Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!

By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!

Get Started
  • If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.

Brett Kavanaugh

Sometimes it isn't clear, trying to pin down what you're saying. Feels like backpeddling. Now the idiots are just the people that don't believe your specific take on her story.

Gimme a break. It's your specific take that you're trying to use to invalidate what I've been consistently saying all along. You're altering the tale from what's been told to find a possible scenario where this could have happened and it may not be stupid to believe it's possible. I haven't done that and I haven't changed my position nor will I - I haven't backpedaled a single step. The idiots are the ones who believe the story as it's been told. Even if you're arguing it's plausible that this happened to her and she shut up about it, maybe but I still think it's foolish to believe because she's not the only one who would have to be silent. She said there were other witnesses. If someone believe that the circumstances she described could have happened multiple times and not only she but EVERYONE involved would have remained silent then and for 30+ years after, they have to be pretty dumb.
 
Last edited:
It's a backpedal to go from "If you believe any of that story is possible" to "youd have to be an idiot to believe her story in its entirety". One allows for uncertainty in some elements and the other doesn't.
 
Last edited:
It's a backpedal to go from "If you believe any of that story is possible" to "youd have to be an idiot to believe her story in its entirety". One allows for uncertainty in some elements and the other doesn't.

right, it's believable that there was drinking at a high school party. you win.
 
actually the catholic church and other stories like the nasser case, etc make this more unbelievable. my understanding is sexual predators are sexual predators, they dont grow out of that. al those cases involved active cover ups or enablers and inthe case of the church they tried to reform or rehab many of the perpetrators and they pretty much all were still sick predators. thats not the case with kavanaugh - you have a few politically motivated accusers with ZERO witnesses corroborating either the deeds or his alleged predatory character, in fact as far as his character virtually every witness vouches for Kavanaugh and then theres nothing resembling that kind of behavior for the following 30 years plus.

What Nasser did or the Catholic Church did is not the same thing as here of course, and I disagree that a person has to be a Larry Nasser-type in order to rape drunk girls at parties.

I've known two guys who did shit like this, one by his own admission in high school, and another in law school who I had heard credible stories about, and saw first had he was sleazy as hell around other peoples' wives/GFs.

I would say both guys were good guys, athletic, good-looking, well-liked by other guys AND girls. They were fun to be around. for whatever reason, they had no shame about taking advantage of drunk girls, or even passed-out ones. Maybe a heightened sense of entitlement? privilege? But I digress...

So this idea of yours that there's no possible way Kavanaugh or any of his buddies would rape/gang bang drunk girls at a party because they're not predators on the level of Larry Nasser is just flat out wrong. I know otherwise from personal experience.

And I went to a private all-boys high school, where we were STILL not nearly from families as rich or well-connected as those in the DC suburbs or East Coast. If that kind of thing was happening in Metro-Detroit, it was happening even more in Connecticut, Manhattan, Bethesda, Georgetown, ETC. among the boarding school crowd, where parents were never home, and kids had the means to buy booze, drugs, rent hotels, etc.

And as far as the fake credulity from Republicans about "Why don't these girls say something then?" there are PLENTY of stories about girls who did come forward, and had their reputations destroyed because of it. You're being intentionally ignorant if you try to pretend otherwise. HERE... the WaPo just published a long, well-researched one on a girl raped at a HS party in TX a decade ago, who had to leave HS school because of the harassment after she came forward and filed charges.

the dynamic is even more pronounced if the girl is from a poorer family. This has been the society we live in for a long time...
 
Attitudes have changed. I saw a comment pointing out that these days Back to the Future couldn't feature a protagonist who's plan is to do something to a woman (nevermind that it's his mother) against her will until she fights back and needs to be rescued.
 
Attitudes have changed. I saw a comment pointing out that these days Back to the Future couldn't feature a protagonist who's plan is to do something to a woman (nevermind that it's his mother) against her will until she fights back and needs to be rescued.

I don't remember that.

I as I remember McFly's mom was hot for him, and it creeped him out.

His goal was to hook his mother up with his father.

It was a long time ago - damn, like 35 years ago - and my memories of the details are kinda foggy.

But I'm sure McFly was played by Michael J. Fox.

100% sure it was him.
 
I don't remember that.

I as I remember McFly's mom was hot for him, and it creeped him out.

His goal was to hook his mother up with his father.

It was a long time ago - damn, like 35 years ago - and my memories of the details are kinda foggy.

But I'm sure McFly was played by Michael J. Fox.

100% sure it was him.


Yeah. That's how the plan backfires. He's too nervous to do whatever he was planning and she was into him. But the plan they talked about beforehand was for Marty and his mom to be fighting and George to throw open the door and say "Hey you! Get your damn hands off her!"
 
Last edited:
Yeah. That's how the plan backfires. He's too nervous to do whatever he was planning and she was into him. But the plan they talked about beforehand was for Marty and his mom to be fighting and George to throw open the door and say "Hey you! Get your damn hands off her!"

Didn't George - the dad - end up slugging Biff in front of the mom and the mom dug that and she hooked up with him?

Lorraine, I guess was her name. Played by Lea Thompson.

George was Crispin Glover.
 
Didn't George - the dad - end up slugging Biff in front of the mom and the mom dug that and she hooked up with him?

Lorraine, I guess was her name. Played by Lea Thompson.

George was Crispin Glover.


Yeah. Marty can't go through with his plan, but Biff shows up and gets rid of Marty. So when George sees struggling in the car, he thinks it Marty, but it's actually Biff he tells to get his damn hands off her - forever changing the George-Biff dynamic in the new timeline.
 
What Nasser did or the Catholic Church did is not the same thing as here of course, and I disagree that a person has to be a Larry Nasser-type in order to rape drunk girls at parties.

I've known two guys who did shit like this, one by his own admission in high school, and another in law school who I had heard credible stories about, and saw first had he was sleazy as hell around other peoples' wives/GFs.

I would say both guys were good guys, athletic, good-looking, well-liked by other guys AND girls. They were fun to be around. for whatever reason, they had no shame about taking advantage of drunk girls, or even passed-out ones. Maybe a heightened sense of entitlement? privilege? But I digress...

So this idea of yours that there's no possible way Kavanaugh or any of his buddies would rape/gang bang drunk girls at a party because they're not predators on the level of Larry Nasser is just flat out wrong. I know otherwise from personal experience.

And I went to a private all-boys high school, where we were STILL not nearly from families as rich or well-connected as those in the DC suburbs or East Coast. If that kind of thing was happening in Metro-Detroit, it was happening even more in Connecticut, Manhattan, Bethesda, Georgetown, ETC. among the boarding school crowd, where parents were never home, and kids had the means to buy booze, drugs, rent hotels, etc.

And as far as the fake credulity from Republicans about "Why don't these girls say something then?" there are PLENTY of stories about girls who did come forward, and had their reputations destroyed because of it. You're being intentionally ignorant if you try to pretend otherwise. HERE... the WaPo just published a long, well-researched one on a girl raped at a HS party in TX a decade ago, who had to leave HS school because of the harassment after she came forward and filed charges.

the dynamic is even more pronounced if the girl is from a poorer family. This has been the society we live in for a long time...

Nice anecdote about your personal experience of having friends of yours unexpectedly pull a train on you but it doesn't even come close to invalidating what I said. Being good looking, athletic or likable has nothing to do with it. In fact charisma, likability and good looks are characteristics of many sociopaths and they probably contribute to their ability to do what they do - they're not all anti-social or socially awkward introverts. Regardless of how many times it happened to you, it's you who is wrong - and those friends of yours are probably still deviants, like your friend at that third tier, retread law school you went to who as an adult was still engaging in that sleazy behavior.

edit: besides, even if Kavanaugh did outgrow this sexual deviance you're so convinced he once had, it's hardly likely that a whole gang of 10+ rapists would all "grow up" and become normal family men and productive members of society.
 
Last edited:
No one in my high school class was anywhere as evil as Biff, even the (supposed) rapist guy. Biff would do that kind of thing.

some of the guys in the class ahead of mine were like that. a lot of them got kicked out and went to other schools. actually that class had a lot of bad apples... I think rapey, aggressive behavior can be contagious.
 
No one in my high school class was anywhere as evil as Biff, even the (supposed) rapist guy. Biff would do that kind of thing.

some of the guys in the class ahead of mine were like that. a lot of them got kicked out and went to other schools. actually that class had a lot of bad apples... I think rapey, aggressive behavior can be contagious.

Biff grew up to be Donald Trump in Back to the Future II - at least in the eyes of the writers, Robert Zemeckis and Bob Gale.
 
Biff grew up to be Donald Trump in Back to the Future II - at least in the eyes of the writers, Robert Zemeckis and Bob Gale.


Yeah. Original Biff was bad.



Biff that got knocked out was much better, he still lied about waxing a car, but fessed up when challenged on it.



Biff that got knocked out and then got rich turned into Trump and killed George.
 
Nobody in my high school was rapey as far as I knew - nobody ever bragged about it; not even as a joke.

Nobody at Michigan either.

That said, a lot of the girls in my high school weren't averse to putting out; and when I went on to Michigan...wow...like times 50.

The myth that Michigan gals are all hairy lesbians is quite a myth.
 
Jeff Flake, R - Nebraska for those who don't know, is in the process of requesting the the Senate Judiciary Committee to delay sending the nomination to the full Senate for a period of time limited to one week to allow the FBI to do an investigation into the allegations.

This could work out for the Republicans, though.

The FBI is almost surely going to be told the same stuff from everybody that has already said, and come back with no new conclusions.

So the Republicans can say "okay...we did everything that you asked..."

What else is anyone going to say after that?

So anyways, it appears that the Judiciary Chairman, Grassley I think's his name, has agreed to postpone having the committee vote yay or nay for a week regarding submitting Kavanagh's name to the full Senate for confirmation, pending an FBI investigation. At this point, McConnell seems will have to go to the President and request the President to authorize the FBI investigation.

EDIT: For those who don't know, Flake is a fairly newbie Senator who refused to endorse Trump.
 
Last edited:
mud just calls things how he sees them, I must admit I agree with the flake on this


I'm simply stating the discussion that we had between us all is that I would hope and I think we had some agreement before that the Democrats who have been -- I think -- justifiably uncomfortable moving ahead, could publicly, in an effort to bring this country together, say that we would feel better.... I'm not expecting them to vote yes... but not to complain that an FBI investigation has not occurred. This is what I'm trying to do. This country is being ripped apart here. We've got to make sure that we do due diligence.

I will further say that I am listing to Infowars live right now and I disagree with some of the comments Owen is making and wholeheartedly believe though he has the right to his opinion and that the socialist Chicom bigtech should not be banning them.
 
Last edited:
Jeff Flake, R - Nebraska for those who don't know, is in the process of requesting the the Senate Judiciary Committee to delay sending the nomination to the full Senate for a period of time limited to one week to allow the FBI to do an investigation into the allegations.

This could work out for the Republicans, though.

The FBI is almost surely going to be told the same stuff from everybody that has already said, and come back with no new conclusions.

So the Republicans can say "okay...we did everything that you asked..."

What else is anyone going to say after that?

So anyways, it appears that the Judiciary Chairman, Grassley I think's his name, has agreed to postpone having the committee vote yay or nay for a week regarding submitting Kavanagh's name to the full Senate for confirmation, pending an FBI investigation. At this point, McConnell seems will have to go to the President and request the President to authorize the FBI investigation.

EDIT: For those who don't know, Flake is a fairly newbie Senator who refused to endorse Trump.

The first thing the dems will say is a week isn't nearly enough time.
 
The first thing the dems will say is a week isn't nearly enough time.

It doesn?t matter.

All that matters to Republicans is that Flake, Collins and the couple others needed to consent vote.

Partisan liberals will always see Kavanagh as a rapist.

Partisan conservatives will always see Ford as a liar.

People in the middle will see that Republicans did everything the Democrats asked for, Specially when the FBI report comes back with no new information and no conclusions.
 
It doesn’t matter.

All that matters to Republicans is that Flake, Collins and the couple others needed to consent vote.

Partisan liberals will always see Kavanagh as a rapist.

Partisan conservatives will always see Ford as a liar.

People in the middle will see that Republicans did everything the Democrats asked for, Specially when the FBI report comes back with no new information and no conclusions.

I agree, nothing short of withdrawing his nomination would satisfy the Dems but I'm not so sure that's how the middle will see it. I think to truly be effective, the Rs would have to submit to a full investigation with no or at least a much longer time limit. The Dems will still cry foul but at least the Rs can more clearly and easily make the point that nothing would ever satisfy them.

I'm certainly not advocating for that, but that's the only way to truly alleviate doubt or show the middle they tried. Is the middle even asking for time or an investigation?
 
Last edited:
I agree, nothing short of withdrawing his nomination would satisfy the Dems but I'm not so sure that's how the middle will see it. I think to truly be effective, the Rs would have to submit to a full investigation with no or at least a much longer time limit. The Dems will still cry foul but at least the Rs can more clearly and easily make the point that nothing would ever satisfy them.

I'm certainly not advocating for that, but that's the only way to truly alleviate doubt or show the middle they tried. Is the middle even asking for time or an investigation?

I?d say Flake as much as anybody is the voice of the middle. The middle knows that both sides play politics. The middle knows the Democrats are trying to run out the clock on the confirmation until after the midterms, just like the middle knows that the Republicans held up on Obamas guy-I can?t believe I forgot his name-knowing there was a possibility that the next the next president could be a Republican.

The middle likes, to a degree, collegiality and bipartisanship. I think the middle will see the additional week and the FBI investigation as being a fair negotiation.
 
Back
Top