WAR ROOM LOUNGE V21: ♫♪ Tom Lehrer Awareness Week ♪♫

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cubo de Sangre said:
Because language has nuance. Because any honest person filling out the "race" box on a questionnaire knows that if they're genetically/culturally 97% one thing and 3% the other that they would be misrepresenting things by checking the box associated with the 3%.
Click to expand...

Do you understand the point, though? You're interpreting her as not only saying something she never said but as saying something that she explicitly disavowed.

Cubo de Sangre said:
You've yet to refute any claims I've attributed to her.
Click to expand...

The question isn't about what she said. See above. It's really that simple. In the set of sentences you provided, you couldn't possibly accuse the person of lying.

Cubo de Sangre said:
But we both know you won't do either and that the crux of this disagreement is not her claims, it's the implication of one claim compared to another.
Click to expand...

The facts are not in dispute. What you're saying is that if you interpret her as saying something that she didn't say and disavowed, then she lied. OK. I agree with that. At the same time, I think if you just look at what she said, there's no issue. She claimed to have a distant NA ancestor, and the test showed exactly that.

Cubo de Sangre said:
And now that you're at the end of your rope here comes the partisan hackery projection. :rolleyes: Not sure what's worse, being too small to admit to such a minor correction in your stance or actually believing that there's no difference between claiming to have a distant NA relative and claiming to be NA oneself.
Click to expand...

The worst thing always is to not blindly accept GOP talking points. And what do you want me to say when you're hacking it up like this? Your partisan attachments are a clear obstacle to normal communication.
 
The next time you try to tell a joke that egregious, I'm going to spray you with a water bottle like a misbehaving pet

It will be a mist take
 
Jack V Savage said:
Do you understand the point, though? You're interpreting her as not only saying something she never said but as saying something that she explicitly disavowed.
Click to expand...

Yes or no, she had herself listed as a minority at UPenn?

Yes or no, she claimed to be Cherokee in her cookbook entry?

Yes or no, does what we know of her ancestry and upbringing definitively make her either Cherokee or Native American?



Kafir-kun said:
In the US where we believe in the one drop rule its not exactly that crazy. In
Click to expand...

Who is "we"? Outside of bigots who are soundly ridiculed over that viewpoint I don't think there's much support there. Which is likely why you're saying "not exactly that crazy" instead of agreeing with it.
 
Lost a roast battle because dude wasn't feeding me comebacks and threw me off and now I want to break some shit.
 
Gregolian said:


So, who wants to take me out for lunch?
Click to expand...

Just for the record, there's plenty of fairly low price teppanyaki, and it's all very good. So, if you get the chance...
 
Cubo de Sangre said:
Who is "we"? Outside of bigots who are soundly ridiculed over that viewpoint I don't think there's much support there. Which is likely why you're saying "not exactly that crazy" instead of agreeing with it.
Click to expand...
Its hardly something only bigots believe. Most people with some minority ancestry still identify with that minority ancestry because that's how they're generally perceived. The roots are in bigotry but its become ingrained in the culture to the point that most people have internalized it without any sort of racial animosity.

Obama is a great example. he's half white but everyone called him black.
 
Cubo de Sangre said:
Yes or no, she had herself listed as a minority at UPenn?

Yes or no, she claimed to be Cherokee in her cookbook entry?

Yes or no, does what we know of her ancestry and upbringing definitively make her either Cherokee or Native American?
Click to expand...

I don't get why you think this kind of thing is productive. I have no idea about this cookbook thing. As I said, the dispute isn't over the facts, it's whether we should interpret the facts as her claiming something she never claimed and made clear that she wasn't claiming.
 
Hunter Simpson said:
Just for the record, there's plenty of fairly low price teppanyaki, and it's all very good. So, if you get the chance...
Click to expand...
I’ve been to Japan 3 times cause of family so I know the best food is the $5 ramen shack on the side of the road next to the takoyaki spot outside a dive bar.
 
Jack V Savage said:
You're irrationally denying that credible allegations are credible
Click to expand...

Ford claims that something happened 36 years ago.

  • She can't remember where it happened.
  • She can't remember when it happened.
  • She can't remember how she got there.
  • She can't remember how she left.
  • She named four other people who she says were there; all of those people have issued sworn statements denying any memory of that event.
  • Through her attorneys, Ford said she needed to delay her hearing to help overcome her "fear of enclosed spaces" which were preventing her from boarding an airplane, then admitted that she flies very frequently for work and for leisure. Her C.V. lists leisure activities that could only be carried out through long flights.
  • Ford justified her multiple flights to the Pacific (in spite of her "fear of flying") by claiming that it's easier for her to fly in the direction of the Pacific.
  • She claimed she needed to add a second door to her house to help deal with the trauma of Kavanaugh's sexual assault. Google Street View reveals that the "second door" was actually an addition onto a secondary dwelling unit, and public records show that Ford was hosting people in that secondary dwelling unit.
  • Ford has ample reason to lie. Her documented political views align with a worldview that makes Kavanaugh out to be a grave threat to "women's rights". She has received nearly $1 million in crowdfunding, is certain to receive a $1 million+ book deal, has been celebrated by the national news media, and has been nominated for a "distinguished aluma award" at her alma mater for "telling the truth about her sexual assault."
  • Her ex-boyfriend of many years stated under penalty of perjury that Ford never expressed fear of flying or fear of enclosed spaces in their years together despite the fact that they had taken multiple flights together including in a propeller plane in Hawai'i. He also says that Ford lied under oath when she said she had never coached anyone to pass a polygraph, and named the FBI agent (Monica McLean) who Ford allegedly coached.
  • Ford's polygraph, arranged for by her own attorney, consisted of only two yes/no questions.
  • Ford refused to turn her "therapist's notes"---the one bit of possible corroboration that could even hope to lend her credibility--over to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Based on my history of interaction with you, it's likely you will ignore the above. Please tell me why you think Ford is credible.

Also, this is your weekly reminder that I think you should stop attacking people's motivations for their stated views and start putting more effort into attacking arguments.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,280,500
Messages
58,289,582
Members
175,995
Latest member
rodriigoxd

Share this page

Back
Top