Kavanaugh hearing

[Forty Two]

Yeah... well... we used to have all sorts of fun (and lots of female members too), but shit changes.

Yes, and the common denominator is that there were lots of female members at a time pre-AtheismPlus and the later evolving SJW trend. It's those douchebags that ruin everything they come in contact with.

[Jason]

Yeah tell me about it.

[Hermit]

I never said it was formed to be a lifeboat for the rational mind, and I made no assertion as to why it was founded. The forum is not merely a "Feral OffTopic" discussion. There is room for that, of course, but there are political, news, current event, historical, philosophical, and scientific areas of the forum. Rationalia is not supposed to be anti-reason or anti-logic -- but if you're trying to say that the discussion boards here are not rational, logical or pro-science, then I'll grant you that some folks here do support your assertion.

The irony of someone starting off with

This is supposedly a pro-reason, pro-logic, pro-science message board.

and finishing up with the extraordinary gish gallop above, is not lost on me.

I was about to fisk it, but decided to laugh, make a brief comment, and move on. I do suggest you do likewise after you wipe all that egg off your face.

[Forty Two]

What is your problem? Rationalia has always been pro-reason, logic and science. Look at the discussions here. Other than a few people in the far left arena that have subscribed to some weird SJW version of reality, and few on the far right who have mostly been banned or don't post anymore, it's a pretty rational, logical bunch that values science.

What in the Sam Hill are you on about?

[L'Emmerdeur]

Regarding your assertion that Leland Keyser said that she had 'never met' Kavanaugh, can you cite this quote? As far as I'm aware what she said is that she doesn't know Kavanaugh.

She doesn't know Mr. Kavanaugh. Had she met him, she would know him. Before the FBI interview, Keyser submitted two statements, and then she was interviewed by the FBI and reaffirmed it. https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/l ... thing-new/

Lame bullshit. I've met thousands of people in my life, as I expect you have. Most of them I don't know. I asked you for the quote of Keyser saying that she never met Kavanaugh, or never met him, ever, as you claimed she said. Despite your claim it looks like you don't have one, because she never said that, ever, and it was a fabrication on your part.

Oy, so, she doesn't know him. Right? She does not know Mr. Kavanaugh, and she does not remember the party that Ford described. Right?

I have not disputed that is what she has said. It is you who claimed that she said she never met him, ever. You have yet to cite the quote of her saying that.

CBS News reported this:

Keyser had previously released a statement through her attorney saying that she did not remember the party in question, and that she does not remember ever meeting Kavanaugh.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/christine- ... kavanaugh/

That is an inaccurate paraphrase of the statement. Anybody can read the published quotes from the statement, and nowhere does Keyser say that she's never met Kavanaugh, nor does she say she 'does not remember ever meeting Kavanaugh.' You've been given ample opportunity to cite a quote of her saying this, and instead of doing so, you've cited a CBS report on her statement which happens to have a paraphrase that coincides with your false quote. In fact later in the same report the exact words are quoted: '... she does not know Judge Kavanaugh and and has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present.' Apparently that isn't sufficient for you, so you've embellished what she said by creating a false quote.

[Brian Peacock]

What is your problem? Rationalia has always been pro-reason, logic and science. Look at the discussions here. Other than a few people in the far left arena that have subscribed to some weird SJW version of reality, and few on the far right who have mostly been banned or don't post anymore, it's a pretty rational, logical bunch that values science.

What in the Sam Hill are you on about?

You know you've been caught dishing out a cheap shot and railing gainst others for apparently not upholding the shining guiding principles of the forum. Just own it and move on dude.

[Joe]

Yeah, if the shoe fits....

[JimC]

...jam it up your arse!

[Jason]

Consult your doctor, YMMV.

[JimC]

He'll only tell me to keep taking my medication!

[Joe]

Can you take it with gin?

[JimC]

Why would I wash the pills down with boring old water when neat gin is available?

[Joe]

If it messes with the flavor of the gin...or so I've been told.

[Jason]

Medication + alcohol - it's a winning combination.

[Seabass]

What is your problem? Rationalia has always been pro-reason, logic and science. Look at the discussions here. Other than a few people in the far left arena that have subscribed to some weird SJW version of reality, and few on the far right who have mostly been banned or don't post anymore, it's a pretty rational, logical bunch that values science.

What in the Sam Hill are you on about?

Far left? Who here is far left? Sandinista was far left, but I haven't seen him around in forever.

SJW? Who here is an SJW? You? You do seem to often be in need of a safe space. Are you an SJW? I tend to think of you more as a Social Injustice Warrior.

The far-right? They're still here. There's a guy named "Forty Two" who slimes the forum every day with far-right, pro-Trump propaganda. There's also Tyrannical who still pops in to spew hate from time to time.

Rational, logical bunch that values science? Yes, most of us. I'd exclude you from that group, however, since you continue to support this ignorant, dangerous moron: