Probably motivated by military service

It's when I learned that the term "Bill of Rights" is wildly inaccurate

My USG teacher said "It is a bill of negative rights of government" which is wildly more restrictive than a bill which specified rights could possibly be

Restrictive of government that is

Which is supposed to be upheld by the people

Ideally yes

But people have it backwards now and are waiting for the government to give them their rights back

Well I'd argue it's a problem that unfortunately started with the civil Rights act of '64

Cuz if you want to get super technical about it, the bill of rights doesn't actually apply to individuals

It applies to states.

Which then applies to individuals

More accurately I've seen it described as a deal between the fed and states

I'm still working through the federalist papers. Something I wish I'd done a long time ago

I actually bought a nice bound hard copy version of the Federalist papers a few month ago and have yet to start reading it.

Also rightly or wrongly. I believe the declaration of independence is the philosophical founding document of the country and the Constitution is the nut and bolts of how gov is supposed to work.

As a side note, I heard a fun argument that I liked from Larry Elder. It was: If the government needed an amendment to ban alcohol, why don't they need an amendment for other drugs? He might not be the origin of that idea, but that's who I heard it from.

The declaration of Independence is, imo, at best a ideological ideal but only insofar as the most famous of the sentences. The rest really is just a listing of grievances

Inspiring to be sure, but relatively simple in it's inspiration

@grant I believe this was the argument back before alcohol. I want to say with opium back when it was smoked in pipes at opium dens/bars/whatever.

I'd imagine though Larry Elder simply understands that there isn't any kind of explicit permission for government to make those laws. Those fall under the concept of unenumerated rights

One day Tim Will become a constitutional constructionist. I'm willing to bet on it

Then he'll be a libertarian

Before you even know it

Just wait. One day I believe he will see the superiority of constitutional constructionism. (Literalism)

My issue with @Timcast report on the Kavenah stuff is Tim comes out as a sexist.
"I believe her more than him" so you beleive her based on the fact she is a woman Tim, thats textbook sexism. you should wieght them equally if you are not sexist.

I get he is trying to be compassionate however its actual sexism.

Another prediction. (Though it's already happening). The Democrats start looking for specific statements to try and push the narrative that there is a conspiracy and Kavanaugh is lying. Specifically, they'll look to accuse him of perjury which serves the dual purpose of making him look bad and sets up for later impeachment or criminal proceedings if he were to be nominated.

The specific statements will be borderline. Stuff like dodges or guilt by association issues.

They're ruthless.

I still think this played terribly for the Democrats with anyone right of Bernie Sanders

They are already doing that Pratel

They are trying to paint him as "angry"

The entire thing was to get him to testify so that they can pick it apart.

Seems he lied about his connections to Yale.

@Jes I think he said that because statisically one is more likely to accuse someone of something they did actually do

@Tal,Karpov,AlekhineAllCoolGuys well I'd love to hear it from the horses mouth. it comes accross as sexism.

I believe because of sex

is sexism

I don't think he said that though

but its just one of the many things I'd love to discuss with @Timcast

maybe you can get such an idea from what he said

he gave no reason for his belief at any point

but he never directly said that

no he didnt you are right. he gave no reason at all as to why he beleives her but he did say he beleives her more than him

the only logical reason I can conclude (and please correct me) is he is being sexist

its positive discrimination which is still discrimination

either women have the same rights and responsibilities as men or they dont

It might also simply be due to it being a sexual crime; which is very different than other crimes

if they do you can just believe one or the other

oh yeah, if he is guilty, burn him at the stake

if she made it up she should do prison time

and yes, thats me judging the crime of abuse above lying

I do however disagree with openly saying that one believes one over the other even if one inheritly feels one is more likely to be guilty; because that is not very objective

all men positivly discriminate in favour of women

Not all

at some point or another

That's a bit much

not malitiously

Misogny is seen as a big thing in msm which is false but it does exist in some places

look at prison sentancing men vs women for the same crime

the majority

misandry is far more prevelent

yes that can be true

but not all

I dont mind a little bit of positive in favour of women - biologically they are more important to the species but "believe all women" is beyond the pale

Yes that is a problem but there is no proof that Tim believes that; it's just a logical conclusion

totally

Though sex crimes should not be portrayed as a gender issue imo.

appologies if it seems I'm putting words into his mouth, all my comments are of course my opinion

I was hoping he'd respond

The accuser should have some leeway in evidence not because they are female or gay or something but due to how hard evidence is to find. Even then; there should be some evidence or multiple witnesses with the exception of very rare cases.

And the witnesses must be credible

if they report it you know, withing 30 years of the accusation

*must

act*

I fixed my msg

I fall back on "better 10 guilty go free than 1 innocent is imprisoned"

I remember when the left used to stand for this too

did you hear 2 men have come forward claiming it was them not Kavenagh?

What?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2a1dtcZrPWY&lc=z23etxnzuwygclasqacdp4340ksk3vshdjo1qxkffh1w03c010c.1538482223223662

thats Sargon

just watching it

yeah I watch some of his stuff

its in USA today

I like Sargon but I feel recently he has been getting more partisan

he is covering it in the first couple of minutes of that vid

That's probably why he decided to take a break

nah the left is just getting more extreme

No I don't mean that

he is certainly getting more political but he is still a centre left in his views

I mean before he used to say some things to clarify his stance and say sympathetic things to some people in groups who were suffering as a result of radical left beliefs

ahh

but now he doesn't really do that

probably tied of using caveats every time he speaks lol

actually you just made me realise something

Tim is probably just covering his own arse to avoid backlash

thats more likely than he being sexist

so thanks 😃

why?

do u mean

backlash from who?

from the left

if he didnt say he believed her he'd be in the crosshairs

I had assumed that's what you meant

thats more logical a conclusion than actual positive discrimination.

legit, thanks for engaging on this. you made me think it through in a different way

k

but yeah I agree on sargon being more full on these days and a bit less compassionate

yeah I kinda miss that compassion; it was probably very useful; I cam imagine it changed the opinions of a lot of main stream left-leaning people

agreed

angry sargon is funny but yes, it doesnt convince new people

and he used to convert a lot of people. I'm sure his current path isnt doing that nearly as much

Yes I agree; I was never part of the main stream left. Though there were some lies they preached that I fell prey to before I started watching political commentary from all sorts of sides

this is why I watch Tim. he is as far left as I can watch without reeeeing

because he does actual research and doesnt lie

I watch some rather far left people

Though I disagree with lots of

the things they say

They do have the occasional speck of gold in their huge mountain of dirt

I try not to give them my clicks. its the only way to hurt them

good conversation

😃

@Jes no it isnt. you didnt listen to what i was saying if you believe that

I said that an accused naturally will deny it

so i give more weight to an accuser but wont take action without evidence

it is substantially more likely a someone deny allegations than someone make false allegations

so i weigh a accusation slightly higher but no action should be taken without evidence

“It is more important that innocence be protected than it is that guilt be punished, for guilt and crimes are so frequent in this world that they cannot all be punished.
But if innocence itself is brought to the bar and condemned, perhaps to die, then the citizen will say, 'whether I do good or whether I do evil is immaterial, for innocence itself is no protection,' and if such an idea as that were to take hold in the mind of the citizen that would be the end of security whatsoever.” - John Adams

@Timcast cool, I must have missed that bit.

thanks for clarifying

@Timcast so what you're saying is... lobsters?

So what you're saying is... All lobsters are rapists?

#yesalllobsters

I think the issue here is that innocence is violated by the insinuation that there is _any_ validity to accusations which are almost beyond proof by definition.

If you allow Dr. Ford's testimony to in any way affect your perception of Judge Kavanaugh's moral character, something has already been lost.

That's because you're looking it as either
"The accusation is 100% correct"
Or
"The accusation is 100% incorrect"

It could be that Ford was assaulted, but not by Kav

Sure, but that is also the crucial matter determining whether Kavanaugh is even 1% guilty, or whatever you want to call it.

Right but it's not a necessary fact that Kavanaugh is guilty for Ford to have been a victim

Sure, but what we are opining on here is not the guilt of Kavanaugh, not the existence of Ford's abuser.

So you can believe that someone is victimized, and then go "okay, let's see if we can determine the victimizsr"

because Ford's alternative perpetrator is not present, and has not been named.

That's not what Tim's comments have necessarily addressed

I've found he's made clear distinctions in general

And even directly stated that it's possible, perhaps even probable, for Kav to be innocent and Ford to be a victim

Sure, but I think it is hard to draw a clear distinction here between acknowledging accusations, and believing accusations.

I can fully acknowledge Dr. Ford's testimony without believing its contents, which include fingering Judge Kavanaugh as the perpetrator.

but I must be careful not to characterize the acknowledgement as a "partial belief"

because Judge Kavanaugh can't really be _a little bit guilty of sexual assault_.

You can also believe some or nearly all of her testimony without presuming the guilt of Kavanaugh

My point is that belief in the parts of the accuser's testimony which are insufficient to establish the crime alleged should not have any effect on my perception of the accused as guilty of that crime.

Sure

Otherwise that gives the broad public the ability to generally paint anyone as guilty of just about anything.

(if only to the slightest degree)

Here is something that is absolutely accurate

Pence was right

Right about what?

Using principles to avoid the specter of impropriety?

You still need records, to complete that deal.

true

Doesn't protect Mike Pence from the "Mike and his buddy tied me up and spitroast me in a DC alley!" type accusations.

shit

Well, you can always go full NEET and then make sure whenever you go ANYWHERE you have a camera on you AND... I was going to say a woman with you but what if that woman is the one that accuses you?

heheh

my god we're all fucked

Well, I don't record 100% of the time currently, but most of the time yes.

BACK TO THE BUNKER

usually not video

I agree with @xorgy on this matter. Giving Ford the characteristics honest and credible are not appropriate because the one thing she is sure of (100%) is that the attack was done by Kavanaugh. Everything else she was unsure of. Saying you partially believe her when pretty much the entirety of her accusation is "Kavanaugh assaulted me" is not giving Kavanuagh any presumption of innocence. Because you now only arguing over what percent of an assault Kavanaugh executed. Even if you're separating the issue better in your head when you say she's honest all other people hear is Kavanugh is guilty.

Can we start funding the mass immigration of leftists to Europe
that would benefit everyone involved

Agreed. Let's kickstarter that shit

I'm still waiting for all the people who threatened to leave to actually leave

Well it won't be willingly.

We would all be so much happier
separation is preferable to a big bloody war and lgbt death squads

i can't really imagine an lgbt death squad without laughing

This is why powerful federal government is bad. The states were supposed to be that separation.

^

They literally hate everything that america is based on but they can't summon the balls to move to the european paradises they idolise so much
They'd rather just tare down the lincoln memorial and burn the bill of rights thAn move to the countries that they belong in

I tell you the day that they come for the John Parker statue will be the day I grab my musket

YOU HAVE A MUSKET?

http://www.militaryheritage.com/muskets.htm

jelly

mine is a metaphorical one but you can buy them

oh. Well now I want a real one

i gotta get my handgun and AR first

by handgun you mean colt revolver and by AR you mean Henry Lever Action right?

no

id like to get those eventually but I need to get the guns I want for my home defense first

I would grab an AR as quickly as possible actually

but if you havent fired a HLA from horseback yet you aren't american 🤠

@Deleted User I'm not spending the money to ride a horse rn

I'll look forward to it when i go to Texas on vacation

Not an expert, but as a manager in various companies, HR generally provides good guides/training for you in cases like this. Dr. Ford being a Psychologist should be smarter than me. The first thing they advise, is to tell an employee is gather corroborating evidence and document. If there is little evidence the employee can still go forward with the case and can confront the perpetrator, but they need to be aware of the potential consequences where little proof is available. Dr. Ford is either mental or a liar, as a professional in this field she would know these things. Even if what she says is true, you do not have the right to smear people like this. Her coming forward like this is almost certainly political motivated, and the trauma she talks about is manufactured for TV.

Every day I'm happier I don't work with women

What kinda place you work with no women?

Systems Administrator and 365 Engineer at an MSP

So information technology

Why have no women forced their way in? Is he work hard?

It's high paced usually but we've been slow for a couple months

Odd hours?

We've had a couple get hired but they have failed to make it here

Usually out within 60 days

@Deleted User & @oprahsminge Nooooooooo! we have far to many far lefties here already. unless you gonna sponser my move to the states?

no

you're getting ours airdropped

no refunds

oh airdropped is fine. from say 35,000 feet without a parachute?

we're trying to determine if we really want to spend money on parachutes

no chutes

maybe we do one for every 15 and let them fight on the way down for it

nah lets be capitolists about it. sell them a chute before being pushed. help the national debt at the same time

^ winning idea

you should hear how I'd monetise death row then lol

but itd get me banned fo sure

The Pinochet method huh.

@Jes Yes you must come to the states
the great exchange can be leftists to Europe
rightists to the US
both sides can be in cultures that align with their ideals

I'd rather fix the country I'm in

of course these days rightist includes classical liberals and basically anyone who isn't socialist

so we'll have diverse opinions at least

@Deleted User it's anyone who basically isn't a communist

Like early 1900's all over again

Today, right and left are relative of an ever shifting center.

A center that moves further and further left.

I would go look at that Tim video, which I'm sure you did already, where Tim shows the data for the shift.

It's interesting how little shift on the right happened by comparison to me at least

The shift he presented was for Democrats and Republicans.

According to politics not too long ago, both parties would be left.

if you judge it by TODAY'S standard of what "left" is, then you would say the left would be right wing

while the right has shifted slightly left to at least some degree

Yes. That is why I referred to a shifting center.

Left and right only makes sense in relation to the current center, not as absolute terms, in that context.

Otherwise, they would still refer to the original meaning of pro monarchy and pro democracy affiliations, as the term was first used during the French Revolution.

Now, it's kind of murky what "left" and "right" means.

If Hitler is extreme right and Stalin extreme left, what am I? Halfway between Stalin and Hitler? That makes no sense.

hitler is third position

@Deleted User thats the plan.
Downside of splitting that way is the right tends to not change when needed. without the left to pull them forward the right only leads to stagnation

also good oppersition keeps people working on better ideas.

@oprahsminge yes mate, the Conservative party in the UK is majority centre left now

as the overton window shifted.

they went with it

@Undead Mockingbird Hitler wasnt extreme right. some of his ideas were but mostly he was a far lefty

Well, pick whoever you like.

😃

You will probably find that it makes just as little sense to present it as a continuous spectrum.

I think as long as we all keep talking and no one starts claiming X group is superior/inferior/evil/good ect we should make it through this folly

Agreed.

Except people who put toilet paper upset down.

the individual is the only minority that matters 😃

hahaha ❤

There is ONE proper way to put the toilet paper on the holder. All humans should have rights - except the ones that put the toilet paper coming from UNDER onto the holder.

If we could eliminate all such people, utopia would be achieved.