Who gives a fuck about #metoo? Not me. Not many other people other than #metoo themselves... The reason over 2,400 law professors signed a petition against him: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/10/03/opinion/kavanaugh-law-professors-letter.html Not a single fucking thing mentioned about #metoo.
I'm saying that the fake accusation machine started up as soon as the idea that people care about rapists being punished entered the right wing conspiracy mindspace and that any actual consequences for people who are accused are irrelevant. Had Kavanaugh's nomination been blocked after a proper investigation into Dr Ford's accusations and into Kavanaugh's financial history I don't think that dumbfucks like Jocob Wohl would have changed their tactics at all. But I also think that had the Republicans who nominated Kavanaugh taken the accusations seriously and actually investigated them or you know investigated him properly before nominating him in the first place then you wouldn't have idiots on the internet dismissing reliable accusations because the people they look up to for guidance moved the bar on the definition of reliable accusations to suit their political agenda and to cover up for their lack of due diligence when looking for potential nominees for a lifetime appointment. And now that bar is being moved again to somehow give credibility to attacks against Biden. Whose source is in question and one that even Fox news isn't running with.
The current conversation we are having is about the societal standards around sexual assault accusations towards people in power and the media and cultural reaction to them. Particularly the wheel jerk standards the metoo movement wanted to usher in and how the same people pushing these have reversed course and want to dial it back (a suggestion that would have gotten you REEEERE’d out of the room said last year) What stealing Merrick Garlands seat, that went to gorsuch not Kavanaugh, or law professors calling out partisan grandstanding by a judge has to do with this topic I don’t know. Down don’t know why relative public spotlight of the accused would make any difference to the way we treat the versatility of the accusers claims. I think we’re in agreement with pretty much everything else.
The backlash from the dirty politics that got Kavanaugh manifested in the form of a lot of Democrats issuing a lot of talking points for something that should have been a procedural formality. I can't say I feel too bad about that, it was a pretty obvious obstruction tactic from a master of them, and it had to have some corresponding "no, fuck you too." The fact that it made for compelling television and hit at the peak discussion on sexual assault seems like an unanticipated coincidence. Because Biden's accusations could have happened at any point over the last 27 years. Now, of all times? That doesn't strike you as odd? Seriously? Not when he was being vetted as VP? Or when he was considering a run in 2016? Now of all times is the first we're hearing of it? Ford came forward more or less immediately when she found out Kavanaugh was being given a seat on the Supreme Court. That makes sense to me: "Hey, no, fuck that. He shouldn't be confirmed, he's a piece of shit." What doesn't make sense is "Hey, no, fuck that. He shouldn't be nominated, he's a piece of shit." after damn near 30 years of what? Why hasn't she made these allegations previously? It's not the spotlight as much as timing of entering/being in the spotlight. My question is what is the point of this conversation? MeToo was wrong? Ok, sure. In some cases. The media treats Republicans and Democrats differently? Welcome to the first day of 4th grade, when you see Fox News on in the principal's office. I will point out that the poster child of the MeToo movement is in jail, after criminal proceedings. That seems like justice to me. People like Kevin Spacey, Louis CK, Aziz Ansari, etc. taking a step back from entertainment when we weren't happy with them is hardly a political discussion, more a step in the direction of "holding celebrities accountable", something I am not opposed to. I think there's a ton of overreaction to social media shit storms in the last few years, and the MeToo movement is the latest, but it won't be the last. I am also thinking that between the Bernie movement, the "Storm Area 51" campaign and a few others, we're starting to see a widening chasm between actual voter behavior and internet behavior. Some movements are more effective at translating internet outrage into actual behavior, and in retrospect, it was unclear how MeToo was going to accomplish more than getting actual charges filed against folks like Weinstein.
I get that this is more rhetorical/ranting than a legitimate question, but why is there so much fucking money in right-wing grifting? A healthy eco-system should not be able to support this many predators, and yet the well never seems to run dry. You can't turn around without bumping into yet another jackass spouting the most inane opinions and blatantly wrong hot-takes. Those that support them never seem to either wise up or run out of money to give. This rant brought to you by today's tweet from the illustrious Dennis Prager: https://twitter.com/prageru/status/1255255227663597571
The reason people were so annoyed with the Kavanaugh situation is that it represented the absolute pinnacle of partisan fucktardation in it's most raw, insufferably idiotic form. All of the accusations were laughably absurd in one form, or another. Even when they appeared more plausible, the way they were leveled was comically bizarre. Ford couldn't remember anything about what happened other than that, you know, it for sure happened. Dick in the face girl wasn't sure if it was a real dick that someone threw into her face, or if it was Kavanaugh, and at the same time was totally sure. Whack job gang rapee was a whack job. I really can't think of another sexual assault scandal where the range of accusations was so strange. People were acting all outraged about it not being investigated and still are, but there's just a couple of problems. - None of the accusers could provide anything at all resembling coherent information. It's hard enough to determine truth with a he/she said kind of situation. but despite all the accusations happening under circumstances that would involve witnesses who should have been able to corroborate at least some (or all)details if they were true, the accusers couldn't provide anything for them to corroborate. Even so... - They were investigated. The media investigated them for weeks. More than the media has ever dug into any sex scandal I can remember (outside of maybe Clinton's historic blowjob). Ford got a hearing. The FBI did an investigation. None of these ever turned up jack shit, but what are people still bitching about? It wasn't investigated! What exactly do these people want? What lead are these allegedly unused investigators supposed to follow? What detail should they try to corroborate? Because there was nothing to go on, and people were so whipped up into their hysteria about how this was a person they had to hate, what you ended up with was people writing long winded, completely random illogical gibberish about how they could intimate this or that from some irrelevant past behavior, body language, or some bullshit social theory. What you wrote sums up the whole fiasco so well. What lack of due diligence? Not being aware of events no one close to these people could provide any details about? Explain how they should have known about these accusations. I could see leaving the door open that the accusations were plausible (although I don't find them as such), but you're saying people who don't believe them are idiots? Based on what are the accusations so reliable? You sound like you have nothing to go on other than your full steam, emotional, irrational hatred of republicans. Where, or in what direction did the bar move relative to the "idiots" who dismiss the "reliable" accusations against Kavanaugh? You really look down on those bar haulers, eh? The other thing that irked me about the Kavanaugh situation, although a lot less, is all the outrage about his temperament during the scandal. It's not that I think someone is unfair to feel his behavior was disqualifying. I'm not quite sure I agree with that, and maybe I'm a little more sympathetic toward someone not handling what was clearly an all out smear campaign with their best demeanor, but sure, there's certainly a strong case his behavior was unbecoming of the highest judicial office in the land. That said, I feel like I live in an alternate universe with people who are that upset about his poor temperament under those circumstances. Multiple democrat senators were making up entire swaths of bullshit about his judicial record and peddling demonstrably false narratives and conspiracy theories. These same people didn't find any of that unbecoming of their office. Then there's the reality that most politicians are whoring themselves right, left and center on a daily basis, but apparently people find it so much more upsetting that someone could dare get a prestigious seat while having a questionable temperament under a wave of myriad lies being said about them and all out character assassination. I get being put off by it, but I don't get treating it like it's one of the most egregious things this country has permitted. I feel like I see more egregious shit happen on a daily basis.
I wish I had one tenth of the confidence to not only say something that stupid, but create a quote graphic to advertise my stupidity. ...but he has a private University named after him, like all the religious geniuses such as Fallwell and Pat Robertson do.
At least Liberty University and Regent University have physical campuses and teach classes. PragerU is literally just a youtube channel.
So slightly lower on the ladder than The University Of Phoenix. Got it. Is there such thing as a zero-tier school?
The republican-led MI house refused to let the governor extend the state of emergency and authorized a lawsuit against her for doing basically the same thing as all of the other governors in surrounding states, only we have way more cases and deaths. All while a bunch of armed protestors crammed into the capitol building, more of them wearing bullet proof vests than face masks. So that's cool.
I love how the Fat Gun Fucks always squeeze their snowman bodies into those flak jackets like their fat asses just walked into “the sandbox” and an invisible force will open fire on them at any second. They are the official mascot of the micropenis. What is their message, exactly when they dress up like glorified stormtroopers? “Do what we want it we’ll shoot you?”
They don't pay Federal tax unless they're a federal employee, and since they don't pay tax and the IRS is handling the funds, they have no record of them.
During the last hurricane your government seemed to take on an attitude towards Puerto Rico that Ivan Drago takes towards his downed opponents. Not cool. I mean, that shitty parade of theirs in NYC no doubt slowed down Trump’s limo once a year so I guess it was payback time.
yeah I work with quite a few people from Puerto Rico — Texas has a growing PR community, and it’s great. Some of the nicest people you’ll ever meet. The attitude toward toward PR pissed me right the fuck off. They needed serious help. Still do. It wasn’t their fault and the US acted like they were an unwanted child. hopefully they become a state at some point. There’s a push to make them one. That’d be really cool. Beautiful area, again everyone I’ve met from there has been absolutely incredible. Kickass food too.
They do, but their voting rights are quite limited compared to other citizens. They get to vote in the primaries, but don't have any electoral votes for the general, and receive no direct voting representation in congress. They should have just been made a state a long time ago.