What? Care to connect the dots for me? I described a very specific “flavor” of person I wasn’t particularly interested in hearing from (highly specific, in fact – much more specific than just “those who supported Kavanaugh”). I never said I wasn’t interested in hearing from anyone who supported Kavanaugh.
HurricaneDitka, is it so important to you that America become a dictatorship? Because that’s the only actual policy that Kavanaugh holds, it’s the reason he was chosen for his position, and it’s the basis on which he’s going to make his decisions as a judge.
Bullshit. As if you need the dots connected. Not going to bother trying to nail down jello again though.
I’m often very specific on purpose. It’s because I have a very specific target in mind, and deliberately want to avoid making a general comment. If I wanted to make a general comment about Kavanaugh supporters, I would have made a general comment about them. But I made a very specific comment about a very specific subset of Kavanaugh supporters.
We’ve had this kind of disagreement before – hopefully you can see this is based on a different way of relating and communicating rather than dishonesty. Best wishes to you.
There’s a list of silly ad hominem attacks. Do you have anything substantive to say? Any evidence to support your assertions?
Like, his statement that it should be illegal to investigate the President?
Honestly, the hard truth here is that cases like this have two victims. The innocent man who intended nothing more than to rock out with his cock out, and the wonan who never saw it coming. The friends, apparently just trying to pull a funny boner, are the real dicks here.
We’ve had this disagreement before because you quite often dishonestly describe the plain words we see. You weren’t specific at all in your original question and when HD answered you basically said “sorry, I meant if non-scumbags have changed their mind” and think we are all supposed to buy that you were merely clarifying your question. Like I said, that’s bullshit and I’m done.
I wasn’t specific at first, and perhaps I should have been. But why is it “dishonest” to be more specific in a later post? We’re just talking here. No reason to get all upset and storm off.
Because you weren’t being more specific, you were just saying “I don’t want your asshole opinion, HD”.
If that’s how it came across, I deeply apologize.
Now hopefully we can get back to being critical of sexual abusers and their enablers.
Do you have a substantive reply to make? I don’t see why any of this requires personal insults.
You will all calm down or I’ll isdues warnings for personal shots and lock the thing down.
I hope that’s clear.
Nm
“Scare him into turning Liberal”? How the F does that work?
The most infuriating part here is that so many Republicans in office seem to act as if no one could possibly be honestly concerned about fighting sexual assault and rape in our society. That anything beyond political concerns are just not believable to them.
Anyway. That there are more accusations that were not investigated is, I doubt, a surprise to anyone, the most Rightward partisan inclusive. HD, is the revelation that more accusations existed that were not fully investigated a surprise to you? And it does not seem like anyone of any position is going to have their positions changed by this alone.
Not sure what hypothetical something would be enough to get anyone to shift their perspective.
From each side. Would Blasey Ford on tape stating that she really wasn’t very sure about any of these memories be enough on the one side? Would Kavanaugh on tape bragging about getting away lying about his behavior in college be enough on the other?
Is calling for Kavanaugh’s impeachment now a wise political move?
The fact that there were unfollowed leads is not news to anyone who has followed the story. There were people complaining during the actual confirmation hearings that the FBI declined to interview them. The witness mentioned in the OPs article isn’t talking to the press. So this thread/“new” accusation is just, as mentioned earlier, an excuse to gripe “we wuz robbed”.
No, and no (at least not for the dems, but that’s never really stopped them in the past).
It’s actual news, even if it’s not terribly surprising news. It’s appropriate to discuss and be angry about further indications that the Kavanaugh investigation was a sham, even if they aren’t that surprising.