Presidential Address Tonight

[RiverDog]

Oh, I agree with you. I just don't like the idea of not voting, which is the only other option I have. In 2016, I voted for Gary Johnson, the Libertarian candidate as the two major parties gave us the absolute worst two choices we've been given since I started voting in 1972. I'm ripe for a 3rd party if one could ever get any traction.

I continue to vote as well even though I mostly put no confidence. i would almost at this point prefer to vote for resumes than philosophies. Our philosophy should be set. Unfortunately our politicians have interpreted Democracy as offering handouts for votes and pursuing control of the world with our tax money on behalf of our business community. It's an unfortunate reality Americans don't seem to realize because too many of the folks that think tax money is a handout system have too much voting power.

You're never going to get a candidate that completely aligns with your philosophy, and neither will I. I have a good friend that if he doesn't know much about the two candidates, will vote against the incumbent, his logic being that "I'm sure that they've done something that would piss me off."

[Aseahawkfan]

You're never going to get a candidate that completely aligns with your philosophy, and neither will I. I have a good friend that if he doesn't know much about the two candidates, will vote against the incumbent, his logic being that "I'm sure that they've done something that would piss me off."

I don't like the philosophical shifts by candidate. It's extremely low character and immoral that a politician should be able to levy taxes to pay for homeless people, most that are voluntarily homeless due to their irresponsible and stupid behavior. Insert drug users, criminals, and the like. They are basically using force of government to provide for their personal charities.

Even now I work with immigrants from other nations that mix working and government benefits like that is how it is supposed to be. I try to explain that using government benefits is shameful. It doesn't even register with them. They are being taught this is just how it is by politicians and a system that is encouraging handouts like government money grows on trees rather than being forcibly taken through taxes and distributed in a manner many would not like. You would think that a government for the people, by the people would only levy greater taxes for absolute needs, not "do gooder" desires or foreign investment.

I'm tired of that trash. When we have politicians in Washington that basically circumvent the vote of the people on tax issues, when do you pull them down forcibly? I imagine never at this point since they are continuing to ensure people earn their living from the government tit ensuring they have soldiers to defend the system. The current model of government in America is antithetical to our nation's founding philosophy, but they don't care. They are putting systems in place under the guise of charity to make people dependent on government handouts so those same people will continue to vote for those that protect their feeding trough.

It's a damn shame that Americans have gone from prideful, independent believers in liberty to weak, dependent, feminized pansies looking to the government to fix their problems and making war on the wealthy rather than clean up their behavior and build themselves a llfe through responsible behavior.

You ever listen to these folks talk about how much they spend on internet phones, housing, cars, and all the irresponsible uses of credit for immediate gratification. These same folks talk like savvyman about the "95%" trash while these same folks engage in behaviors that don't lead to successful lives. They want to be able to blow their checks on junk and luxuries without saving, then think they can tax the wealthy to pay for their pathetic behaviors.

I despise the thinking and the weakness associated with it. Really, I'd love a TV show with middle and low income folks showing all their rotten habits they expect the wealthy to pay for. It would show clearly how full of trash politicians are when they talk about main street or the poor. Most of them are vice driven, undisciplined people that would buy their cigarettes rather than save for their kids education. This is what I have to pay for. I despise it.

[RiverDog]

I don't like the philosophical shifts by candidate. It's extremely low character and immoral that a politician should be able to levy taxes to pay for homeless people, most that are voluntarily homeless due to their irresponsible and stupid behavior. Insert drug users, criminals, and the like. They are basically using force of government to provide for their personal charities.

I've softened my approach in recent years. I don't know what the percentages of homeless that are there by choice are, but I suspect that it's relatively high and I certainly do not agree with coddling them like they do in Seattle. But I do think that we should be providing more in the way of drug rehab and decriminalize of drug use laws. Having had a step son that had gotten himself in trouble at an early age, I can see how incredibly difficult for them to reconnect with the normal world.

Even now I work with immigrants from other nations that mix working and government benefits like that is how it is supposed to be. I try to explain that using government benefits is shameful. It doesn't even register with them. They are being taught this is just how it is by politicians and a system that is encouraging handouts like government money grows on trees rather than being forcibly taken through taxes and distributed in a manner many would not like. You would think that a government for the people, by the people would only levy greater taxes for absolute needs, not "do gooder" desires or foreign investment.

I'm not exactly sure where you're going with this statement. I admittedly work (or used to work) with the cream of the crop when it comes to my association with immigrants, but my experience has been that they do not have an entitlement attitude about them, to the contrary, many do not know their rights and can be taken advantage of. Personally, if I had no other information to draw on, I'd rather have an immigrant that's just happy to have a job than someone that was born here, at least for the entry level types of jobs that were common to my work in the food processing industry.

It's a damn shame that Americans have gone from prideful, independent believers in liberty to weak, dependent, feminized pansies looking to the government to fix their problems and making war on the wealthy rather than clean up their behavior and build themselves a llfe through responsible behavior.

You ever listen to these folks talk about how much they spend on internet phones, housing, cars, and all the irresponsible uses of credit for immediate gratification. These same folks talk like savvyman about the "95%" trash while these same folks engage in behaviors that don't lead to successful lives. They want to be able to blow their checks on junk and luxuries without saving, then think they can tax the wealthy to pay for their pathetic behaviors.

I despise the thinking and the weakness associated with it. Really, I'd love a TV show with middle and low income folks showing all their rotten habits they expect the wealthy to pay for. It would show clearly how full of trash politicians are when they talk about main street or the poor. Most of them are vice driven, undisciplined people that would buy their cigarettes rather than save for their kids education. This is what I have to pay for. I despise it.

Each generation has their complaints about the succeeding ones. I can remember my dad's very vociferous complaints about my generation, ie baby boomers. He thought that we were addicted to the TV, that our music was obscene and shameful, didn't like the long hair, women's lib, had his problems with the civil rights movement, etc. He thought that the country was going to hell in a handbasket...to use his own words.

Although I agree with most of what you are saying, I've learned to accept it for what it is. The world is not going to conform to the way I think things should be.

[Aseahawkfan]

I've softened my approach in recent years. I don't know what the percentages of homeless that are there by choice are, but I suspect that it's relatively high and I certainly do not agree with coddling them like they do in Seattle. But I do think that we should be providing more in the way of drug rehab and decriminalize of drug use laws. Having had a step son that had gotten himself in trouble at an early age, I can see how incredibly difficult for them to reconnect with the normal world.

I do not want to pay for druggies and alcoholics. I have had my experience in family and out. I have zero tolerance for it. My experience is they do it to themselves, then tell sob stories when they get in trouble to make weak-minded politicians who don't have the heart to do what must and should be done. They need to suffer the full consequences of their choices even if it is death. Once they are at the point of death, they will make a choice. Either way society will not suffer their burden at that point.

I'm not exactly sure where you're going with this statement. I admittedly work (or used to work) with the cream of the crop when it comes to my association with immigrants, but my experience has been that they do not have an entitlement attitude about them, to the contrary, many do not know their rights and can be taken advantage of. Personally, if I had no other information to draw on, I'd rather have an immigrant that's just happy to have a job than someone that was born here, at least for the entry level types of jobs that were common to my work in the food processing industry.

Nothing against the immigrants. My point is they are being weaned on the welfare state and just as welfare recipients learn to manipulate state assistance, they are learning to manipulate state assistance like quitting their job or cutting back hours to maintain health insurance and the benefits they receive. We basically see Democrats creating a welfare state with immigrants preparing them to vote for the socialist agenda through immigration to benefit themselves.

Each generation has their complaints about the succeeding ones. I can remember my dad's very vociferous complaints about my generation, ie baby boomers. He thought that we were addicted to the TV, that our music was obscene and shameful, didn't like the long hair, women's lib, had his problems with the civil rights movement, etc. He thought that the country was going to hell in a handbasket...to use his own words.

Although I agree with most of what you are saying, I've learned to accept it for what it is. The world is not going to conform to the way I think things should be.

I look at my grandparents as a better generation than my parents or myself or these young'uns. That was a generation that believed in family, duty, honor, hard work for its own stake because professionalism was a matter of pride, taking care of their children, and doing right by society. Absent the racism they were taught, that was a generation of Americans to be admired. Most of them were just better people in almost all metrics. That World War 2 generation was toughened by circumstances and it showed in their character, work ethic, manners, and so many traits.

[RiverDog]

I do not want to pay for druggies and alcoholics. I have had my experience in family and out. I have zero tolerance for it. My experience is they do it to themselves, then tell sob stories when they get in trouble to make weak-minded politicians who don't have the heart to do what must and should be done. They need to suffer the full consequences of their choices even if it is death. Once they are at the point of death, they will make a choice. Either way society will not suffer their burden at that point.

I don't have anymore tolerance for druggies and alcoholics than you do. My only point is that we do not provide enough opportunities for those that want to get straight to do so and re-enter the normal world. I've seen a family member that got into trouble early in his life and could never recover in large part because the system kept him down. He couldn't legally drive unless he could pay for insurance, he couldn't afford the insurance without a job, and he couldn't get a job unless he could drive, and if he tried to drive, the cops knew him and his car and would nail him immediately, send him back to the can and he'd lose his job.

Nothing against the immigrants. My point is they are being weaned on the welfare state and just as welfare recipients learn to manipulate state assistance, they are learning to manipulate state assistance like quitting their job or cutting back hours to maintain health insurance and the benefits they receive. We basically see Democrats creating a welfare state with immigrants preparing them to vote for the socialist agenda through immigration to benefit themselves.

That might be your experience, but it's not what I've seen. I'm not saying that your wrong, only that I've been treated to a much different type of immigrant. Perhaps it's because of my position as a supervisor, I'm more likely to see those with a good work ethic than those without. While I acknowledge that there are immigrants looking to take advantage of the system, I also have to recognize that there are plenty of natural born citizens with that very same tendency, perhaps more.

I look at my grandparents as a better generation than my parents or myself or these young'uns. That was a generation that believed in family, duty, honor, hard work for its own stake because professionalism was a matter of pride, taking care of their children, and doing right by society. Absent the racism they were taught, that was a generation of Americans to be admired. Most of them were just better people in almost all metrics. That World War 2 generation was toughened by circumstances and it showed in their character, work ethic, manners, and so many traits.

I'm going to guess that your grandparents were from what Tom Brokaw described as the "greatest generation", ie those born before 1930 and experienced the Great Depression and WW2, which is the generation my parents belonged to. You're right about their belief system, but keep in mind that they did not have counter information bombarding them from all sides like the baby boomers had. They believed that the US was always right because that's what they had been told and there was no information to the contrary. They did not hear counter opinons on the internment of Japanese citizens, the refusal to admit Jewish refugees from Europe, or Jim Crowe laws. Heck, my dad didn't even know why the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor (due in large part to sanctions we imposed on them) until I told him what I had been taught in history.

My parents were products of the greatest generation and it's a fair assessment to credit them with higher ideals. But it's not fair to compare their generation with mine in that the environment they were raised in was much different from the one I was. Had they been raised under the same conditions I was, I have no doubt that they would have matured in a very similar fashion.

[burrrton]

That might be your experience, but it's not what I've seen. I'm not saying that your wrong, only that I've been treated to a much different type of immigrant. Perhaps it's because of my position as a supervisor, I'm more likely to see those with a good work ethic than those without. While I acknowledge that there are immigrants looking to take advantage of the system, I also have to recognize that there are plenty of natural born citizens with that very same tendency, perhaps more.

This.

I don't know how it is everywhere else, but around here, illegals can be easily spotted because they're the ones piled 8 high in '92 Accord at 4am heading out to work for as much money as they can. Their work ethic is second to none, and shames half the US population in my estimation (and their taco trucks are money!).

[burrrton]

And this Covington kids thing is probably going to need its own thread, but suffice it to say, I'm feeling roughly how I felt watching the Kavanaugh bullsh*t right now.

This country is descending into madness.

[RiverDog]

I don't know how it is everywhere else, but around here, illegals can be easily spotted because they're the ones piled 8 high in '92 Accord at 4am heading out to work for as much money as they can. Their work ethic is second to none, and shames half the US population in my estimation (and their taco trucks are money!).

I used to work in the field department and coordinated deliveries from the farms directly to the processing plants. Since the plants ran 24/7, the harvest crews, made up mostly of migrants, had to work some really long hours, sometimes in excess of 16 hours per day. When asked if it would help if we went to two-8 hour shifts, the growers all said that they would lose most of their workers, that their crews wanted the long hours so they can make more money.

A lot of that type of work is being eliminated by automation, and some of the highly labor intensive crops like asparagus is being grown in other countries as far south as Peru. I honestly feel that one of the ways to help stem the tide of illegal immigrants coming across the southern border is to have a very robust trade arrangement with some of these countries to support their local economies and remove some of the motivation for their citizens to come across the border seeking unskilled work (there's other legitimate issues with hosting migrants, such as DUI's). Besides, with the minimum wage laws they've been passing, farmers up here can't compete with the cheap labor south of the border, and our growing season limits the time of year that we can deliver fresh vegetables that customers demand.

The bottom line is that while there are legitimate concerns surrounding the immigration issue and border security, this narrative that Trump has created about migrants, illegal or otherwise, being nothing but a pack of drug smuggling, gang raping, murderous criminals to which the only solution is a 20' high, $25B border wall is completely false and insulting to the many Americans whose ancestors came to this country via that method.

[RiverDog]

And this Covington kids thing is probably going to need its own thread, but suffice it to say, I'm feeling roughly how I felt watching the Kavanaugh bullsh*t right now.

This country is descending into madness.

Or, from a few years back, the Duke lacrosse team.

[burrrton]

Or, from a few years back, the Duke lacrosse team.

Yup.

And if you haven't seen it, you should watch this:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5432446/

It really was fascinating.

[RiverDog]

Or, from a few years back, the Duke lacrosse team.

Yup.

And if you haven't seen it, you should watch this:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5432446/

It really was fascinating.

Thanks for the recommendation. But we need to get Hawktalk to watch it with me.

Another example is Richard Jewell, the guy that the media tried and convicted in the Atlanta Olympic bombing case. Or, going back even further, how about the rape trial of William Kennedy Smith, which took the jury a little over an hour to come to a not guilty verdict...and that includes the time it took them to select a foreman.

I wonder if anyone in the #Metoo movement has ever heard of any of those cases. It's why free and just countries like ours, or at least as ours should strive to be, should defend the concept of presumption of innocence.

[Aseahawkfan]

I don't have anymore tolerance for druggies and alcoholics than you do. My only point is that we do not provide enough opportunities for those that want to get straight to do so and re-enter the normal world. I've seen a family member that got into trouble early in his life and could never recover in large part because the system kept him down. He couldn't legally drive unless he could pay for insurance, he couldn't afford the insurance without a job, and he couldn't get a job unless he could drive, and if he tried to drive, the cops knew him and his car and would nail him immediately, send him back to the can and he'd lose his job.

If he had proven to be a threat driving, then he should learn to take public transportation. This is exactly what I'm talking about. Some drunk can't control himself, gets in trouble, then tries to blame the system when he should sober up, take public transportation while he does so, and keep himself clean or he can go rot. You making excuses for this person is the same crap I hate from Dems. You do not have to be able to drive to get a job. If this person was claiming that, just another pathetic excuse to justify bad behavior. How about get off the alcohol and act responsible or live in the street and die? Before you say "what about your family?" I'd say it to my own mother. I've seen these alcoholics and drug addicts. I lived with them in my family. They do not change until they reach the ultimate choice of life or death. If they choose death, you let them go and do it. It's sad, but necessary. Society should not have to pay for people that can't handle their vices. It's just as bad a slippery slope to always try to feel good to help some person that can't beat their demons always thinking more money and more services will somehow fix something that can't be fixed.

[

That might be your experience, but it's not what I've seen. I'm not saying that your wrong, only that I've been treated to a much different type of immigrant. Perhaps it's because of my position as a supervisor, I'm more likely to see those with a good work ethic than those without. While I acknowledge that there are immigrants looking to take advantage of the system, I also have to recognize that there are plenty of natural born citizens with that very same tendency, perhaps more.

Not the point I'm making. They are being taught to take advantage of the system, like welfare recipients or socialists. It's literally expected that they do so, so the Democrats can justify more taxation for more social programs. It is a purposeful teaching to get people on welfare programs because people using social programs for support without a doubt vote for those continuing those programs.

None of the guys I know have bad work ethics. They drive uber, work multiple jobs, and the like. They been funneled into systemic aid and don't know any better. They learn to manipulate the system for survival and advancement. It's being taught by the left wing folk that don't push people away from government dependence.

The same could be said of American welfare dependents that learn to rely on the system their entire life. It's an encouraged behavior. When the Democrats talk about helping the poor, what do you think they are talking about?

I'm going to guess that your grandparents were from what Tom Brokaw described as the "greatest generation", ie those born before 1930 and experienced the Great Depression and WW2, which is the generation my parents belonged to. You're right about their belief system, but keep in mind that they did not have counter information bombarding them from all sides like the baby boomers had. They believed that the US was always right because that's what they had been told and there was no information to the contrary. They did not hear counter opinons on the internment of Japanese citizens, the refusal to admit Jewish refugees from Europe, or Jim Crowe laws. Heck, my dad didn't even know why the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor (due in large part to sanctions we imposed on them) until I told him what I had been taught in history.

It has nothing to do with believing the U.S. is right. I don't care about that. I care that they cared about their family, that they believed in professionalism, and that they taught their children to work hard. They didn't mollycoddle the lot of them. They didn't cry about working too many hours. The men didn't want to go to psychiatrists to weep about growing up hard. The women weren't looking to start romances online or watching the Kardashians, some sluttish women that have wealth for vapid reasons. They were just better people that supported their community.

I look at these parents nowadays treating their kids like their pint-sized friends. They say things like. "Little Molly doesn't like this food. Or little Peter doesn't want to be bothered while he's playing his video games or he'll throw a tantrum." While they play on their phones and act like big children themselves. Sorry, it makes me sick. It's not how you raise children. I don't get it.

My parents were products of the greatest generation and it's a fair assessment to credit them with higher ideals. But it's not fair to compare their generation with mine in that the environment they were raised in was much different from the one I was. Had they been raised under the same conditions I was, I have no doubt that they would have matured in a very similar fashion.

It certainly is fair since your generation. You are on that border of the 60s hippy generation that has taken our country from what it is to what it is now. I despise that drunken, drugging generation of "free" love people that ushered in the drug age. Some of the worst and most selfish people in American history. My parents and your generation give or take some were some of the worst parents I've ever seen. The laundry list of bad parenting is long and varied from absenteeism with multiple kids from multiple women to drugs and drinking and just general rotten, selfish behavior. I keep hearing talk of Millennials being bad, but who made them and their parents. That's what I always ask.

[RiverDog]

If he had proven to be a threat driving, then he should learn to take public transportation.

You are assuming that he had public transportation available, which he did not. Try living in a small town (Ritzville, pop. 1500) with no driver's license and you'll see what I mean. He had to depend on friends and family to ferry him around, but they weren't always available. And to make matters worse, when you live in a small town, the cops all know the car you drive and the fact that you don't have a driver's license, so the moment they saw his car, bingo, they pull him over.

I'm not making excuses for him. Lord knows, I've had many a discussion with both him and his mother regarding personal responsibility. I am simply saying that it was much more difficult than I imagined for a young kid that got themselves into trouble to break free and re-enter normal society. That doesn't mean that they can't, just that it's more difficult. My step son was simply dysfunctional, and a person that needed an advocate, a parent, friend, girl friend, etc. I often said that if he were a squirrel, he'd starve to death because he was all about instant gratification and didn't have the ability to think more than 6 hours into the future. The kid had lots of problems, eventually losing his life to them.

In any event, having a pesonal relationship with an individual that was living on the fringe of society opened my eyes, and as such, I'm a bit more sympathatic to them than I was before.

[Hawktawk]

[

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5432446/



Thanks for the recommendation. But we need to get Hawktalk to watch it with me.

Another example is Richard Jewell, the guy that the media tried and convicted in the Atlanta Olympic bombing case. Or, going back even further, how about the rape trial of William Kennedy Smith, which took the jury a little over an hour to come to a not guilty verdict...and that includes the time it took them to select a foreman.

I wonder if anyone in the #Metoo movement has ever heard of any of those cases. It's why free and just countries like ours, or at least as ours should strive to be, should defend the concept of presumption of innocence.

Its really getting tiresome reading all the second hand potshots directed at me although RD I think you and I agree on a lot more than most in here and generally have my back. Asea and a few others are much worse. If you want to confront me do it to my cyberface , not behind my back when I'm not online. Ill condense this into a medley of several subjects.

#1 this discussion is obviously a reference to the drunken rapist Kavanaugh. Im well aware of the Duke Lacrosse case, allegations of sexual assault filed by a stripper hired to perform nude in front to the fraternity, a joke of a case that should have never proceeded at all.. Im also well aware of the tragedy that was Richard Jewell, a victim of an overzealous prosecutor and law enforcement under pressure to solve a crime that was ultimately proved to be the work of a far right kook.

Frankly I think William Kennedy Smith was guilty of rape and was gotten off by an excellent attorney and the incredible star power of his name. Remember OJ got off in an hr too...The subsequent conviction of Mike Tyson with far less evidence of a crime and much more exculpatory evidence to boot was the national "make up call". His skin color and violent nature of his craft was probably a factor as well.

In the case of Kavanaugh he was initially reported by a tenured professor with a top level federal security clearance who had grown up in the same community at the same time who had written an anonymous letter to the senate and asked not to be identified. She passed a lie detector test administered by a former FBI agent which none of you calling me a kook have explained away.She had begun discussing his assault on her with her therapist as far back as 2012.

When the story of Blasi fords sexual assault broke Kavanaugh huddled for days with a phalanx of lawyers in the basement of the WH as Trump kept his distance and never spoke to him, a whisker from dumping him and after Blasi fords testimony Trump initially called her "a fine person and credible" until he read the polls and flopped like a dying fish as always.


It wasn't a legal matter as all the others mentioned above . It was a JOB INTERVIEW FOR THE NEXT 3 PLUS DECADES. There were ultimately 5 accusations including Blasi Ford, ms Ramirez reporting he had shoved his genitals in her face in a drunken state, Ms Judy Swetnick who was represented by Michael Avenatti who reported that she had been gang raped at a party where Mark Judge and Kavanaugh were present although she stated she DID NOT KNOW IF THEY WERE INVOLVED. Same with Blasi Ford who said the rapist had ATTEMPTED to tear off her one piece suit.

These stories have the ring of truth to me as much for what they women did NOT allege as for what they did.While the friends of these women could not remember these crimes almost to a person they said that in their experience these women were serious honest people and that they believed them completely to be telling the truth.
2 other reported victims chose to remain anonymous after the withering attacks from the president to Faux to republicans in the Senate.
The FBI investigation was controlled by their client Don Mcgann, chief WH counsel at the time and was very limited. The Polygraph examiner wasn't interviewed. Mark Judges former girlfriend who stated under oath that he had admitted participating in raping passed out women was not interviewed. In all over 40 people who knew Kavanaugh as a young man volunteered to testify and were rebuffed.

Charles Grassley had said he would investigate Avenati and Swetnick for false reporting and perjury and not a damn thing has happened since. Kavanaugh was advised to sue these women and nothing has happened.

Ultimately 83!!!!! separate allegations of Judicial misconduct were sent to Justice Roberts but he punted them to a lower court in Colorado knowing full well they had no jurisdiction over the SCOTUS. Their statement dropping the investigation said they were "very serious charges" but they had no authority to proceed. I'll go to my grave knowing in my heart that a man who was a preppie privileged frat boy drunk that had attempted to sexually assault numerous women sits in judgement of us all till the day I likely die.

Now before you call me a kook go line by line and refute what I've written in an analytical fashion or keep your opinion to yourself.If you think my opposition to Kavanaugh is some anti Trump vendetta pull up my thread bashing Neil Gorsuch....Good luck with that.

As for Trump yeah I despise him. Wish he was gone tomorrow and with the indictments of Stone putting the conspiracy with Russia clearly in his inner circle he might be. Him lasting till 2020 is not OK with me but clearly out of my hands. But pull up where I said he's HITLER BURRTON, where I said hes EVIL INCARNATE AND I WISH HE WAS DEAD. Share it with us all or be quiet.

Polls show his approval rating is somewhere between 33% and even Rasmussen has him at only 44% as a total outlier. Of his 30 something % base only 60% STRONGLY support him while the other 40% "somewhat" approve while 58% disapprove and between 48% to 53% depending on the poll STRONGLY disapprove.70% of independents disapprove, up almost 40 points since the election.

My "kooky opinion" is in a distinct majority and praise the lord for that, maybe there's hope for America after all.

And yes hes nuts, batsh#t crazy. insane in the membrane.Obvious to any objective observer and the thousands of psychologists around the nation who have signed a letter stating they believe he suffers from numerous mental disorders. Or maybe "anonymous"a high ranking member of the administration, possibly Pence whose letter to the NYT depicts a staff that contemplated pursuing the 25th amendment remedy within weeks of his inauguration. These are facts that are echoed in Bob Woodward's book of a man who spends 8 hours a day watching cable news, screaming at the television, a man described by a prominent CONSERVATIVE critic as spending massive chunks of "free time "hoovering rails of adderral". Yeah I stand by my description of this guy 100%


GO BOB MUELLER YOU AMERICAN HERO!!!!DRAIN THE SWAMP!!!!!

[RiverDog]

Eee gads, HT. I make a little backhanded compliment about watching a movie and you get offended?

The reason why I made that comment was because you seem so convinced of a person's guilt in these he said, she said cases. I'm not going to get into it with you over the Kavanaugh debate again as we've kicked that dead horse long enough. Suffice it to say that I completely disagree with your take.

But I will take issue with your comparison of the William Kennedy Smith and Mike Tyson trials. The the accusers couldn't have been more different. Kennedy's accuser was 29, Tyson's 18. Kennedy's was sexually active, admitted to having stayed out at a bar until 3 am and took her panties off and put them in her purse prior to leaving with him and going to Kennedy's home. That doesn't mean that she wasn't raped or that those actions imply consent, but it was more than enough to put a reasonable doubt in juror's minds. Kennedy's accuser did not have any medical evidence to support her contention. The fact that the jury took such little time in coming to their verdict speaks volumes. You can't get 12 people to agree on the time of day.

The Kennedy name and star power notation cuts both ways. Yes, with his money, he was able to hire the best defense attorney money can buy. But his fame and fortune also presented a huge motivation for a gold digger looking to get rich quick on an out of court settlement.

Tyson's accuser was, according to her, virginal, and at 18, it can be argued that she was naïve, at least more naive than a woman 11 years her senior. She went to the emergency room on the next day and a physician testified that her injuries were consistent with rape. Tyson's accuser had not been drinking like Kennedy's had been. And there's one helluva lot more evidence of Tyson's emotional instability and addiction to sex than there was with the defendant in the Kennedy trial.

I'm not convinced of Tyson's guilt, but neither have I seen all the evidence that was presented at trial. But I do know enough to determine that there were significant differences between the two cases and that you can't link them in the manner you are attempting to do.

My entire point is one of the presumption of innocence, and I used the Duke lacrosse team as an example of why we need to keep that principle at the forefront of our minds. The saying goes that I'd rather let 10 guilty men go free than convict one innocent man.

[burrrton]

Ford couldn't, and can't, remember the time, the date, the location, who was there, how she got there, how she got home, and her 4 named witnesses all say they have no idea what she's talking about.

In other words, as the most credible of his 3 accusers, she's laughably non-credible.

Suffice it to say that I completely disagree with your take.

So does everybody but Trump-deranged lunatics. All they do at this point is make themselves look credulous and stupid, though, so I kinda welcome the comments.

[Hawktawk]

Fair enough regarding Tyson vs Kennedy smith although Tyson's accuser went willingly to his room in the middle of the night and also removed something that... well lets just say women wear monthly.

Its two peas in a pod evidence wise with the 2 cases and many commentators at the time linked the two opposing verdicts due to the outcry from women across the nation after Kennedy walked Scot free..

I see you don't want to refute the Kavanaugh facts i presented one at a time as nobody ever has in a response to me presenting them .Nor will anyone else who will call me a kook and make up facts about the case such as Burrton does while bashing me and many many millions of Americans who believe the women and think Kavanaugh is a skunk.

Have a great day though RD. Hope you are doing well.

[Hawktawk]

Ford couldn't, and can't, remember the time, the date, the location, who was there, how she got there, how she got home, and her 4 named witnesses all say they have no idea what she's talking about.

In other words, as the most credible of his 3 accusers, she's laughably non-credible.



So does everybody but Trump-deranged lunatics. All they do at this point is make themselves look credulous and stupid, though, so I kinda welcome the comments.

Once again your cherry picking her and her friends statements and making stuff up Burrton.

Again, point by point dude, go for it.Answer the questions, the lie detector test, the discussions with her therapist etc, not that she cant recall exactly where or when her assault happened while knowing THAT it did. Plenty of catholic priests are doing life based on he said he said testimony from equally long periods of time ago where the victim can only remember the incident/s and not much more.

This as I say was a job interview for the most powerful body on the planet and he failed in so many ways not the least of which was being a drunken sexual assaulter of women.

Weak argument Burrton. It doesn't get stronger every time you say it, just weaker.

Hating Trump may be crazed lunacy I guess Burrton but a majority of the country does so Im glad to be a Trump crazed lunatic. Trump is THE crazy lunatic and people like you are his enablers.

[RiverDog]

Plenty of catholic priests are doing life based on he said he said testimony from equally long periods of time ago where the victim can only remember the incident/s and not much more.....This as I say was a job interview for the most powerful body on the planet and he failed in so many ways not the least of which was being a drunken sexual assaulter of women.

How many Catholic priests were convicted and are doing life for sexual abuse based on little more than he said, he said? Please, be specific, and include links.

Most powerful body on the planet? That's a gross overstatement if I've ever heard one. How many wars were started by the Supreme Court? How many diseases did they cure? How many men did they put on the moon? The Supreme Court is nothing more than an arbitrator if others can't agree. Otherwise, they are powerless.

When you go so over the top in your characterizations, your opponents will hone in on the outrageous, easy to defeat statements like I just did. Not every subject is framed in black or white, good or evil, or right or wrong as you tend to skew them as. You are making your statements weak and painting yourself as an extremist.

[burrrton]

Weak argument Burrton.

LOL. Coming from some crank calling a sitting Supreme Court justice a serial gang rapist based on "testimony" of a lady who almost literally can't remember a thing about the alleged "incident"?

I'll work hard, but I think I can get over it.

[Hawktawk]

How many Catholic priests were convicted and are doing life for sexual abuse based on little more than he said, he said? Please, be specific, and include links.

Good grief RD. If you haven't heard or read about the scores of priests convicted of molesting young boys decades earlier I don't know what to tell you. It's an epidemic and many dioceses have been bankrupted paying off lawsuits as well. As for what their sentences were Ill admit being a little careless with the hyperbole but unquestionably many priests and non priests have gone to jail over raping children years earlier. You and Burrton and the like are just having a hard time letting go of the good old boy network where the victim becomes the accused unless she's got videotape and in the case of Trump even that isnt enough to prove it in some people's minds.

Most powerful body on the planet? That's a gross overstatement if I've ever heard one. How many wars were started by the Supreme Court? How many diseases did they cure? How many men did they put on the moon? The Supreme Court is nothing more than an arbitrator if others can't agree. Otherwise, they are powerless.

When you go so over the top in your characterizations, your opponents will hone in on the outrageous, easy to defeat statements like I just did. Not every subject is framed in black or white, good or evil, or right or wrong as you tend to skew them as. You are making your statements weak and painting yourself as an extremist.

This SCOTUS comments were a typo. I meant JUDICIAL body. Are you going to dispute that? maybe the UN or WTO have a little more pull but the SCOTUS has more power than any other branch of government to decide the lives of 350 million people as the ultimate arbiter of what laws we will obey.Hard to dispute that. And Kavanaugh was so unqualified before the reports of his sexual assaults as to be farcical which is why Mitch McConnell and others advised him to make a better choice. As it turned out for them it likely saved the senate in what was otherwise a blue tsunami, just another deal with the devil made by my former party. Proud to say i wouldnt play along.

[Hawktawk]

LOL. Coming from some crank calling a sitting Supreme Court justice a serial gang rapist based on "testimony" of a lady who almost literally can't remember a thing about the alleged "incident"?

I'll work hard, but I think I can get over it.

Yes way to challenge my analysis line by line. Weak. you can't so you won't, just keep throwing out the same old weak line.And there were at least 5 victims, not one.

She remembers what happened, just not the time or place and her friends say they absolutely believe her even though they cant remember the details from 40 years ago... Lie detector? She passed....
Welcome to the good old boy network.

[burrrton]

And there were at least 5 victims, not one.

LOL. Wait another month and we'll be in double digits!

She remembers what happened, just not the time or place and her friends say they absolutely believe her even though they cant remember the details from 40 years ago... Lie detector? She passed....

One more time: she can't remember the time, the place, the date, who was there, how she got there, how she got home, and the 4 witnesses SHE NAMED say they have no idea what the fck she's talking about.

If you take a couple of her buddies who know nothing about it saying "I totes believe her!" over all those failures, that's says volumes about your state of mind, none of it complimentary.

Oh, and counselor, do you know why polygraphs are no longer used as evidence in trials? Go do some reading:

https://www.google.com/search?q=why+are ... e+in+court

[RiverDog]

How many Catholic priests were convicted and are doing life for sexual abuse based on little more than he said, he said? Please, be specific, and include links.

Good grief RD. If you haven't heard or read about the scores of priests convicted of molesting young boys decades earlier I don't know what to tell you. It's an epidemic and many dioceses have been bankrupted paying off lawsuits as well. As for what their sentences were Ill admit being a little careless with the hyperbole but unquestionably many priests and non priests have gone to jail over raping children years earlier. You and Burrton and the like are just having a hard time letting go of the good old boy network where the victim becomes the accused unless she's got videotape and in the case of Trump even that isnt enough to prove it in some people's minds.

As far as I know, there are no priests or former priests currently serving any time for convicted sex crimes in the United States. Nearly all were settled out of court for monetary amounts. Most of them were civil trials, not criminal ones. If you know of a priest that was convicted of a sex crime and is currently serving time for it, either post your link or drop your claim. I came up with one, and even that one was declared a mistrial on appeal. The issue I'm having with your posts is your over dramatization, and your claim about "lots of priest serving life" is a prime example. It's an over the top remark that detracts from the points you're trying to make.

Most powerful body on the planet? That's a gross overstatement if I've ever heard one. How many wars were started by the Supreme Court? How many diseases did they cure? How many men did they put on the moon? The Supreme Court is nothing more than an arbitrator if others can't agree. Otherwise, they are powerless.

When you go so over the top in your characterizations, your opponents will hone in on the outrageous, easy to defeat statements like I just did. Not every subject is framed in black or white, good or evil, or right or wrong as you tend to skew them as. You are making your statements weak and painting yourself as an extremist.

This SCOTUS comments were a typo. I meant JUDICIAL body. Are you going to dispute that? maybe the UN or WTO have a little more pull but the SCOTUS has more power than any other branch of government to decide the lives of 350 million people as the ultimate arbiter of what laws we will obey.Hard to dispute that. And Kavanaugh was so unqualified before the reports of his sexual assaults as to be farcical which is why Mitch McConnell and others advised him to make a better choice. As it turned out for them it likely saved the senate in what was otherwise a blue tsunami, just another deal with the devil made by my former party. Proud to say i wouldnt play along.

That's not a typo, it's an omission, and a heck of a one at that. It almost completely changes the context of your statement.

SCOTUS is an extremely important branch of government that can, at times, have a very large and direct impact on our lives. But their actual power pales in comparison with the Legislative and Executive branches. The vast majority of executive decisions, laws and other legislation never sees the light of day inside a court room, let alone SCOTUS. There's no better example than the recent government shutdown as the court system was completely powerless. That's not to say that nominations aren't to be taken seriously. They are lifetime appointments and require a very careful and deliberate vetting process.

If you're going to be critical of Kavanaugh because of his qualifications, then I can handle that. To me, the one thing that did concern me in his testimony was that in defense of himself, he started calling out the Democrats specifically, which brings into question his judicial temperament. But that wasn't what you or any of the Dems seemed to be focusing on.

[burrrton]

To me, the one thing that did concern me in his testimony was that in defense of himself, he started calling out the Democrats specifically, which brings into question his judicial temperament.

I think that's the fairest criticism, but in light of the asinine, over-the-top accusations being leveled at him, I can't say with certainty I'd have reacted any differently. It was infuriating watching those @ssholes grandstanding as if there was any merit to it, and I wasn't the one they were pointing at.

[RiverDog]

To me, the one thing that did concern me in his testimony was that in defense of himself, he started calling out the Democrats specifically, which brings into question his judicial temperament.

I think that's the fairest criticism, but in light of the asinine, over-the-top accusations being leveled at him, I can't say with certainty I'd have reacted any differently. It was infuriating watching those @ssholes grandstanding as if there was any merit to it, and I wasn't the one they were pointing at.

I won't accept that as an excuse, however, it wasn't so egregious to make it a deal breaker for me. I do know that if I were Chief Justice Roberts that I'd have a little chit chat with him regarding the court's political independence immediately after the swearing in ceremony.

[burrrton]

I do know that if I were Chief Justice Roberts that I'd have a little chit chat with him regarding the court's political independence immediately after the swearing in ceremony.

Wouldn't be unreasonable, but there's a 0% chance that was needed. Kavanaugh is experienced enough to be well-aware of such things.

However, the apolitical behavior is required on the bench, not anywhere else, and especially not in front of a bunch of hack politicians calling you a gang rapist. In fact, RBG herself has illustrated that clearly.

[RiverDog]

I do know that if I were Chief Justice Roberts that I'd have a little chit chat with him regarding the court's political independence immediately after the swearing in ceremony.

Wouldn't be unreasonable, but there's a 0% chance that was needed. Kavanaugh is experienced enough to be well-aware of such things.

0%? In the interest of being even handed, I'm going to have to call you out on that assertation just as I have HT on his over dramatizations. Even if you had a very intimate relationship with him, there's no way you or anyone can make such an assumption.

However, the apolitical behavior is required on the bench, not anywhere else, and especially not in front of a bunch of hack politicians calling you a gang rapist. In fact, RBG herself has illustrated that clearly.

The problem is that stressful situations often times brings out a person's true colors. Whether or not that was the case with Kavanaugh in the hearings I couldn't say, but it is one of those things that for me would prompt a little more probing. Besides, some of those partisan comments were given as a part of Kavanaugh's initial remarks at the beginning of the session and thus considered beforehand, not during a heated exchange where I'd be more inclined to give him a pass.

[burrrton]

0%? In the interest of being even handed, I'm going to have to call you out on that assertation just as I have HT on his over dramatizations. Even if you had a very intimate relationship with him, there's no way you or anyone can make such an assumption.

Oh for heaven's sake. There's never a literally *zero* percent chance of anything up to whims of humans- of course I'm being a bit hyperbolic. I'm just saying it strikes me as *extremely* unlikely a judge with his experience would have to be reminded the SCOTUS is expected to stay above partisanship (just as I doubt RBG needed to be reminded).

Besides, some of those partisan comments were given as a part of Kavanaugh's initial remarks at the beginning of the session and thus considered beforehand, not during a heated exchange where I'd be more inclined to give him a pass.

Fair enough. I'm confident Roberts had the appropriate discussion with Brett, Dad-to-teen style.

[Hawktawk]

LOL. Wait another month and we'll be in double digits!



One more time: she can't remember the time, the place, the date, who was there, how she got there, how she got home, and the 4 witnesses SHE NAMED say they have no idea what the fck she's talking about.

If you take a couple of her buddies who know nothing about it saying "I totes believe her!" over all those failures, that's says volumes about your state of mind, none of it complimentary.

Oh, and counselor, do you know why polygraphs are no longer used as evidence in trials? Go do some reading:

https://www.google.com/search?q=why+are ... e+in+court

You do some reading Mr smart ass know it all.

https://apnews.com/937ab9e859ae4c018f6960f451a39460

And Straight from the mouth of the drunken rapist TWO YEAR AGO. He said he would take one to senator Harris but last I checked the innocent man never did. And as I've said ad nauseum It was a job interview where employers routinely subject employees to polygraphs. She took it and passed.

Welcome to the good old boys club where the victim goes on trial. You're a charter member. I wonder what skeletons must be in your closet to protest so loudly.

My state of mind as it mirrors the drunken rapist jurist is mirrored by a majority of americans 56% of whom wanted him to continue to be investigated even after his confirmation.

My state of mind is just fine Burrton. I worry more about a guy who can't get beyond his one weak line, refuses to actually engage the entire debate beyond his weak line and can't ever refrain from some kind of ad hominem personal attack on my mental state or whatever when he gets nailed to the cross by the facts.

[Hawktawk]

As it pertained to kavanaugh my mind was made up when I read his writing about a president being immune from investigation and prosecution . This from a man who wrote the articles of impeachment for Ken Starr. Then in the initial hearings he was belligerent and evasive , refused to answer basic questions about things such as whether people could be banned from entering America based on race or country of origin. After Blasi Ford reported he had assaulted her in a stumbling drunk state he gave up all pretense of judicial temperament , lied outright about his alcohol consumption and other matters as well. Of the 83 complaints of judicial misconduct sent to Roberts about half dealt with his lack of judicial temperament. But I was off the bandwagon when I heard his comments about presidential immunity. Imo it’s why trump chose him in the first place. And as I’ve said for those who want to accuse me of opposing him strictly out of rejection of the conservative philosophy find me my posts railing against Gorsuch. I don’t seem to remember women coming out if the woodwork accusing him of misconduct either.....

[RiverDog]

Oh for heaven's sake. There's never a literally *zero* percent chance of anything up to whims of humans- of course I'm being a bit hyperbolic.

Which was my point. You could have said extremely unlikely and I wouldn't have reacted. Although there's a difference in scale, it's essentially the same tactic as Hawktalk's comment about their being "plenty of Catholic priests doing life (sentences)". He had a good point to make but he ruined it with his over dramatization and factually inaccurate statement.

That's part of the problem in how we as a society debate subjects nowadays as we're always injecting false statements and completely unnecessary superlatives into our arguments in an attempt to enlarge our otherwise legitimate points beyond reality.

[burrrton]

Although there's a difference in scale

*sigh* The phrase I used was intentionally absurd- there's no way the likelihood can be zero for the type of thing I was speaking about.

You're chastising me because you took it literally. Don't.

[burrrton]

You do some reading Mr smart ass know it all.

LOL. That's *google* that knows it all, you tool.

Say hello to the mute list again.

[RiverDog]

*sigh* The phrase I used was intentionally absurd- there's no way the likelihood can be zero for the type of thing I was speaking about.

You're chastising me because you took it literally. Don't.

So why did you feel that you had to be intentionally absurd with me in order to get your point across? Do I give you that bad of an impression?

It's not that big of a deal and I probably wouldn't even have mention it if Hawktalk wouldn't have used such outrageous, false statements about priests serving life sentences based on Kavanaugh-like evidence. I felt that if I called him out for it that I should at least point out your rather minor transgression.

Peace?

[burrrton]

So why did you feel that you had to be intentionally absurd with me in order to get your point across?

Er, I didn't. It was just a lazy, rhetorical tool. Like saying "There's no way I'm doing that!" (when in fact, given extreme enough circumstances, there's almost nothing I wouldn't do).

That sort of thing?

Yeah, peace.

[RiverDog]

Er, I didn't. It was just a lazy, rhetorical tool. Like saying "There's no way I'm doing that!" (when in fact, given extreme enough circumstances, there's almost nothing I wouldn't do).

That sort of thing?

Yeah, peace.

I guess I can handle that.

It's time for a different subject. Kavanaugh is old news.