Tuesday, September 25, 2018

The Abortion Debate

At the Kavanaugh hearing
“Are you planning to debate abortion in class?” asked our new principal. We were standing in the hallway near my classroom in the early1980s.

“Yes,” I said.

“Don’t,” she said.

“Why not?”

“Because…” She paused, seeming surprised that I would question her. “Because eighth graders are too young to discuss it.”

At the Kavanaugh hearing
“But we’ve debated it several times the past couple of years and they’ve handled it quite well,” I said.

She was new in the job, and the first principal I’d worked with who was a contemporary, both of us were in our early thirties. She was a bit overweight with short hair and she wore pant-suits or long dresses, usually with a brightly colored shawl over one shoulder. She declared herself a feminist and her mode of dress I afterward realized was a uniform for feminists of the time. 

“I invite parents to come in to observe the debates each year,” I said, “and many have accepted. Usually, four or five come to each class.”

“Why did you choose to debate abortion?” she asked.

“Students chose it,” I explained. “I’d announce that we were going to debate a topic from current events. Then we’d brainstorm a list of topics, and students would vote on them. Sometimes they’d vote for a different topic like gun control, but most classes usually chose abortion.”

“Eighth graders aren’t mature enough to debate abortion,” she insisted.

“Hmm,” I said. “But some eighth graders have abortions. Did you know that?”

“Yes,” she said, breaking eye contact and shuffling a bit.

“If they’re old enough to have abortions they’re old enough to discuss them, don’t you think?”

At the Kavanaugh hearing
At that point, her secretary walked up, excused herself, and handed the principal one of those pink message slips. She read it and said, “I’ll have to get back to you on this.”

She never did, and I went ahead with the debates.

First, we defined the terms. I asked each class if someone could define abortion for me and I had a good reason for doing this. Fourteen-year-olds have fully developed brains, but lack nuance. I’d call on a student whose hand was up and he/she would say something like: “Abortion is when a woman is pregnant and she kills the baby inside her.”

That plainly worded definition is typical of 14-year-olds. They’re refreshingly direct. Every year, in every class, the first student I called on would define abortion in almost exactly the same way.

“Does everyone agree with that definition?” I’d ask.

There’d be nods all around, and I’d write it on the blackboard. Then I’d go on to explain that people who supported abortion called themselves “Pro-choice” and people who were against it called themselves “Pro-life.” Pointing to the definition on the board, I’d circle the words “kill” and “baby,” then tell them that a seasoned “pro-choice” person would never utter those words when debating abortion. A pro-life person, however, would nearly always use them. “A definition like that,” I’d say, pointing the board again, “indicates a pro-life bias. I can tell what somebody thinks about abortion by the words they use to define it.” At this point, I’d look toward the student who gave it. “Is that your opinion? Are you pro-life?” Usually, he or she was, but not always.

Then I’d ask how a pro-choice person would define abortion. Students would ponder what I said and offer suggestions like: “It’s when a woman finds out she’s pregnant and doesn’t want to be, so she goes to a doctor and he takes it out.”

At the Kavanaugh hearings
“Not bad,” I’d say. Eventually, I’d get one that sounded just like something out of NARAL literature, such as: “When a woman terminates her pregnancy,” which I’d also write on the board.

Often a student would ask my opinion at this point and I’d say, “I’ll tell you after the debate is over.”

Students chose which side they wanted to argue. If there were too many on one side or the other, I’d try to even them up by challenging some to argue the opposite of what they believed. Some of my best students would usually offer to do so.

After that, I let them sit in their groups to prepare. My instructions were that they start recording their side’s strongest arguments on one list, then record their opponents’ strongest arguments on another.

“Why do you want us to list our opponents’ arguments?” they’d ask.

“So you can prepare counter-arguments to use during the debate when they bring up those points,” I’d answer. “It’s what opposing lawyers would do in a courtroom. You need to research all sides of any issue. As someone said once: ‘You don’t fully understand your own side unless you understand your opponent’s.’”


Anonymous said...

Is the hard-Left’s opposition to Kavanaugh really about abortion or part of a bigger picture? I think they vehemently oppose having a conservative judge on the SCOTUS and use this issue to rally the troops. Kavanaugh is a highly qualified, decent, patriotic family man which is the antithesis of most progressives. If they lose this battle, which they will, they know their Marxist revolutionary agenda is in jeopardy.

CaptDMO said...

Now let's chat about how this invasive medical procedure is paid for.
Maybe chat about parental/guardian consent,or notification, for an unemancipated minor, in their care.
Maybe chat about....Gloucester Mass.
OK, Maybe 10th grade for all THAT stuff.

Jared J Bristol said...

Just read an article by JD Pendry in which he likened the progressive left as the modern form of the religion worshippers of Baal. The child sacrifice and bonfires of dead babies to be accompanied by sex orgies (and let's do it again) is exactly what is going on in America with abortion. Nothing less. Lovely, isn't it?

Brian said...

‘You don’t fully understand your own side unless you understand your opponent’s.’”

Interesting coming from Tom, who has repeatedly shown how out of touch he is with the beliefs of his opponents, only able to spout the pre-conceived talking points that right wing media uses to create goofy caricatures.

Brian said...

Charles said: "Kavanaugh is a highly qualified, decent, patriotic family man"

How does he know that? I guess by the knee-jerk reaction of thinking victims are liars and simply swallowing up what he is fed by his chosen outlets.

Brian said...

"...their Marxist revolutionary agenda is in jeopardy."

Huh? When is the last time a conservative presidential candidate has gotten more votes than his opponent? The snowballing of progressive values is unstoppable through the history of America. After the mid-terms you can get a good look at what is crumbling despite whatever judge get's despicably pushed through.

Jared J Bristol said...

To Brian: Where do I begin? An accusation has been made. That's all. The woman is getting her day in court at a hearing. She cites witnesses that deny her claim. But you think Kavanaugh is "despicable? What happened to "innocent until proven guilty"? Do you expect a conservative president to nominate another Ginsburg, Sotomayer, or Kagan? Yeah. Can you spell delusional, guy? And our system is intentionally designed to prevent the high population centers of NY and CA from dominating the vote...hence the electoral college...which you undoubtedly wish to disband and turn our elections over to the ignorant masses of useful idiots. When more than 50% of the population realizes they can vote themselves a raise via welfare, the society will crumble. That's what will happen in the mid-terms if your side prevails.

Brian said...

Jared, I did not say that Kavanaugh is despicable. I said that the process of rushing a man of questionable values through is. Try and think of the reason for an FBI investigation not to be called for. How can Kavanaugh himself not be the one demanding an investigation so he can prove his innocence? Isn't that what you would want if accusations were falsely thrown out?

Society is crumbling now, but the mid-terms will stop the bleeding.

Isn't it ironic in a hilarious way how Trump constantly says the world is laughing at us, and now they are literally laughing in his face when he tries some of his "rally" lines on them!

Dawn said...

Another good article Tom. I always appreciated the fact, when you had my boys in class, you made them think for themselves. I cringe at what's going on in the school systems today and worry for my grandchildren. Education is old school. Indoctrination is the new modern way. I foresee mass exiting of the public schools in the very near future if this doesn't stop.

I agree with Charles. I think Brett Kavanaugh scares the left out of their undies. He's a good white guy. They can't have that. Their response is to gather up false witnesses to smear him. An old tactic straight out of Satan's handbook, but it seems to work because people want to be deceived if it suits their agenda.

Brian said...

Satan's handbook surely includes smearing people as liars when you know absolutely no information to back it up. Who is scared by "good white" (what the hell does race have to do with anything?) People are just reluctant to put miscreants like Roy Moore in positions of power, so why not be careful and thorough in the process? Scared of what might be found?

Take your own advice and stop deceiving yourself before you find out all the facts.

Jay said...

2 points:

Kavanaugh has already been vetted by the FBI SIX times! what will another investigation bring, especially since Ford has no concrete and verifiable facts to back up her claim? The FBI doesn't just launch an investigation without some forensic evidence available.
During the Anita Hill debacle it was suggested by some that an FBI investigation would clear Justice Thomas. Joe Biden spoke up against this. He said that an FBI investigation would find and prove nothing useful. Apparently Biden and the democrats have changed their minds.
Apparently today, all you need to do to smear a person is make allegations. Proof be damned. All of these morons demonstrating against Kavanaugh are demonstrating against.....an accusation.
Nothing more.

CaptDMO said...

"Satan's handbook surely includes smearing people as liars when you know absolutely no information to back it up"
Amusing, coming from "Brian".

Brian said...

The FBI could help determine whether or not he was at the party in quesion as well as interview and take sworn statements from potential witnesesses. The other vetting was not looking into this particular case. What is the harm, maybe they can prove that Ford is lying.

You say all you need to do is smear someone (like Dawn did), but consider the possibility that she is telling the truth, in which case it is not a smear. The "morons" are demonstrating against the lack of a process to find the truth.

Brian said...

...and where did you get the idea that the FBI can't start an investigation without forensic evidence. Also, Cosby was convicted on testimony, not forensic evidence.

Jay said...

Again, Kavanaugh has been vetted by the FBI already. SIX times.
If democrats were serious about getting to the truth Feinstein would have released the letter from Ford as soon as she got it. Why did she wait? Oh, she waited till the last minute because (fill in the blank democrats).
Also it might be good to educate yourself on why and how the FBI starts an investigation. Again, Ford has provided no proof at all. What would the FBI “investigate”? Again, no proof and no forensic evidence to look at.

Brian said...

Again, the FBI was unaware of the allegations at the time of the previous vetting so they couldn't look into it. This was easy to look up yourself, but if you need me to fill in the blanks about the delay with the letter it was because the accuser had asked her to keep them confidential.

Of course the FBI can look into this, but they need the request of the White House:

"When the FBI conducts a background investigation of a presidential nominee, it vacuums up all kinds of information about the nominee, including claims from people interviewed by agents, and dumps it into the file. It does not, however, investigate whether or not derogatory information is true — unless it's asked to follow up by the White House."


Of course you don't need proof to start an investigation, if you had proof you wouldn't need one...it would already be proved.

So why doesn't Trump call for it....he has demanded other investigations with no forensic evidence. Maybe he too is scared of what might be found.

So you need to educate yourself on the fact that yes, the FBI could investigate.

Dawn said...

Com'on Brian. Do we really need to tell you that truth should have some teeth to it? How can we consider she's telling the truth when she has nothing but her word? There used to be a day when your word meant something. Those days are long gone now.

I was sexually assaulted 21 years ago. I remember every detail. Not only that, but I filed a police report immediately. I had proof. Cuts, bruises and still have the newspaper article about it. She has nothing!!!! Which makes more sense looking at the evidence (or lack thereof) smear or truth?

Jay said...

Brian, I believe you are in error. What you are proposing is something like being sued because you hit somebody’s car and gave them whiplash, but they were not actually in the car when you hit it.
Ford is essentially saying that she doesn’t remember any of the details from 36 years ago. Her “friends” have denied knowing anything. You can’t begin an investigation based on nothing and no place to start. I have heard from several people in law enforcement, including a former director of the FBI, and they all say that this is NOT how things are done.
If I told you there was a buried treasure I knew about and you were welcome to it if you found it, you’d be interested, I’m sure. But then if I told you that I had no map to find it, no information about it and no idea even what the treasure was, would you start looking for it? That is, in essence, what these accusers are offering. And it’s the same thing democrats tried to do with Herman Cain and Justice Thomas.
We can NOT have a society where any person can accuse anyone with absolutely no proof and demand to automatically be believed. If Ford had really experienced what she claimed and really wanted justice, she would have reported this immediately instead of after 36 years. At the very least she would have reported it to law enforcement instead of a hack democrat puppet like Feinstein.
Actions speak louder then words. Fords actions speak volumes. None of her actions show a true desire for justice. She is a pawn invested in liberal dogma who is doing what she can to derail the appointment of what she feels is a political opponent. Plain and simple.
I might believe her if she had evidence, like a dress with something on it. Oh wait, that was a Bill Clinton. There was real evidence. But at least Clinton told the truth about it. Oh wait, he lied. Oh, but it was okay for him to remain President. But it’s not okay for a man who has never been accused of anything to be barred from sitting on the Supreme Court because of uncorroborated accusations.
Again, we must not become a country where the burden of proof is on the accused. We must never become a country where a single person, armed with absolutely no evidence, can ruin someone’s reputation and career.

Brian said...

You are wrong. The FBI can investigate if asked by the White House. Even Trump doesn't say they "can't", he claims they don't "want" to.


You are also wrong about Ford's friends. 4 people have already turned in statements saying that they were told of these events years ago. So there is some corroboration for you.

The trash about "it would have been reported 36 years ago" just shows how ignorant you are as to the facts about sexual abuse victims and the trauma involved.

Do you think Cosby should be freed because the events happened so long ago without any forensic evidence? Could the rush to put him on the Supreme Court be partly because of the fear a 3rd, a 4th, etc victim may come forward? Wow...I just went to look up something else and saw that a third accuser HAS come forward. Hmmmm, the pressure is building to the point we may actually see this investigation after all.

So once again...why not have the investigation? If you are correct then it would simply be a quick case with the FBI saying, we can't find anything, we are done. Why wouldn't Kavenaugh want to be cleared this way? Nobody has answered me that. Why not wait an extra week or two so everything is uncontroversial?


BTW, Clinton has nothing to do with this, but since you bring him up do I really have to explain the difference between a infidelity between consenting adults and sexual assault?

And I find it also deliciously ironic that after Kavenaugh's role in asking all the sexual questions during the Clinton hearings that it has come full circle. I'm sure Bill is enjoying that aspect.

Jared J Bristol said...

Brian et al, this is insane as is the case in any leftist issue. The accused does not have to prove the negative. That's likely impossible, especially if no date, no time, and no place is given in evidence, along with all her "witnesses" saying nothing happened. There is nothing here beyond the accusation of a liberal democrat. That's really a preponderance of BS. The accuser has to prove (beyond that reasonable doubt) that the accused did something. The FBI is not charged with investigating 36 year old teenage petting claims. Let me lay out my own theory: two teenagers find themselves drunk, with her hot little bathing suit in a bedroom at a party. He reaches out to touch someone! She freaks and starts to scream. He reflexively puts a hand to her mouth and says, "Don't. I'll stop!", and he does. Where's the crime? Neither of them really remember the incident, him not at all. But you think it's just fine to rake him over the coals on her foggy, last minute, charge? You're more adolescent than they were.

Jay said...

I really don’t see any point in arguing with someone who knows att the answers. Apparently you know all about how the FBI works, it’s investigative procedures and how rape victims respond. I’m glad you know all of these things and so happy that you have seen fit to educate all of us.
I stand corrected, even when I’m sitting down. I will be sure to inform the law enforcement people I’ve heard from that they are wrong and you are correct. I’ll make sure I tell the women I know who’ve been through similar situations that they shouldn’t have reported the incidents immediately and should have waited 36 years. I’ll make sure I tell anyone who is accused by anyone without any evidence at all that they are guilty, simply because of the accusation. In this way I can make sure that your endless knowledge is spread throughout the country
I do what I can.
It’s comforting to know that in these confusing times at least one person, such as you, knows all the answers. I will ignore all of the experts in the future and defer to your judgement.
Thank you so very much Brian.

Brian said...

"this is insane as is the case in any leftist issue"

Right there is enough to let me know that you are not to be taken seriously, but just a blind follower. I shouldn't waste my time, but I'll quickly point out that there are now THREE accusations, and again, examine the Cosby case to see how that stuff works.

You're wacky little imagining about hot little bathing suits, etc is just that. Your imagination.

And take a look at his creepy yearbook for a hint at his young character.

How long did you remain a Roy Moore supporter. Perhaps you still are.

And how is an investigation to clear his name "raking him over the coals"?

If I were in his shoes and innocent I would want an investigation for sure. Who wouldn't? A guilty person maybe?

Jay said...

I have to side with Jared here. The left has demonstrated a lot of insanity in the past and especially since Donald Trump decided to run. Hence the name “Looney Left”. This current crop of crap is more evidence of the Looniness.
Democrats had a President who was accused of rape by women who actually had proof and did nothing and more to the point, actually cheered him on and smeared his accusers. Does the name Anthony a Wiener mean anything? Then there’s Hillary, one of the biggest criminals to ever take money from US taxpayers. Just a few of the shining examples of the party of the KKK.
In sixty years the democrat party has gone from John Kennedy, who was the last decent democrat president, (although a womanizer), to BHO who was the worst President of our time, IMHO.
Now democrats are relying on a blatant smear campaign to destroy a good man simply because they are desperate to pack the court with non conservatives. They are willing to stand by these false accusers and the sleazy lawyer. Apparently, there is nothing these democrats won’t do to get what they want.

Brian said...

I'll ignore the moronic comments of somebody who actually somehow "knows" the truth about Kavavaugh, dismissing multiple accusations as "smears" without anything whatsoever to back it up.

It's disturbing to people like Jay who get their echo chamber bubble burst by outsiders who chime in with facts and common sense. He proved to be just another wimp who can't address the question as to "why not investigate to clear Kavanaugh's name"

Seems like nobody has the guts.

Jay said...

I’ll ignore the comments of someone who automatically assumes guilt without evidence.

It’s disturbing to me when people like Brian are so full of themselves that they think they are actually bothering me. Guess again genius. You have provided no facts and common sense. You sir, are the echo chamber, perpetuating the lie that a man is guilty without any proof at all.

When it comes to guts, you are only a parrot of the leftist swill that you listen to. It takes no guts to repeat lies and falsehoods. The only wimps around here are those, like you, who swallow the leftist socialist propaganda without the where with all to think for yourself. It requires thought and research, two things you have obviously forsaken to please your socialist liberal democrat friends, if you have any.

And by the way, I don’t much care for personal attacks but if choose to continue, please do so. I’m merely responding to your blow hard idiocy. This is really quite enjoyable. I love seeing the looney left at its best. And it demonstrates to all where folks like you come from. It’s a good example of what not to be.

Peter said...

For what it's worth, here are my two cents on this issue. Many of us seem to be coming to ironclad conclusions, insulting those who consider the other side. The two sides seem to be that: 1) it is crazy to be rushing to seat somebody who is possibly "a man-of-bad-character" to a life long position in which character is the most important qualification of all; Or,
(2) that "this is all just a big scam by the horrible loony left, and all these women are probably just lying". I think Tom's great advice, about not being able to understand one side if you can't understand the other side, really fits here. It is easy to see the train of thought on both of these "already decided" conclusions. If all of these women are lying and this really is some twisted plot by Democrats, then that is despicable indeed, and we should all be disgusted and outraged. The women should then face harsh jail time to deter such future accusations. Or, if all the women are telling the truth, then they are certainly being subjected to horrible derision, and we are ignoring the quality of character when it comes role models, and those who will supremely judge our land. But we don't know for sure. How could we? We need to observe, question, listen to what all sides are saying, and investigate. It seems obvious that we should do all those things to best know the truth. So why not do a little investigating on this issue that is undeniably very important for our country? It seems obvious that we should try and find the truth. But then there is the side that thinks "so what?" about what Kavanaugh may or may not have done, so long as he will be a judge that they feel will side for what they deeply believe to be "right" side, no two ways about it. So what is more important, our chosen issues or the notion that the pillars of our society be role models, people to look up to and try to exemplify. Do we want to set the example to our "boys who will be boys" that it really isn't that big a deal if you take sexual advantage of women, or even sexually assault them. Because heck, you could still go on to be a Supreme Court judge or even the President. Like jaywalking. This is a time for our country to make big decisions about what we want to be. So we should watch tomorrow with open minds, like watching a soap opera just beginning, in which we have not yet determined who are the "good guys" and the "bad guys". Anybody who thinks they are good at getting a sense of people's characters should be watching carefully tomorrow, pretending that both Ford and Kavanaugh are our friends, who we've believed to be both good people. Because at this point, none of really know.

Anonymous said...

I agree with you Peter.
Up until a few days ago my mindset was to let this play out and hear what Ford had to say. Then I started hearing about all of the witnesses that Ford citied who were not corroborating her story. Then I started hearing about the second woman and how no one was backing up her story either. When the third one came out, herded into the fray by the slime ball Avenatti, I paid very close attention. Her story makes no sense to me
If a woman witnessed gang rapes at a party, why would she go back to the same party 9 more times? I’ve also been hearing rumors about this woman’s sanity.
I believe that this is all a set up. I could be wrong. I’ve been wrong before. Up until a few days ago I was a lot more open minded about all of this. It just smells wrong and I’m not buying it
If this were three more women coming out against Bill Clinton, with his track record, I might believe it. Proof or no proof. It fits a pattern of behavior.
But this man Kavanaugh, for all intents and purposes and by all other accounts, was a good man. And it’s very suspicious to me that these three women just happened to come out so close to the confirmation deadline and the fact that Feinstein withheld the letter for 6 weeks. None of this makes any logical sense to me. It seems to me more likely that this is a tactic to delay and destroy a Supreme Court appointment that the democrats desparelty don’t want. That fits the facts for me easily.
But I, like you, will listen to everything said tomorrow and reassess my opinion based on the hearing. If I hear anything to change my mind I’ll be the first to call for Kvanaugh to be voted down. If none of these accusers provides any solid proof I’ll be all in for a quick confirmation.

Tom McLaughlin said...

Anonymous: Please use a name when you post. You can make one up if you like but then use it consistently. I've been deleting Anonymous posts. I'll let this one stand because it's civil and I don't recognize your writing style, so I'm assuming you're new here.

Brian said...

It is hard to try and communicate with somebody with such low reading comprehension skills. Nowhere did I write that I assumed Kavanaugh was guilty. Even taking into account his sleazy yearbook, and the multiple women, and the fact that Jones took and passed a polygraph test while Kavanaugh will not do so, and doesn't even doesn't even want an investigation that could clear his name, despite all those things I am assuming nothing. Time will tell. If a lot more information and evidence comes out after he is seated it is still possible to later impeach him. But if he is innocent, great, judge away.

And when you finally muster up the guts, the question remains:

Why wouldn't he want his name cleared with an investigation? As it stands now his name will always be clouded in doubt over these women's allegations.

Jay said...

Sorry Tom. The anonymous post was me. I hit the wrong button and didn’t notice it till I reread it some hours later.

Brian, nobody would care or be worried if the FBI were to launch yet another investigation into Kavanaugh. But as I’ve repeatedly explained he’s already been investigated 6 times. If you get a flat tire going down the road and you check the tire to see if it’s flat, do you really have to check it another 5 times? From what I understand these investigations are exhaustive and go all the way back to the womb. They take weeks and include interviews with friends, co-workers, relatives, etc etc. it is a very deep investigation. He’s had 6 of them.
Don’t really know why you’re fixated on this point.
Also, you might YouTube what Joe Biden said about these investigations during the Clarence Thomas hearings. Funny how some democrats change their minds depending on the situation. At the time, dems didn’t want an investigation because they knew Thomas had already been vetted and it would turn up nothing. This is the same reason that the FBI is cruel toy not investigating Kavanaugh. Why spend more money on yet a 7th investigation when the first 6 have turned up nothing.
Anyway, today’s the day. We will see what happens.

Brian said...

Jay, I think you are being purposely dense. NEW information came up. Of course the FBI did not check into this matter they did not yet know about. I feel like I am explaining this over and over to a child. Your analogies are very week. You could investigate as to WHY the tire went flat. If you can't figure out why it is flat, and then you get NEW information as to the cause it would certainly be a good idea to see if that information is correct.

Clarence Thomas DID get investigated.

Yes, today we will get to hear from ONE of the accusers. I wonder why they would not allow other witnesses to testify.

Brian said...

To clarify, I meant not just the other two accusers, but witnesses that could help substantiate the stories of both Kavanaugh and Ford.

Anonymous said...

Brian, it’s really refreshing to exchange ideas with someone so full of positive energy and good will. Your style of debate no doubt will win you friends and sway enemies.
I love the fact that you consider me dense and I am “like a child” and that you find my analogies weak.
I will most definitely re-think my own style of debate because as you have demonstrated, you have the goods man. You can easily change hearts and minds with your wonderous style.
I also appreciate that you refuse to believe facts and realty. I now see that this is the way to debate. I only wish I had adopted this strategy earlier on.
I see now that the facts don’t matter in a debate. Better to try to denigrate the person you’re debating. I doubted this technique before but now that I see that this is the course you have adopted, I realize it must be the correct one.

Brian said...

You might want to go back and read your posts when it comes to insults....you know what they say about throwing stones. Hypocritical much? I'm glad you caught on that you should change your debate style because you do need at least a little substance and facts to go along with your pre-conceived opinion.

Also, keep working on getting some guts and answering simple questions. Strap on a pair and communicate instead of blathering and ignoring. It's been nice schooling you!

Jay said...

Pretty funny stuff Bri. It’s always been my experience that the people who blow their horns the loudest usually have nothing under the hood. You are no exception. You have tried to turn a debate into a forum of personal attack. You have no facts to back you up and are just plain full of your little self.
I’ve already stated the facts and you’ve ignored them. Instead, you rely on belittling those who disagree with you.
It’s been said that when a person runs out of facts he resorts to slander. In your case, nothing could be more true. You have the ability to actually formulate a sentence. You use bigger words then I would give a person with your intelligence credit for. But you lack substance. You merely parrot that which you’ve heard and are closed minded. You can not resist trying to denigrate those who disagree with you. That’s the mark of an intellectually bankrupt person.
It’s the mark of someone who sits behind his keyboard in his parents basement and thinks that only he has the answers. Your smugness and self congratulatory opinion of yourself are amply evident. You make it clear of your high opinion of yourself with every post.
It’s a waste of time debating with you although I do admit it’s kind of fun to see what garbage you will come up with next. But I think that I have better things to do. I can learn nothing from you. You have nothing to teach. I must also tell you, in case you didn’t know, I was kidding in my last post. I really find your smug, vindictive style morose and boring. It’s the same stuff I’ve heard from every other closed minded, full of themselves, socialist democrat liberal. It’s boring. Sometimes funny but mostly boring.

Brian said...

Sorry, didn't meant to get you so riled up. Although I do enjoy the sophomoric attempts at insulting me! I gave facts. You chose to ignore them. I asked questions. You couldn't answer, so ignored them like a coward.

You are right, this is a waste of time. Work on opening that mind of yours to consider what the other side has to say.

I hope this doesn't set you off on yet another long and angry tirade. Relax and consider your blood pressure.


Tom McLaughlin said...

Brett Kavanaugh is kicking ass! He's laying out the Democrats flat on their backs. He's had enough, and so have millions of Americans all across the country!

Jay said...

Tom, I found Fords testimony weak and in my opinion, rehearsed. Her demeanor seemed to have been practiced or coached. I didn’t buy it. I’ve heard from students of hers that she is a loud mouthed, somewhat shrill Person who they are kind of afraid of. That doesn’t jibe with her very very timid demeanor displayed at the hearing.
Kavanaugh seems like a man who’s ready to explode as I would be if in his situation. He did just address the FBI investigation question posed by Feinstein. He answered it just as the law enforcement people I have heard from mentioned. He told her that he wanted a hearing the day after the first accuser came forward and would have agreed to an investigation if the committee deemed it necessary. They did not. He just wants to clear his name however the committee sees fit. He also said that all the FBI could do in this situation would be to question people who’ve already been questioned and write out 302’s to that effect. Nothing new would be gained.
This all stinks and I feel sorry for this country and the level of filth the democrat party has dragged us down to.

Jay said...

Brian, you just proved my point, yet again.
The only one being riled up is you.

Brian said...

To me, Kavanaugh's testimony sounded like a robot programmed to cry and whine. But what really got me was how completely flummoxed Kavanaugh was when asked the very question I posed to Jay...Why NOT have the FBI clear your name? He blubbered and got off point, but was never able to give a single reason why he wouldn't want the investigation. Like Jay. Both scared off what might be revealed.

This all really does stink to high heaven, and it is horrible that our country is ignoring morals in the quest for political "wins".

Jay said...

I have to say that I totally agree with Brian here.
This does stink to high heaven and it IS horrible that the democrats are ignoring morals in the quest for political wins.
This whole sham is without a doubt, the worst and lowest thing I’ve ever seen perpetrating by the democrats. And that’s saying A LOT!
I have to take umbridge with something brian babbled though. After Kavanaugh said about a million times that he would do whatever the committee wanted, what more do these democrats need? In other words, if they wanted an FBI investigation, he was cool with that. Apparently the democrats there, like Bri here, don’t understand that doing whatever the committee wants means doing whatever the committee wants. I guess dems need it spelled out.
But again Bri, I suggest you YouTube what Your boy Joe Biden said in reference to an FBI investigation. I know it might take a few mouse clicks in your moms basement, but you may find it worth the trouble.
But hey, if there were an investigation the FBI would go talk to the same people, (who have already denied Fords claims), and report back in their 302’s that these folks denied Fords claims. That after being investigated already 6 times by the FBI is probably a good way to spend tax payer dollars. But what do democrats care about wasting money. That’s their forte.

Brian said...

It is hard with a man of such character, but I am trying to picture the following scenario. What if 3 women had come out with accusations that Obama had sexually assaulted them. One of them took, and passed, a lie detector test and wanted a FBI investigation, even knowing the consequences of jail time if she was caught lying to them. Now imagine Obama declining to take the polygraph and trying to avoid an investigation. What would you think? And if you claim that you your attitude would be "Aw, the women are probably lying and Obama has already had his background checked...he just doesn't want to have it investigated because, uh, whatever" then I can say without a shadow of a doubt that you are hypocritical liars.

I know Jay, and Tom, that it aggravates the crap out of you that I bring up these obvious points that can't be refuted and have to be ignored. It's hard dealing with reality sometimes. So shut it out and cheer for your "side". What else is one with no real values of their own to do?

Brian said...

Yes, the weasel said that he would do whatever the "committee" wanted, even after being asked his own personal opinion. He refused to give it. He damn well know that the Republican controlled committee will not give the FBI a chance. And I don't give a crap what Biden said, what the hell do I care about him? I care about uncovering the truth. Which is something that guilty people do NOT want. And how many times do you have to spit out the moronic statement about being vetted 6 times even after having it explained to you that new information has come up. Is that really all you've got? And you say it is about $$$$???!!!??? Wow, right there you have proven that the right is way more concerned about the almighty dollar than in truth and justice. Thanks for reconfirming your forte.

Jay said...

I can’t speak for Tom but none of what you say aggravates me. It’s just the same old line I hear from most every liberal democrat socialist.
Your argument referring to Obama is quite a different story. Polygraphs are not admissible in court. Too easy to cheat. Too many have been proved wrong. And what is it with you and the whole investigation thing? An investigation at this late date would only delay the confirmation vote until after the mid terms, which is exactly what you democrats wanted to happen. Those dems on the committee know that. Maybe you do too?
You don’t care about what your boy Biden said? Very funny. Very hypocritical. Very democrat.
And by the way, he’s been vetted six times by the FBI.
Either way, Kavanaugh looked good today. What Graham and Cruz said today made the most sense of anything. Tomorrow our President, (and yours), Donald J Trump, May choose to have Kavanaugh put up for a vote. If he does, it’s likely he’ll be confirmed.
Case closed and another disgusting democrat tactic put to bed but aired for the whole country to see.
If Kavanaugh isn’t confirmed, we’ll get another Judge who thinks in a similar fashion. Conservatism baby!

Jay said...

I have a question for my buddy Brian.
What do you think of Judge Kavanaugh?
You called him a weasel and I’m curious on what you base your opinion.

Brian said...

OK, school is back in session. Let's take your silly statements one by one. My story on Obama was imaging the EXACT thing with him, so not quite different at all. And you know you wouldn't have discounted the women.

Next, were you aware that Kavanaugh has been a big supporter of polygraphs in his rulings? Oops. I guess he is is prepared to stand for the proposition that “there’s a law for thee but not for me.” That should be a disqualifying characteristic in a Supreme Court justice.

"My boy Biden"? Huh? How on earth is it hypocritical to not care about him? For one thing, I am not a Democrat.

And let me show you how real men respond to questions, unlike you and Kavanaugh. We answer them. WhY do I think he is a weasel. For some of the very reasons I have mentioned. He would not answer his own opinion on the investigation, but deferred to the committee. Weasel like. And he is having it both ways on the lie detectors. Weasel like.

Still waiting on you to man up.

Brian said...

I am not sure what values Jay is championing when he says "conservatism, baby"

I have nothing against good old fashioned conservatism, ala Ronald Reagan, who wouldn’t repeal most government welfare programs “regardless of the price.” He said that “any person in the United States who requires medical attention and cannot provide for himself should have it provided for him.”

He raised California’s taxes in 1967 rather than slash welfare and Medicaid spending. His 1971 welfare reform bill that removed the able-bodied from the rolls also increased welfare checks for people staying in the program by 43%. He was proud of this and called it “giving them a raise”.

As president, he made clear that budget cutting would only target those who didn’t need government help. People who “through no fault of their own” relied on taxpayer support — “the poverty stricken, the disabled, the elderly, all those with true need” — could “be assured that the social safety net of programs they depend on are exempt from any cuts”.

Reagan even raised taxes as president to keep safety nets intact.

It is the bastardized alt-right spin on conservatism that is troubling, and must have Reagan spinning in his grave.

Anyway, the judge will most likely get rammed through, but the values of justice for all will never be dampened by the rulings of partisan judges. Just look at our history and see how equality has been spreading for all since the end of slavery.

I'm an optimist. Good will continue to triumph. A MLK said “the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.”

Rick said...

The following are the opinions of an outlet promoting conservatism:


"Conservatives are now the bastion of situational ethics and moral relativism - exactly what drove me away from liberalism as a young man."

"The idea that the party of Bill Clinton, of abortion-at-all-costs, and mandatory transgenderism in public schools has gotten out ahead of the GOP on sexual morality tells you all you need to know."

Jay said...

I must admit that I’ve enjoyed these last few days. Some of the posts are hilarious. I find it enjoyable that those on the left are so desperate that they use obfuscation, non-facts and attempted character assasination. When you run out of ideas and facts, these are things you rely on. The only thing that keeps some of these folks alive is the fact that the main stream media still hawks this garbage that they so desperately want to believe. Never do they question it because it helps fan the fires of hatred that they wish to stoke. Even if what they’re being told makes absolutely no sense and goes against everything this country stands for.

Brian said...

Either that last post was brilliant self-evaluation, satire, "I know you are but what am I", or the ramblings of an ignorant soul.

Anyway, you prove yourself once again unable to respond to what is posted. One more debate tips.....debates are never won when you can't answer questions.

I too have enjoyed exposing you to some reality. And once again, I apologize for getting you so irked. It is always a big tell when people spend so much time claiming they are not upset, otherwise you'd just let it go.

Hasta luego!

Brian said...

And so, despite those of you who didn't think it could be done, the FBI will investigate. Allow me to remind you of the previous statements:

Me: "You are wrong. The FBI can investigate if asked by the White House."

Jay: "I really don’t see any point in arguing with someone who knows att the answers. Apparently you know all about how the FBI works, it’s investigative procedures and how rape victims respond. I’m glad you know all of these things and so happy that you have seen fit to educate all of us.
I stand corrected, even when I’m sitting down. I will be sure to inform the law enforcement people I’ve heard from that they are wrong and you are correct."

So by your own words you admit that there is no point in arguing with somebody who knows what you don't. I accept your thanks, and you are welcome for the education. Please don't forget to keep your word and inform the law enforcement people you have heard from that they are wrong and I was correct.

It was great to know that true conservatives, like those I used to look up to years ago, still exist in people like Flake. Reagan stopped spinning for a brief moment.

And don't worry, the odds that the FBI can come up with enough evidence in one week to pressure Republican Senators to do the right thing is slim to none. Calling for the investigation themselves is what Republicans, if they were smart enough, should have done right away. If they had, Kavanaugh would probably already be seated by now.

So once again, you are welcome for shedding some light on the truth of this matter, and keep in mind your own words:

I"t’s comforting to know that in these confusing times at least one person, such as you, knows all the answers. I will ignore all of the experts in the future and defer to your judgement."


Anonymous said...

Wow. I just realized that Corey Booker and Brian are BOTH Spartacus..

I have debated many many liberal socialist democrats, which is exactly what Spartacus/Brian is, and usually find a huge ego hidden behind a huge ego hidden behind assumptions and self aggrandizement. Brian is no different.

He seems to think that he is right even when he’s wrong. To wit, he thinks I said that the FBI can not investigate Kavanaugh. I never said that. What I said was that they wouldn’t, on their own. Of course the WH could authorize it and they have.

But that doesn’t seem to be good enough tor Spatacus/Brian even though that’s what he’s been screaming for. I guess If the FBI had said it would take ten years and cost 50 million dollars, that would make him happy. Maybe set up a special council?

And I really don’t understand Spartacus/Brian’s penchant for trying to insult my manhood. He seems to try this almost every post. My guess is it’s some sort of projection. My guess is he doesn’t know how to just stick to the facts without trying to make himself look better by tearing someone else down. Sad, that.

Anyway, I look forward to this all being over and done with and having a good man like Kavanaugh sitting on the bench of SCOTUS. I don’t know what everyone took away from the hearing but I didn’t buy Fords rehearsed testimony. More importantly, she provided no verifiable facts. Even the democrats must have known that but they, and people like Spartacus/Brian, are still making this into a political game.
These people wanted an investigation. They are going to get it. But I guarantee it won’t be good enough for them. They don’t really care about Ford. Whatever happens, they will cry foul. They are just angry because they are not getting their way and the Evil Donald Trump is pushing this through.

I say good for Trump. That’s why I voted for him. That’s why he won. My guess is if Hillary had won, she would have appointed Al Franken.

Tom McLaughlin said...

I assume Anonymous above is Jay. As a reminder, please identify yourself. If the interface is confusing, or you forget until you've typed a paragraph or two, then type in your name, or a consistent pseudonym, at the bottom of the post.

Jay said...

I don’t know why when I choose to use my own name it sometimes spits back anonymous. That last comment was from me..

Brian said...

Jay, I see now why you are a Trump fan. You relate to people who are big blowhards with no regard for the truth. Even caught in a lie/mistake as blatant as this one, you bluster and try and change reality. Let's recap actual reality:

You: "The FBI doesn't just launch an investigation without some forensic evidence available." (so what is the forensic evidence in this case?)

Me: "where did you get the idea that the FBI can't start an investigation without forensic evidence?"

You "it might be good to educate yourself on why and how the FBI starts an investigation." (I guess reality has now shown it is you needing the education!)

Me: "Of course the FBI can look into this, but they need the request of the White House"

You: "Brian, I believe you are in error. What you are proposing is something like being sued because....."(blah blah blah)

Me: "You are wrong. The FBI can investigate if asked by the White House." (Cue the announcement of the investigation")

I know you hate to be proven wrong by somebody that has been needling you so, but put on your big boy pants, admit you were wrong, and try and inform yourself better and get back in the game. But I know your type, and Trump's type...it will never happen. That is why Trump got laughed at in his face on the world stage recently, and why you are the big joke right now.

Jay said...

Spartacus/Brian, once again you are making assumptions and are in error. But it is telling. You asked me what forensic evidence exists in this case. That is my point and once again, you just proved it for me. There is none.
The FBI doesn’t go around investigating things when there is nothing to investigate. However, if directed by the WH, they will. And they are going to. Let’s spend even more money for an investigation on a man who’s already been vetted by the FBI six times for which there is no real evidence of anything except for unsubstantiated claims. Spartacus/Brian, I hope you never fall under such scrutiny. But perhaps this last investigation will silence you and other democrats......nah...you’ll find some other reason to hate Kavanaugh. You’ll find some reason to hate anyone Trump brings up.
To say that because I back Trump I like “big blowhards with no respect for the truth” is pretty funny and also telling. Obama was the biggest blowhard ever. He lied every time he opened his mouth, yet you seem to think he’s a man beyond reproach. You made such an allusion in your comment on 9/27.
Your last paragraph from your last post, proves another point I made. When people like you run out of ideas and feel their back is against the wall, you merely resort to denigration of character. I’ll “put on my big boy pants” now and await your next edition of diatribe.

Brian said...

OK, I have to keep in mind your low reading comprehension, so let's just look at a little bit.

Me: "Of course the FBI can look into this, but they need the request of the White House"

You: "Brian, I believe you are in error.

Pretty clearcut there. How was my statement in error? It wasn't, you were in error. Case closed. Try looking in another drawer for your big boy pants. Maybe ask your mommy where they are.

And yes, everybody that found Ford to be believable (even Trump said she was credible, as did the Judicial committee) will continue to dislike the notion that a man of such low character is sitting on the Supreme court.

As to your statement: "When people like you run out of ideas and feel their back is against the wall, you merely resort to denigration of character." The following are some statements that all came before I made any insult toward you whatsoever.

"All of these morons demonstrating against Kavanaugh" Not directed directly at me maybe, but denigrating their character because you must have been out of ideas.

"educate yourself"

And then the endless stream of dopey sarcasm, the true tell of a beaten man....

"I really don’t see any point in arguing with someone who knows att the answers."

Which was hilarious as the sarcastic comment turned out to be true!

Take your own advice and give up the argument. I'm starting to feel I'm kicking you while you're down. It's too easy.

Jay said...

Spartacus/Brian, Very nice to know that you still have such lofty dreams of pomposity.
You seem to be doing what the mainstream media does; take a quote out of context. The way you portray your adventures in diatribe in your last post, it looks like we are having a one sentence conversation back and forth. Of course, that isn’t how this works. Good try though.
Of course the President could order an investigation. I never said he couldn’t. My feeling is that he wouldn’t. But he has. So what? Now you are clinging to a false assumption that I said that he could not do that. You seem to want to prove me wrong about something at any cost, even by taking my thought out of context. Ever thought of applying at CNN? But Hey, if it makes you feel better, go ahead and believe it.
So now your argument and debate is again just an attack on me and contains no information. Seems to be a theme with you and those at CNN.
You seem to have viewed the hearings with a belief that Ford was truly a victim and Kavanaugh was a predator. I think again, you have swallowed the mainstream media BS. I watched the same hearings and found her testimony to be rehearsed and her little (fake) voice to be like fingernails down a chalkboard. She was treated with the utmost respect by all present. Kavanaugh was treated like a worthless rabid dog by the demoncrats. But if you want to believe in the concept of guilty until proven innocent, that’s your right. If you choose to believe a woman who has zero evidence, that is your right.
As far as your fear of kicking me while I’m down. Don’t worry about that Spartacus/Brian. I consider these exchanges to be humorous and your pompous attacks have little effect on me, other then making me laugh. More like a mosquito landing on my arm. I usually just swat them and forget about it. But writing keeps me busy when I’m taking a break and thus I continue and unless you sink to even lower levels of discourse and even less presentation of facts, I will continue to continue.
But, just to try to keep this interesting for other readers, perhaps you could lose the “I am Spartacus/Brian and a warrior and all before me are not worthy men” pretense and just try to discuss your feelings and the facts as you think you know them. I believe the purpose of this blog is an exchange of ideas and not an excercise in self aggrandizement. We all get it now that you are truly a real man and a badass with a sky high IQ and the rest of us mortal men are just a waste of space. But then again, that very fact is what keeps this humorous for me. Perhaps you should keep us laughing?
Your choose. Have a great day. I am.

Brian said...

Holy crap, what a long and laborious exercise in self aggrandizement that was!

Enough already. Stop your "out of context" crap and the rest of your BS. The two quotes were taken from posts right after each other...you were obviously replying to my prior one. I said an investigation could be ordered by the White House, and you said "I believe you are in error". Facts. Stop Tumpin' You are like the proverbial boy with his hand in the cookie jar, crumbs on face, denying the facts. Pathetic when performed by an adult.

You are like a school yard bully who gives a little jab, a little poke, a little push and then whines and plays the victim when whomped in the face. But now it has come full circle and it is me that feels like the bully, picking on somebody who is defenseless. Not being able to answer questions is like not being able to punch back. So I'm done. I am sorry if you are a masochist and are enjoying this, but fun time is over. I know that a person of your disposition will be compelled to have the last word in order to protect your ego, so have it. And thanks for the wishes of a great day....I just got back from kayaking on the lake where a bald eagle flew less than 40 feet directly overhead....it was great indeed. I really am sorry that I got dragged into the mud, this does no good for anybody.


Jay said...


Wow. Project much?

Again, you ARE in error.

This is fun. Unproductive, but fun.


Tom said...

"She was a bit overweight with short hair and she wore pant-suits or long dresses, usually with a brightly colored shawl over one shoulder."
I see what you did there Mr. McLaughlin. Very versed in Goebbels I take it.

Unknown said...

Thank U. This is badly needed for the country. I've been asking pro-abortions what if your mother aborted U? They have no answer