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
- Thread starter joecct
- Start date
- Status
The Sicatoka
Kicizapi Cetan
Wisko McBadgerton
Teaching you how to Bucky.
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
Great. Has she rescinded her incorrect tweet then, or can you just point me to where she corrected it?
This isn't tweeted by some random blogger, it's a CNN reporter who is supposed to be accurate, at least one would think.
And what is the point she is conveying? "Look at these righty's that want to dump Kavanaugh!" She says none are liberals. Wrong. None are pro choice. Wrong. 2/3 are both those things.
Not to mention had she even been accurate in citing America, it's is a small publication with 45k circulation (there are 70 million Catholics in the US) that has since equivocated on the original editorial, which basically said after the hearing that they'd prefer it if K was just replaced with someone less controversial that is still Pro life.
Great. Has she rescinded her incorrect tweet then, or can you just point me to where she corrected it?
This isn't tweeted by some random blogger, it's a CNN reporter who is supposed to be accurate, at least one would think.
And what is the point she is conveying? "Look at these righty's that want to dump Kavanaugh!" She says none are liberals. Wrong. None are pro choice. Wrong. 2/3 are both those things.
Not to mention had she even been accurate in citing America, it's is a small publication with 45k circulation (there are 70 million Catholics in the US) that has since equivocated on the original editorial, which basically said after the hearing that they'd prefer it if K was just replaced with someone less controversial that is still Pro life.
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
Enemy of the people and all...you've been programmed well.
Enemy of the people and all...you've been programmed well.
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
But Senator Grassley told me he ABA didnt feel that way and the letter from the President two weeks ago was just one man's opinion. Are you telling me the GREAT AND POWERFUL OZ was wrong?
But Senator Grassley told me he ABA didnt feel that way and the letter from the President two weeks ago was just one man's opinion. Are you telling me the GREAT AND POWERFUL OZ was wrong?
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
She's a (Republican) political commentator, not a reporter--there is a difference. Perhaps if you want to crusade for accuracy in tweets and responsible rescinding of inaccuracies, there is someone higher up the food chain you could focus your attention on?
edit: ignoring the rest of your post as it's not particularly relevant to anything I posted.
She's a (Republican) political commentator, not a reporter--there is a difference. Perhaps if you want to crusade for accuracy in tweets and responsible rescinding of inaccuracies, there is someone higher up the food chain you could focus your attention on?
edit: ignoring the rest of your post as it's not particularly relevant to anything I posted.
Last edited:
Wisko McBadgerton
Teaching you how to Bucky.
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
I said it was wrong. If you think that was accurate then say so, don't just make some bs talking point accusation. Talk about programming.
I said it was wrong. If you think that was accurate then say so, don't just make some bs talking point accusation. Talk about programming.
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
If you are going to go all semantical on us you might want to get all of your facts straight. As stated by others she is not a reporter, she is a GOP commentator. Not the same thing.
Now normally I would probably let that go but since you seem to be on the Semantics High Horse of late I figure it is relevant
If you are going to go all semantical on us you might want to get all of your facts straight. As stated by others she is not a reporter, she is a GOP commentator. Not the same thing.
Now normally I would probably let that go but since you seem to be on the Semantics High Horse of late I figure it is relevant
bronconick
Yep, still here
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
The staffs have been looking to see if they have any vacation time for the past two weeks
The staffs have been looking to see if they have any vacation time for the past two weeks
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
From her comments from yesterday it's pretty apparent that she wouldn't vote no based on the assault accusations since she thinks it was a super duper thorough investigation that found no corroboration. I guess there's still the tiny hope that she'd vote no based on the naked, angry partisanship he displayed in the hearing. But, I think the fact that she claimed the investigation was thorough even though it clearly was not probably indicates she'll be a yes.
From her comments from yesterday it's pretty apparent that she wouldn't vote no based on the assault accusations since she thinks it was a super duper thorough investigation that found no corroboration. I guess there's still the tiny hope that she'd vote no based on the naked, angry partisanship he displayed in the hearing. But, I think the fact that she claimed the investigation was thorough even though it clearly was not probably indicates she'll be a yes.
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
agreed.
way to let me down again Susan.
agreed.
way to let me down again Susan.
Wisko McBadgerton
Teaching you how to Bucky.
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
I suggested this was largely unimportant to start with, but that it was wrong. Who cares if she's an R or a Hare Krishna? ( the latter does provide a really terrific free vegetarian lunch on the UF campus on Tuesdays, btw) I agree that I was wrong in using the word reporter. See? I can say actually I was wrong. However I disagree that my argument was a semantical one. The tweet is blatantly wrong to anybody that can read. So what? So nothing, it's just one illustration of how easily ideas can be spread around that just aren't factual. That's not a secret or anything, everybody sees it.
If you are going to go all semantical on us you might want to get all of your facts straight. As stated by others she is not a reporter, she is a GOP commentator. Not the same thing.
Now normally I would probably let that go but since you seem to be on the Semantics High Horse of late I figure it is relevant
I suggested this was largely unimportant to start with, but that it was wrong. Who cares if she's an R or a Hare Krishna? ( the latter does provide a really terrific free vegetarian lunch on the UF campus on Tuesdays, btw) I agree that I was wrong in using the word reporter. See? I can say actually I was wrong. However I disagree that my argument was a semantical one. The tweet is blatantly wrong to anybody that can read. So what? So nothing, it's just one illustration of how easily ideas can be spread around that just aren't factual. That's not a secret or anything, everybody sees it.
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
I am just saying if you seem very anal about little things of late so you have to expect that to be returned in kind. It is like when grammar nazis get called out on boards...nothing personal just fun
I am just saying if you seem very anal about little things of late so you have to expect that to be returned in kind. It is like when grammar nazis get called out on boards...nothing personal just fun
trixR4kids
New member
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
bUt bErNiE IzN't a dEmOcRaT!
The Sicatoka
Kicizapi Cetan
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
They're all living a Southwest Airlines commerical ... "Wanna get away?"
They're all living a Southwest Airlines commerical ... "Wanna get away?"
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
I've got to believe Manchin goes whichever way Collins does. He's probably not going to supply a 50th vote, though I wish he'd go one step further an not supply a 51st vote either--force Pence to cast the tiebreaker if it comes to that.
I've got to believe Manchin goes whichever way Collins does. He's probably not going to supply a 50th vote, though I wish he'd go one step further an not supply a 51st vote either--force Pence to cast the tiebreaker if it comes to that.
The Sicatoka
Kicizapi Cetan
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
Old joke ...
Q: How do you keep a bunch of idiots in suspense?
A:
Old joke ...
Q: How do you keep a bunch of idiots in suspense?
A:
- Status