One Political PlazaSM - Home of politics
Home | Political Digest | Active Topics | Newest Pictures | Search | Login | Register | Help
Main
Why do Democrats and Republicans see Kavanaugh in such different ways?
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 11 next>>
Oct 8, 2018 12:34:19   #
rumitoid (a regular here)
 
Party polarization is tearing at the fabric of American society. The partisan reaction to sexual assault allegations against Brett Kavanaugh demonstrates how far the threads have frayed. An Economist/YouGov poll shows Democrats by about an eight to one margin believe that Kavanaugh committed assault, while Republicans by a similar margin believe he didn’t.

Republicans, for example, have demonstrated an incredible capacity to see, hear, and speak no evil even when it comes to President Trump’s most questionable actions and assertions. According to a Quinnipiac poll in January 2018, about three-quarters of Republicans think he’s a good role model for their children.

Democrats, for their part, don’t seem willing to acknowledge inarguably positive developments for the country. A Gallup poll from July 2018 found that Republicans were more than twice as likely as Democrats (78 to 36%) to rate the economy as “excellent” or “good,” realizing full well that Trump and the Republicans benefit from the strong economy.

Before the 2016 election, a survey asked Americans which came closest to their view – “our lives are threatened by terrorists, criminals and immigrants, and our priority should be to protect ourselves” or “it’s a big, beautiful world, mostly full of good people, and we must find a way to embrace each other and not allow ourselves to become isolated”. About 80% of Trump supporters chose the first. About 80% of Clinton supporters chose the second. Talk about worlds apart.

On the Republican side of the worldview divide sit those who prefer children who respect their elders, are obedient, have good manners, and are well-behaved. They have what we call fixed worldviews. Because the world is dangerous to them, traditions and conventions should be fixed in place to maintain order. This worldview sees male authority figures such as Judge Kavanaugh sympathetically because male authority has always stood at the top of the cultural hierarchy. As such, they are concerned about new immigrants and threatened by the prospect of unconventional groups such as transgendered people sharing their bathrooms.

On the Democratic side are those who prefer independent, self-reliant, curious, and considerate children. They have what we call fluid worldviews. Because the world is, to them, safe to explore, challenging old folkways is feasible. Sometimes-discriminatory traditions and hierarchies must be swept away. This worldview sees traditional male authority as an unfair privilege that has allowed men to get away with anything and everything, including sexually assaulting women, without punishment. Fluid types celebrate new approaches and champion those who challenge old norms.

Worldviews operate at the gut level, shaping opinions before conscious thought begins. When it comes to the Kavanaugh allegations, specifically, fixed-worldview Republicans reflexively want to believe the man and will search for evidence to support that first impulse. Fluid-worldview Democrats reflexively want to believe the woman and will perform the same biased search for information to buttress their first impulse.

The fluid tend to be city dwellers, secular in their approach to religion and prefer the vanguard in both their politics and consumer choices. Biryani and a pinot gris sounds nice. Their grandparents’ coffee is boring to them and light beer is swill. And they’re predominantly Democrats.

When feelings are this deeply negative, it is little wonder that partisans seem so blind to obvious transgressions of their own leaders and that one side roots for the other to fail when that side is in power. The dynamics should be familiar to any reader who has ever hated another person. You always see yourself as virtuous and your enemy as villainous. And, if the feelings are sufficiently strong, you may even root for bad things to happen to your nemesis.

When worldviews divide partisans, it is best not to expect much to change. All the hatred has caused partisans’ political identities to become central to how they see themselves. The cognitive dissonance associated with giving an inch to their opponents overwhelms Americans’ rational selves. Partisans will perform Olympic-caliber mental gymnastics to maintain their beliefs and will seek information sources not in order to discern the truth, but to reinforce their existing beliefs, even – perhaps especially – when a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court is on the line.

Marc Hetherington and Jonathan Weiler are the co-authors of Prius or pickup: How the answers to four simple questions explain America’s great divide (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt), which is out on October 9 2018

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 13:13:24   #
Louie27 (a regular here)
 
rumitoid wrote:
Party polarization is tearing at the fabric of American society. The partisan reaction to sexual assault allegations against Brett Kavanaugh demonstrates how far the threads have frayed. An Economist/YouGov poll shows Democrats by about an eight to one margin believe that Kavanaugh committed assault, while Republicans by a similar margin believe he didn’t.

Republicans, for example, have demonstrated an incredible capacity to see, hear, and speak no evil even when it comes to President Trump’s most questionable actions and assertions. According to a Quinnipiac poll in January 2018, about three-quarters of Republicans think he’s a good role model for their children.

Democrats, for their part, don’t seem willing to acknowledge inarguably positive developments for the country. A Gallup poll from July 2018 found that Republicans were more than twice as likely as Democrats (78 to 36%) to rate the economy as “excellent” or “good,” realizing full well that Trump and the Republicans benefit from the strong economy.

Before the 2016 election, a survey asked Americans which came closest to their view – “our lives are threatened by terrorists, criminals and immigrants, and our priority should be to protect ourselves” or “it’s a big, beautiful world, mostly full of good people, and we must find a way to embrace each other and not allow ourselves to become isolated”. About 80% of Trump supporters chose the first. About 80% of Clinton supporters chose the second. Talk about worlds apart.

On the Republican side of the worldview divide sit those who prefer children who respect their elders, are obedient, have good manners, and are well-behaved. They have what we call fixed worldviews. Because the world is dangerous to them, traditions and conventions should be fixed in place to maintain order. This worldview sees male authority figures such as Judge Kavanaugh sympathetically because male authority has always stood at the top of the cultural hierarchy. As such, they are concerned about new immigrants and threatened by the prospect of unconventional groups such as transgendered people sharing their bathrooms.

On the Democratic side are those who prefer independent, self-reliant, curious, and considerate children. They have what we call fluid worldviews. Because the world is, to them, safe to explore, challenging old folkways is feasible. Sometimes-discriminatory traditions and hierarchies must be swept away. This worldview sees traditional male authority as an unfair privilege that has allowed men to get away with anything and everything, including sexually assaulting women, without punishment. Fluid types celebrate new approaches and champion those who challenge old norms.

Worldviews operate at the gut level, shaping opinions before conscious thought begins. When it comes to the Kavanaugh allegations, specifically, fixed-worldview Republicans reflexively want to believe the man and will search for evidence to support that first impulse. Fluid-worldview Democrats reflexively want to believe the woman and will perform the same biased search for information to buttress their first impulse.

The fluid tend to be city dwellers, secular in their approach to religion and prefer the vanguard in both their politics and consumer choices. Biryani and a pinot gris sounds nice. Their grandparents’ coffee is boring to them and light beer is swill. And they’re predominantly Democrats.

When feelings are this deeply negative, it is little wonder that partisans seem so blind to obvious transgressions of their own leaders and that one side roots for the other to fail when that side is in power. The dynamics should be familiar to any reader who has ever hated another person. You always see yourself as virtuous and your enemy as villainous. And, if the feelings are sufficiently strong, you may even root for bad things to happen to your nemesis.

When worldviews divide partisans, it is best not to expect much to change. All the hatred has caused partisans’ political identities to become central to how they see themselves. The cognitive dissonance associated with giving an inch to their opponents overwhelms Americans’ rational selves. Partisans will perform Olympic-caliber mental gymnastics to maintain their beliefs and will seek information sources not in order to discern the truth, but to reinforce their existing beliefs, even – perhaps especially – when a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court is on the line.

Marc Hetherington and Jonathan Weiler are the co-authors of Prius or pickup: How the answers to four simple questions explain America’s great divide (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt), which is out on October 9 2018
Party polarization is tearing at the fabric of Ame... (show quote)


What you have stated in your post, is quite true. The main fact to remember is the Democrats, which are not the ultra liberals they once were. They are now the ultra left progressives/socialists of this country and do not stand for the Constitution and our laws provided by Congress. They wish to impose their tyrannical power over all Americans without ever having a vote of all of the people. They want the coast states to control our country and to hell with the rest of the people.

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 13:15:11   #
Pennylynn (a regular here)
 
Could it be that Republicans and Conservatives still believe that a person must be presumed innocent until proven guilty? And could it be that Republicans and Conservatives have seen what many of your "good people" have done once they were embraced? Could it be that the Republicans and conservatives teach children to be good listeners and respectful of adults because they are children and do not know everything? I do not know of one person who has learned anything while their mind is filling the mouth with one's own point of view.

True, most liberals prefer city dwelling. In this way they are like rats, they live by being stealthy, stealing, and by killing each other to survive to fight another day. When you have a mischief with their bucks, does, and kittens all grouped into their cells it is not long until they overpopulate and they begin killing off the weak and then when food and resources become scares they practice cannibalism. These colonies or mischiefs never stabilize, many of them simply go insane and continue in their habits even when normal resources are resumed, they continue to steal from each other and hoard it away, they continue to kill the weak and consume them as food. Also curious in the study of rats, when you remove the rat that has gone insane into a less crowed environment, they do not adapt well, it takes two or more generations for the insanity to diminish in their blood line, although the insanity was brought on by overcrowding and not by diminished brain functions. Interesting those city dwellers, they do not recognize authority, they have no self limitations on their behavior, and many are as loony as Jaybirds.

rumitoid wrote:
Party polarization is tearing at the fabric of American society. The partisan reaction to sexual assault allegations against Brett Kavanaugh demonstrates how far the threads have frayed. An Economist/YouGov poll shows Democrats by about an eight to one margin believe that Kavanaugh committed assault, while Republicans by a similar margin believe he didn’t.

Republicans, for example, have demonstrated an incredible capacity to see, hear, and speak no evil even when it comes to President Trump’s most questionable actions and assertions. According to a Quinnipiac poll in January 2018, about three-quarters of Republicans think he’s a good role model for their children.

Democrats, for their part, don’t seem willing to acknowledge inarguably positive developments for the country. A Gallup poll from July 2018 found that Republicans were more than twice as likely as Democrats (78 to 36%) to rate the economy as “excellent” or “good,” realizing full well that Trump and the Republicans benefit from the strong economy.

Before the 2016 election, a survey asked Americans which came closest to their view – “our lives are threatened by terrorists, criminals and immigrants, and our priority should be to protect ourselves” or “it’s a big, beautiful world, mostly full of good people, and we must find a way to embrace each other and not allow ourselves to become isolated”. About 80% of Trump supporters chose the first. About 80% of Clinton supporters chose the second. Talk about worlds apart.

On the Republican side of the worldview divide sit those who prefer children who respect their elders, are obedient, have good manners, and are well-behaved. They have what we call fixed worldviews. Because the world is dangerous to them, traditions and conventions should be fixed in place to maintain order. This worldview sees male authority figures such as Judge Kavanaugh sympathetically because male authority has always stood at the top of the cultural hierarchy. As such, they are concerned about new immigrants and threatened by the prospect of unconventional groups such as transgendered people sharing their bathrooms.

On the Democratic side are those who prefer independent, self-reliant, curious, and considerate children. They have what we call fluid worldviews. Because the world is, to them, safe to explore, challenging old folkways is feasible. Sometimes-discriminatory traditions and hierarchies must be swept away. This worldview sees traditional male authority as an unfair privilege that has allowed men to get away with anything and everything, including sexually assaulting women, without punishment. Fluid types celebrate new approaches and champion those who challenge old norms.

Worldviews operate at the gut level, shaping opinions before conscious thought begins. When it comes to the Kavanaugh allegations, specifically, fixed-worldview Republicans reflexively want to believe the man and will search for evidence to support that first impulse. Fluid-worldview Democrats reflexively want to believe the woman and will perform the same biased search for information to buttress their first impulse.

The fluid tend to be city dwellers, secular in their approach to religion and prefer the vanguard in both their politics and consumer choices. Biryani and a pinot gris sounds nice. Their grandparents’ coffee is boring to them and light beer is swill. And they’re predominantly Democrats.

When feelings are this deeply negative, it is little wonder that partisans seem so blind to obvious transgressions of their own leaders and that one side roots for the other to fail when that side is in power. The dynamics should be familiar to any reader who has ever hated another person. You always see yourself as virtuous and your enemy as villainous. And, if the feelings are sufficiently strong, you may even root for bad things to happen to your nemesis.

When worldviews divide partisans, it is best not to expect much to change. All the hatred has caused partisans’ political identities to become central to how they see themselves. The cognitive dissonance associated with giving an inch to their opponents overwhelms Americans’ rational selves. Partisans will perform Olympic-caliber mental gymnastics to maintain their beliefs and will seek information sources not in order to discern the truth, but to reinforce their existing beliefs, even – perhaps especially – when a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court is on the line.

Marc Hetherington and Jonathan Weiler are the co-authors of Prius or pickup: How the answers to four simple questions explain America’s great divide (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt), which is out on October 9 2018
Party polarization is tearing at the fabric of Ame... (show quote)

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 13:53:23   #
son of witless (a regular here)
 
Louie27 wrote:
What you have stated in your post, is quite true. The main fact to remember is the Democrats, which are not the ultra liberals they once were. They are now the ultra left progressives/socialists of this country and do not stand for the Constitution and our laws provided by Congress. They wish to impose their tyrannical power over all Americans without ever having a vote of all of the people. They want the coast states to control our country and to hell with the rest of the people.


This still comes down to innocent until proven guilty. Something Liberals do not believe in. Blassey Ford did not prove her case, end of story. Liberals want Kavanaugh to prove he is innocent, which is impossible to do. Liberals demonstrated they do not believe in Constitutional protections once again. They just know by her demeanor that Ford told the truth and they just know by his demeanor that Kavanaugh has to be guilty.

The liberal lynch mob is dangerous and must never be given power.

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 14:33:05   #
Floyd Brown (a regular here)
 
rumitoid wrote:
Party polarization is tearing at the fabric of American society. The partisan reaction to sexual assault allegations against Brett Kavanaugh demonstrates how far the threads have frayed. An Economist/YouGov poll shows Democrats by about an eight to one margin believe that Kavanaugh committed assault, while Republicans by a similar margin believe he didn’t.

Republicans, for example, have demonstrated an incredible capacity to see, hear, and speak no evil even when it comes to President Trump’s most questionable actions and assertions. According to a Quinnipiac poll in January 2018, about three-quarters of Republicans think he’s a good role model for their children.

Democrats, for their part, don’t seem willing to acknowledge inarguably positive developments for the country. A Gallup poll from July 2018 found that Republicans were more than twice as likely as Democrats (78 to 36%) to rate the economy as “excellent” or “good,” realizing full well that Trump and the Republicans benefit from the strong economy.

Before the 2016 election, a survey asked Americans which came closest to their view – “our lives are threatened by terrorists, criminals and immigrants, and our priority should be to protect ourselves” or “it’s a big, beautiful world, mostly full of good people, and we must find a way to embrace each other and not allow ourselves to become isolated”. About 80% of Trump supporters chose the first. About 80% of Clinton supporters chose the second. Talk about worlds apart.

I find this a well thought out on how we are coping with the situation.

Much of we what should be taking to heart.

On the Republican side of the worldview divide sit those who prefer children who respect their elders, are obedient, have good manners, and are well-behaved. They have what we call fixed worldviews. Because the world is dangerous to them, traditions and conventions should be fixed in place to maintain order. This worldview sees male authority figures such as Judge Kavanaugh sympathetically because male authority has always stood at the top of the cultural hierarchy. As such, they are concerned about new immigrants and threatened by the prospect of unconventional groups such as transgendered people sharing their bathrooms.

On the Democratic side are those who prefer independent, self-reliant, curious, and considerate children. They have what we call fluid worldviews. Because the world is, to them, safe to explore, challenging old folkways is feasible. Sometimes-discriminatory traditions and hierarchies must be swept away. This worldview sees traditional male authority as an unfair privilege that has allowed men to get away with anything and everything, including sexually assaulting women, without punishment. Fluid types celebrate new approaches and champion those who challenge old norms.

Worldviews operate at the gut level, shaping opinions before conscious thought begins. When it comes to the Kavanaugh allegations, specifically, fixed-worldview Republicans reflexively want to believe the man and will search for evidence to support that first impulse. Fluid-worldview Democrats reflexively want to believe the woman and will perform the same biased search for information to buttress their first impulse.

The fluid tend to be city dwellers, secular in their approach to religion and prefer the vanguard in both their politics and consumer choices. Biryani and a pinot gris sounds nice. Their grandparents’ coffee is boring to them and light beer is swill. And they’re predominantly Democrats.

When feelings are this deeply negative, it is little wonder that partisans seem so blind to obvious transgressions of their own leaders and that one side roots for the other to fail when that side is in power. The dynamics should be familiar to any reader who has ever hated another person. You always see yourself as virtuous and your enemy as villainous. And, if the feelings are sufficiently strong, you may even root for bad things to happen to your nemesis.

When worldviews divide partisans, it is best not to expect much to change. All the hatred has caused partisans’ political identities to become central to how they see themselves. The cognitive dissonance associated with giving an inch to their opponents overwhelms Americans’ rational selves. Partisans will perform Olympic-caliber mental gymnastics to maintain their beliefs and will seek information sources not in order to discern the truth, but to reinforce their existing beliefs, even – perhaps especially – when a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court is on the line.

Marc Hetherington and Jonathan Weiler are the co-authors of Prius or pickup: How the answers to four simple questions explain America’s great divide (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt), which is out on October 9 2018
Party polarization is tearing at the fabric of Ame... (show quote)

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 15:28:19   #
vernon (a regular here)
 
rumitoid wrote:
Party polarization is tearing at the fabric of American society. The partisan reaction to sexual assault allegations against Brett Kavanaugh demonstrates how far the threads have frayed. An Economist/YouGov poll shows Democrats by about an eight to one margin believe that Kavanaugh committed assault, while Republicans by a similar margin believe he didn’t.

Republicans, for example, have demonstrated an incredible capacity to see, hear, and speak no evil even when it comes to President Trump’s most questionable actions and assertions. According to a Quinnipiac poll in January 2018, about three-quarters of Republicans think he’s a good role model for their children.

Democrats, for their part, don’t seem willing to acknowledge inarguably positive developments for the country. A Gallup poll from July 2018 found that Republicans were more than twice as likely as Democrats (78 to 36%) to rate the economy as “excellent” or “good,” realizing full well that Trump and the Republicans benefit from the strong economy.

Before the 2016 election, a survey asked Americans which came closest to their view – “our lives are threatened by terrorists, criminals and immigrants, and our priority should be to protect ourselves” or “it’s a big, beautiful world, mostly full of good people, and we must find a way to embrace each other and not allow ourselves to become isolated”. About 80% of Trump supporters chose the first. About 80% of Clinton supporters chose the second. Talk about worlds apart.

On the Republican side of the worldview divide sit those who prefer children who respect their elders, are obedient, have good manners, and are well-behaved. They have what we call fixed worldviews. Because the world is dangerous to them, traditions and conventions should be fixed in place to maintain order. This worldview sees male authority figures such as Judge Kavanaugh sympathetically because male authority has always stood at the top of the cultural hierarchy. As such, they are concerned about new immigrants and threatened by the prospect of unconventional groups such as transgendered people sharing their bathrooms.

On the Democratic side are those who prefer independent, self-reliant, curious, and considerate children. They have what we call fluid worldviews. Because the world is, to them, safe to explore, challenging old folkways is feasible. Sometimes-discriminatory traditions and hierarchies must be swept away. This worldview sees traditional male authority as an unfair privilege that has allowed men to get away with anything and everything, including sexually assaulting women, without punishment. Fluid types celebrate new approaches and champion those who challenge old norms.

Worldviews operate at the gut level, shaping opinions before conscious thought begins. When it comes to the Kavanaugh allegations, specifically, fixed-worldview Republicans reflexively want to believe the man and will search for evidence to support that first impulse. Fluid-worldview Democrats reflexively want to believe the woman and will perform the same biased search for information to buttress their first impulse.

The fluid tend to be city dwellers, secular in their approach to religion and prefer the vanguard in both their politics and consumer choices. Biryani and a pinot gris sounds nice. Their grandparents’ coffee is boring to them and light beer is swill. And they’re predominantly Democrats.

When feelings are this deeply negative, it is little wonder that partisans seem so blind to obvious transgressions of their own leaders and that one side roots for the other to fail when that side is in power. The dynamics should be familiar to any reader who has ever hated another person. You always see yourself as virtuous and your enemy as villainous. And, if the feelings are sufficiently strong, you may even root for bad things to happen to your nemesis.

When worldviews divide partisans, it is best not to expect much to change. All the hatred has caused partisans’ political identities to become central to how they see themselves. The cognitive dissonance associated with giving an inch to their opponents overwhelms Americans’ rational selves. Partisans will perform Olympic-caliber mental gymnastics to maintain their beliefs and will seek information sources not in order to discern the truth, but to reinforce their existing beliefs, even – perhaps especially – when a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court is on the line.

Marc Hetherington and Jonathan Weiler are the co-authors of Prius or pickup: How the answers to four simple questions explain America’s great divide (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt), which is out on October 9 2018
Party polarization is tearing at the fabric of Ame... (show quote)



I think what these loonies are saying is, lets all unite under the jackasses tail and everything will be all right.I think if they came together we would be the ones getting shit on.That includes you all these billionaires arn,t about to let a common guy get in their pocket.

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 15:40:08   #
Floyd Brown (a regular here)
 
son of witless wrote:
This still comes down to innocent until proven guilty. Something Liberals do not believe in. Blassey Ford did not prove her case, end of story. Liberals want Kavanaugh to prove he is innocent, which is impossible to do. Liberals demonstrated they do not believe in Constitutional protections once again. They just know by her demeanor that Ford told the truth and they just know by his demeanor that Kavanaugh has to be guilty.

The liberal lynch mob is dangerous and must never be given power.
This still comes down to innocent until proven gui... (show quote)


So the lynch mob that acted in you personal approval was fine.

It was a personal opinion on the what Ford felt about the actions of Kavanaugh.
It was not sent to convict him.
It was in her personal view based on her true feeling that the public should be aware of he not be worthily of being in such a trust worthy position.
There was more than enough to raise the question of reasonable doubt.
In criminal cases reasonable reason to arrest people takes every day.
Then it becomes the judicial system that judges on the matter.
Engaging complete investigation of all information on people involved with actions mentioned at the time.
From the very start the right was saying the man was innocent of any wrong doing.
Ms Ford only want to raise the issue because of personal knowledge of action by Kavanaugh.
That he may not have the true qualifications & integrity to be appointed to the Supreme Court.
There was very little effort put in to seeking the real truth.
The key Mr. Judge who she pointed out early in her statement was never investigated with any real in what involvement he had with Kavanaugh at the time in question.
Judge wrote a book out lining what well have be just as collaborating information.
Information that is to the book buying public. even year book entries were ignored.

It is all public knowledge.
Our elected officials choose to ignore it all.

If there ever was a treasons act that was it.
It never was about being a criminal case.
It was about over looking the true qualification of a person to sit in judge of others.
To satisfy filling a position that may very well be used in judication of criminal crimes by select individuals involved in actions taking place now.

So you feel that any means to hide the truth from coming out.
Is fair even when actions are taken to cover the facts & keep the truth from others.

Well we have much that happens & much of what happen is hidden from the public.
Aiding in keeping truth hidden from the public is behind much of the problems we all see today.
But if I hide or you hide the truth from each other we will never be able to live side by side.

When it comes to personal actions that are or may be harm full to others.
Care must be taken for all information be shown.
If we hide information that covers a possible criminal act we are only abetting a criminal act.
When we allow public representatives entrusted to preserve & protect the lifes & well being of all.
The is no room for partisan politics.

There is to much wrong that comes with the might makes right way of doing things in the publics best interest.
.

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 15:59:20   #
vernon (a regular here)
 
Floyd Brown wrote:
So the lynch mob that acted in you personal approval was fine.

It was a personal opinion on the what Ford felt about the actions of Kavanaugh.
It was not sent to convict him.
It was in her personal view based on her true feeling that the public should be aware of he not be worthily of being in such a trust worthy position.
There was more than enough to raise the question of reasonable doubt.
In criminal cases reasonable reason to arrest people takes every day.
Then it becomes the judicial system that judges on the matter.
Engaging complete investigation of all information on people involved with actions mentioned at the time.
From the very start the right was saying the man was innocent of any wrong doing.
Ms Ford only want to raise the issue because of personal knowledge of action by Kavanaugh.
That he may not have the true qualifications & integrity to be appointed to the Supreme Court.
There was very little effort put in to seeking the real truth.
The key Mr. Judge who she pointed out early in her statement was never investigated with any real in what involvement he had with Kavanaugh at the time in question.
Judge wrote a book out lining what well have be just as collaborating information.
Information that is to the book buying public. even year book entries were ignored.

It is all public knowledge.
Our elected officials choose to ignore it all.

If there ever was a treasons act that was it.
It never was about being a criminal case.
It was about over looking the true qualification of a person to sit in judge of others.
To satisfy filling a position that may very well be used in judication of criminal crimes by select individuals involved in actions taking place now.

So you feel that any means to hide the truth from coming out.
Is fair even when actions are taken to cover the facts & keep the truth from others.

Well we have much that happens & much of what happen is hidden from the public.
Aiding in keeping truth hidden from the public is behind much of the problems we all see today.
But if I hide or you hide the truth from each other we will never be able to live side by side.

When it comes to personal actions that are or may be harm full to others.
Care must be taken for all information be shown.
If we hide information that covers a possible criminal act we are only abetting a criminal act.
When we allow public representatives entrusted to preserve & protect the lifes & well being of all.
The is no room for partisan politics.

There is to much wrong that comes with the might makes right way of doing things in the publics best interest.
.
So the lynch mob that acted in you personal approv... (show quote)



Why not get one of her witnesses to verify her statement not one of those named said it was true.But you demoRAT loonies don't want to hear that.

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 18:47:29   #
son of witless (a regular here)
 
Floyd Brown wrote:
So the lynch mob that acted in you personal approval was fine.

It was a personal opinion on the what Ford felt about the actions of Kavanaugh.
It was not sent to convict him.
It was in her personal view based on her true feeling that the public should be aware of he not be worthily of being in such a trust worthy position.
There was more than enough to raise the question of reasonable doubt.
In criminal cases reasonable reason to arrest people takes every day.
Then it becomes the judicial system that judges on the matter.
Engaging complete investigation of all information on people involved with actions mentioned at the time.
From the very start the right was saying the man was innocent of any wrong doing.
Ms Ford only want to raise the issue because of personal knowledge of action by Kavanaugh.
That he may not have the true qualifications & integrity to be appointed to the Supreme Court.
There was very little effort put in to seeking the real truth.
The key Mr. Judge who she pointed out early in her statement was never investigated with any real in what involvement he had with Kavanaugh at the time in question.
Judge wrote a book out lining what well have be just as collaborating information.
Information that is to the book buying public. even year book entries were ignored.

It is all public knowledge.
Our elected officials choose to ignore it all.

If there ever was a treasons act that was it.
It never was about being a criminal case.
It was about over looking the true qualification of a person to sit in judge of others.
To satisfy filling a position that may very well be used in judication of criminal crimes by select individuals involved in actions taking place now.

So you feel that any means to hide the truth from coming out.
Is fair even when actions are taken to cover the facts & keep the truth from others.

Well we have much that happens & much of what happen is hidden from the public.
Aiding in keeping truth hidden from the public is behind much of the problems we all see today.
But if I hide or you hide the truth from each other we will never be able to live side by side.

When it comes to personal actions that are or may be harm full to others.
Care must be taken for all information be shown.
If we hide information that covers a possible criminal act we are only abetting a criminal act.
When we allow public representatives entrusted to preserve & protect the lifes & well being of all.
The is no room for partisan politics.

There is to much wrong that comes with the might makes right way of doing things in the publics best interest.
.
So the lynch mob that acted in you personal approv... (show quote)


Presumption of innocence is a foundation of law going back to Roman times and certainly since the Founding of the United States. With out that false accusations for political purposes would be out of control. If I accuse you of something from 30 years ago and only the two of us were there and there was no physical evidence, it is impossible for you to prove it did not happen . That is why the burden of proof is always on the accuser.

I remind you once again what happens when these rules are ignored. The Duke Lacrosse rape case and the University of Virginia rape case had innocent men smeared. If procedures had been followed and mob hysteria not whipped up by those who should have known better, these men would not have been victimized.

The circus of the Kavanaugh confirmation had all of the atmosphere of another lynch mob. Blassey Ford had the burden of proof and she failed. She had huge holes in her account of what happened.

It occurs to me that she could be telling the truth, but with 4 witnesses that she named saying it did not happen that is enough doubt for me. Also the way the Democrats held this back until the last minute is also proof against it. That Kavanaugh could be innocent never enters your brain. Not that the fate of an innocent man means anything at all to you.

Doubt is not enough to deny Kavanaugh the nomination. Accusing anyone of this crime is more serious than you imagine. Either he is guilty or he is not. I doubt whether you have much knowledge of these things, but that doubt is enough for me to conclude I'd never vote for your nomination to anything.

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 20:54:09   #
Floyd Brown (a regular here)
 
vernon wrote:
Why not get one of her witnesses to verify her statement not one of those named said it was true.But you demoRAT loonies don't want to hear that.


I did not say any thing about any of Fords witnesses.
If you were truly paying attention you would have see the name Mr Judge.
A person who Ms ford said was present at the same time.
Mr judge has written a book about his connection to Mr Kavanaugh.
What Mr Judge had to say was not covered or if covered was not released.

This is all really apart of common knowledge ignored by the Committee advancing the appointment.
TOO USE YOUR WORDS YOU REPUBLICAN LOONIES DON'T WANT TO HEAR THAT.
I GUESS IT IS JUST TO EASY TO SAY & DO WHAT YOU WANT TO GET WHAT YOU WANT..

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 20:58:45   #
Floyd Brown (a regular here)
 
son of witless wrote:
Presumption of innocence is a foundation of law going back to Roman times and certainly since the Founding of the United States. With out that false accusations for political purposes would be out of control. If I accuse you of something from 30 years ago and only the two of us were there and there was no physical evidence, it is impossible for you to prove it did not happen . That is why the burden of proof is always on the accuser.

I remind you once again what happens when these rules are ignored. The Duke Lacrosse rape case and the University of Virginia rape case had innocent men smeared. If procedures had been followed and mob hysteria not whipped up by those who should have known better, these men would not have been victimized.

The circus of the Kavanaugh confirmation had all of the atmosphere of another lynch mob. Blassey Ford had the burden of proof and she failed. She had huge holes in her account of what happened.

It occurs to me that she could be telling the truth, but with 4 witnesses that she named saying it did not happen that is enough doubt for me. Also the way the Democrats held this back until the last minute is also proof against it. That Kavanaugh could be innocent never enters your brain. Not that the fate of an innocent man means anything at all to you.

There is enough information that is public knowledge that this was all a cover up by the Republicans.
This issue is not going to go away no mater what you have to say.
You would be better served in the matter to seek what was ignore on this issue.


Doubt is not enough to deny Kavanaugh the nomination. Accusing anyone of this crime is more serious than you imagine. Either he is guilty or he is not. I doubt whether you have much knowledge of these things, but that doubt is enough for me to conclude I'd never vote for your nomination to anything.
Presumption of innocence is a foundation of law go... (show quote)

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 22:19:08   #
Pennylynn (a regular here)
 
Fact is, Mr. Judge's book was brought up in the cross examination of Judge K. Mr. Judge was interviewed by the FBI. In fact, several childhood friends were questioned by the FBI and NONE remembered the incident or the party that Ford described:

Who has been interviewed by the FBI?

Deborah Ramirez — The second woman to accuse Kavanaugh of misconduct, Ramirez has alleged that Kavanaugh exposed himself to her while both were in college at Yale University, which Kavanaugh denies. Ramirez was interviewed by the FBI for more than two hours on Sunday.

Mark Judge — Judge, a high school classmate of Kavanaugh, was interviewed this week. His interview was seen as crucial to the investigation because Ford says he was in the room for her alleged assault. Judge previously sent two letters to the Senate Judiciary Committee saying he did not remember the events Ford described that he “never saw Brett act in the manner Dr. Ford describes.”

Judge’s own memoir, however, seems to support one aspect of Ford’s story. She says that she saw Judge at a local Safeway shortly after the alleged incident and that he appeared very uncomfortable around her. In his memoir, Judge writes that he worked at the local grocery store during the summer before his senior year, which would have been the same year Ford is talking about.

Chris Garrett — Garrett, who was nicknamed “Squi” on Kavanaugh’s high school calendars, also participated in a FBI interview this week. He is the most frequently mentioned friend on Kavanaugh’s calendars and was listed as attending a July 1, 1982 party that includes several of the attendees Ford mentioned in her allegation.

P.J. Smyth — The FBI interviewed Smyth this week. He is another person that Ford alleges was at the party, and is mentioned as being at the July 1 party on Kavanaugh’s calendar. Smyth previously said through his lawyer that he had no knowledge of the party or the behavior that Ford alleged.

Leland Keyser — Keyser is a high school friend of Ford’s, who Ford says was at the gathering where the alleged assault occurred. The FBI interviewed her this week, according to the New York Times, but Keyser has previously said she does not remember the incident.

Timothy Gaudette — The FBI also interviewed Gaudette, who was noted as the host of the July 1 party on Kavanaugh’s calendar.

Unknown witnesses — The FBI interviewed at least three more unknown witnesses who have not been named publicly.

These were all of the "witnesses" that Ford said could vouch for her story, yet none did. Indeed, one person says that Ford and her retired CIA friend tried to convince her to swear to something she knew nothing about.

If just two of these people had vouched for Ford, I would be on board saying that perhaps another Judge should be nominated. But, NONE of these people vouched for her..... so, was the incident another year? A different party? Or is it possible that her "recovered" memories been wrong? Here is an excellent paper on recovered memories: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11228839 and this is a page of other articles on memory and "recovered" memory: http://www.fmsfonline.org/?qmemories=LaboratoryResearch:Recovered-Memories and this site is all about false memory http://www.fmsfonline.org/index.php. I am not saying that Ford is a bad person, I believe that she throughly believe what she claims.



Floyd Brown wrote:
I did not say any thing about any of Fords witnesses.
If you were truly paying attention you would have see the name Mr Judge.
A person who Ms ford said was present at the same time.
Mr judge has written a book about his connection to Mr Kavanaugh.
What Mr Judge had to say was not covered or if covered was not released.

This is all really apart of common knowledge ignored by the Committee advancing the appointment.
TOO USE YOUR WORDS YOU REPUBLICAN LOONIES DON'T WANT TO HEAR THAT.
I GUESS IT IS JUST TO EASY TO SAY & DO WHAT YOU WANT TO GET WHAT YOU WANT..
I did not say any thing about any of Fords witnes... (show quote)

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 22:41:12   #
rumitoid (a regular here)
 
Pennylynn wrote:
Could it be that Republicans and Conservatives still believe that a person must be presumed innocent until proven guilty? And could it be that Republicans and Conservatives have seen what many of your "good people" have done once they were embraced? Could it be that the Republicans and conservatives teach children to be good listeners and respectful of adults because they are children and do not know everything? I do not know of one person who has learned anything while their mind is filling the mouth with one's own point of view.

True, most liberals prefer city dwelling. In this way they are like rats, they live by being stealthy, stealing, and by killing each other to survive to fight another day. When you have a mischief with their bucks, does, and kittens all grouped into their cells it is not long until they overpopulate and they begin killing off the weak and then when food and resources become scares they practice cannibalism. These colonies or mischiefs never stabilize, many of them simply go insane and continue in their habits even when normal resources are resumed, they continue to steal from each other and hoard it away, they continue to kill the weak and consume them as food. Also curious in the study of rats, when you remove the rat that has gone insane into a less crowed environment, they do not adapt well, it takes two or more generations for the insanity to diminish in their blood line, although the insanity was brought on by overcrowding and not by diminished brain functions. Interesting those city dwellers, they do not recognize authority, they have no self limitations on their behavior, and many are as loony as Jaybirds.
Could it be that Republicans and Conservatives sti... (show quote)


HOLY MACKEREL! Seriously? Wow! Can't reply. Nothing really to reply to. This has to be perhaps the wildest post I have seen here--and that approaches or passes the Nth Degree.

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 22:41:52   #
Floyd Brown (a regular here)
 
Pennylynn wrote:
Fact is, Mr. Judge's book was brought up in the cross examination of Judge K. Mr. Judge was interviewed by the FBI. In fact, several childhood friends were questioned by the FBI and NONE remembered the incident or the party that Ford described:

Who has been interviewed by the FBI?

Deborah Ramirez — The second woman to accuse Kavanaugh of misconduct, Ramirez has alleged that Kavanaugh exposed himself to her while both were in college at Yale University, which Kavanaugh denies. Ramirez was interviewed by the FBI for more than two hours on Sunday.

Mark Judge — Judge, a high school classmate of Kavanaugh, was interviewed this week. His interview was seen as crucial to the investigation because Ford says he was in the room for her alleged assault. Judge previously sent two letters to the Senate Judiciary Committee saying he did not remember the events Ford described that he “never saw Brett act in the manner Dr. Ford describes.”

Judge’s own memoir, however, seems to support one aspect of Ford’s story. She says that she saw Judge at a local Safeway shortly after the alleged incident and that he appeared very uncomfortable around her. In his memoir, Judge writes that he worked at the local grocery store during the summer before his senior year, which would have been the same year Ford is talking about.

Chris Garrett — Garrett, who was nicknamed “Squi” on Kavanaugh’s high school calendars, also participated in a FBI interview this week. He is the most frequently mentioned friend on Kavanaugh’s calendars and was listed as attending a July 1, 1982 party that includes several of the attendees Ford mentioned in her allegation.

P.J. Smyth — The FBI interviewed Smyth this week. He is another person that Ford alleges was at the party, and is mentioned as being at the July 1 party on Kavanaugh’s calendar. Smyth previously said through his lawyer that he had no knowledge of the party or the behavior that Ford alleged.

Leland Keyser — Keyser is a high school friend of Ford’s, who Ford says was at the gathering where the alleged assault occurred. The FBI interviewed her this week, according to the New York Times, but Keyser has previously said she does not remember the incident.

Timothy Gaudette — The FBI also interviewed Gaudette, who was noted as the host of the July 1 party on Kavanaugh’s calendar.

Unknown witnesses — The FBI interviewed at least three more unknown witnesses who have not been named publicly.

These were all of the "witnesses" that Ford said could vouch for her story, yet none did. Indeed, one person says that Ford and her retired CIA friend tried to convince her to swear to something she knew nothing about.

If just two of these people had vouched for Ford, I would be on board saying that perhaps another Judge should be nominated. But, NONE of these people vouched for her..... so, was the incident another year? A different party? Or is it possible that her "recovered" memories been wrong? Here is an excellent paper on recovered memories: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11228839 and this is a page of other articles on memory and "recovered" memory: http://www.fmsfonline.org/?qmemories=LaboratoryResearch:Recovered-Memories and this site is all about false memory http://www.fmsfonline.org/index.php. I am not saying that Ford is a bad person, I believe that she throughly believe what she claims.
Fact is, Mr. Judge's book was brought up in the c... (show quote)


It is only under oath that what a person says carries any weight.
There is more than enough information for how the whole issue was handled so that the issue will never die & can never be erased. from history.
You may feel that it was a victory in your view.

It is quite another in the minds of may.
What has taken place over this issue is going to be the issue that will destroy the Republican as it stands to day.

The days of partisan politics is slipping away.

It is time for you to a line your self with what is coming.
The game is not going to be played by the Good Old Boys any more.
There is going to be a whole new gang. Many of them women.
I think the day of the individual is going to replace the Good Old Boys.

Maybe you should try to replace one of those Good Old boys.
May be if you played your cards right you could be one of the New Good Old Girls.

Some how I feel you would never be as bad.

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 22:42:01   #
rumitoid (a regular here)
 
son of witless wrote:
This still comes down to innocent until proven guilty. Something Liberals do not believe in. Blassey Ford did not prove her case, end of story. Liberals want Kavanaugh to prove he is innocent, which is impossible to do. Liberals demonstrated they do not believe in Constitutional protections once again. They just know by her demeanor that Ford told the truth and they just know by his demeanor that Kavanaugh has to be guilty.

The liberal lynch mob is dangerous and must never be given power.
This still comes down to innocent until proven gui... (show quote)

| Reply
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 11 next>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2018 IDF International Technologies, Inc.