Discussion about hot topics trending today

[Chaka-Z0]

Ummm………….
Metal is a strange land where songs can talk about the most egregious things and the Fans, and the artists themselves generally have some pretty noble souls. Think of Slayer. Over their discography, they talk about some pretty bad stuff, but as they once said themselves, the idea of their music is not to glorify the horrific, but put it in your face so you are aware of just how bad humanity can be and learn from it.
If 30 odd years in the metal scene has taught me anything, going to concerts etc, it's that Metal is really, really not what it's detractors make it out to be.
Simply, metalheads are not a good baseline for bad behaviour.

You know your stuff Nothing to add to that, I could go on forever about this topic but I'll stop right there.

No, he isn't.
You get drunken rapey behaviour at drunken rapey events, and Metal gigs are not drunken rapey events.
Bacchus events however...………….

Precision: I do not consider gigs or jams as parties. The parties I'm talking about are ranging from when I was 14 years old in high school to 24 in University. But yes the distinction is important in that regards. I've never attended parties from, say, the Football team, I never could relate to these folks.

It is true though that Kavanaugh was one of them wasn't he? So all-in-all, I just think that classifying these parties right off the bat as *drunken rapy orgies* is too much. That just doesn't happen. You ever heard of orgies going on in the general population? Is that a thing? No its not.

Iwouldn't have said anything if it wasn't for the fact that Tood said that like 6 times in his post, which to me sounds like a bit biased. Apologies in advance if that wasn't the intent on Tood's part.

[Chaka-Z0]

a euphemistic way of saying he committed perjury

Oh yea he probably did, wouldn't be surprising.

Let's be real, most people that are on the far-right conservative side are absolutely against alcohol consumption the first place. So again, its no wonder he didn't want to offend his fans. Noticed how he insisted that he was a virgin and a shy guy in high school? I have issues believing that, heck even the ugliest guys in the football team could pretty much get any girls they wanted. Prestige.

(annoyed)It really doesn't matter what he did or didn't say. His past really isn't the issue here, it's that he's going to tip SCOTUS 5-4 to the right.

That's in your head mate. If there's even the slight chance that Kavanaugh has done any of what's alleged, he needs to be out.

Just ask yourself this, what would the population think if they just went right ahead and nominated him without an investigation? Can anyone also answer why he wasn't really willing to have a full investigation from the FBI? If you've been wrongfully accused, wouldn't that be the first thing you want to clear your name?

[Gatefan1976]

Whitewater... yeah, I know but forgot to add that.

How convenient, you "forgot" the only parallel since watergate, but you were for it then (whitewater) I assume?

As for Merrick Garland, I never heard of him, until you (GF) brought his name up. I didn't pay much attention to who President Obama appointed for what. It was the same with most of the previous Presidents, too (let them do what they did... the Enquirer & etc. would fill in the scoops, while waiting on line at the grocery store). And no, I don't read or listen much to the political news, unless there is a reason to do so (such as -- like my future retirement is in jeopardy!?).

So, basically, you don't know WHAT you are talking about, have no history of what IS being talked about, and don't BOTHER to actually learn anything about what you are talking about?
That's called wilful ignorance, can't let FACT get in the way of my OPINION.

What is so difficult to understand this game that the DEMs have against the Republicans? If the DEMs can't go thru the same wringer process, investigations on the same subjects and issues from their own life, as they put the Republicans thru, and face the SAME consequences which the DEMs&Company set forth against the Republicans or Conservatives or any other "party", then they shouldn't have started this approach in the first place.

They HAVE gone through the same things, for longer, and on less evidence. The Clintons have basically been under investigation for nigh on 30 years by the right and they have produced a blowjob.
Oh MY!!!

Otherwise, there exists a DOUBLE STANDARD. Seems the DEMs plan on keeping it that way, in their favor, of course.

You do not understand what a double standard is in this context.
Lets say "you" believe in no sex before marriage.
Let's say "I" believe you can have sex whenever you want.
I catch "you" having sex before marriage, I can quite easily hold up your professed belief being broken by "you"
You catch "me" having sex before marriage and tell people how "bad I am"
I respond "I never said sex before marriage was bad"
The only "double standard" is self imposed because "you" claim to hold yourself to a high standard, while "I" do not.
That's not double standards, it's DIFFERENT standards, and it makes "you" a liar, and "me" a truth teller. You can debate the "morality" of "me", that's fair game, but what you cannot debate is who is lying.

[Gatefan1976]

You know your stuff Nothing to add to that, I could go on forever about this topic but I'll stop right there.

Hit me up on PM then, we can wax lyrical that way

Precision: I do not consider gigs or jams as parties. The parties I'm talking about are ranging from when I was 14 years old in high school to 24 in University. But yes the distinction is important in that regards. I've never attended parties from, say, the Football team, I never could relate to these folks.

Which limit's your view of them, simply through lack of experience. Metal concerts were not the only "parties" I went to as a Teen, I just preferred metal "parties" as no-one got beaten to a pulp, and there was little to no "FIGJAM" elements (look it up, can't pass the censor on that one) that you get in sporty events.

It is true though that Kavanaugh was one of them wasn't he? So all-in-all, I just think that classifying these parties right off the bat as *drunken rapy orgies* is too much. That just doesn't happen. You ever heard of orgies going on in the general population? Is that a thing? No its not.

Kavanaugh was NOT in the general population here, he was in the air of the actual elite, the same air that got snotty nosed arsehats in English schools doing stupid crap elected to parliament, which is the exact same model US elite schools attempt to emulate.
You could fill a library with the degrading stuff English Fraternities have done to both members, wanna be members and targets of oppertunity, why think a system based on thiers would be any better?
That's the real Cray Cray.

I wouldn't have said anything if it wasn't for the fact that Tood said that like 6 times in his post, which to me sounds like a bit biased. Apologies in advance if that wasn't the intent on Tood's part.

Tood is biased, so am I.
I can't speak for Tood, but in all the years we have interacted, he has never said anything without thought, or "just because" unless he was blatantly joking.

[Annoyed]

Oh yea he probably did, wouldn't be surprising.

Let's be real, most people that are on the far-right conservative side are absolutely against alcohol consumption the first place. So again, its no wonder he didn't want to offend his fans. Noticed how he insisted that he was a virgin and a shy guy in high school? I have issues believing that, heck even the ugliest guys in the football team could pretty much get any girls they wanted. Prestige.


That's in your head mate. If there's even the slight chance that Kavanaugh has done any of what's alleged, he needs to be out.

Just ask yourself this, what would the population think if they just went right ahead and nominated him without an investigation? Can anyone also answer why he wasn't really willing to have a full investigation from the FBI? If you've been wrongfully accused, wouldn't that be the first thing you want to clear your name?

There have already BEEN FBI investigations. At least 6, from what I understand; when he was nominated for this post, and before his elevation to lower court offices.

The time to bring these charges would have been when he was nominated, in order to allow time to investigate them, not at the 11th hour, as the Democrats are doing in hopes of delaying things till (and if) they take the Senate in November.
What's the old saying? You snooze, you lose.

[Chaka-Z0]

There have already BEEN FBI investigations. At least 6, from what I understand; when he was nominated for this post, and before his elevation to lower court offices.

The time to bring these charges would have been when he was nominated, in order to allow time to investigate them, not at the 11th hour, as the Democrats are doing in hopes of delaying things till (and if) they take the Senate in November.
What's the old saying? You snooze, you lose.

Of course there's been investigations, I would expect no less than a full background check and in-depth analysis of any candidate for this post.

Was there any specifically about the sexual assault charges?

[Gatefan1976]

There have already BEEN FBI investigations. At least 6, from what I understand; when he was nominated for this post, and before his elevation to lower court offices.

The time to bring these charges would have been when he was nominated, in order to allow time to investigate them, not at the 11th hour, as the Democrats are doing in hopes of delaying things till (and if) they take the Senate in November.
What's the old saying? You snooze, you lose.

So, where are trumps tax filings?
Plenty of people on the left and the right asked for them.
Quite simply, you don't want what happened to Garland happening to your boy, cause you already know how that works, because unlike Bork where you still got your pick, you flat out denied Garland, for over a year.
I Warned you it would bite you, the same way I warned the left their complacency of Hillary winning would bite them. If you don't believe me, go back about 12 months in the search history, I said it then, I say it now.

[Gatefan1976]

Of course there's been investigations, I would expect no less than a full background check and in-depth analysis of any candidate for this post.

Was there any specifically about the sexual assault charges?

No, so it's a conspiracy!!!!

[jelgate]

Its always a conspiracy with him. Its better than considering reality

[Annoyed]

So, where are trumps tax filings?
Plenty of people on the left and the right asked for them.
Quite simply, you don't want what happened to Garland happening to your boy, cause you already know how that works, because unlike Bork where you still got your pick, you flat out denied Garland, for over a year.
I Warned you it would bite you, the same way I warned the left their complacency of Hillary winning would bite them. If you don't believe me, go back about 12 months in the search history, I said it then, I say it now.

Oh, we're still likely to get "our pick". All Trump has to do is withdraw Kavanaugh, and nominate Comey-Bennett or another. Even if the Senate does flip next month, the newly elected senators don't take office till January.
Plenty of time to confirm another nominee.

[SoulReaver]

Oh, we're still likely to get "our pick". All Trump has to do is withdraw Kavanaugh, and nominate Comey-Bennett or another.

if it comes to her hopefully they can dig up some dirt on the b*tch too

[SoulReaver]

though come to think of it - what's to stop King Don from picking an even more conservative candidate for the SCOTUS / SDS if only out of spite?
that's why the Democrats should focus on packing the SDS (adding more judges to it) if they ever return to power that's the only effective counter

[Annoyed]

though come to think of it - what's to stop King Don from picking an even more conservative candidate for the SCOTUS / SDS if only out of spite?
that's why the Democrats should focus on packing the SDS (adding more judges to it) if they ever return to power that's the only effective counter

I don't think that's likely in the near future, anyway. Remember the voters put Trump in office, knowing a seat was open and the Senate was held by Republicans, and knowing that the Republicans denied even a hearing for Garland. It's a pretty good bet that the voters would like to see the court move to the right.

Packing the court would require majorities in both the house and the senate, as well as the white house. I don't think it would happen.

[Annoyed]

if it comes to her hopefully they can dig up some dirt on the b*tch too

I'd love to see them try it. No one would believe them.

Oh, and as a side note, you're always going on about how unfair the criminal justice system is. You do know that in supporting the Democrats in the current battle, you're advocating "Guilty until proven innocent", right? Or doesn't that matter in this case?

[jelgate]

Your analogy only works in black and white choices