What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

The thing a lot of righties seem to forget is this is a job interview.

If Joe Schmoe were applying to literally any company and someone from his past contacted the company and put forth these kind of allegations, his application process would end right there. Without question.

unofan said:
Blacking out != passing out. There are telltale signs when someone crosses the threshold even when they're not aware of it themselves at the time. I can tell you several college friends who blacked out a lot.
Click to expand...

Curious, how do you differentiate the two?

BassAle said:
No one is asking to lock him up or add him to a sex offender registry. We just don’t think he deserves to be on the Supreme Court for life.
Click to expand...

I don't get how there's still confusion about this. It's pretty clear and isn't complicated.
 
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

This whole thing reminds me of a quote from the movie "Devil's Advocate:"

Kevin Lomax: Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I know you've spent all morning listening to Mr. Broygo talk; I know you're hungry; what I need to tell you won't take very long at all. I don't like Alexander Cullen. I don't think he's a nice person. I don't expect you to like him. He's been a terrible husband to all three of his wives; he's been a destructive force in the lives of his stepchildren; he's cheated the city, his partners, his employees. He's paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in penalties and fines over the years. I don't like him. I'm going to tell you some things during the course of this trial that are going to make you like him even less. But this isn't a popularity contest; it's a murder trial.

He may be a complete unqualified bastige, but is Kav a sex offender? I don't know that we'll ever know.

burd: it matters for future people who are under the microscope. If an unproven allegation is enough to convict a person in the popular view....that's dangerous.
 
Brenthoven said:
This whole thing reminds me of a quote from the movie "Devil's Advocate:"

Kevin Lomax: Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I know you've spent all morning listening to Mr. Broygo talk; I know you're hungry; what I need to tell you won't take very long at all. I don't like Alexander Cullen. I don't think he's a nice person. I don't expect you to like him. He's been a terrible husband to all three of his wives; he's been a destructive force in the lives of his stepchildren; he's cheated the city, his partners, his employees. He's paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in penalties and fines over the years. I don't like him. I'm going to tell you some things during the course of this trial that are going to make you like him even less. But this isn't a popularity contest; it's a murder trial.

He may be a complete unqualified bastige, but is Kav a sex offender? I don't know that we'll ever know.

burd: it matters for future people who are under the microscope. If an unproven allegation is enough to convict a person in the popular view....that's dangerous.
Click to expand...

Unproven allegations have convicted people....forever...that's not likely to change.
As for your quote...this isn't a trial...it's a job interview.
 
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

First Time said:
Unproven allegations have convicted people....forever...that's not likely to change.
As for your quote...this isn't a trial...it's a job interview.
Click to expand...

It's a public, not court, trial. It's still a trial.

See also: Ellison in MN. IMO, that allegation is becoming sketchier by the day.

Point being, this is a person's life we're talking about. If an allegation can ruin a person's life, even if proven false, and I have provided previous examples in past threads...that's dangerous.
 
Brenthoven said:
It's a public, not court, trial. It's still a trial.

See also: Ellison in MN. IMO, that allegation is becoming sketchier by the day.

Point being, this is a person's life we're talking about. If an allegation can ruin a person's life, even if proven false, and I have provided previous examples in past threads...that's dangerous.
Click to expand...

No kidding it is...but it is also not likely to change.
Welcome to the mob.
 
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

Brenthoven said:
It's a public, not court, trial. It's still a trial.

See also: Ellison in MN. IMO, that allegation is becoming sketchier by the day.

Point being, this is a person's life we're talking about. If an allegation can ruin a person's life, even if proven false, and I have provided previous examples in past threads...that's dangerous.
Click to expand...

Oh, no, the poor rich entitled White Boy isn't entitled to the Supreme Court after all. Wah Wah.
 
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

Later rumor is that there are texts from Brett and friends to deal with Ramirez before she went public with the p enis in the face story
 
dxmnkd316 said:
The thing a lot of righties seem to forget is this is a job interview.

If Joe Schmoe were applying to literally any company and someone from his past contacted the company and put forth these kind of allegations, his application process would end right there. Without question.



Curious, how do you differentiate the two?



I don't get how there's still confusion about this. It's pretty clear and isn't complicated.
Click to expand...

Blacking out you're still awake, walking, talking, but part of your brain has shut off. You will wake up with a black hole in your memory and not remember a thing for that time period.

Passed out means you're unconscious.
 
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

dxmnkd316 said:
Curious, how do you differentiate the two?
Click to expand...

unofan said:
Blacking out you're still awake, walking, talking, but part of your brain has shut off. You will wake up with a black hole in your memory and not remember a thing for that time period.

Passed out means you're unconscious.
Click to expand...

Yep, agree with unofan. I had a friend in college who would get blackout drunk, in that he was functioning, we partied with him all night, but talking to him the next day, large chunks of the night were missing. Like the night that all he remembers is drinking two long island pitchers around 10pm, dancing, then the next thing he remembers is when we were tobogganing down his behind campus at 2am and he came out of his blackout as his sled was heading directly to a tree line at high speed.

Passed out means your body isn't functioning at that moment and makes a great whiteboard for sharpie at parties.
 
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

ScoobyDoo said:
Oh, no, the poor rich entitled White Boy isn't entitled to the Supreme Court after all. Wah Wah.
Click to expand...

This attitude doesn't help the greater good, and is a pizz poor attitude to fixing such issues in the future.
 
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

Brenthoven said:
It's a public, not court, trial. It's still a trial.

See also: Ellison in MN. IMO, that allegation is becoming sketchier by the day.

Point being, this is a person's life we're talking about. If an allegation can ruin a person's life, even if proven false, and I have provided previous examples in past threads...that's dangerous.
Click to expand...

I haven't yet heard your concern that a woman (women) might very possibly have been sexually assaulted and left to deal with the well known harm that results from those crimes (in addition to being publicly vilified by conservatives everywhere), while the perp is rewarded with a seat on the United States Supreme Court? Does that possible injustice weigh just as heavily?

You may have expressed that concern and I just chose to overlook it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top