User Tag List

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456
Results 76 to 83 of 83

Thread: Dr. Ford's Lie-Detector Test a Fraud

  1. #76
    Out of Order Town Heretic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Within a whisper of rivers...
    Posts
    20,266
    Thanks
    3,600
    Thanked 7,791 Times in 4,513 Posts

    Blog Entries
    15
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147824
    Quote Originally Posted by fool View Post
    Well if there's a fire put it out, we tend to disagree what's a fire though.
    Just noting that two of the most prosperous times in our recent history happened with a division of power and didn't happen without it.

    Are you referring to the two characters in [Inherit the Wind]
    I am. Henry's character was sympathetic to Brady, having measured and found the man admirable in many ways and for some time. He was, however, and during their difference, forced to recognize that Brady had become trapped inside an ideology that would not permit him to acknowledge some fairly if not self-evident truths then truth to which a mind of his caliber should have found its way. In that recognition, Henry lamented.
    You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

    Pro-Life







  2. #77
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    21,635
    Thanks
    2,300
    Thanked 6,573 Times in 4,900 Posts

    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2147740
    Quote Originally Posted by fool View Post
    You're not looking above the surface.
    People who don't care what other people think don't care what other people think.
    People who don't think don't realize that other people do

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to ok doser For Your Post:

    fool (October 11th, 2018)

  4. #78
    Over 4000 post club lifeisgood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,909
    Thanks
    8,517
    Thanked 3,007 Times in 1,942 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147613
    Quote Originally Posted by Town Heretic View Post
    If someone lied about me and it cost me that opportunity I'd sue them civilly for the loss of income.
    So, you wouldn't simply take it that a man/woman alleges that you assaulted him/her who knows how long ago, who knows where, uncorroborated by his/her witnesses, etc., etc. Good for you.

    I was wondering, what if you did NOT lose that opportunity? Would you still civilly sue him/her even though you got the job?
    No man can come to God except through Christ. (Jn. 14:20)
    No man can come to Christ unless he comes through the Cross. (Jn. 3:16; Eph. 2:1318)
    No man can come to the Cross without a denial of self. (Lk. 9:2324)

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to lifeisgood For Your Post:

    CatholicCrusader (October 11th, 2018)

  6. #79
    Over 5000 post club CatholicCrusader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    US of A
    Posts
    5,150
    Thanks
    431
    Thanked 711 Times in 583 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    192544
    Quote Originally Posted by CatholicCrusader View Post
    Really. So.... ....if you . go into a job interview for your dream job, and during the interview some jerk who you never met stands up and said you attacked her during the VE Day celebration, and then the owner looks at you and says, "Sorry bub, I gotta believe her. Take a hike".... ....you're going to stand here, right here right now, and tell us all that you woulds be cool with that. Is that right? Your dream job of a lifetime shot to hell on the word of somebody you never met and you'd accept that because presumption of innocence would have no place in your interview.

    You're going top tell us all right now that you would accept that and walk away. Is that right?
    Quote Originally Posted by Town Heretic View Post
    What I've said is that the state, or in your scenario a private sector employer, should hear the competing narratives, examine whatever supportive evidence there is to be had, and come to their best decision, without assuming anything at the outset.

    If someone lied about me and it cost me that opportunity I'd sue them civilly for the loss of income.
    It sounds like you're changing your tune now. So, do you think Kavanaugh should sue Ford?

    "God never gives someone a gift they are not capable of receiving. If he gives us the gift of Christmas, it is because we all have the ability to understand and receive it." - Pope Francis

  7. #80
    Out of Order Town Heretic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Within a whisper of rivers...
    Posts
    20,266
    Thanks
    3,600
    Thanked 7,791 Times in 4,513 Posts

    Blog Entries
    15
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147824
    Quote Originally Posted by CatholicCrusader View Post
    It sounds like you're changing your tune now.
    No idea why you'd think that. I supported the nomination before the hearing. During the hearing I noted that her testimony was consistent with what I'd expect from someone telling the truth and that I found his testimony on the point as good as could be proffered. In short, isolated that way I didn't see how a call could be made, and that would have worked in Kavanaugh's favor. Because if you can't tell what the truth is then you have to go with the truth you know and we're back to qualification.

    But the judge went beyond that response and those remarks. It was in doing that where he lost my belief in and support for his nomination. Though I've also said that in making statements I found less than frank and credible outside of the question that sponsored the hearing it would be reasonable to apply a Latin maxim from school that was noted during the hearing, translated roughly as, to be false in one thing is to bring reasonable question as to the rest. If you apply it you might reduce the balance between the parties testimony and find for Dr. Ford, but I didn't alter my support on that principle.

    So, do you think Kavanaugh should sue Ford?
    No, because of the standard for public figures. He'd have to prove the testimony of Ford was willfully malicious. And he'd have his own testimony working against him, where he essentially fails to evidence any belief that that is the case, instead placing the blame elsewhere and inferring a serious mistake driven by trauma when it comes to Ford.

    That would be hard for him to change now without looking like a calculating political operative, which might then throw the larger question into play.

    Among the questions Dr. Ford's lawyer would ask (or more likely file in a successful motion to dismiss):

    L: Justice Kavanaugh, and please limit your response to a yes or no, you're aware the standard for your suit would require either a knowing falsity on the part of Dr. Ford or a reckless disregard for the truth?
    L: And referring back to the hearing where you offered testimony under oath, and again limiting your testimony to a yes or no, did you at any time level that accusation at Dr. Ford?
    L: Again, limiting your response to a yes or no, didn't you, in fact, proffer something closer to that charge at others, at a larger conspiracy outside of Dr. Ford's person and control?
    L: And again, limiting your answer to a yes or no, did you, in point of fact, testify and characterize Dr. Ford's testimony as mistaken and stemming from a trauma you found credible if misplaced?
    L: And, limiting your answer to yes or no, is it your testimony now that you believe something differently about Dr. Ford's testimony?
    L: And which time should we find you credible?
    L: Now, Justice Kavanaugh, let's talk about your credibility, which is at the heart of your altered position before us today. Let's begin with your drinking...

    Just not in his best interest to do it. Beyond the above Dr. Ford's team would be able to have witnesses subpoenaed and testimony and cross as a part of the public record. No, the Justice will leave this one alone and he should. There's little chance of gaining anything and a great deal to lose. He's going to look to rehabilitate his reputation from the bench, where he has control, and not from some court docket where he's again in a subordinate position, an environment he doesn't appear to exactly thrive in.
    You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

    Pro-Life







  8. #81
    Over 5000 post club CatholicCrusader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    US of A
    Posts
    5,150
    Thanks
    431
    Thanked 711 Times in 583 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    192544
    Gobbldeygook

    "God never gives someone a gift they are not capable of receiving. If he gives us the gift of Christmas, it is because we all have the ability to understand and receive it." - Pope Francis

  9. #82
    Out of Order Town Heretic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Within a whisper of rivers...
    Posts
    20,266
    Thanks
    3,600
    Thanked 7,791 Times in 4,513 Posts

    Blog Entries
    15
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147824
    Quote Originally Posted by CatholicCrusader View Post
    Gobbldeygook
    Sounds like you just had an aneurysm...but it's a great way to illustrate why I don't typically waste much energy on people like you beyond the odd funny stick application.

    You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

    Pro-Life







  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Town Heretic For Your Post:

    Arthur Brain (October 11th, 2018)

  11. #83
    Over 5000 post club fool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,447
    Thanks
    264
    Thanked 903 Times in 616 Posts

    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    284722
    Quote Originally Posted by Town Heretic View Post
    Just noting that two of the most prosperous times in our recent history happened with a division of power and didn't happen without it.


    I am. Henry's character was sympathetic to Brady, having measured and found the man admirable in many ways and for some time. He was, however, and during their difference, forced to recognize that Brady had become trapped inside an ideology that would not permit him to acknowledge some fairly if not self-evident truths then truth to which a mind of his caliber should have found its way. In that recognition, Henry lamented.
    Okay, can you run down some of these fairly if not self evident truths for me? I don't think we've ever had a President that screamed Prosperity like Trump. His only qualification was Being a business man, if anything I'd be more afraid of unfettered prosperity with Him.
    Everyman is a voice in the dark.
    I II III IV

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us