Post 272523 by neverfadingwood@qoto.org
(DIR) More posts by neverfadingwood@qoto.org
(DIR) Post #272322 by neverfadingwood@qoto.org
2018-09-28T15:24:13Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
The man is a monster. This is my view based on what I heard him do and say. He's not fit to sit on any court, let alone SCOTUS.
(DIR) Post #272323 by freemo@qoto.org
2018-09-28T15:45:25Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@neverfadingwood Any specific examples you'd like to call on?
(DIR) Post #272438 by neverfadingwood@qoto.org
2018-09-28T15:56:56Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @neverfadingwood Just his general demeanor and what he said about "the left". His anger, bluster, and bias are not acceptable traits for a supreme court judge. Or any judge come to that.
(DIR) Post #272456 by freemo@qoto.org
2018-09-28T15:58:06Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@neverfadingwood I dont agree or disagree. Was just hoping to hear a specific example to help form my opinions.
(DIR) Post #272523 by neverfadingwood@qoto.org
2018-09-28T16:04:20Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @neverfadingwood I was dipping in and out of his testimony on the bird site. Sorry, I can't remember specifics now, but both Ford's testimony and Kavanaugh's persuaded me that he wasn't suitable. Not enough to convict him in court, possibly, but that's not the point. This was a job interview, not a criminal case. And in cases of sexual assault and rape I believe the onus should be on the accused to show they *didn't* do it.
(DIR) Post #272548 by freemo@qoto.org
2018-09-28T16:07:05Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@neverfadingwood Fair.Though the whole guilty until proven innocent thing is just dangerus and i could never get behind that. So you feel i could just go around and accuse anyone I waned, man or woman, or rapping me and unless they could somehow produce evidence to prove I didnt they all go to jail for years? The potential for abuse in that situation would be way too high.
(DIR) Post #272606 by neverfadingwood@qoto.org
2018-09-28T16:12:46Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @neverfadingwood Look at the ordeal the accuser has to go through, though. It's not burglary they're accusing people of, it's a crime of the most intimate and personal kind. There's almost no way it can be criminally proven 35 years later. Does that mean the accused should get off scot free? If the accuser's testimony is credible it has to be taken account of somehow. What would you suggest?
(DIR) Post #272683 by Surasanji@qoto.org
2018-09-28T16:18:07Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @neverfadingwood I watched (or listened) to the Brett Kavanaugh part of the hearing, so my opinions right now are based only on his testimony.I think he was understandably angry. If someone said I was a sexual criminal, or I sexually assaulted them and I hadn't I'd be super pissed.Did he? Didn't he? I don't know. I'd probably react with the same anger either way.It does sound like something sketchy is going on here and I'm not sure who to trust anymore.That being said, I'm not sure that Judge Kavanaugh is appropriate for the supreme court. I can't trust him after all this. Be it character assassination, true fact, or some kind of political ball game. it has worked.
(DIR) Post #272702 by freemo@qoto.org
2018-09-28T16:18:55Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@neverfadingwood There is no doubt that the accused will occassionally, perhaps even often, not get justice. That is very unfortunate and if we could create a system where that didnt happen I'd be all for it.The problem is your suggestion creates more injustice, not less. It effectively gives anyone the power to put anyone in jail at any time, justified or not. For example when Obama was elected if anyone in the country felt they didnt like Obama all they had to do was accuse him of rape 35 years ago, and bam, in jail and no president. Obviously he could never disprove the accusation. That seems like utter chaos. Do you really want to make it so any person has the power to put anyone in jail they want at any time without needing evidence, just an accusation?My suggestion is that if there isnt evidence, then there should be no repercussions. Yes it means some evil people get to go free sometime, problem is we dont know who is evil and getting off and who is actually innocent, so we have to just live with that unfortunate situation until we have better ways to acquire evidence.I have no doubt that if we let an accusation be the only requirement for jail time youd see hugely more innocent people jailed than you'd see justice.
(DIR) Post #272750 by freemo@qoto.org
2018-09-28T16:23:53Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Surasanji I am very careful not to be a victim of the political game. One of the reason im not watching testimony is because I am waiting until all the evidence comes out and will judge ont he hard facts. I dont like being manipulated by the political game.@neverfadingwood
(DIR) Post #272763 by Surasanji@qoto.org
2018-09-28T16:25:01Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @neverfadingwood I can understand that.I feel like Brett isn't being honest, is the very core of it. But, I also think something sketchy is going on over Dr. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh and it calls into question the entire thing.
(DIR) Post #272779 by freemo@qoto.org
2018-09-28T16:26:22Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Surasanji I dont think anyone in the political spotlight is every honest about anything. If i used that standard for who I support then I'd never support anyone (and I guess in one sense I dont, even though I do vote)@neverfadingwood
(DIR) Post #272854 by neverfadingwood@qoto.org
2018-09-28T16:31:54Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @Surasanji @neverfadingwood I don't think politicians are honest either, but judges have to be held to a higher standard than politicians. They must not only be honest, but be seen to be above reproach and totally impartial. After Kavanaugh's testimony yesterday he himself made it perfectly clear he's neither of those.
(DIR) Post #272917 by freemo@qoto.org
2018-09-28T16:37:31Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@neverfadingwood I partly agree. I think finding a human being who has no opinions on anything (impartial) simply doesnt exist. They only need to act impartially and by the letter of the law while sitting behind the bench, otherwise when not behind the bench they can have whatever opinions they want.RBG is an amazing judge, but it is clear she has strong personal opinions on all sorts of issues. Thankfully on many of them I agree with her, but even though there are many of her opinions I dont I still support her as a judge.@Surasanji
(DIR) Post #272978 by neverfadingwood@qoto.org
2018-09-28T16:41:52Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @neverfadingwood @Surasanji Fair point. It's impossible to find someone impartial, but they have to *appear* so, and Kavanaugh showed no impartiality yesterday. It's no surprise Trump likes him. They're both bullies. Birds of a feather.
(DIR) Post #273026 by freemo@qoto.org
2018-09-28T16:43:38Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@neverfadingwood I'd argue the only time they need to act/appear impartial is when they are acting as a judge over a case. I wouldn't say that there is any requirement for a judge to lie about his or her opinions just to give an appearance of impartiality in their personal daily lives. I care about if they can make impartial decisions as a judge, not if they hold impartial decisions or appear impartial when they arent acting as a judge.@Surasanji
(DIR) Post #273151 by neverfadingwood@qoto.org
2018-09-28T16:53:07Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @neverfadingwood I think we may have to agree to disagree there. I believe a judge should strive to be impartial at all times. It should be a personality feature of anyone who wants to be a judge. @Surasanji
(DIR) Post #273183 by freemo@qoto.org
2018-09-28T16:56:03Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@neverfadingwood Fair, we can disagree on that point. So therefore would you say someone who was on the opposite side of kavenaugh who made a negative remark about republicans rather than democrats, and had strong negative opinions about them (but was otherwise impartial in their duties as a judge), then that too would make them inappropriate as a judge?@Surasanji
(DIR) Post #273342 by freemo@qoto.org
2018-09-28T17:07:56Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@neverfadingwood I was thinking about this particular stance some more and I realized why I really dont like it.Since we agree that a truly impartial person doesnt exist you just want them to appear impartial at all times and in their personal life. I respect that opinion. But consider what it means. What you are effectively saying is you want someone who constantly lies. Who has opinions but lies to "appear" they dont all the time in every day life.I'd say for me honesty of character is a FAR more important train in a judge than someone who puts on an act to be impartial at all times in their private life. Particularly when they make completely impartial decisions when on the job.@Surasanji
(DIR) Post #287686 by neverfadingwood@qoto.org
2018-09-29T17:06:31Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @neverfadingwood @Surasanji Yes. 😊