Wife-beating likely rapist in the Senate?

[_Water Dog]

Damn, Dog. You project everywhere. Just because you take positions based on your tribe, that doesn't mean everyone else does.

Dude, you're not going to flip this on me. Nice try, I guess? Weak.

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=50134&p=1150038#p1150038

You are the Mormon apologist. You claim Nephites are real. I call BS. My inability to prove your negative isn't a "win" for you. The burden is with you.

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=50201&p=1150169#p1150169

I genuinely do not understand the thought processes that play into this sort of pathology. It's really weird. He really is like a Mormon apologist. Clutching his Nephite pearls. Some sort of deep seated insecurity drives his need to believe. But at the same time, he senses something is amiss. Lacking the character to confront this, he secures himself away in a safe space. That then leads to a neurotic need to always be right.

In that context of the Mormon analogy, what he's doing here is two things.

1) He wants to control the environment. He wants to debate things like Word Print Analysis and Hebraisms. Faith promoting pseudo intellectual rubbish that is daunting and seemingly advanced to the layperson, which they find persuasive and bias confirming, and is at the same time tedious and laborious for "deniers" to respond to. Because RI and the other apologists know I'm not an expert on Hebrew poetry. Who the “F” is? Even the "experts" aren't experts. That's not a rigorous, highly competitive field. And even if I am, it's such a mind numbing discussion, goes over most people's heads, and can be debated endlessly due to its subjective nature and my inability to prove a negative. By even engaging the discussion I actually legitimize this nonsense. It then becomes a contest of personalities. Hey look, a Yale PhD Egyptologist just went toe to toe with the denier. The whole thing is reduced to soundbites and the emotion accompanying rhetorical jabs.

2) Personal attacks. Ad hominem. Debate the person, not the subject. It's all bout me. He will do anything but discuss the subject. Whenever he can't debate the subject, he starts to debate me. Which also includes using epithets like "denier." Like the apologist's use of terms such as "critic" or "anti" or "doubter." These are subtle attempts to dehumanize or delegitimize his opposition. And which shows he is not taking the discussion seriously and never was.

So, care to show me where you drew this comparison first? Eh, TBML?

[_Res Ipsa]

Add projection to the things you don't understand. What, you think it involves some kind of race?

You want to list the many, many times you've accused others of doing the very thing you are doing? I'd be happy to start a new thread and go through it, blow by blow.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

So, Doc, do you think this case is a better or worse one than Ford's in terms of it being a political hit job from the start?

Oh, I don't really give a crap. I just see the double standards on display by the Left, and now they're trying to nuance their way into respectability regarding #justbelieveher.

Like. Didn't they see how this would play out with Kavanaugh? They weaponized BS allegations, used #metoo to try to take him down, and they didn't stop to think this would almost immediately backfire?

I think ANY politician, at this point, is subject to this malicious and cynical tactic. Y'all thought this was a good way to take Kavanaugh out (and please, don't make me go back in the thread and ferret out your double standard). This is what you get. This is the reality you and Leftists have set. Good job.

- Doc

[_Res Ipsa]

So, Doc, do you think this case is a better or worse one than Ford's in terms of it being a political hit job from the start?

Oh, I don't really give a ____. I just see the double standards on display by the Left, and now they're trying to nuance their way into respectability regarding #justbelieveher.

Like. Didn't they see how this would play out with Kavanaugh? They weaponized ____ allegations, used #metoo to try to take him down, and they didn't stop to think this would almost immediately backfire?

I think ANY politician, at this point, is subject to this malicious and cynical tactic. Y'all thought this was a good way to take Kavanaugh out (and please, don't make me go back in the thread and ferret out your double standard). This is what you get. This is the reality you and Leftists have set. Good job.

- Doc

Go ahead and ferret out my double standard, Doc. If you can make the case, go ahead. It's entirely possible I've been inconsistent, in which case I'll address it. But, please, stop telling me what I think. You really do suck at it.

[_Water Dog]

Add projection to the things you don't understand. What, you think it involves some kind of race?

You want to list the many, many times you've accused others of doing the very thing you are doing? I'd be happy to start a new thread and go through it, blow by blow.

A backhanded admission, I'll take it. With a sort of threat. Ok. Cool. Sure, if you'd like to spend your time obsessing over me in that way. You're the stalker, after all. Your words. I won't try to stop you from stalking me.

[_Res Ipsa]

Add projection to the things you don't understand. What, you think it involves some kind of race?

You want to list the many, many times you've accused others of doing the very thing you are doing? I'd be happy to start a new thread and go through it, blow by blow.

A backhanded admission, I'll take it. With a sort of threat. Ok. Cool. Sure, if you'd like to spend your time obsessing over me in that way. You're the stalker, after all. Your words. I won't try to stop you from stalking me.

What admission? Quote exactly what I've admitted.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Go ahead and ferret out my double standard, Doc. If you can make the case, go ahead. It's entirely possible I've been inconsistent, in which case I'll address it. But, please, stop telling me what I think. You really do suck at it.

Oh, I must be mixing you up with some other poster who had an epic damned meltdown over just believing a woman's allegation regarding sexual assault, stopped posting for a bit, and then came back once his blood pressure decreased enough.

Forgive me.

- Doc

[_Water Dog]

What admission? Quote exactly what I've admitted.

You know what. Deflections and omissions speak volumes. You said you were going to stalk me, and you're keeping to your word. This continued attempt to appropriate my argument about your TBM like behavior and apply it to me is pathetic. Must have really gotten under your skin having a mirror held up in front of you. Triggered all sorts of PTSD from your church days.

[_Res Ipsa]

What admission? Quote exactly what I've admitted.

You know what. Deflections and omissions speak volumes. You said you were going to stalk me, and you're keeping to your word. This continued attempt to appropriate my argument about your TBM like behavior and apply it to me is pathetic. Must have really gotten under your skin having a mirror held up in front of you. Triggered all sorts of PTSD from your church days.

LOL. No. I don't know what. And either do you. But do you see what you just did there. You made a claim. I asked you a straightforward question about it. You evaded. You accuse me of evading, then you evade. Projection.

Ooooo. Let's go again. Exactly what deflections? Exactly what omissions?

And, of course, again you lie what I said. I asked you if you wanted me to make the case about how you constantly project what you actually do onto others. That's not remotely anything resembling: I'm going to stalk you.

And, speaking of stalking, I don't recall addressing you in this thread until after you addressed me.

You've never presented an argument as to how I'm engaging in TBM behavior -- you just asserted it. I've given lots of examples of how your acting like a TBM argument is just another projection. You've never recovered from being an apologist. Same old Water Dog. Just switched teams.

[_Kevin Graham]

So Leftists are now setting the standard of credibility at:

Non-anonymity.

That's kind of ____ up isn't it? Before anonymity safeguarded against victimizing the woman twice over. Now?

#believeallwomen #anonymityisrespect #justbelieveher

- Doc

Doc, you're increasingly slipping into stupidity. You try to play unbiased observer and the king of pointing out double standards, but it didn't even occur to you the double standard of the anti-Ford crowd immediately taking the side of an anonymous woman after bending over backwards trying to find every slither of excuse imaginable to grant Kavanaugh the benefit of the doubt. The existence of this thread is a textbook example of hypocrisy. Your ability to overlook this makes me wonder how many women you've abused or have abused you.

Again, tell me who I am to believe? You and your idiot sidekicks can't make a valid point on this because you keep misrepresenting what's been argued. I didn't believe Ford based on the accusation alone, and I don't think anyone here started defending her until they heard her long testimony/interrogation at which point she came across as entirely credible. So much so that Republicans had to admit the same thing.

And now you're comparing her to some anonymous person who, for all you know, doesn't even exist. And you're calling us out for hypocrisy because we don't treat a lifelong appointment to Supreme Court the same as some congressman. There is a reason Kavanaugh received much more scrutiny and attention than whoever it is you're moaning about above. But at the end of the day, if this person did assault a woman, then get rid of him. Doesn't matter to me if he is Republican or Democrat.