EPTleahy is within his rights to pursue this particular line of questioning, and i think willetts made a measured and reasonable response. i'm pretty okay with him as an appointee either way even though i disagree with his politics.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 9245
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
leahy is within his rights to pursue this particular line of questioning, and i think willetts made a measured and reasonable response. i'm pretty okay with him as an appointee either way even though i disagree with his politics. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11953 Posts
On November 16 2017 01:49 Mohdoo wrote: For some people, all the outrage over some casual sexual assault (I mean golly, not even rape for cryin' out loud) is considered somewhat of a women's rights thing. For the type of women who have, sadly, been raised to believe "boys will be boys and women just need to keep their heads down", it becomes a defense of culture thing. In these bumfuck rural communities, it is a part of their natural order for men of power to deviate a bit. But for the sake of community cohesion, it is expected that women will bottle it all up inside and not "pull the community apart". Lots of people in these areas believe efforts to demonize "human nature" are somewhat of an attack on their culture. And with these areas being deeply hierarchical, there's also the creepy component of people wanting to protect their leader. Honestly, that sounds to me as if they maybe need their culture assaulted, because their culture is shit. If sexual assault and misogyny are a central to your culture, you need to join not even the 21st, but actually the 20th century. I as a man don't understand why people want to be seen as a barely controlled animal that can go out of control for any reason at all. That culture you describe sees a man as basically unable to help themselves from sexually assaulting any attractive female around them whenever they have the ability to do so. That would mean that men are basically not capable of existing in a civilized society. This excuse is so deeply denigrating that i cannot understand why any man would use it. On November 16 2017 02:35 Plansix wrote: When federal judges get vetted, they pull everything the Judge wrote all the way back to their college days. If they wrote a movie review at one point, someone is going to read it. Only the truly uninformed or willingly ignorant would believe that jokes on twitter would be immune to this meticulous review. Yes, i get that. I am just confused why "Dude, you have no experience as a judge whatsoever" is not already a reason for instant dismissal. And if it were, none of the other critique would be necessary. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On November 16 2017 02:31 farvacola wrote: Your lack of empathy for others who had their rights denied them by government authorities throughout the country, some even following Obergefell, smacks of self-important narrow-mindedness of the kind indicted by Leahy. Either that or you genuinely think the treatment of gay people should differ from state to state much like Willett does (better yet, why not both?). I do not agree with your response on this issue to be “That’s not funny.” It shows not empathy, but perpetual victimhood. If you can’t crack a joke on a subject, if it’s too much of a sacred cow (and I’m taking lighthearted humor, if you still possess the faculties to distinguish that from meanspirited demeaning jokes), then the problem is found in the individual. And that's all ignoring the obvious violation of the "appearance of propriety" standard that most states require their judges follow, especially regarding topics germane to a live controversy. Then again, we've routinely established that you like to talk about legal topics with all the authority of having read the day's shock conservative headlines. Above all, the latitude white men and women should be given in terms of public jokes makes for a nice casus belli among the "FREEDOM IS UNDER ATTACK" crowd, so kudos for sticking to the script. Bacon propriety. Now I’ve heard it all. This is a stupid overgeneralization of a useful rule to infringe on a judge’s free speech rights. You pick your aggrieved victim group and you will always find somebody that thinks it isn’t a joking matter. Historically, this was true of the Puritans. Today, the puritans think joking on marrying bacon crosses the line. I advocate empathy for the other political side and get routinely derided for it. I don’t think your application of the principle has merits in this instance. If thinking your political opponents rely on scripts and headlines, then whatever makes you feel better about yourself. I apologize for the legal opinions and reports that I skimmed through too quickly or didn’t reread and misrecollected their salient points. I think more often than not, the disagreement comes to actual judicial and political philosophy rather than ignorant viewpoints. Now, unless you want a cavalcade of victim groups taking issue at everything on the funny spectrum, let’s see a little more sense with bacon. Call it separation from the groups that get offended at everything. The SJWs get derision for doing that ... and I’d say you’re dancing on membership in that club. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On November 16 2017 02:34 farvacola wrote: It's ok Dangles, we get it, you think people who think and act like you are under attack, no need to fill the thread with shitty twitter jokes. Let me put on my little GreenHorizons hat and suggest you’re dodging the question. Are you saying he shouldn’t have made that joke too, because Trump voters fought such a hard election to get him in office and the forgotten man should feel aggrieved? Or is your empathy restricted to gays and lesbians? The world wonders. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On November 16 2017 02:53 Plansix wrote: Did anyone advocate that the man couldn't make the joke? The discussion was about if it was appropriate for the a Senator to bring it up since the man is trying to become a federal judge. You seem to have jumped the shark again Danglars. Of course Leahy can bring it up. He just looks retarded for doing so. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On November 16 2017 02:53 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: https://twitter.com/ThePlumLineGS/status/930845840410890241 Are we finally at a point where republican commoners understand trickle down economics has been widely disproven in the world of economics? Would be pretty amazing if all this anti-elite sentiment finally kept rural america from defending corporate interests. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22531 Posts
On November 16 2017 02:55 Mohdoo wrote: Are we finally at a point where republican commoners understand trickle down economics has been widely disproven in the world of economics? Would be pretty amazing if all this anti-elite sentiment finally kept rural america from defending corporate interests. Doesn't matter until they stop voting for them. | ||
|
Introvert
United States5021 Posts
Also Plansix might be confused? This tweeting judge isn't the same nominee we were talking about yesterday. Pretty funny. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On November 16 2017 02:54 xDaunt wrote: Of course Leahy can bring it up. He just looks retarded for doing so. Federal judges have been questioned about books they have written, papers they wrote as an undergrad and speaking engagements with graduating high school classes. At some point, twitter hot takes were going to make it into the hearings about who is qualified to be a federal judge. On November 16 2017 03:00 Introvert wrote: Farv should be happy, Willet has tweeted only once since he was nominated! Also Plansix might be confused? This tweeting judge isn't the same nominee we were talking about yesterday. Pretty funny. Woops, its hard to keep track. I thought he was going to be grilled yesterday. To be honest, I'm in awe that a judge a state Supreme Court judge has a twitter account. | ||
KwarK
United States44248 Posts
Danglars, imagine a hypothetical case where Christian business owner was levied an additional tax due to his religious beliefs. If a liberal judge retweeted a news story about that case with "my local 7-Eleven just charged me $1.49 for an AriZona Iced Tea #therealinjustice #99c", would you question his sincerity about the separation of church and state? | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
brian
United States9643 Posts
On November 16 2017 03:01 KwarK wrote: Judges ought not to be drawing an equivalence between gay Americans wanting legal equality and fat Americans wanting to marry bacon. The two struggles are not equal in dignity, nor validity, and it undermines the integrity of civil society to present them as such. Danglars, imagine a hypothetical case where Christian business owner was levied an additional tax due to his religious beliefs. If a liberal judge retweeted a news story about that case with "my local 7-Eleven just charged me $1.49 for an AriZona Iced Tea #therealinjustice #99c", would you question his sincerity about the separation of church and state? expecting professionalism out of the workplace? that only extends to liberal government contractors. sorry. it’s funny how some things come back up so quickly. i wanted to post this earlier but it was completely irrelevant, but since ive put myself here with a stupid joke anyway, someone raised $100k on gofundme on her behalf. the things people give their money for. | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On November 16 2017 03:00 Plansix wrote: Federal judges have been questioned about books they have written, papers they wrote as an undergrad and speaking engagements with graduating high school classes. At some point, twitter hot takes were going to make it into the hearings about who is qualified to be a federal judge. Woops, its hard to keep track. I thought he was going to be grilled yesterday. To be honest, I'm in awe that a judge a state Supreme Court judge has a twitter account. well, there is also the one who has a thing for underage girls and the other one who issued his official legal opinion about "lawyer dogs". | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On November 16 2017 03:35 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: https://twitter.com/michaeldweiss/status/930862367927427072 Now if the claims in the dossier are right, that’s blockbuster. Mueller has the funding and manpower to settle that account. I still don’t know why the FBI were unwilling to give up details on the dossier’s use/nonuse justifying FISA court-mandated wiretaps to congressional oversight. The good news is they finally did after Speaker Paul Ryan demanded their cooperation. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On November 16 2017 03:34 ticklishmusic wrote: well, there is also the one who has a thing for underage girls and the other one who issued his official legal opinion about "lawyer dogs". id read an in-depth journalistic portrait about the judge who issed the lawyer dogs opinion | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
| ||
