Proof women and authority don't mix.  

 

The Evil Genius
Admin
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 1420
26/09/2018 1:03 am  

The day before yesterday  Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Ha. stated:  “I just want to say to the men in this country, 'Just shut up and step up. Do the right thing for a change,'...Not only do women, like Dr. Ford, who bravely comes forward, need to be heard, but they need to be believed.” She went on to say: "Look, we're not in a court of law,  we're actually in a Court of Credibility at this point."

What exactly is the Senator saying here? Break it down. She is stating that men are guilty just because they are men, and women should be believed, not because they are truthful but because they are women.  So evidence is no longer important--the sole criteria is gender. Where is the "Court of Credibility" in Article III of the Constitution? I can't find it. 

What about the bedrock principals of our jurisprudence? what happened to the presumption of innocence, the right to confront accusers, cross-examine accusers, and due process of law? These are the very foundations of justice.

I'll tell you what happened to them. In one breathtaking moment a U.S. Senator threw all of these fundamental principals under the bus. To her they don't matter. Evidence doesn't matter, the U.S. Constitution doesn't matter. All that matters to her is: men=bad, women=good end of story.  I'll spare everyone a lengthy discussion of the historical, philosophical, and moral basis for these principals of jurisprudence, suffice they can trace a tradition back almost 2000 years to the days of Cicero.  Yet here we have a women, one of 100 senators who can blithely dismiss these things with a wave of her hand. Is she unfamiliar with our government and its principals; is she a closet communist; is she just stupid; or is her hamster wheel coming off the rails? 

This gentlemen standing alone is an indictment of women in power. She has no trouble reducing the institutions of our government to a "star chamber". She is unqualified and unworthy of any position in our government. 


Quote
BigSiameseCat
Founder.
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 1074
26/09/2018 1:27 am  

I think her hamster wheel has a seized bearing. I don't recall a US Senator advocating a Star Chamber before this. Do you think she is expecting the prostrate media to cover for her? Is the assumption being made that the general public is to anesthetized to see the implications of what she is saying? Is this a trial balloon? Or is she just stroking the egos of a special interest group?


ReplyQuote
MG-ɹǝʍo┴
Founder..
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 2924
26/09/2018 1:45 am  

"women and authority don't mix"  

Hammer meets Nitro Glycerin, mixing occurs, I don't see a problem.  


ReplyQuote
GregBO
Admin
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 2132
26/09/2018 2:19 am  
Posted by: BigSiameseCat

I think her hamster wheel has a seized bearing. I don't recall a US Senator advocating a Star Chamber before this. Do you think she is expecting the prostrate media to cover for her? Is the assumption being made that the general public is to anesthetized to see the implications of what she is saying? Is this a trial balloon? Or is she just stroking the egos of a special interest group?

I think that she has sent up a balloon to test the political winds prior to the mid-term.  If successful, then look for things to really ratchet up in a hurry. The DNC is still very unsure of their position and this tentative outreach is another indication of why the results will not go their way.

By default, anything she, or her peers perform, is at the wishes of a SIG and not the constituents.  

​"What we have done for ourselves alone dies with us; what we have done for others and the world remains and is immortal." -Albert Pike

​"​My father didn't tell me how to live; he lived, and let me watch him do it.​" - Clarence Buddinton Kelland


ReplyQuote
BigSiameseCat
Founder.
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 1074
26/09/2018 2:36 am  

I agree that anything that she does is at the wishes of a special interest group, especially if you include the Deep State in that category. I was referring to the common practice of politicians "throwing red meat" to a special interest group by saying things that appeal to that group, despite such extreme statements not appealing to the general populace. If the politician is then held to account for making extreme statements, the sympathizers claim that the politician wasn't serious, they were "throwing red meat" to the special interest group and whatever the politician said should not be taken seriously.

What I am getting at is, did the Senator make this statement in a context that allows them to easily "walk back" whatever they said, or was it a less tentative trial balloon? So much is spewed by the ruling class that I wonder how much credence to give a single instance of this. After all, other Demonrats have worried in public about islands tipping over.


ReplyQuote
Uly The Cunning
Admin
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 2182
26/09/2018 3:10 am  

Women don't like being questioned. If anything, women only want to be dictators. The female mind is incapable of viewing things from the longterm point of view, so they end up focusing on the here and now and making shortsighted statements and actions that lead to collapse. This is why women behave in such ridiculous ways and think it is okay. It was a good idea to them at the time, and they didn't think about after the moment. In a way, I would say, women are only experts from their perspective and at that moment in time, while men can find relevance and planning from history for planning to the future. 

"Remember, you're fighting for this woman's honor, which is probably more than she ever did."
Groucho Marx: Duck Soup (1933)


ReplyQuote
uoSʎWodɹɐH
Founder.
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 685
26/09/2018 7:15 am  

If I could not out think her logic I would not consider myself worthy to sit on the bench myself..

If she asked me anymore questions I would reply that I respected her authority over me too much to

refuse to obey her wishes that I just shut up. 

I then reserve my 5th amendment right to remain silent and also my right to face and question my accuser.

I would not answer any further questions until the accuser makes a physical appearance. 

Not even the FBI's questions would I respond to.

I have faith he will get the nod and take his place among the others.

That is my hopes anyways.

I was bound to be misunderstood, and I laugh at the idiots who misunderstand me! Kind mockery toward the well-intentioned and unfettered cruelty toward all would-be prison guards of my creative possibilities. In this way I learn to revel as much in misunderstanding as in understanding and take pleasure in worthy opponents. Making language fluid, flowing like a river, yet precise and pointed as a dirk, contradicts the socialistic purpose of language and makes for a wonderful verbal dance—a linguistic martial art with constant parries that hone the weapon that is the two edged sword of my mouth.


ReplyQuote
GregBO
Admin
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 2132
26/09/2018 4:26 pm  

Great outline Harpo.  This could be applicable in many varied G'ment encounters.

​"What we have done for ourselves alone dies with us; what we have done for others and the world remains and is immortal." -Albert Pike

​"​My father didn't tell me how to live; he lived, and let me watch him do it.​" - Clarence Buddinton Kelland


ReplyQuote
uoSʎWodɹɐH
Founder.
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 685
26/12/2018 5:46 pm  

GregBo  wrote: Great outline Harpo. This could be applicable in many varied G'ment encounters.

Yes  the least words  say the most.  When my father's  heavenly spirit testifies for me,  I am taking the fifth while he is making some powerful noise in my favor.

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=special%20appearance

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Freedom%20of%20Religion

L&R

I was bound to be misunderstood, and I laugh at the idiots who misunderstand me! Kind mockery toward the well-intentioned and unfettered cruelty toward all would-be prison guards of my creative possibilities. In this way I learn to revel as much in misunderstanding as in understanding and take pleasure in worthy opponents. Making language fluid, flowing like a river, yet precise and pointed as a dirk, contradicts the socialistic purpose of language and makes for a wonderful verbal dance—a linguistic martial art with constant parries that hone the weapon that is the two edged sword of my mouth.


ReplyQuote
Machiavelli
Creator
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 314
26/12/2018 6:16 pm  
Posted by: The Evil Genius

The day before yesterday  Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Ha. stated:  “I just want to say to the men in this country, 'Just shut up and step up. Do the right thing for a change,'...Not only do women, like Dr. Ford, who bravely comes forward, need to be heard, but they need to be believed.” She went on to say: "Look, we're not in a court of law,  we're actually in a Court of Credibility at this point."

What exactly is the Senator saying here? Break it down. She is stating that men are guilty just because they are men, and women should be believed, not because they are truthful but because they are women.  So evidence is no longer important--the sole criteria is gender. Where is the "Court of Credibility" in Article III of the Constitution? I can't find it. 

What about the bedrock principals of our jurisprudence? what happened to the presumption of innocence, the right to confront accusers, cross-examine accusers, and due process of law? These are the very foundations of justice.

I'll tell you what happened to them. In one breathtaking moment a U.S. Senator threw all of these fundamental principals under the bus. To her they don't matter. Evidence doesn't matter, the U.S. Constitution doesn't matter. All that matters to her is: men=bad, women=good end of story.  I'll spare everyone a lengthy discussion of the historical, philosophical, and moral basis for these principals of jurisprudence, suffice they can trace a tradition back almost 2000 years to the days of Cicero.  Yet here we have a women, one of 100 senators who can blithely dismiss these things with a wave of her hand. Is she unfamiliar with our government and its principals; is she a closet communist; is she just stupid; or is her hamster wheel coming off the rails? 

This gentlemen standing alone is an indictment of women in power. She has no trouble reducing the institutions of our government to a "star chamber". She is unqualified and unworthy of any position in our government. 

And the Rule of Law too and the principle of Equality before the law, so the same laws apply to everyone. The reasoning behind it being that it's a restraint on tyrants, because they wont want to pass laws that could be used against them.

We are free to do whatever we like, there's no law against us as Independent men of automatically believing every man who is accused by a woman as automatically innocent. And to believe every women who accuses a man as automatically guilty of being a liar and a false accuser and suffering from a severe mental illness.

Give her what she wants, but reverse the man and the woman around so that all men need to be believed and all women need to be considered liars.

Then while ever she continues with her nonsense, we take it a step further and we will disbelieve every court ruling in the country and believe the male is innocent.

If she wants to make it a Court of Credibility let her, we are free to choose that their kangaroos courts and female accusers have zero credibility. When women and their kangaroo courts have lost all credibility it serves them right for waging a war on men. We've got the evidence to show they are corrupt.


ReplyQuote
Travis3000
Moderator
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 1468
26/12/2018 7:33 pm  

I don't find this particular quote to be novel, new, or revelatory.  I'm not saying that I agree with it in any way, nor am I saying that I don't think that it's dangerous.  

Let me explain.  For decades now feminists have been publicly clamoring for the erasure of what they call, "rape culture."  

What is this so called "rape culture"? Here's a link:

https://www.marshall.edu/wcenter/sexual-assault/rape-culture/

That's just one university though you may say.  Here are two sources that explain Rape Culture in the aforementioned context:

These are just gateway resources to show the pervasive nature of the feminist ideology concerning "rape culture."

There is also a "We Believe You" campaign that has been around for awhile.

https://www.mumsnet.com/campaigns/we-believe-you-mumsnet-rape-awareness-campaign

 

So in the end the Senator is merely parroting what's already out there.  And has been said many times before.  She is pandering to her base.   Is it wrong? Yes.  Is it going to destroy lives, yes. But it's going to continue no matter what anyone says.  Because there is ALOT of money to be made by the people hustling this ideology. The only thing that men can really do is exactly what the OP did, raise awareness and simply walk away.  


ReplyQuote
The Evil Genius
Admin
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 1420
26/12/2018 7:46 pm  

That is a good point Machiavelli and makes me wonder; is she (Hirono) really that stupid or is it the case her electorate is that stupid and she is just pandering to their stupidity. If it is the latter I don't think men in general even enter the equation. She simply doesn't care about her credibility with us because her election(s) are not contingent upon what men think about her credibility. Either way its is a sad state of affairs. 


ReplyQuote
Advertisements