Supreme court nominees

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kmcicco2000
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
JonNC said:
It’s almost like he deserves to have his reputation destroyed. How dare he be a constitutionalist, nominated by Trump, and then emotionally defend his name. How dare he demand presumption of innocence! As the overt sexist from Hawaii said, his judicial philosophy disqualifies him from the privilege.
Click to expand...
He deserved to have his conduct, values, and temperament questioned. That is part of the job application.
To express outrage about that is an epic fail.
 
You didn’t expound.

I’m not saying that PTSD magically gives you photographic memory superpowers. But I am saying that people with PTSD can give you the basic who/what/where/when rundown of their individual traumas, and can usually bring concrete details to the situation.
 
midori said:
Can you think of anyone in your circle of friends who has PTSD, but doesn’t have a clear memory of what, exactly, the circumstances of the original traumatic experience were? One of the primary characteristics of PTSD is to relive the trauma. Over and over and over and over again.
Click to expand...
The new new thing is ‘trauma informed care’, you assume everyone is coming from severe trauma and suffering from PTSD.
 
Trauma-informed care means treating a whole person, taking into account past trauma and the resulting coping mechanisms when attempting to understand behaviors and treat the patient. To illustrate why trauma-informed care is so important, take a few examples. Sometimes people only believe victims of rape when they are incredibly emotional when describing the details of the assault because that reaction is perceived to be the normal reaction to such trauma. But many of victims speak matter-of-factly and without affect or visible emotion about these traumatic events. This doesn’t mean that a victim is lying, or exaggerating claims. Rather, the stoicism is often tied to a victim’s desperate attempt to cope with trauma through detachment.
Click to expand...
Trauma-informed care comes into play when you’re treating someone, like in therapy. Understanding that everyone has their own coping mechanisms is fine-- some people will be emotional, and others will be detached.

But you still don’t go around saying, “I have chicken-pox-like symptoms” because you have a headache and no appetite— the major symptom of chicken pox is going to be a spotty rash. Likewise, no psychologist worth her salt is going to say “I have PTSD-like symptoms” and yet not be able to give concrete, definite information regarding the particulars of the initial incident, except that that guy over there was there.

The people coming out of WWI (back when it was called “shell-shock”) had a difficult time adjusting back into life, because no one understood PTSD. By the time you get to Vietnam, the field has come a long way in learning how to treat it. Nowadays, you can have things like “trauma informed care” as your baseline in how to treat people who have undergone significantly traumatic experiences, and that’s great.

But even just a quick glance around my own circle of friends— when people have a This Happened To Me story, they have a series of solid facts. “I was eight months pregnant and my husband’s cousin came to the house when I was alone and I let him in because he was a relative and he tried to rape me and I only got away because I shoved a burning cigarette in his face because that was before moms were discouraged from smoking. I never told anyone, because he was everyone’s darling, and they’d never have believed me.” Even though it may have happened over 40 years ago, you’ve got a series of facts about who/what/when/where that can be followed up— not just a vague accusation.
 
Last edited:
dvdjs said:
He deserved to have his conduct, values, and temperament questioned. That is part of the job application.
To express outrage about that is an epic fail.
Click to expand...
His conduct and values appear to be exemplary.
On the temperament part, high marks for his incredible restraint in the face of these horrific attacks.
 
JonNC said:
40.png
Ender:
What should be done is to look at the evidence. This is not a popularity contest. No charge like this should be believed simply because one person’s demeanor is more appealing. You’ve set an awfully low bar to allow the destruction of a man’s life and reputation.
Click to expand...
This is absolutely spot on. This is a criminal accusation, not merely a challenge to a character flaw. Far more than a seat on the SC is now involved here.
Without corroborating evidence, there is no reason to even consider the accusation in the determination of one’s vote.
Click to expand...
Why do you continue to put forth a clearly false claim? They even said during the hearing, “This is not a trial.” Nothing more than a seat on the SC is at stake.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
Why do you continue to put forth a clearly false claim? They even said during the hearing, “This is not a trial.” Nothing more than a seat on the SC is at stake.
Click to expand...
Why put out such a false claim? The accusation is a felony! If charges are brought, he could go to prison with corroborating evidence.
His reputation, honor and name are also at stake. To present such an accusation with no evidence, then say it’s only a job interview is despicable.
 
JonNC said:
40.png
LeafByNiggle:
Why do you continue to put forth a clearly false claim? They even said during the hearing, “This is not a trial.” Nothing more than a seat on the SC is at stake.
Click to expand...
Why put out such a false claim? The accusation is a felony! If charges are brought, he could go to prison with corroborating evidence.
Click to expand...
…and that is when presumption of innocence would kick in.
His reputation, honor and name are also at stake. To present such an accusation with no evidence, then say it’s only a job interview is despicable.
Click to expand...
If that accusation is slander, the remedy is the same for anyone else who is slandered. Kavanaugh can file civil charges against Ford. But the remedy for slander is not to give him a seat for life on the Supreme Court.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
…and that is when presumption of innocence would kick in.
Click to expand...
Presumption of innocence is in effect until there is a conviction.
LeafByNiggle said:
If that accusation is slander, the remedy is the same for anyone else who is slandered. Kavanaugh can file civil charges against Ford. But the remedy for slander is not to give him a seat for life on the Supreme Court.
Click to expand...
Just remember that this low standard you have been defending will someday he applied to a nominee who holds a similar judicial view as you.
 
JonNC said:
40.png
LeafByNiggle:
If that accusation is slander, the remedy is the same for anyone else who is slandered. Kavanaugh can file civil charges against Ford. But the remedy for slander is not to give him a seat for life on the Supreme Court.
Click to expand...
Just remember that this low standard you have been defending will someday he applied to a nominee who holds a similar judicial view as you.
Click to expand...
I promise I will not complain if my favorite nominee is denied because he behaved as Kavanaugh has behaved. After all, Merrick Garland was denied his seat and there were no accusations at all!
 
Last edited:
JonNC said:
His conduct and values appear to be exemplary.
Click to expand...
If you think that Ford and the others who have come forward with discussion with negative experiences with his conduct and values are lying or mistaken. Otherwise Kavanuagh was lying under oath.
JonNC said:
On the temperament part …
Click to expand...
He acted out with passion, in a situation in which a good judge would have remained poised. A great value of a scholar and leader value is ataraxia. I think he proabaly has more than he showed, but was playing for Trump, who has other values.
 
dvdjs said:
He acted out with passion, in a situation in which a good judge would have remained poised.
Click to expand...
He has a wife and children .And they were present if I am not mistaken.
One cannot expect a person to be a robot 24/7.
And for the case,the lady,being a Psychiatrist or Psychologist had plenty of time and resources in her life also . And she was a bit emotional too for something 36 years past.
If you think of it,what one could see was two really grown up adults talking about college times.
And I reserve my opinion,but politics is all over the place if one wants to make sense of the scene for me. As it was,it didn t. For me.
 
Last edited:
dvdjs said:
If you think that Ford and the others who have come forward with discussion with negative experiences with his conduct and values are lying or mistaken. Otherwise Kavanuagh was lying under oath.
Click to expand...
If or when there is corroborating evidence, then I will question his honesty. Until then, his life, by the accounts of those who know him, has been exemplary. It is interesting that the scores of women who have vouchedfor him are not believed.
dvdjs said:
He acted out with passion, in a situation in which a good judge would have remained poised.
Click to expand...
He acted exactly as he should have. I would have found it suspect had he reacted calmly and without passion. He was not sitting on the bench. He was being attacked.
dvdjs said:
A great value of a scholar and leader value is ataraxia. I think he proabaly has more than he showed, but was playing for Trump, who has other values.
Click to expand...
He was defending himself. Claiming that it was a show forTrump just further proves the point that this is political
 
None of this is present in the case,as I see it.
And all the answers I got had to do with politics.
Either what had happened in previous administrations,or this or that others " might " come forward ".
They both looked serious and grown up. That was the sad part…and disconcerting.
 
Last edited:
And sad that there is so much time and money to spare when there are real needs among the people.
 
Last edited:
dvdjs said:
Thta’s too bad. You risk thte erro of making a bad hire.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but that’s better than falsely destroying a man’s life based on no evidence. If it comes out that the charges are true, impeachment is the process.
dvdjs said:
That is not how people who are tasked with mature and thoughtful refection act.
Click to expand...
It is indeed. A person who lacks the passion to defend himself in the face of a viscous attack is neither mature nor thoughtful.
dvdjs said:
Sadly, he indicted himself.
Click to expand...
Do you realize how Orwellian it sounds to say that One passionately defending oneself is actually indicting oneself?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top