Naked fat black crippled dykes are hard to find...

[Guest_b8931fdb]

It's just politics. It's just courtroom tactics. It's no big deal. There's no lasting harm to Kavanaugh or his family. It's payback for what they did to Garland.

Fuck that shit.

Then the question becomes, the the fuck do you do about it? They're using these tactics because they work. Failure to use them means you lose. The Republicans fucked with the nomination of a SCOTUS judge, and now they're reaping the whirlwind. And whining a lot about it too. I agree I don't like seeing the party I've supported for years sink to this, but I have yet to hear anybody give a workable alternative.

Hopefully at some time in the future, there will be an armistice, treaty, and there will be no clouds of mustard gas drifting across the trenches of politics. But don't hold your breath...

I'm old enough now to think that a) we do get through most bad times, b) what they said was the end times yesterday (Reagan) they will venerate today (Reagan), c) and they are all lying and specifically they have lied to me many times and I have fallen for it.

I won't play their game. I won't be complicit in that bullshit.

The DNC and the media ran Clinton and fucked themselves out of the Presidency and their best fucking friend is Trump, because if Trump was only 1/4th as bad as he is, the DNC leaders would have been defenestrated and forced to reform. (Little hope for media though) But as it is, they are all allowed to double and triple down and it's just getting worse.

So I am old enough to think the tough love approach, let the Ds be out of office for 16 years, let the Rs roll back what they can and leave it to the States may be the right approach. That's not the worse future. I'm okay with many States Rights issues: minimum wage, pollution control, gay marriage, marijuana, health care, 50 experiments in democracy, and I think "the right side of history" will get the other states to support these things as well.

Maybe at the end, the Ds won't be the public face of communism and the private party of Wall Street.

But I won't be complicit in their bullshit.

[free thoughtpolice]

Nothing from the calendars indicates whether he might have met Dr. Blasey. Judge Kavanaugh has told friends and advisers that he does not remember her. But senators are likely to question him on his drinking and partying during that era.

Jeesus H Christ, seriously? .. What exactly are they going to ask him, "Judge Kavanaugh, do you remember having a whiskey after your third bottle of Bud or was it a vodka on the night of ???? 1982" .. "Can you please state how many tequila's you drank in the month of May 1983?"

This is a witch hunt, anyone with an ounce of common sense can see it, why on earth is being allowed to continue?

Because reasonable attempts to tank Kavanaugh's nomination -- on the grounds that he's clearly perjured himself to Congress, on multiple occasions -- have failed. Therefore, the Dems are resorting to more desperate measures.

Those fucking Demonrats! They should treat Bart O'Kavanaugh fairly, just like the Republicans treated Merrick Garland.

[Guest_b8931fdb]

Nothing from the calendars indicates whether he might have met Dr. Blasey. Judge Kavanaugh has told friends and advisers that he does not remember her. But senators are likely to question him on his drinking and partying during that era.

Jeesus H Christ, seriously? .. What exactly are they going to ask him, "Judge Kavanaugh, do you remember having a whiskey after your third bottle of Bud or was it a vodka on the night of ???? 1982" .. "Can you please state how many tequila's you drank in the month of May 1983?"

This is a witch hunt, anyone with an ounce of common sense can see it, why on earth is being allowed to continue?

Because reasonable attempts to tank Kavanaugh's nomination -- on the grounds that he's clearly perjured himself to Congress, on multiple occasions -- have failed. Therefore, the Dems are resorting to more desperate measures.

Those fucking Demonrats! They should treat Bart O'Kavanaugh fairly, just like the Republicans treated Merrick Garland.

lST MAN
We should defend ourselves. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.

TEVYE
Very good. And that way, the whole world will be blind and toothless.

[TheMudbrooker]

You just know that Kavanaugh did it because he was a woman-hating virgin incel well into college.

Perhaps you missed the part where he's accused of attempted rape. And of course, you can wag your dick in someone's face and still preserve your virginity.

Why should we believe anything this man says? He's already perjured himself twice before Congress. And as a fundie pro-life zealot, it'd be fine to 'lie for Jesus' about not overturning Roe v. Wade -- or anything else to get into a position to do so.

We have nine SC justices for 330 million citizens. There is not a short list of one with Bart O'Kavanaugh's name on it, and every nominee should be thoroughly vetted as to their personal character. The only reason for the rush is that Gops expect to lose Senate seats in a few weeks. They want BK now, cuz they do expect him to overturn Roe. These freaks are obsessed with fetuses.

Wait... what. Are you trolling or are you just being temporarily stupid. (I say "temporarily" because I know you are not a stupid person)

First of all - how exactly did he perjure himself?.... I listened to much of the hearing.... and I must have missed this part.

Second - He has stated that Roe v. Wade is settled law. What evidence do you have that he will overturn Roe?

(finally... and on a side... I hope the SCOTUS does overturn Roe. I say that the states should decide this. It is a criminal issue, after all, and states should determine how they enforce criminal law).

You really don't understand what Roe v. Wade is about, do you? It's a common enough misconception, most people think Roe is about abortion, it's actually about privacy. Does the government have the right to dictate the behavior of private citizens when there is no overriding public need to do so? Roe answered that question with a resounding no. That it legalized abortion is incidental. Overturning Roe gives whatever vocal minority that holds a majority in government the power to dictate, under penalty of law, your behavior according to dogma they hold. The single most important principle upon which the United States is based is the freedom of the individual from government interference in their private lives, overturn Roe and you've destroyed the foundation of our nation.

[John D]

First of all - how exactly did he perjure himself?.... I listened to much of the hearing.... and I must have missed this part.

Newly Released Emails Show Brett Kavanaugh May Have Perjured Himself at Least Four Times

Second - He has stated that Roe v. Wade is settled law. What evidence do you have that he will overturn Roe?

See above: he's a liar. Christian taqiyya exists, and pro-lifers readily engage in it.

Further, his BFF, Mark Judge, swears that he and the Brettster were meek choir boys during prep school. Yet Judge published a memoir about their wild boozing and slut-chasing. BK absolutely denies being anything but a little virginal angel. I might believe him if he instead pleaded Prodigal Son.

(finally... and on a side... I hope the SCOTUS does overturn Roe. I say that the states should decide this. It is a criminal issue, after all, and states should determine how they enforce criminal law).

WTF -- are you a Tenther?

Yes... I agree with the idea that BK "could" overturn Roe v Wade. His language is legalistic when answering questions. Indeed, he could believe Roe should be changed. This would fit with his philosophy. I don't think he will overturn it... but this is only my guess.

I am sick of Roe v Wade. I am of the opinion that the abortion topic would be best left to the states. This would improve the function of the Federal government by taking the abortion issue out of Federal politics. Maybe this is a silly idea on my part, but I can hope. Almost every state would maintain legal abortions. Some would have local battles to decide the issue. Some places (think North Dakota) would outlaw abortion fully and women would have to travel to seek an abortion. Most populous states would maintain the status quo. Let the people decide. Let the states compete with each other over who makes this work the best. I am basically pro-abortion, but I don't believe I should decide for women in other states. They can vote for what they want.... as it should be.

and... I guess I still think BK may have done some shitty things... dropped his pants or something. Really though, I couldn't care less and this shit from his college years should just be completely dismissed out of hand. It should have never come up.

I was super pissed when the Reps delayed the Garland nomination. This was purely tactical and wrong in my opinion. However, the Reps didn't try to destroy Garland's life to stop him. Maybe they would have under different circumstances. I just hope the Dems are going to be punished for this latest behavior... otherwise it will continue unabated.

[John D]

You just know that Kavanaugh did it because he was a woman-hating virgin incel well into college.

Perhaps you missed the part where he's accused of attempted rape. And of course, you can wag your dick in someone's face and still preserve your virginity.

Why should we believe anything this man says? He's already perjured himself twice before Congress. And as a fundie pro-life zealot, it'd be fine to 'lie for Jesus' about not overturning Roe v. Wade -- or anything else to get into a position to do so.

We have nine SC justices for 330 million citizens. There is not a short list of one with Bart O'Kavanaugh's name on it, and every nominee should be thoroughly vetted as to their personal character. The only reason for the rush is that Gops expect to lose Senate seats in a few weeks. They want BK now, cuz they do expect him to overturn Roe. These freaks are obsessed with fetuses.

Wait... what. Are you trolling or are you just being temporarily stupid. (I say "temporarily" because I know you are not a stupid person)

First of all - how exactly did he perjure himself?.... I listened to much of the hearing.... and I must have missed this part.

Second - He has stated that Roe v. Wade is settled law. What evidence do you have that he will overturn Roe?

(finally... and on a side... I hope the SCOTUS does overturn Roe. I say that the states should decide this. It is a criminal issue, after all, and states should determine how they enforce criminal law).

You really don't understand what Roe v. Wade is about, do you? It's a common enough misconception, most people think Roe is about abortion, it's actually about privacy. Does the government have the right to dictate the behavior of private citizens when there is no overriding public need to do so? Roe answered that question with a resounding no. That it legalized abortion is incidental. Overturning Roe gives whatever vocal minority that holds a majority in government the power to dictate, under penalty of law, your behavior according to dogma they hold. The single most important principle upon which the United States is based is the freedom of the individual from government interference in their private lives, overturn Roe and you've destroyed the foundation of our nation.

Good point... but... however it works out, the SCTOUS usually makes very specific and small changes. It is possible that the "right" to an abortion is decided to be outside this idea of privacy and personal autonomy. It could be decided that the state has a compelling interest in protecting the existence and development of the fetus and that this very specific interest overrides privacy. I don't see this change as being entirely bad. This is a more likely outcome than a complete reversal of the concept of privacy as a right. Just my 2c of course. It is also nearly impossible that the SCOTUS would ban abortion outright.... this will just not happen.

[shoutinghorse]

Sargon has also been taking his lumps of late from the usual suspects aka nabobs of negativity and nihilism (Mr Metokur and Ethan Ralph amoungst others).

And there is no doubt that there is a wealth of content to comb through if you are of a mind to find something that would be politically problematic for a potential politician. ('White Niggers' comes to mind).

UKIP are used to being smeared or past deeds brought up by the mainstream media and press so I doubt the white niggers remark or the Jess Phillips "I wouldn't even rape you" will bother him too much, it might worry some of the old guard like Patrick O'Flynn or toxic Suzanne Evans but to be fair kippers have had to put up with being maligned since inception so a few choice phrases from Sargon shouldn't be too much of an embarrassment to most.
No his biggest problem for me is when Batten steps down as leader next year (he only agreed to be leader for 1 year) and a possible return for (as rumoured) Farage. He will no longer be seen as the boy that laid the golden egg as Farage has history of not letting anyone's ego get bigger than his own. Plus Sargon can forget being critical of Islam while Farage and his cronies are around, just ask Anne Marie Waters.

[MarcusAu]

Com you magnificent bastard

[comhcinc]

All I know is I have had my dick out on so much I am going ahead now and stepping down from being nominated for the SC.

[Guest_b8931fdb]

https://quillette.com/2018/09/25/how-an ... d-my-life/

How An Anonymous Accusation Derailed My Life
written by Stephen Elliott

In early October, 2017, following the emergence of the Harvey Weinstein allegations, a writer and activist living in Brooklyn named Moira Donegan created a Google Doc entitled “Shitty Media Men.” She sent it to female friends working in media and encouraged them to add to it and forward it on. The idea was to spread the word about predatory men in the business so that women would be forewarned. Anyone with access to the link could edit and add to the list. At the top of the spreadsheet were the following instructions: “Log out of gmail in order to edit anonymously, never name an accuser, never share the document with any men.” In the first column was this disclaimer: “This document is only a collection of misconduct allegations and rumors. Take everything with a grain of salt.” Nobody did.

The list had only been live for 12 hours when word reached Donegan that Buzzfeed were preparing to publish a story about it. She immediately closed it down. By that time, there were already 74 entries. The Buzzfeed article ran the following day. Other media outlets soon followed up on the story and, shortly thereafter, the list was weaponized by right-wing blogger and conspiracy theorist Mike Cernovich. My entry reads: “Rape accusations, sexual harassment, coercion, unsolicited invitations to his apartment, a dude who snuck into Binders???”

I was shocked to find myself accused of rape. I don’t like intercourse, I don’t like penetrating people with objects, and I don’t like receiving oral sex. My entire sexuality is wrapped up in BDSM. Cross-dressing, bondage, masochism. I’m always the bottom. I’ve been in long romantic relationships with women without ever seeing them naked. Almost every time I’ve had intercourse during the past 10 years, it has been in the context of dominance/submission, often without my consent, and usually while I’m tied up or in a straitjacket and hood. I’ve never had sex with anyone who works in media.

I am not seeking to come out about my sexuality as a means of creating a diversion, as Kevin Spacey appeared to do when he was accused of sexual misconduct. I’ve always been open about my sexuality, and I have even written entire books on the topic. I’ve never raped anybody. I would even go one step further: There is no one in the world who believes that I raped them. Whoever added me to Donegan’s list, it was not someone with whom I’ve had sex.

...

The original version of this essay was significantly more conciliatory. New York magazine agreed to run it. It would have been the perfect venue, since it was there that Moira Donegan’s essay justifying her creation of the list had appeared in January. I worked with the editor for a few weeks and then, just as I believed it was about to be published, they informed me that it wouldn’t run after all. It was then accepted by two senior editors at the Guardian, but the essay was spiked again, apparently after other editors revolted. I’ve never had an essay accepted somewhere and then rejected. Now it’s happened twice.

Through the editor at New York, I tried to contact Moira Donegan. I sent her a note asking if we could speak, at a place of her convenience, alone or in the presence of witnesses, either on or off the record—however she preferred. I wanted to ask her how I came to be on her list. Were there in fact two accusations that she had combined into “rape accusations”? Did she touch my entry as an editor, or even as a writer? Was she the one who highlighted my entry in red, one of 16 entries identified in this way to indicate supposed multiple accusations of rape or violent sexual assault? I did not receive a reply.

...

When Donegan acknowledged creating the list, she wrote that she knew it was unreliable but that it was meant to protect women. She tweeted (or retweeted) the claim that many of the men on the list were being found guilty. She acknowledged that the document was indeed vulnerable to false accusations and “sympathize(d) with the desire to be careful, even as all available information suggests that false allegations are rare.” (In fact, U.S. numbers suggest that at least 5% of rape allegations are false or baseless, a higher rate than other major crimes such as murder).

Of course, in some sense, Donegan didn’t have to worry, because no one is truly innocent. Even if you’re not guilty of the particular crime of which you stand accused, you’re likely to be guilty of something. It’s a Kafkaesque scenario. The accused can either refuse to engage, or try to maintain their specific innocence from a position of more general guilt. Either way, the trial is over before any defense can arrive.

[free thoughtpolice]

Guest wrote:

lST MAN
We should defend ourselves. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.

TEVYE
Very good. And that way, the whole world will be blind and toothless

All very noble to turn the other cheek if the person that smites thee is a person of honor. Keep turning the other cheek to the Republicans and they will never stop beating you and stealing your lunch money. They will get their way every time instead of like now just most of the time.

[comhcinc]

Wait I know something else. IF you have an issue with a dick getting pulled out at a kegger you are not allowed at my parties.

When I was in my early 20s there was plenty of parties and almost all involved someone getting naked at some point.

[CaptainFluffyBunny]

Nothing from the calendars indicates whether he might have met Dr. Blasey. Judge Kavanaugh has told friends and advisers that he does not remember her. But senators are likely to question him on his drinking and partying during that era.

Jeesus H Christ, seriously? .. What exactly are they going to ask him, "Judge Kavanaugh, do you remember having a whiskey after your third bottle of Bud or was it a vodka on the night of ???? 1982" .. "Can you please state how many tequila's you drank in the month of May 1983?"

This is a witch hunt, anyone with an ounce of common sense can see it, why on earth is being allowed to continue?

Because reasonable attempts to tank Kavanaugh's nomination -- on the grounds that he's clearly perjured himself to Congress, on multiple occasions -- have failed. Therefore, the Dems are resorting to more desperate measures.

Those fucking Demonrats! They should treat Bart O'Kavanaugh fairly, just like the Republicans treated Merrick Garland.

lST MAN
We should defend ourselves. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.

TEVYE
Very good. And that way, the whole world will be blind and toothless.

Whereas the other alternative is to bend over and take it...

[comhcinc]

Which isn't always that bad...

[CaptainFluffyBunny]

You just know that Kavanaugh did it because he was a woman-hating virgin incel well into college.

Perhaps you missed the part where he's accused of attempted rape. And of course, you can wag your dick in someone's face and still preserve your virginity.

Why should we believe anything this man says? He's already perjured himself twice before Congress. And as a fundie pro-life zealot, it'd be fine to 'lie for Jesus' about not overturning Roe v. Wade -- or anything else to get into a position to do so.

We have nine SC justices for 330 million citizens. There is not a short list of one with Bart O'Kavanaugh's name on it, and every nominee should be thoroughly vetted as to their personal character. The only reason for the rush is that Gops expect to lose Senate seats in a few weeks. They want BK now, cuz they do expect him to overturn Roe. These freaks are obsessed with fetuses.

Wait... what. Are you trolling or are you just being temporarily stupid. (I say "temporarily" because I know you are not a stupid person)

First of all - how exactly did he perjure himself?.... I listened to much of the hearing.... and I must have missed this part.

Second - He has stated that Roe v. Wade is settled law. What evidence do you have that he will overturn Roe?

(finally... and on a side... I hope the SCOTUS does overturn Roe. I say that the states should decide this. It is a criminal issue, after all, and states should determine how they enforce criminal law).

You really don't understand what Roe v. Wade is about, do you? It's a common enough misconception, most people think Roe is about abortion, it's actually about privacy. Does the government have the right to dictate the behavior of private citizens when there is no overriding public need to do so? Roe answered that question with a resounding no. That it legalized abortion is incidental. Overturning Roe gives whatever vocal minority that holds a majority in government the power to dictate, under penalty of law, your behavior according to dogma they hold. The single most important principle upon which the United States is based is the freedom of the individual from government interference in their private lives, overturn Roe and you've destroyed the foundation of our nation.

:clap: hallelujah.

[dogen]

You just know that Kavanaugh did it because he was a woman-hating virgin incel well into college.

Perhaps you missed the part where he's accused of attempted rape. And of course, you can wag your dick in someone's face and still preserve your virginity.

Why should we believe anything this man says? He's already perjured himself twice before Congress. And as a fundie pro-life zealot, it'd be fine to 'lie for Jesus' about not overturning Roe v. Wade -- or anything else to get into a position to do so.

We have nine SC justices for 330 million citizens. There is not a short list of one with Bart O'Kavanaugh's name on it, and every nominee should be thoroughly vetted as to their personal character. The only reason for the rush is that Gops expect to lose Senate seats in a few weeks. They want BK now, cuz they do expect him to overturn Roe. These freaks are obsessed with fetuses.

Wait... what. Are you trolling or are you just being temporarily stupid. (I say "temporarily" because I know you are not a stupid person)

First of all - how exactly did he perjure himself?.... I listened to much of the hearing.... and I must have missed this part.

Second - He has stated that Roe v. Wade is settled law. What evidence do you have that he will overturn Roe?

(finally... and on a side... I hope the SCOTUS does overturn Roe. I say that the states should decide this. It is a criminal issue, after all, and states should determine how they enforce criminal law).

Here's a discussion of his lying to congress:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... 537c2c60eb

[free thoughtpolice]

If anybody is feeling sorry for Kavanaugh, keep this in mind:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/20/politics ... index.html

Recently opened National Archives records from the 1990s independent counsel probe reveal some of Kavanaugh's actions, including his aggressive pursuit of documents tied to Vince Foster, a top Clinton administration lawyer who committed suicide, and broad concern for how Starr's Lewinsky findings could taint the reputation of Starr and the lawyers working with him.

Kavanaugh was all gung ho about pursuing bullshit allegations against Billdawg. Tough shit if he is getting dragged through the mud now. He is getting a taste of what he was all too willing to dish out.

The September 1998 Starr Report, which described the encounters between Clinton and Lewinsky down to the details of their oral sex and evidence of a semen-stained dress, shocked the nation as it was disseminated over the Internet. In one of the more attention-getting memos now available to the public, Kavanaugh blasts Clinton and recommends hard-hitting questions, including about specific acts of oral sex and masturbation.
"The President has disgraced his Office, the legal system, and the American people by having sex with a 22-year-old intern and turning her life into shambles -- callous and disgusting behavior that has somehow gotten lost in the shuffle," Kavanaugh wrote in an August 15, 1998, memo to Starr and other lawyers.
"He should be forced to account for all of that and to defend his actions. It may not be our job to impose sanctions on him, but it is our job to make his pattern of revolting behavior clear -- piece by painful piece," he wrote.

The word is that he wanted to get every little bit of explicit detail out there and humiliate Clinton to the max and it was even too much for Starr. It gives me a little bit of the same feeling as if someone came forward and accused PZ of rape or when a professional Witchfinder gets put on trial. The sleazy fucking toad was bragging about his Finger, Fuck, and Forget, and his Devil's Triangle exploits in his college yearbook. Even if he was lying about doing it, it seems to show his state of mind. A decade later he talks about Clinton engaging in consensual sex, calls it shameful behavior and wants to public shame him to the max.
Poor fucking Brett.

[dogen]

If anybody is feeling sorry for Kavanaugh, keep this in mind:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/20/politics ... index.html

Recently opened National Archives records from the 1990s independent counsel probe reveal some of Kavanaugh's actions, including his aggressive pursuit of documents tied to Vince Foster, a top Clinton administration lawyer who committed suicide, and broad concern for how Starr's Lewinsky findings could taint the reputation of Starr and the lawyers working with him.

Kavanaugh was all gung ho about pursuing bullshit allegations against Billdawg. Tough shit if he is getting dragged through the mud now. He is getting a taste of what he was all too willing to dish out.

The September 1998 Starr Report, which described the encounters between Clinton and Lewinsky down to the details of their oral sex and evidence of a semen-stained dress, shocked the nation as it was disseminated over the Internet. In one of the more attention-getting memos now available to the public, Kavanaugh blasts Clinton and recommends hard-hitting questions, including about specific acts of oral sex and masturbation.
"The President has disgraced his Office, the legal system, and the American people by having sex with a 22-year-old intern and turning her life into shambles -- callous and disgusting behavior that has somehow gotten lost in the shuffle," Kavanaugh wrote in an August 15, 1998, memo to Starr and other lawyers.
"He should be forced to account for all of that and to defend his actions. It may not be our job to impose sanctions on him, but it is our job to make his pattern of revolting behavior clear -- piece by painful piece," he wrote.

The word is that he wanted to get every little bit of explicit detail out there and humiliate Clinton to the max and it was even too much for Starr. It gives me a little bit of the same feeling as if someone came forward and accused PZ of rape or when a professional Witchfinder gets put on trial. The sleazy fucking toad was bragging about his Finger, Fuck, and Forget, and his Devil's Triangle exploits in his college yearbook. Even if he was lying about doing it, it seems to show his state of mind. A decade later he talks about Clinton engaging in consensual sex, calls it shameful behavior and wants to public shame him to the max
Poor fucking Brett.

My thoughts entirely. All this weeping for poor little Bart is too fucking weak to make a decent brew of Male Tears Tea...

[comhcinc]

Here's a discussion of his lying to congress:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... 537c2c60eb

Not to be too pedantic but that's not a discussion. That an opinion piece by Patrick Leahy. Whether Kavanaugh was lying or not Leahy would right a piece saying he was.

It's in the opinion section so it hasn't been fact-checked.

[Guest_b8931fdb]

Guest wrote:

lST MAN
We should defend ourselves. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.

TEVYE
Very good. And that way, the whole world will be blind and toothless

All very noble to turn the other cheek if the person that smites thee is a person of honor. Keep turning the other cheek to the Republicans and they will never stop beating you and stealing your lunch money. They will get their way every time instead of like now just most of the time.

Well we can play dirty like Bork and video tapes and dirtier still like Kavanaugh or we alternatively, try to run better candidates, and run on platforms that support our constituents, do that repeatedly and with integrity and we will end up owning all the scotus seats!

We ran Clinton and elections have consequences.

[free thoughtpolice]

https://newrepublic.com/minutes/150749/ ... -us-senate
How about this one commie?

Among other things, the emails show that Judge Kavanaugh helped work on a binder of documents about the judge, Charles W. Pickering Sr., to give to Senate staff members; drafted a letter to a senator about him; and handled a draft opinion article supporting his confirmation intended for publication under the name of Alberto Gonzales, the White House counsel whose staff called him “Judge.”

He said he wasn't "primarily involved", at best deliberately misleading. Or more to the point - he lied.

[John D]

You just know that Kavanaugh did it because he was a woman-hating virgin incel well into college.

Perhaps you missed the part where he's accused of attempted rape. And of course, you can wag your dick in someone's face and still preserve your virginity.

Why should we believe anything this man says? He's already perjured himself twice before Congress. And as a fundie pro-life zealot, it'd be fine to 'lie for Jesus' about not overturning Roe v. Wade -- or anything else to get into a position to do so.

We have nine SC justices for 330 million citizens. There is not a short list of one with Bart O'Kavanaugh's name on it, and every nominee should be thoroughly vetted as to their personal character. The only reason for the rush is that Gops expect to lose Senate seats in a few weeks. They want BK now, cuz they do expect him to overturn Roe. These freaks are obsessed with fetuses.

Wait... what. Are you trolling or are you just being temporarily stupid. (I say "temporarily" because I know you are not a stupid person)

First of all - how exactly did he perjure himself?.... I listened to much of the hearing.... and I must have missed this part.

Second - He has stated that Roe v. Wade is settled law. What evidence do you have that he will overturn Roe?

(finally... and on a side... I hope the SCOTUS does overturn Roe. I say that the states should decide this. It is a criminal issue, after all, and states should determine how they enforce criminal law).

Here's a discussion of his lying to congress:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... 537c2c60eb

A wapo opinion piece.... you must be joking!

[John D]

https://newrepublic.com/minutes/150749/ ... -us-senate
How about this one commie?

Among other things, the emails show that Judge Kavanaugh helped work on a binder of documents about the judge, Charles W. Pickering Sr., to give to Senate staff members; drafted a letter to a senator about him; and handled a draft opinion article supporting his confirmation intended for publication under the name of Alberto Gonzales, the White House counsel whose staff called him “Judge.”

He said he wasn't "primarily involved", at best deliberately misleading. Or more to the point - he lied.

That is the weakest of weak sauce.

[free thoughtpolice]

Guest wrote:

lST MAN
We should defend ourselves. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.

TEVYE
Very good. And that way, the whole world will be blind and toothless

All very noble to turn the other cheek if the person that smites thee is a person of honor. Keep turning the other cheek to the Republicans and they will never stop beating you and stealing your lunch money. They will get their way every time instead of like now just most of the time.

Well we can play dirty like Bork and video tapes and dirtier still like Kavanaugh or we alternatively, try to run better candidates, and run on platforms that support our constituents, do that repeatedly and with integrity and we will end up owning all the scotus seats!

We ran Clinton and elections have consequences.

You won the election and the repubs denied Garland a vote, which by all accounts would have given him the seat. The republicans stole the SC seat. Maybe they should be shown that playing dirty has consequences too, either than just allowing them to get their way.
A long time ago, when I had just moved and started in to a new school there was the supposed school tough guy that tried to bully me on basically the first day. I told him to fuck off, he asked if I wanted to take it off property after school to settle it. I said sure and let him know that I was wasn't afraid to either take or inflict real damage. He chickened out and didn't show up. Not only did I never get any more flak from him or others, I got respect for standing up for myself.
Trump played dirty and played the bully and won the election from a better, more experienced, albeit flawed opponent. Voters aren't going to respect someone that allows themselves to get pushed around anymore than the kids I went school with did.

[free thoughtpolice]

John D:

That is the weakest of weak sauce.

He played an important part in trying to get the judge appointed. Are you saying he gave an honest answer? Give me a fucking break.

[Guest_b8931fdb]

Guest wrote:

lST MAN
We should defend ourselves. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.

TEVYE
Very good. And that way, the whole world will be blind and toothless

All very noble to turn the other cheek if the person that smites thee is a person of honor. Keep turning the other cheek to the Republicans and they will never stop beating you and stealing your lunch money. They will get their way every time instead of like now just most of the time.

Well we can play dirty like Bork and video tapes and dirtier still like Kavanaugh or we alternatively, try to run better candidates, and run on platforms that support our constituents, do that repeatedly and with integrity and we will end up owning all the scotus seats!

We ran Clinton and elections have consequences.

You won the election and the repubs denied Garland a vote, which by all accounts would have given him the seat. The republicans stole the SC seat. Maybe they should be shown that playing dirty has consequences too, either than just allowing them to get their way.
A long time ago, when I had just moved and started in to a new school there was the supposed school tough guy that tried to bully me on basically the first day. I told him to fuck off, he asked if I wanted to take it off property after school to settle it. I said sure and let him know that I was wasn't afraid to either take or inflict real damage. He chickened out and didn't show up. Not only did I never get any more flak from him or others, I got respect for standing up for myself.
Trump played dirty and played the bully and won the election from a better, more experienced, albeit flawed opponent. Voters aren't going to respect someone that allows themselves to get pushed around anymore than the kids I went school with did.

Garland should have had his confirmation hearing, but the delay was entirely constitutional. Feinstein's delay on the other broke Senate rules and grossly abused both Ford and Kavanaugh. Smearing people then rationalizing because you dislike the viewpoints is disgusting.

How did Trump play dirty? By mocking verbally all the assholes? By lying? I dislike that shit, but it seems par for the course and a standard of politicians. The record shows it was Clinton who stole any elections.

> Voters aren't going to respect someone that allows themselves to get pushed around anymore than the kids I went school with did.

Dems constantly take it in the ass, that's true. Running on who is the dirtiest isn't that alternative I am looking for.

---------------------------------------
---------------------------------------









---------------------------------------
---------------------------------------

Bad 24 hours for Avenatti

[comhcinc]

https://newrepublic.com/minutes/150749/ ... -us-senate
How about this one commie?

Among other things, the emails show that Judge Kavanaugh helped work on a binder of documents about the judge, Charles W. Pickering Sr., to give to Senate staff members; drafted a letter to a senator about him; and handled a draft opinion article supporting his confirmation intended for publication under the name of Alberto Gonzales, the White House counsel whose staff called him “Judge.”

He said he wasn't "primarily involved", at best deliberately misleading. Or more to the point - he lied.

You are making more of it than even the writer of the piece itself. Bolding Mine

In 2006, when Kavanaugh himself was nominated to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, he told the Senate that Judge Charles W. Pickering “was not one of the judicial nominees” that he was “primarily handling” as part of his work as an attorney for the George W. Bush administration. But documents from the time show that Kavanaugh may have actually played an important role in Pickering’s nomination process:

"Help work on a binder", "Drafted a letter", " Handled a draft opinion article. To me, that doesn't sound like he was the guy doing the "primarily handling" of the guy, but I admit I don't know that would detail.

Frankly, at the end of the day, it sounds like semantics.

[Ape+lust]

Remember how Jeremy Hambly AKA The Quartering was sucker punched at an after-hours gathering while attending GenCon? No... actually, he was head-locked from behind and pummelled, a little bit more than just a punch.

GenCon has decided what they'll do about it. They banned Hambly for violating their rules of conduct.

To add absurdity to insult, the email informing him has a clause that says he can't share it without their permission.

[Really?]

You just know that Kavanaugh did it because he was a woman-hating virgin incel well into college.

Perhaps you missed the part where he's accused of attempted rape. And of course, you can wag your dick in someone's face and still preserve your virginity.

Why should we believe anything this man says? He's already perjured himself twice before Congress. And as a fundie pro-life zealot, it'd be fine to 'lie for Jesus' about not overturning Roe v. Wade -- or anything else to get into a position to do so.

We have nine SC justices for 330 million citizens. There is not a short list of one with Bart O'Kavanaugh's name on it, and every nominee should be thoroughly vetted as to their personal character. The only reason for the rush is that Gops expect to lose Senate seats in a few weeks. They want BK now, cuz they do expect him to overturn Roe. These freaks are obsessed with fetuses.

https://www.skeptic.com/reading_room/ps ... -recovery/

In Memory Warp, his unflinchingly bold new book, Mark Pendergrast warns that repressed memory recovery, and accompanying memory distortions, are still a major problem in contemporary society. The book is essential reading for all because it offers valuable protection from the most damaging of psychology’s modern practices. In Memory Warp, Pendergrast articulately and thoroughly explains the history and the dangers of therapies that uncover purportedly repressed memories of trauma. He meticulously describes past and current research and explains how beliefs in repressed memories still predominate in today’s society. For example, he provides evidence refuting the claims of The Keepers, a documentary released on Netflix in 2017 involving the case of a murdered Catholic nun and a priest accused of sexual abuse, which he argues has fallaciously re-enforced a belief in repressed memories in households across the nation.

https://www.csicop.org/si/show/remembering_dangerously

Like the witch-hunt trials of old, people today are being accused and even imprisoned on ‘evidence’ provided by memories from dreams and flashbacks — memories that didn’t exist before therapy. What is going on here?

[Really?]

Nothing from the calendars indicates whether he might have met Dr. Blasey. Judge Kavanaugh has told friends and advisers that he does not remember her. But senators are likely to question him on his drinking and partying during that era.

Jeesus H Christ, seriously? .. What exactly are they going to ask him, "Judge Kavanaugh, do you remember having a whiskey after your third bottle of Bud or was it a vodka on the night of ???? 1982" .. "Can you please state how many tequila's you drank in the month of May 1983?"

This is a witch hunt, anyone with an ounce of common sense can see it, why on earth is being allowed to continue?

Because reasonable attempts to tank Kavanaugh's nomination -- on the grounds that he's clearly perjured himself to Congress, on multiple occasions -- have failed. Therefore, the Dems are resorting to more desperate measures.

Those fucking Demonrats! They should treat Bart O'Kavanaugh fairly, just like the Republicans treated Merrick Garland.

http://bloggingblue.com/wp-content/uplo ... Hitler.png

[Really?]

If anybody is feeling sorry for Kavanaugh, keep this in mind:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/20/politics ... index.html

Recently opened National Archives records from the 1990s independent counsel probe reveal some of Kavanaugh's actions, including his aggressive pursuit of documents tied to Vince Foster, a top Clinton administration lawyer who committed suicide, and broad concern for how Starr's Lewinsky findings could taint the reputation of Starr and the lawyers working with him.

Kavanaugh was all gung ho about pursuing bullshit allegations against Billdawg. Tough shit if he is getting dragged through the mud now. He is getting a taste of what he was all too willing to dish out.

The September 1998 Starr Report, which described the encounters between Clinton and Lewinsky down to the details of their oral sex and evidence of a semen-stained dress, shocked the nation as it was disseminated over the Internet. In one of the more attention-getting memos now available to the public, Kavanaugh blasts Clinton and recommends hard-hitting questions, including about specific acts of oral sex and masturbation.
"The President has disgraced his Office, the legal system, and the American people by having sex with a 22-year-old intern and turning her life into shambles -- callous and disgusting behavior that has somehow gotten lost in the shuffle," Kavanaugh wrote in an August 15, 1998, memo to Starr and other lawyers.
"He should be forced to account for all of that and to defend his actions. It may not be our job to impose sanctions on him, but it is our job to make his pattern of revolting behavior clear -- piece by painful piece," he wrote.

The word is that he wanted to get every little bit of explicit detail out there and humiliate Clinton to the max and it was even too much for Starr. It gives me a little bit of the same feeling as if someone came forward and accused PZ of rape or when a professional Witchfinder gets put on trial. The sleazy fucking toad was bragging about his Finger, Fuck, and Forget, and his Devil's Triangle exploits in his college yearbook. Even if he was lying about doing it, it seems to show his state of mind. A decade later he talks about Clinton engaging in consensual sex, calls it shameful behavior and wants to public shame him to the max.
Poor fucking Brett.

What do you mean "bullshit allegations" against Clinton?

https://www.sott.net/image/s17/352242/f ... efault.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DETE7KYXsAIZX-V.jpg

[Lsuoma]

Carpet munching on the Beeb.

https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpspr ... a6ea37.jpg

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45637037

[John D]

Remember how Jeremy Hambly AKA The Quartering was sucker punched at an after-hours gathering while attending GenCon? No... actually, he was head-locked from behind and pummelled, a little bit more than just a punch.

GenCon has decided what they'll do about it. They banned Hambly for violating their rules of conduct.

To add absurdity to insult, the email informing him has a clause that says he can't share it without their permission.

Gen Con figures he is just going to cause trouble.... even by simply attending. They have evidence that he has posted repeatedly about the assault and named the person who did it. Gen Con can just claim he is spreading rumors. Ultimately, they will look for any excuse they can to kick him out. Gen Con has a brand and it is going full SJW. They have nothing to gain by backing up Hambly.

Gaming cons used to be about the games but increasingly they are turning into Comicon type shows. Hell, my kids and I even did Cosplay at Gen Con, but it is just not as fun as it used to be.

More and more I get my gaming fix on-line where there is a very healthy bunch of mom and pop vendors. The big conventions are just mega-corporate now. Too much hype and not as much heart.

[comhcinc]

Oh and here is something I think is important about this Kavanaugh thing. I don't actually give a fuck one way or the other. From what I can see, this guy is about what we can expect for the next SCJ. We are not going to get anyone really better or worse if he isn't hired.

I see this all as a bunch of political theatre that doesn't actually matter at the end of the day.

So with that said what do we have here really? Let's say both women are telling the complete and whole truth.

1. As a teenager, he tried to rape a girl. Bad news but it seems he never did it again. This might sound bad to many but teenagers do stupid awful shit and they should be forgiven for it. Especially when it's closing in on 40 years without a repeat.

2. He pulled his dick out during a party game in college. I can't take that seriously at all. I just don't care. It's not a thing. It's college kids have fun at a fucking party.

So yeah. Anyway, I might be starting college again in a couple of weeks. I will be taking a bible class. Fun times.

[MarcusAu]

So yeah. Anyway, I might be starting college again in a couple of weeks. I will be taking a bible class. Fun End times.

FIFY

[John D]

https://www.skeptic.com/reading_room/ps ... -recovery/

In Memory Warp, his unflinchingly bold new book, Mark Pendergrast warns that repressed memory recovery, and accompanying memory distortions, are still a major problem in contemporary society. The book is essential reading for all because it offers valuable protection from the most damaging of psychology’s modern practices. In Memory Warp, Pendergrast articulately and thoroughly explains the history and the dangers of therapies that uncover purportedly repressed memories of trauma. He meticulously describes past and current research and explains how beliefs in repressed memories still predominate in today’s society. For example, he provides evidence refuting the claims of The Keepers, a documentary released on Netflix in 2017 involving the case of a murdered Catholic nun and a priest accused of sexual abuse, which he argues has fallaciously re-enforced a belief in repressed memories in households across the nation.

Interesting guy. He may be the only person on earth trying to defend Jerry Sandusky.



http://www.markpendergrast.com/

[TheMudbrooker]

---------------------------------------
---------------------------------------

Bad 24 hours for Avenatti

Yep, totally believable cuz every lawyer I've ever met acts exactly the same way. Just the other day I called Clarence Darrow and told him I assfucked Mike Pence and made him tattoo my name on his nutsack to commemorate the occasion. Then I had him call my buddy and he told him it was like totally true and shit. So Darrow sent me a check for $75 million dollars and booked me a spot on the Ellen Degeneris show but I didn't do it cuz I was like, you know, bored and shit.

[comhcinc]

So yeah. Anyway, I might be starting college again in a couple of weeks. I will be taking a bible class. Fun End times.

FIFY

Nope. I am going to answer the way they want me to and get out of there and be done with this shit.

[Guest_b8931fdb]

Yep, totally believable cuz every lawyer I've ever met acts exactly the same way. Just the other day I called Clarence Darrow and told him I assfucked Mike Pence and made him tattoo my name on his nutsack to commemorate the occasion. Then I had him call my buddy and he told him it was like totally true and shit. So Darrow sent me a check for $75 million dollars and booked me a spot on the Ellen Degeneris show but I didn't do it cuz I was like, you know, bored and shit.

We will know whether Avenatti got punked in just a bit over a day, so that's nice, he's got that going for him.

[jugheadnaut]

You really don't understand what Roe v. Wade is about, do you? It's a common enough misconception, most people think Roe is about abortion, it's actually about privacy. Does the government have the right to dictate the behavior of private citizens when there is no overriding public need to do so? Roe answered that question with a resounding no. That it legalized abortion is incidental. Overturning Roe gives whatever vocal minority that holds a majority in government the power to dictate, under penalty of law, your behavior according to dogma they hold. The single most important principle upon which the United States is based is the freedom of the individual from government interference in their private lives, overturn Roe and you've destroyed the foundation of our nation.

Nope, it was definitively an abortion ruling that used the previously affirmed right to privacy from Griswold v Connecticut to extend to abortion. It acknowledged that despite its finding of abortion being a fundamental right, there could still be a state interest in restricting abortion and gave a framework for balancing this. The framework basically made the first two trimesters off-limits while theoretically permitting third trimester regulation, although subject to strict judicial scrutiny. Roe offers no judicial framework for balancing privacy rights in any other context and cannot reasonably be held to be the primary bulwark of the SC's privacy jurisprudence.

The balance established by Roe has already been overturned by the Casey decision, which removed the trimester framework as well as strict scrutiny review and permits abortion regulation subject to an 'undue burden' standard. Any further changes to the original Roe decision will almost certainly be in the same vein, with no reference to the underlying privacy right. What I think is most likely to happen in a future abortion case before a conservative SC is the undue burden standard be replaced with rational basis review of state abortion restrictions, which would likely have the practical effect of permitting most post-viability and peri-viability state abortion bans.

[CommanderTuvok]

It is politics all the way down. Fairness left the building a long time ago. Or maybe Garland would have been up for a vote, right? It will be up to the people to say "enough" to the dirty political manipulations, and so far they're only doing that when they're calling out the other side.

A while ago, a president got an illicit blowjob, and sex and accusations have been weaponized to an unheard of degree since. While it's disgusting and harming political discourse, it is also sorta funny that Republicans have become so blase about sex since then, especially concerning Trump. You have an admitted serial cheater endorsed by God-fearing Christians. All because of whose side he's on. Gotta love tribalism.

Trump could anally rape the Virgin Mary, and his Conservative fanboys would give him a pass. "What about Clinton, and the Deep State, tho. Those are much worse!"

:roll:

[dogen]

Yep, totally believable cuz every lawyer I've ever met acts exactly the same way. Just the other day I called Clarence Darrow and told him I assfucked Mike Pence and made him tattoo my name on his nutsack to commemorate the occasion. Then I had him call my buddy and he told him it was like totally true and shit. So Darrow sent me a check for $75 million dollars and booked me a spot on the Ellen Degeneris show but I didn't do it cuz I was like, you know, bored and shit.

We will know whether Avenatti got punked in just a bit over a day, so that's nice, he's got that going for him.

[free thoughtpolice]

Really wrote:

What do you mean "bullshit allegations" against Clinton?

The first part of the quote was about the Vince Foster thing where Kavanaugh and his skeevy Republican pals tried to pin a murder on the Clintons because of some utterly shameful conspiracy theories. Even if those sex assault claims Party Barty O'Kavanaugh are false it still is less bad then trying to claim he committed murder.

[Guest_b8931fdb]

Yep, totally believable cuz every lawyer I've ever met acts exactly the same way. Just the other day I called Clarence Darrow and told him I assfucked Mike Pence and made him tattoo my name on his nutsack to commemorate the occasion. Then I had him call my buddy and he told him it was like totally true and shit. So Darrow sent me a check for $75 million dollars and booked me a spot on the Ellen Degeneris show but I didn't do it cuz I was like, you know, bored and shit.

We will know whether Avenatti got punked in just a bit over a day, so that's nice, he's got that going for him.

4chan didn't make Avenatti say 48 hours.

I don't think he's going to produce on this.

If Avenatti doesn't produce this woman and victim, are you going to let him off the hook?

Say Ford withdraws and as a result the Senate declares they will hold a vote on Thursday or Friday and Avenatti says, well, since there is no hearing, we will not go through. Are you going to give him the benefit of the doubt on this? Yeah, he probably had that story of the high school gang running rape trains and it is understandable he didn't produce on it, I mean, because the hearings weren't held....

What would it take for you to say Avenatti was full of shit about this the entire time?

Do you think Avenatti will produce this witness and victim?

[free thoughtpolice]

commie wrote:

"Help work on a binder", "Drafted a letter", " Handled a draft opinion article. To me, that doesn't sound like he was the guy doing the "primarily handling" of the guy, but I admit I don't know that would detail.

Frankly, at the end of the day, it sounds like semantics.

He was working on the file and gave a misleading answer to the question. It was semantics alright. Where some was using misleading language to make it sound like he wasn't involved. Unfortunately, the questioner wasn't sharp enough to see was using weasel words to get around the truth. He should have been asked what he meant by "primary involvement" and if he did any work on the file.
Nevertheless, it was an act of deception.

[jugheadnaut]

The first part of the quote was about the Vince Foster thing where Kavanaugh and his skeevy Republican pals tried to pin a murder on the Clintons because of some utterly shameful conspiracy theories. Even if those sex assault claims Party Barty O'Kavanaugh are false it still is less bad then trying to claim he committed murder.

The what-aboutism over the last couple of pages is getting painful. And lest I be what-abouted, I stipulate that it's become a major mode of argumentation on both sides.

[TheMudbrooker]

Yep, totally believable cuz every lawyer I've ever met acts exactly the same way. Just the other day I called Clarence Darrow and told him I assfucked Mike Pence and made him tattoo my name on his nutsack to commemorate the occasion. Then I had him call my buddy and he told him it was like totally true and shit. So Darrow sent me a check for $75 million dollars and booked me a spot on the Ellen Degeneris show but I didn't do it cuz I was like, you know, bored and shit.

We will know whether Avenatti got punked in just a bit over a day, so that's nice, he's got that going for him.

4chan didn't make Avenatti say 48 hours.

I don't think he's going to produce on this.

If Avenatti doesn't produce this woman and victim, are you going to let him off the hook?

Say Ford withdraws and as a result the Senate declares they will hold a vote on Thursday or Friday and Avenatti says, well, since there is no hearing, we will not go through. Are you going to give him the benefit of the doubt on this? Yeah, he probably had that story of the high school gang running rape trains and it is understandable he didn't produce on it, I mean, because the hearings weren't held....

What would it take for you to say Avenatti was full of shit about this the entire time?

Do you think Avenatti will produce this witness and victim?

Neither myself nor Dogen made any comment on Avenatti's claims, only that the supposed 4chan troll's claims sound highly unlikely to the point of absurdity. Try not to let your hardon for Michael Avenatti get in the way of your reading comprehension.

[free thoughtpolice]

The first part of the quote was about the Vince Foster thing where Kavanaugh and his skeevy Republican pals tried to pin a murder on the Clintons because of some utterly shameful conspiracy theories. Even if those sex assault claims Party Barty O'Kavanaugh are false it still is less bad then trying to claim he committed murder.

The what-aboutism over the last couple of pages is getting painful. And lest I be what-abouted, I stipulate that it's become a major mode of argumentation on both sides.

You have what aboutism mixed up with me saying that I'm not against retaliating with low blow if the other guy throws one first. I'm pointing out that this guy is a massive prick that is getting what he deserves.

[Driftless]

It is politics all the way down. Fairness left the building a long time ago. Or maybe Garland would have been up for a vote, right? It will be up to the people to say "enough" to the dirty political manipulations, and so far they're only doing that when they're calling out the other side.

A while ago, a president got an illicit blowjob, and sex and accusations have been weaponized to an unheard of degree since. While it's disgusting and harming political discourse, it is also sorta funny that Republicans have become so blase about sex since then, especially concerning Trump. You have an admitted serial cheater endorsed by God-fearing Christians. All because of whose side he's on. Gotta love tribalism.

Trump could anally rape the Virgin Mary, and his Conservative fanboys would give him a pass. "What about Clinton, and the Deep State, tho. Those are much worse!"

:roll:

I think the response would be "Well, technically she would still be a virgin, so what's the problem?" :D

[Guest_b8931fdb]

Neither myself nor Dogen made any comment on Avenatti's claims, only that the supposed 4chan troll's claims sound highly unlikely to the point of absurdity. Try not to let your hardon for Michael Avenatti get in the way of your reading comprehension.

Ah okay, no probs then, you are unwilling to state your belief ahead of time as to whether Avenatti will produce or not, you just want us to know that 4chan is a sketchy place and you doubt what they have to say. I absolutely agree with you on that last point. I don't see anyone hear saying otherwise. In my original post I included a tweet from jbarro saying this was likely bullshit, but I am glad you are willing to go on record how 4chan is probably lying.

[Matt Cavanaugh]

Trump could anally rape the Virgin Mary

I think that already happened on Jeffery Epstein's Island.

[TheMudbrooker]

Neither myself nor Dogen made any comment on Avenatti's claims, only that the supposed 4chan troll's claims sound highly unlikely to the point of absurdity. Try not to let your hardon for Michael Avenatti get in the way of your reading comprehension.

Ah okay, no probs then, you are unwilling to state your belief ahead of time as to whether Avenatti will produce or not, you just want us to know that 4chan is a sketchy place and you doubt what they have to say. I absolutely agree with you on that last point. I don't see anyone hear saying otherwise. In my original post I included a tweet from jbarro saying this was likely bullshit, but I am glad you are willing to go on record how 4chan is probably lying.

Why do you assume I have a belief as to whether Avenatti will produce or not? And why exactly would it be necessary to state that belief ahead of time?

[CaptainFluffyBunny]

Remember how Jeremy Hambly AKA The Quartering was sucker punched at an after-hours gathering while attending GenCon? No... actually, he was head-locked from behind and pummelled, a little bit more than just a punch.

GenCon has decided what they'll do about it. They banned Hambly for violating their rules of conduct.

To add absurdity to insult, the email informing him has a clause that says he can't share it without their permission.

Gen Con figures he is just going to cause trouble.... even by simply attending. They have evidence that he has posted repeatedly about the assault and named the person who did it. Gen Con can just claim he is spreading rumors. Ultimately, they will look for any excuse they can to kick him out. Gen Con has a brand and it is going full SJW. They have nothing to gain by backing up Hambly.

Gaming cons used to be about the games but increasingly they are turning into Comicon type shows. Hell, my kids and I even did Cosplay at Gen Con, but it is just not as fun as it used to be.

More and more I get my gaming fix on-line where there is a very healthy bunch of mom and pop vendors. The big conventions are just mega-corporate now. Too much hype and not as much heart.

The recent turn towards regressive leftism in games really sucks. I used to play table-top games as a kid, Avalon Hill and Steve Jackson stuff. Then I got into Dungeons and Dragons in '78, and played a lot until I went to college and got a girlfriend, job and all that. Recently I've rekindled my interest in games, especially RPG. My youngest son loves all sorts of board and card games, and has fallen in love with Magic The Gathering. Now it looks like a lot of the culture is simply idiotic, SJW crap. I finally have the leisure to go to the big cons, but they've all taken a hard left turn. He wants to go, but he isn't exactly PC or diplomatic. And I hate his money going to Wizards of the Coast, a group of snivelling, self-righteous assholes. I had one lecture me on the spirit of D&D when I was playing before he was born.

I really wonder if Sci-fi, fantasy, games and comics will ever recover from SJW entryism, or if they're permanently damaged in their current form.

[free thoughtpolice]

[Keating]

Could the Kavanaugh stuff be taken to a new Slymepit+ thread?

[Guest_b8931fdb]

Neither myself nor Dogen made any comment on Avenatti's claims, only that the supposed 4chan troll's claims sound highly unlikely to the point of absurdity. Try not to let your hardon for Michael Avenatti get in the way of your reading comprehension.

Ah okay, no probs then, you are unwilling to state your belief ahead of time as to whether Avenatti will produce or not, you just want us to know that 4chan is a sketchy place and you doubt what they have to say. I absolutely agree with you on that last point. I don't see anyone hear saying otherwise. In my original post I included a tweet from jbarro saying this was likely bullshit, but I am glad you are willing to go on record how 4chan is probably lying.

Why do you assume I have a belief as to whether Avenatti will produce or not? And why exactly would it be necessary to state that belief ahead of time?

I understand now, on reflection, you were only wishing to inform us that you feel 4chan is a sketchy site.

And why would anyone, especially at a skeptics site, ask people to write down their opinions and beliefs about the outcome of an event before it took place? Dunno, can't answer that.

[screwtape]

“biological sex doesn't exist”

“biological sex doesn't exist”

“biological sex doesn't exist”

“biological sex doesn't exist”

I do feel your pain. Denial of all we know about biology is painful. I congratulate you on managing to do so. You'll probably be a feminist hero or something.


;) yes, I know, as does everyone else.

[screwtape]

I'm old enough now....

Are you?

So I am old enough....

Are you really?

But not old enough to sign up for an account?

Put up or shut up. We do like people to sign up so we can tell them to fuck off. Some of us are older than you, and it doesn't qualify us for any kind of preference. Age sometimes brings wisdom, but you'll have to forgive me for dismissing that if you live in any decade of lifespan less than my own, save you come up with better arguments than mine. Knowing when you're wrong and admitting it is the kind of wisdom I respect. So do join in with an account and show me and everyone else how we are wrong.

[screwtape]

Dammit, must not make the Pit seem silly by quoting people. Must try misquoting them to improve our standing.....

[TheMudbrooker]

Neither myself nor Dogen made any comment on Avenatti's claims, only that the supposed 4chan troll's claims sound highly unlikely to the point of absurdity. Try not to let your hardon for Michael Avenatti get in the way of your reading comprehension.

Ah okay, no probs then, you are unwilling to state your belief ahead of time as to whether Avenatti will produce or not, you just want us to know that 4chan is a sketchy place and you doubt what they have to say. I absolutely agree with you on that last point. I don't see anyone hear saying otherwise. In my original post I included a tweet from jbarro saying this was likely bullshit, but I am glad you are willing to go on record how 4chan is probably lying.

Why do you assume I have a belief as to whether Avenatti will produce or not? And why exactly would it be necessary to state that belief ahead of time?

I understand now, on reflection, you were only wishing to inform us that you feel 4chan is a sketchy site.

And why would anyone, especially at a skeptics site, ask people to write down their opinions and beliefs about the outcome of an event before it took place? Dunno, can't answer that.

Whatever would I do without you to tell me what my motives are? Thank you, oh thank you for letting me know what I'm doing and what I think!
And why would anyone, especially at a skeptics site, care about the bloviation and deflections of an anonymous twat who can't be bothered to give his balls a tug, sign up and get a nym? Dunno, can't answer that.