringmasters and Directors of the "Kavanaugh circus" was of course the majority party who controlled and orchestrated the entire show in exactly the manner they wanted it to.

      Too fucking bad that Kavanaugh's credibility was shattered in front of the world.

      Delete
    18. @11:07

      An accusation is not a conviction. Anyone can be accused of anything, accidentally or otherwise. That's why we have due process.

      In this case, due process didn't occur because Kavanaugh and the Republicans in congress didn't let the FBI investigation the accusations. That left Ford without justice and Kavanaugh with a besmirched reputation. But Kavanaugh had the power to demand a full investigation, so his reputation is deserved. Too fucking bad a judge doesn't believe in the legal system he serves and won't let the people learn the truth. He let Ford be smeared as a crazy woman. Why? Because he was afraid she was right? We won't know because he was a coward and let Republicans railroad his nomination.

      Delete
    19. Are you crushed by what you apparently perceive as horrible injustice, dembot? Does it make you feel hopeless, desperate?

      Describe your feelings, please. Are you now planning to move to Canada?

      Delete
    20. Obtaining statements (denials) from every eyewitness named by the accuser of a high school non-event 36 years ago in the context of a political battle is too much due process if anything. Further "investigation" is witch hunt and everyone knows this, only some choose not to participate in witch hunts because they are wrong. The only reputations ruined by this fiasco are the Democrats'. Decency recognizes the right outcome happened and decent people are on higher alert (woke) to what the Democrats seem to want to do to every valuable legal institution and principle defining their country.

      Delete
    21. Of course she's lying, there's no doubt whatsoever.

      Why? It's perfectly obvious: TDS. As demonstrated by you and other dembots about a million times here.

      Delete
    22. TDS will end-up like BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome), where the sheer awfulness of Republican governance is gives Bush supporters BDS, and they had to put on tri-cornered hats and make believe they never heard of Bush, after giving him full-throated support for close to a decade.
      Don't sleep on getting yourself a costume for when the Trump Presidency hits the fan, Mao.

      Delete
    23. @12:53,
      All Republicans are cowards. Once you realize every Right-wing accusation is a confession, you'll understand why they call Liberals "snowflakes".

      Delete
    24. mm: Lacks vocabulary outside of curse words AND believes the tale of Julie Swetnick. Amazin

      Delete
  9. There's no point to asking Collins what she thought when her decision was so obviously politically motivated. She needed to keep those submarine bases and other defense spending in Maine. That's what her constituents elected her to do. Why is Somerby being such a child about this?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We just like reminding you that you guys think Julie Swetnick is credible...and Collins called it out!

      Delete
  10. More comparative ancient philosophy. Please. At least it kept out the single-note morons.

    Bob, resume the unbeaten path! This is not a drill.

    Leroy

    ReplyDelete
  11. POWERFUL SPELL CASTER THAT BROUGHT MY EX HUSBAND BACK INTO MY LIFE AFTER HE LEFT ME EMAIL HIM VIA EMAIL INFINITYLOVESPELL@GMAIL.COM OR INFINITYLOVESPELL@YAHOO.COM ADD HIM ON WHATSAPP +2348118829899

    Hello my fellow friends online I'm Diana Gilbert from USA, I want to use this medium to thank Dr Great because he brought back my Ex husband. my husband left me for his ex girlfriend he had before he married me it's a difficult situation for me I called and beg him to come back he refused he said he don't love me anymore I tried every possible way to get him back all was in vain I told my friend about it and she gave me Dr Great email and I emailed him and told him my problem and he told me what to do and I did it and he cast a love spell which brought back my husband within 24 hours. If you need help in getting back together with your Ex, email Dr Great at infinitylovespell@gmail.com or infinitylovespell@yahoo.com WhatsApp him +2348118829899

    ReplyDelete
  12. POWERFUL SPELL CASTER THAT BROUGHT MY EX HUSBAND BACK INTO MY LIFE AFTER HE LEFT ME EMAIL HIM VIA EMAIL INFINITYLOVESPELL@GMAIL.COM OR INFINITYLOVESPELL@YAHOO.COM ADD HIM ON WHATSAPP +2348118829899

    Hello my fellow friends online I'm Diana Gilbert from USA, I want to use this medium to thank Dr Great because he brought back my Ex husband. my husband left me for his ex girlfriend he had before he married me it's a difficult situation for me I called and beg him to come back he refused he said he don't love me anymore I tried every possible way to get him back all was in vain I told my friend about it and she gave me Dr Great email and I emailed him and told him my problem and he told me what to do and I did it and he cast a love spell which brought back my husband within 24 hours. If you need help in getting back together with your Ex, email Dr Great at infinitylovespell@gmail.com or infinitylovespell@yahoo.com WhatsApp him +2348118829899

    ReplyDelete
  13. Hello,

    I'm Dr Ogudugu, a real and genuine spell caster/Spiritual healer with years of experience in spell casting and an expert in all spells, i specialize exclusively in LOVE SPELL/GET REUNITE WITH EX LOVER, MONEY SPELL, POWERFUL MAGIC RING, ANY COURT CASES, FRUIT OF THE WOMB, HIV CURE, CURE FOR CANCER, HERPES, DIABETE, HERPERTITIS B, PARKINSON’S HERBAL CURE, BECOMING A MERMAID, BECOMING A VAMPIRE, SAVE CHILD BIRTH. They are all %100 Guaranteed QUICK Results, it most work. If you have any problem and you need a real and genuine spell caster to solve your problems, contact me now through my personal Email Address with problem case...Note-you can also Text/Call on WhatsApp.

    Contact me -
    Email: greatogudugu@gmail.com
    WhatsApp No: +27663492930

    ReplyDelete