Time To Smear Kavanaugh's Good Name...

[Mountain Man]

We're going to have to disagree. Quite honestly, I don't think she's "all there". She's a grown woman with a PhD, yet she presents as a scared little girl. Even when she was being sworn in, her attorney had to motion to her how to do it. I think she's been coached and pushed, and I believe she became convinced she's "doing the right thing".

You seem to be leaning toward "irrational".

[Cow Poke]

You seem to be leaning toward "irrational".

You're trying to force me into a false dichotomy. Is it "irrational" to testify to something you sincerely believe is true, even though it's not? But, hey, psychology is not my specialty. I'm just an observer of people.

Let's just say I'm inclined to believe she was necessarily lying.

[oxmixmudd]

Here's the problem for Ford: every person she named as a witness refuted her accusation. So even if something did happen to her, she has to know that it wasn't Kavanaugh.

For Ford to press ahead with her claims despite the significant reasonable doubt introduced by the denials of her own named witnesses leaves us with two and only two possibilities:

1) Ford is lying.
2) Ford is irrational.

Tell me, did she come across as irrational during the hearing?

No that is nothing but ignorance and arrogance fueled by partisan hatred.

The other very real possibility is those other people just don't remember and it actually happened. Talking to my wife about this last night. She had conversations with people at her reunion a few years ago, and it was completely random who remembered who and where. She knows she was at party y and person x was there. Person x also knows they were at the same party, but has no memory of my wife being there. And it goes around the room that way. Different people remember different things about events. Very few people remember everything.

The problem here is that you, others, are making no room whatsoever for NORMAL variation in human memory over that long a period of time and casting aspersions and judgement on Ford that simply are not merited. We remember trauma much better, much more clearly, than other events. But we may not remember the details around the trauma very well. So Ford remembers the trauma and remembers the perpetrator as Kavanaugh. But she has nothing to corroborate that, except perhaps Judge. But the reality is, Judge would not unless under a lot of duress betray his buddy Kavanaugh. So what that means is that if the event occurred, the only other person than Kavanaugh likely to have a memory of the event is best buds with kavanaugh and wouldn't reveal anything even if he remembered, even if it happened.

The fact she named names in terms of who should be able to remember she was there, that they all were there, is what to me says she believes this is what happened. For the very reason we see right now. If they were made up, absolutely they would deny knowledge. So who in their right mind names names like that unless they think there is a chance they can help confirm what they are saying?

So that's why I'm saying you need to back off. At least on Ford. Sure, rail all you want on the politicians that made this the circus it is. But your rush to judgement on Ford is callous and ignorant. There is no real reason to believe she is making this up, though there is reason to believe she could be mistaken about the identity of the person that assaulted her. Likewise we can't really know much about what is going on on the Kavanaugh side. He clearly has NOT made this sort of thing part of his adult life. But he also clearly partied a lot in high school and college, so the potential exists something like this happened.

But at this point, there is nothing that can prove anything about this. So we don't know if people are lying, confused, have holes in their memory because of alcohol or what. And that means all of us should stop acting like we know one or the other is lying. We don't.


Jim

[Cow Poke]

So that's why I'm saying you need to back off. At least on Ford. Sure, rail all you want on the politicians that made this the circus it is. But your rush to judgement on Ford is callous and ignorant.

I place all the blames on the abuse of the process for political expediency.

[Zymologist]

You have this habit, OBP, of taking statements I make and generalizing them, and then objecting to your own generalization. Yes - there is a vein of anger in Christianity. It is not in all Christians. It is not in all sects. A vein is PART of the body - or PART of the mountain. It is not the sum total of the body OR the mountain. It is present within it - in some individuals - in some sects - in some attitudes and arguments.

Nobody said anything about ALL. That is your addition - not mine.

OBP didn't say "all." Saying "there is a vein of anger in Christianity" is a generalization.

[Leonhard]

I don't think I ever claimed that Kavanaugh should not be made judge, or that any of the testimonies prove the claim true beyond a shadow of a doubt. I also said, repeatedly, that I thought that what the Democrats were doing was underhanded.

[One Bad Pig]

You have this habit, OBP, of taking statements I make and generalizing them, and then objecting to your own generalization. Yes - there is a vein of anger in Christianity.

I'm not "making" this a general statement, carpe. It IS a general statement.

It is not in all Christians. It is not in all sects. A vein is PART of the body - or PART of the mountain. It is not the sum total of the body OR the mountain. It is present within it - in some individuals - in some sects - in some attitudes and arguments.

Nobody said anything about ALL. That is your addition - not mine.

A vein is an integral part of the body, carpe. The implication of your statement, therefore, is that Christianity in general has a component of anger. If that's not the argument you intended to make, perhaps you'd care to choose a better analogy.

[seer]

Kavanaugh is voted out of committee, Flake wants a one week FBI investigation. I actually think they should do that, a one week delay will not hurt.

[Sparko]

Kavanaugh is voted out of committee, Flake wants a one week FBI investigation. I actually think they should do that, a one week delay will not hurt.

You would think. But what is going to happen is it will be a never ending series of delays and more accusations popping up. This is a coordinated attempt to push off the vote till after the election and they are not going to just stop after a week.

[seer]

You would think. But what is going to happen is it will be a never ending series of delays and more accusations popping up. This is a coordinated attempt to push off the vote till after the election and they are not going to just stop after a week.

That won't happen, Flake and the other fence sitting Republicans won't stand for it. It seems that Trump is OK with it. I personally think it would be good for the country.

[carpedm9587]

OBP didn't say "all." Saying "there is a vein of anger in Christianity" is a generalization.

Not as it was intended. The intension was to convey that I observe that "anger" is a theme that surfaces more and more and more in Christian contexts. A vein of ore is more apt than a vein in the body - so I may have sent people down a false path using that comparison since, as OBP notes, a vein in a body plays a critical function. But a vein of ore, or a thread in a tapestry is merely a small part of a larger whole. Present, but not pervasive.

And I do see more and more "anger" being expressed by those who claim to be Christian. It manifests in the modern widespread support for Trump, in the anger at being "victimized" by those who seek to limit the mixture of religion with government, the anger at "secularists" who are "ruining this country," and so forth. The anger is present - it is very real - and it is very evident. That doe snot mean everyone is angry - it does not mean it is the "heart" of Christianity. But I hear more and more Christians abandoning the "love your enemy" message in favor of the "get even with your enemy" message prevalent today.

[seer]

But I hear more and more Christians abandoning the "love your enemy" message in favor of the "get even with your enemy" message prevalent today.

Carp, what do you mean by love your enemy? What do you think that means? What do you mean by getting even?

[Sparko]

That won't happen, Flake and the other fence sitting Republicans won't stand for it. It seems that Trump is OK with it. I personally think it would be good for the country.

if they do investigate I hope they do a background check on Ford and the other women accusing him. But I think it is just more show than anything else. The FBI has nothing they can investigate about the incident itself.

[Mountain Man]

The other very real possibility is those other people just don't remember and it actually happened.

Possible, but not probable. Surely they all would have remembered the remarkable incident of Ford running down the stairs, past her friends, and out the door. But I mean, if you want to talk about what's possible then we can play that game all day:

It's possible that everybody but Ford is telling the truth.

It's possible that Ford is wilfully lying.

It's possible that Ford is delusional.

It's possible that Kavanaugh and Ford's friends are conspiring against her.

It's possible that Ford was assaulted by someone else.

It's not a matter of what's possible but what's probable, and it's most probable, based on the evidence and witness testimony, that Ford is not telling the truth, either willfully or unintentionally. There is no other possibility BASED ON THE EVIDENCE.

It's that last part you're ignoring. You falsely accuse me of "partisan hatred" (very Christian of you; shall we start calling you "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hypocrite"?) when I'm just looking at the most reasonable conclusion based on the evidence.

[seer]

if they do investigate I hope they do a background check on Ford and the other women accusing him. But I think it is just more show than anything else. The FBI has nothing they can investigate about the incident itself.

Right, we probably are going to end up with the same information we have now. But it is necessary, we just don't have the votes now.