Trump supporter says groping no big deal. Daughters nod in agreement.

[Woberts]

Yeah, I do. Though, we probably need to quantify what it is on paper verses what it is in practice. They're not related at all. There is "liberal" as in "likes equality, social structure, and tolerance" and "liberal" that is nothing more than religious zealotry attempting to jam itself down everyone's throats.

Essentially, it's the difference of building ramps to help a handicap person into a building, versus seeing those who have legs needing them removed to make it fair.

I miss classical liberalism really, if that was still a thing.

It's the same thing on paper as it is in practice.

 

[exchemist]

If he would have come out and admitted to doing very stupid things back then and asserted that he regretted them deeply etc, I think there would be no question that he would be confirmed.

But to threaten Democrats using Trump-like language and Biblical allusions and rant and rave as he did, I hope ended his chance to destroy the integrity of the Supreme Court.

Spot-on! The guy comes across as nakedly partisan and far too emotional to be a Supreme Court judge.

If you get to a state where half the population no longer respects the judgements of the Supreme Court, you have a really serious constitutional problem on your hands. The rule of law itself comes into question.

Turkey, here we come, eh?

 

[Stanyon]

I don't know anything about it. I don't even recognize the name.

I'm sure there are some that would prefer we forget all about her, here's how it was reported not too long ago from multiple sources. It had it all, sex, politics, espionage, and intrigue!:

Sex and schmoozing are Russian spy tactics. Publicity makes Maria Butina different

Maria Butina, explained: accused Russian spy tried to sway US politics through NRA - Vox

Maria Butina, the Russian accused of using sex, lies and guns to infiltrate US politics - CNNPolitics

Maria Butina? Accused Russian spy allegedly offered sex for power


After her Lawyers pushed for evidence of the "sex scandal" the federal government admitted the charges were based on a few three year old texts that they "misinterpreted" and dropped the charges.

Maria Butina sex-for-access text messages misinterpreted, federal prosecutors admit - Washington Times

Government erred in claiming accused Russian spy Maria Butina offered to trade sex for political access - CNNPolitics

Judge Chastises Both Sides in Maria Butina Case - The New York Times

"Judge Chutkan also rebuked prosecutors from the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, which brought the charges, for mistakenly alleging in court filings that Ms. Butina had offered sex in exchange for a job as part of her work for the Russian government. On Friday, prosecutors acknowledged that they had misinterpreted her innocent text messages with a friend.
The judge told Erik Michael Kenerson, an assistant United States attorney, that she was “dismayed” by the mistake. It took her no more than five minutes, she said, to review the messages and conclude they were meant in jest."
It took a judge less than five minutes to determine that the texts were in jest while prosecutors for the U.S. Attorneys Office made formal charges based on them?
I would think that the misogyny displayed by the justice department and the public sexual humiliation and smear in the media would be a major concern for feminists and women's rights activists but no.

It all makes a good story though, after all there are only two kinds of Russian women some in the west can accept, that is either the Femme Fatale or the babushka

 

[Mindmaster]

It's the same thing on paper as it is in practice.

On that, we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[Revoltingest]

If he would have come out and admitted to doing very stupid things back then and asserted that he regretted them deeply etc, I think there would be no question that he would be confirmed.

No question?
Nah.
Sexual assault is not so easily forgiven upon admission.
I think it would've sunk his chances.
(Of course, we can't know if his denial is honest or not.
We're just addressing a hypothetical here.)

Contrast this with Clinton's denial of sex with Lewinsky.
In that case, admitting to consensual sex would've made
life easier because he'd have avoided perjury.

But to threaten Democrats using Trump-like language and Biblical allusions and rant and rave as he did, I hope ended his chance to destroy the integrity of the Supreme Court.

I didn't read of Kavanaugh's making threats.
What were they?

As for biblical allusions, what else can we expect from
people who see reality from a religious perspective?
I'd prefer more non-believers on the court & in government,
but a religious outlook shouldn't disqualify anyone.

 

[suncowiam]

No question?
Nah.
Sexual assault is not so easily forgiven upon admission.
I think it would've sunk his chances.
(Of course, we can't know if his denial is honest or not.
We're just addressing a hypothetical here.)

Contrast this with Clinton's denial of sex with Lewinsky.
In that case, admitting to consensual sex would've made
life easier because he'd have avoided perjury.

I didn't read of Kavanaugh's making threats.
What were they?

As for biblical allusions, what else can we expect from
people who see reality from a religious perspective?
I'd prefer more non-believers on the court & in government,
but a religious outlook shouldn't disqualify anyone.

Are you saying he should lie if these events were true just because he would no longer be nominated?

 

[Revoltingest]

Are you saying he should lie if these events were true just because he would no longer be nominated?

Did I say that?
No, I did not.
The other poster & I were just considering consequences
to a hypothetical alternative to denial, ie, admission.
To consider alternatives is not to advocate for either.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Spot-on! The guy comes across as nakedly partisan and far too emotional to be a Supreme Court judge.

.

 

[exchemist]

.

View attachment 24410​

Er, yes. I didn't think I'd be the only one to spot this.

 

[Stevicus]

So, men can wear panties if they want to. I will defend with my life @Revoltingest ’s right to wear whatever he wants under his kilt.

And I absolutely pledge never to touch whatever it is.

Men do wear panties. It's just that they're more commonly referred to as "briefs."

 

[suncowiam]

Did I say that?
No, I did not.
The other poster & I were just considering consequences
to a hypothetical alternative to denial, ie, admission.
To consider alternatives is not to advocate for either.

That's why I was asking to confirm what you said.

TGIF!

 

[Stevicus]

Apparently, you haven't been to some of my or my friends parties. People drunk, grabbing each other, and laughing their *** off. Running around half naked and whatever... Groping? OMG! You'll be out by the first game of grab-***.

I'm beginning to wonder why the liberals have become prudes, lol. Liberalism used to be about freedom of expression, breaking through cultural norms, and having a good time. Now all it seems about is though and action policing, and victim complexes. Omg, someone thought you were cute and touched you... Your life will never continue... lol

That's it, you've convinced me, every girl that touched my *** without my permission in the last 40 years is going to jail. For at least a hundred of you women, I will have the last laugh, muhahaha!

I may be seen as a bit of a prude, too, although I tend to be rather liberal in that I believe what other consenting adults choose to do, that's their own business. Have fun. But if there's someone not consenting, then it becomes a rights issue, which is something that liberals have always been concerned about.

Granted, in certain situations - such as parties you describe, and the general relaxation of societal mores as a result of the sexual revolution, it's expected that there would be groping and other sexual antics at certain times and places. The 70s and 80s were pretty wild, but some things did get out of hand. People didn't really take things like date rape as seriously until the mid to late 80s, as I recall. Then there were heavily publicized scandals such as Tailhook, and public opinion started to shift as they began to be made aware that some things just aren't okay.

I would concede that it's still not consistent and carries a lot of mixed messages. I've run across some pretty raunchy spring break videos that get posted, although it's assumed that all the groping and other displays are consensual.

I have read articles that younger people are having sex less than they did back when I was in high school and college. So, maybe they're becoming prudes; difficult to say.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I've noticed this myself over the years and wondered why, I also thought about creating a thread about that very same subject but figured why bother? I think maybe the religion of far-left wing liberalism has reached the point where they really do believe their own bulls**t, their true colours finally showing. This new religion seems to come complete with it's very own unique tribunals much like the witch hunts of old complete with the sniveling and sneering mobs ready to burn a "witch" just on accusation alone.

I have become more "prudish," if that's what you want to call it, because I've become sick and tired of men thinking the can put their hands all over me and do what they want any old time they feel like it, as though I am not an autonomous human being. I've had enough. I'm willing to bet other women have as well.

 

[exchemist]

Apparently, you haven't been to some of my or my friends parties. People drunk, grabbing each other, and laughing their *** off. Running around half naked and whatever... Groping? OMG! You'll be out by the first game of grab-***.

I'm beginning to wonder why the liberals have become prudes, lol. Liberalism used to be about freedom of expression, breaking through cultural norms, and having a good time. Now all it seems about is though and action policing, and victim complexes. Omg, someone thought you were cute and touched you... Your life will never continue... lol

That's it, you've convinced me, every girl that touched my *** without my permission in the last 40 years is going to jail. For at least a hundred of you women, I will have the last laugh, muhahaha!

Get real. The allegation in this case is that an underage girl was pinned down to a bed and gagged, while an older boy groped her and implicitly threatened her with rape. That is not like a bit of consensual fun and games in a party where everybody who shows up knows what to expect.

"Liberals" are not being inconsistent. They are objecting to violent sexual exploitation, that's all. If you can't tell the difference between that and consensual activity, it's you that has a problem, not "liberals".

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Being groped where you have a body piercing might cause lasting physical injury, not just psychological trauma.

There is that (my breasts were very sore and sensitive after I got my nipples pierced). I was thinking of those with Asperger's, in which it is most definitely not ok to just touch us. Groped or a pat on the shoulder, it's unpleasant and unwelcomed, and I do not like it. And in the moment, I tend to hate huggy people who throw their arms open and assume everyone is open to a hug.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I've noticed this myself over the years and wondered why, I also thought about creating a thread about that very same subject but figured why bother? I think maybe the religion of far-left wing liberalism has reached the point where they really do believe their own bulls**t, their true colours finally showing. This new religion seems to come complete with it's very own unique tribunals much like the witch hunts of old complete with the sniveling and sneering mobs ready to burn a "witch" just on accusation alone.

You think Liberals are far Left? And where is this attempt to "burn a witch on accusation alone?"

 

[Revoltingest]

There is that (my breasts were very sore and sensitive after I got my nipples pierced). I was thinking of those with Asperger's, in which it is most definitely not ok to just touch us. Groped or a pat on the shoulder, it's unpleasant and unwelcomed, and I do not like it. And in the moment, I tend to hate huggy people who throw their arms open and assume everyone is open to a hug.

Testify, sister!
What makes other people (usually women) think we
want to be hugged or kissed or touched.
Shaking hands suits me....as does avoiding even that.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Yep, prudes... confirmed.

You have me so very wrong if you think I'm a prude.

And, those are Lavey's "rules" not mine.

Those weren't just Lavey. Some of them were, but to say they all were is just as wrong as calling me a prude.

I believe consent-culture is a cancer

Having bodily autonomy, something that has been espoused by both the Left and Right, is not a cancer, it's progress. So do you think Libertarian values are a cancer?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It's also rather odd to see a satanist prostrating themself before politicians who toe an evangelical agenda.

At times I think "edge lord" is a more accurate description.

 

[Shaul]

.

View attachment 24410​

I call bogus on this. What you call “uncontrolled scream” could as easily be called resolute passionate self defense. An innocent man wrongly accused could certainly be forgiven for being perturbed. The fact is no matter how he had acted some of his critics would still complain. If he was vociferous they would say he was unhinged, if he sat dispassionately they would say he was cold and obviously guilty because an innocent man would speak up passionately. Simply put, your mind was made up before the committee hearing and Judge Kavanaugh could say or do nothing to open your closed mind.