Originally posted by One Bad Pig
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Time To Smear Kavanaugh's Good Name...
Collapse
X
-
"What has the Church gained if it is popular, but there is no conviction, no repentance, no power?" - A.W. Tozer
"... there are two parties in Washington, the stupid party and the evil party, who occasionally get together and do something both stupid and evil, and this is called bipartisanship." - Everett Dirksen
-
Originally posted by Littlejoe View PostI dunno...it's not like they really need the help....The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
And more...
The Architect of the Latest Kavanaugh Smear Just Gave a Self-Damning Radio Interview
Pretty well confirms that she went into this with confirmation bias trying her best to make the supposed facts fit her narrative.
There is no substantiated evidence of any sexual misbehavior by Brett Kavanaugh at any point in his entire life. Several shaky claims have been made along these lines, but all of them are badly undercut by available evidence. None of them is more likely than not to be true.
Yet in a casual radio interview this morning, New York Times reporter Robin Pogrebin, a classmate of Kavanaugh’s at Yale, gave an unintentionally revealing report about her approach to the story. Following Christine Blasey Ford’s hard-to-believe testimony, which was undercut by all witnesses she placed at the party in question, including a lifelong friend of hers, and following Deborah Ramirez’s hard-to-believe story, which she herself admitted being uncertain about, Pogrebin obviously became subjected to confirmation bias. She had a narrative in mind and she pushed and pulled her writing to fit it.
Pogrebin is at the center of a discussion of gross journalistic malpractice after publishing a story Saturday night with colleague Kate Kelly that failed to mention that a woman who, according to a man named Max Stier, had Kavanaugh’s penis pressed into her hand at a campus party by multiple friends of his has said she recalls no such incident. That woman has also declined to talk about the matter with reporters or officials. Why even publish Stier’s claim, which was discounted by Washington Post reporters who heard about it a year ago, that he witnessed such an incident during a Yale party in the 1980s? Because of the narrative, Pogrebin says. “We decided to go with it because obviously it is of a piece with a kind of behavior,” she said on WMAL. Pure confirmation bias.
Though the woman at the center of the story wants no part of it, Kelly and Pogrebin published her name anyway (in their book, albeit not in the Times). “You’re kind of directing attention at a victim and she’s gonna be besieged,” Pogrebin said on the radio show, in explaining why the Times piece left the name out. “Even if people can ultimately find her name, it’s not necessarily important to make it easier for them to do so.” Oh, so publishing her name in a book does not constitute making it too easy for people to find this private citizen? It’s a separate but serious scandal. This woman has been made a public figure in a national story without her consent. Even if she were the victim of sexual misconduct, the Times would ordinarily take steps to protect her identity. Yet she has made no claim along these lines, and Pogrebin and Kelly outed her anyway. Is there no respect for a woman’s privacy? Is every woman in America to think of herself as potential collateral damage should she ever cross paths with any Republican whom Times reporters later tried to take down?
In her WMAL interview this morning, Pogrebin repeatedly refers to the woman as a “victim.” This word choice is instructive about Pogrebin’s thought process. Calling her a victim would be begging the question if the woman claimed this status for herself. She would then be only an alleged victim. But she isn’t even that. She has made no claim to be a victim, yet Pogrebin describes her as one anyway. This is a case of a reporter overriding her reporting with her opinion. Pogrebin then impugns the woman by saying she was so drunk that her memory can’t be trusted. She also says that “everyone” at the party was massively drunk and that their memories are therefore unreliable.
Does she hear herself talking? If this is true, it means Max Stier was also drunk and his memories also can’t be trusted. (Someone should ask Pogrebin whether she was present at this party about which she knows so much.) By what journalistic standard does a reporter discount what is said by the person with the most direct and relevant experience of a matter — the woman in question at the Yale party — in favor of a drunken bystander? If both the woman and Stier were drunk, why is his memory more credible than hers? If something like this had actually happened to her, wouldn’t she be more likely than anyone else to remember it? Maybe Stier is remembering a different party. Maybe he’s remembering a different guy. Maybe he made it up.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by One Bad Pig View PostThere's always the possibility is that JimL's a conservative pretending to be a liberal in order to make them look bad. He's doing a bang-up job of that.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostSo many of his posts read like parody that I've often wondered that myself.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostSo many of his posts read like parody that I've often wondered that myself."He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot
"Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman
My Personal Blog
My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)
Quill Sword
Comment
-
If your blindness regarding Trumps criminal behavior wasn't so sad, it'd be funny. If this were Obama in Trumps stead, doing all the things Trump is doing, you would all be screaming lock him up, lock him up. What a sad lot!
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostIf your blindness regarding Trumps criminal behavior wasn't so sad, it'd be funny. If this were Obama in Trumps stead, doing all the things Trump is doing, you would all be screaming lock him up, lock him up. What a sad lot!
So you're asking the wrong question: politics isn't about being morally 'pure', about doing the right thing, about playing by the rules, it's about getting things you want done, done. That's what the left has taught us. No-one who supports Trump particularly cares about Trump's character flaws or moral failings. They care about him doing the stuff they want done.
He's only 'worst President ever' to you because he's doing stuff that you don't agree with politically. If he was using his acerbic wit on Republicans, appointing liberals to the courts, opening up immigration, and so on, you'd be calling for an abolition on terms limits and slobbering over his every word....>>> Witty remark or snarky quote of another poster goes here <<<...
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostAnd more...
The Architect of the Latest Kavanaugh Smear Just Gave a Self-Damning Radio Interview
Pretty well confirms that she went into this with confirmation bias trying her best to make the supposed facts fit her narrative.
There is no substantiated evidence of any sexual misbehavior by Brett Kavanaugh at any point in his entire life. Several shaky claims have been made along these lines, but all of them are badly undercut by available evidence. None of them is more likely than not to be true.
Yet in a casual radio interview this morning, New York Times reporter Robin Pogrebin, a classmate of Kavanaugh’s at Yale, gave an unintentionally revealing report about her approach to the story. Following Christine Blasey Ford’s hard-to-believe testimony, which was undercut by all witnesses she placed at the party in question, including a lifelong friend of hers, and following Deborah Ramirez’s hard-to-believe story, which she herself admitted being uncertain about, Pogrebin obviously became subjected to confirmation bias. She had a narrative in mind and she pushed and pulled her writing to fit it.
Pogrebin is at the center of a discussion of gross journalistic malpractice after publishing a story Saturday night with colleague Kate Kelly that failed to mention that a woman who, according to a man named Max Stier, had Kavanaugh’s penis pressed into her hand at a campus party by multiple friends of his has said she recalls no such incident. That woman has also declined to talk about the matter with reporters or officials. Why even publish Stier’s claim, which was discounted by Washington Post reporters who heard about it a year ago, that he witnessed such an incident during a Yale party in the 1980s? Because of the narrative, Pogrebin says. “We decided to go with it because obviously it is of a piece with a kind of behavior,” she said on WMAL. Pure confirmation bias.
Though the woman at the center of the story wants no part of it, Kelly and Pogrebin published her name anyway (in their book, albeit not in the Times). “You’re kind of directing attention at a victim and she’s gonna be besieged,” Pogrebin said on the radio show, in explaining why the Times piece left the name out. “Even if people can ultimately find her name, it’s not necessarily important to make it easier for them to do so.” Oh, so publishing her name in a book does not constitute making it too easy for people to find this private citizen? It’s a separate but serious scandal. This woman has been made a public figure in a national story without her consent. Even if she were the victim of sexual misconduct, the Times would ordinarily take steps to protect her identity. Yet she has made no claim along these lines, and Pogrebin and Kelly outed her anyway. Is there no respect for a woman’s privacy? Is every woman in America to think of herself as potential collateral damage should she ever cross paths with any Republican whom Times reporters later tried to take down?
In her WMAL interview this morning, Pogrebin repeatedly refers to the woman as a “victim.” This word choice is instructive about Pogrebin’s thought process. Calling her a victim would be begging the question if the woman claimed this status for herself. She would then be only an alleged victim. But she isn’t even that. She has made no claim to be a victim, yet Pogrebin describes her as one anyway. This is a case of a reporter overriding her reporting with her opinion. Pogrebin then impugns the woman by saying she was so drunk that her memory can’t be trusted. She also says that “everyone” at the party was massively drunk and that their memories are therefore unreliable.
Does she hear herself talking? If this is true, it means Max Stier was also drunk and his memories also can’t be trusted. (Someone should ask Pogrebin whether she was present at this party about which she knows so much.) By what journalistic standard does a reporter discount what is said by the person with the most direct and relevant experience of a matter — the woman in question at the Yale party — in favor of a drunken bystander? If both the woman and Stier were drunk, why is his memory more credible than hers? If something like this had actually happened to her, wouldn’t she be more likely than anyone else to remember it? Maybe Stier is remembering a different party. Maybe he’s remembering a different guy. Maybe he made it up.Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.
Beige Federalist.
Nationalist Christian.
"Everybody is somebody's heretic."
Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.
Proud member of the this space left blank community.
Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.
Justice for Ashli Babbitt!
Justice for Matthew Perna!
Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!
Comment
-
Originally posted by MaxVel View PostRight back at you. You have a definite moral blind spot when it comes to your political favourites, too. America hasn't had a really, truly admirable President since... ...not in my lifetime. Carter comes close, but too ineffective for mine. Can't think of many major politicians of any stripe, anywhere, who I truly respect. Maybe The Dragon King of Bhutan.
So you're asking the wrong question: politics isn't about being morally 'pure', about doing the right thing, about playing by the rules, it's about getting things you want done, done. That's what the left has taught us. No-one who supports Trump particularly cares about Trump's character flaws or moral failings. They care about him doing the stuff they want done.
He's only 'worst President ever' to you because he's doing stuff that you don't agree with politically. If he was using his acerbic wit on Republicans, appointing liberals to the courts, opening up immigration, and so on, you'd be calling for an abolition on terms limits and slobbering over his every word.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostNope, you're way off the mark Max. We liberal, progressive, democrats and independents don't like him as president for those reasons you cited as that is always the case, but there is far more to it than that and deep down I think you all know that, you're either blind to what is going on right in front of your faces or you just can't admit it to yourselves. This man is a narcisistic sociopath, a blatant liar, a thief, and a wannabe dictator who is undermining democracy here and around the world, and in my opinion a treasonous embarrassment to the U.S. If you have failed to recognise that by now, then you are either living in the conservative bubble where they only feed you lies as well, or you are psychologically impaired, i.e. in some way blind to facts."The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostNope, you're way off the mark Max. We liberal, progressive, democrats and independents don't like him as president for those reasons you cited as that is always the case, but there is far more to it than that and deep down I think you all know that, you're either blind to what is going on right in front of your faces or you just can't admit it to yourselves. This man is a narcisistic sociopath, a blatant liar, a thief, and a wannabe dictator who is undermining democracy here and around the world, and in my opinion a treasonous embarrassment to the U.S. If you have failed to recognise that by now, then you are either living in the conservative bubble where they only feed you lies as well, or you are psychologically impaired, i.e. in some way blind to facts.
Comment
-
Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View PostAnd yet, you can’t prove any of your charges as true. I think you believe your blind accusations, without a bit of evidence, because it gives you justification to believe your nonsense.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostNow THAT made me laugh!"What has the Church gained if it is popular, but there is no conviction, no repentance, no power?" - A.W. Tozer
"... there are two parties in Washington, the stupid party and the evil party, who occasionally get together and do something both stupid and evil, and this is called bipartisanship." - Everett Dirksen
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by seer, 04-21-2024, 01:11 PM
|
67 responses
395 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by eider
Today, 12:48 AM
|
||
Started by seer, 04-19-2024, 02:09 PM
|
10 responses
149 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seer
Yesterday, 06:09 AM
|
||
Started by seanD, 04-19-2024, 01:25 PM
|
2 responses
57 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seanD
Yesterday, 04:09 PM
|
||
Started by VonTastrophe, 04-19-2024, 08:53 AM
|
21 responses
178 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by oxmixmudd
Yesterday, 11:35 PM
|
||
Started by seer, 04-18-2024, 01:12 PM
|
37 responses
268 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Sam
Yesterday, 07:47 PM
|
Comment