Welcome to Trump town

 
  don_dunstan Minister for Railways

Location: Adelaide proud
I will give you a personal example. I have a fear of speaking in public, I do it semi regularly - why? because it allows me opportunities I would not otherwise have. The benefits outweigh the cost in stress. If I had not done it, it would have somewhat debilitated my career and ability to support my family.

You cant have the job and interests she has and not travel, for sure some of the travel is discretionary, but again many people who fear flying, fly, - they overcome it. get it?
arctic
No - not equivalent. In this case what was being said was that the person had suffered a disability as a result of a trauma - only the disability was proven to be pretty much not at all disabling.

It's like saying "I'm allergic to peanuts and if I eat one I'll die. So I only eat them occasionally".

Sponsored advertisement

  Groundrelay Deputy Commissioner

Location: Surrounded by Trolls!
Your vigorous support of any of Thump's decisions is to be expected. It's a huge victory for one side of US politics.
Hey, you love the ALP to bits and what have they ever done for anyone other than themselves? And here's a tip for you - Shorten will be the Prime Minister who presides over the biggest economic collapse since the Great Depression.
Just because you have this obsessive need to "hate" Labor and in this thread the Democrats, it doesn’t mean I have to "love" them Rolling Eyes
I’m simply pointing out for all your concern about the poor, the side you "hate" far less is counterintuitive; unless you believe in trickle-down economics, Medicare and welfare are socialist, private is always better than public and things like worker, consumer and environmental protection don’t matter.As for your running the country broke hysterics, I don’t lose sleep over deficits. Thump doesn't give a rats. Even the current mob here have adopted a more fluid stance and now it's all about 'forward estimates'.
Social Democrat, Not socialist. Socialism is about ridding the World of capitalism. Social democrats build up welfare states to soften the impact of capitalism
Dangersdan707
Just picking up on the rhetoric of those who denounce universal healthcare and the welfare state as "Socialist/Communist" i.e. Joe Stalin’s coming to get you.
Political and economic systems aren’t necessarily one and the same. After all capitalism existed for centuries before pluralistic democracy. Discussing the -isms would need a thread of its own!
  mejhammers1 Deputy Commissioner

@DonDunstan why are you making the flying habits of Ms Ford the defining moment? You hang your hat on that yet Kavanagh lied about the Devils Triangle being a drinking game, launched a nonsensical tirade against the Democratic party and Hillary Clinton in particular, evaded questions at nearly every opportunity and did not want a FBI investigation. Just what has that dude got to hide?

Michael
  don_dunstan Minister for Railways

Location: Adelaide proud
@DonDunstan why are you making the flying habits of Ms Ford the defining moment? You hang your hat on that yet Kavanagh lied about the Devils Triangle being a drinking game launched a nonsensical tirade against the Democratic party and Hillary Clinton in particular, evaded questions st nearly every opportunity and did want a FBI investigation. Just what has that dude got to hide?

Michael
mejhammers1
That's dishonest, Michael, if you'd read back through this thread you'd see that I've already mentioned a number of issues of which this the last - I really don't want to talk about this any more, I've said my piece.

The crux of this for me I've already explained to Arctic which is that you can't say on the one hand that you've suffered a disability as a result of this attack 35 years ago and yet not show any classic symptoms. At all. Including flying for holidays. Sorry but I just don't buy that - is she saying that her huge problem that she suffered as a result of this attack is largely imaginary? Because it doesn't appear to have an impact on her ability to function whatsoever. The hurt has to be more than just a hurt feeling you've had for decades or a fear of flying that doesn't actually prevent you from flying at all.

Wasn't the whole reason why Amtrak was established in the sixties the fact that some 10% of Americans will never, ever fly? This lady certainly doesn't appear to be one of them.
  mejhammers1 Deputy Commissioner

@DonDunstan Dishonest? Whatever. You really want to get over yourself. Harping on about Ford's disability and fear of flying whilst totally ignoring Kavanagh's quite dreadful testimony which was full of evasion, arrogance and messing with the truth does you no favours at all.

And that is the last I will say on that matter.

Michael
  arctic Assistant Commissioner

Location: Zurich
I will give you a personal example. I have a fear of speaking in public, I do it semi regularly - why? because it allows me opportunities I would not otherwise have. The benefits outweigh the cost in stress. If I had not done it, it would have somewhat debilitated my career and ability to support my family.

You cant have the job and interests she has and not travel, for sure some of the travel is discretionary, but again many people who fear flying, fly, - they overcome it. get it?
No - not equivalent. In this case what was being said was that the person had suffered a disability as a result of a trauma - only the disability was proven to be pretty much not at all disabling.

It's like saying "I'm allergic to peanuts and if I eat one I'll die. So I only eat them occasionally".
don_dunstan
Hold on - are you now saying she said the fear of flying arose from the alleged assault? Reference?
  don_dunstan Minister for Railways

Location: Adelaide proud
Nup, I'm with Michael, I'm not going to talk about this Kavanaugh thing any more - it's already ancient history.
  arctic Assistant Commissioner

Location: Zurich
I will give you a personal example. I have a fear of speaking in public, I do it semi regularly - why? because it allows me opportunities I would not otherwise have. The benefits outweigh the cost in stress. If I had not done it, it would have somewhat debilitated my career and ability to support my family.

You cant have the job and interests she has and not travel, for sure some of the travel is discretionary, but again many people who fear flying, fly, - they overcome it. get it?
No - not equivalent. In this case what was being said was that the person had suffered a disability as a result of a trauma - only the disability was proven to be pretty much not at all disabling.

It's like saying "I'm allergic to peanuts and if I eat one I'll die. So I only eat them occasionally".
don_dunstan
this has to be a joke. if you are allergic to peanuts you have a actual high chance of physical harm if you indulge in eating them. not so for the other two, you can overcome the fear and do the activity and be fine.

apples and oranges.
  arctic Assistant Commissioner

Location: Zurich
Some more info on fear of flying from this report. Ford seems like she was flying 3-5 times per year.
Martin N. Seif, a clinical psychologist, anxiety treatment specialist and one of the founders of the Anxiety and Depression Association of America, says Ford's ability to fly despite her fear is "very typical." "People who have a fear of flying can fly -- they fly with difficulty, they fly irregularly," said Seif. "Some people fly with great difficulty, some people fly with a lots of pills and medication. Also some people can fly one day and not another."
cnn
  davesvline Chief Commissioner

Location: 1983-1998
If this was in Australia, I suspect based on recent times then someone would have put the "Mental Illness" defence up the flag pole.
This seems to have the appropriate cloaking effect and immediately gag any debate on who did what where when why and to whom however long ago - permanently.

Perhaps someone can shed light on the equivalent "the dog ate my homework" excuse in the US is. Maybe not being able to fly is such??
Dunno.

Regards
  ParkesHub Chief Commissioner

Sounds like no support for your contention: "...But then it turns out she was a frequent flyer and had never, ever demonstrated problems with getting on a plane until she made the sexual abuse public...."
Twisting my words and Sarcasm aside. Yes you can "need" to fly when going on vacation. This is being blown up to make her look unreliable. Plenty of people are nervous or afraid of flying but still fly, even on vacation. I know quite a few. She said she was afraid of flying but still flew - so what? - what possible bearing does this have on the matter at hand.
You both look ridiculous. Someone can have a fear of flying but they still fly frequently? It's not exactly a disabling condition when it doesn't really affect your behavior... at all.
don_dunstan
What's 'frequently'? What number do you ascribe to 'frequently', DD? I'll bet it differs to mine.

One thing about PTSD is that it's permanent. I know, I have it. Counselling provides coping mechanisms but never cure. I suggest that Dr Blasey Ford has coping mechanisms in place that allow her to fly, etc.
  Groundrelay Deputy Commissioner

Location: Surrounded by Trolls!
Nup, I'm with Michael, I'm not going to talk about this Kavanaugh thing any more - it's already ancient history.
don_dunstan
He'll be around for quite awhile so history is just starting.
Start winding back the clock!
  don_dunstan Minister for Railways

Location: Adelaide proud
Some more info on fear of flying from this report. Ford seems like she was flying 3-5 times per year.
arctic
So again, she has a fear of flying but it's not actually disabling because she can in fact fly. So on the scale of a psychological issue being "disabling" she would rate a zero because it really doesn't impact he day-to-day functioning.

Do you really want to keep harping on about this? Kavanaugh is on the bench, it's all over.
  don_dunstan Minister for Railways

Location: Adelaide proud
It's like saying "I'm allergic to peanuts and if I eat one I'll die. So I only eat them occasionally".
this has to be a joke. if you are allergic to peanuts you have a actual high chance of physical harm if you indulge in eating them. not so for the other two, you can overcome the fear and do the activity and be fine.

apples and oranges.
arctic
Totally valid analogy. For a disability to be disabling it really has to have some kind of impact on your day-to-day functioning. What kind of a disability did Dr Blasey Ford's fear of flying present to her?

None.

Therefore it doesn't actually have any impact on her ability to function the same as any other adult, that is, it's not a disability. It's a phobia.
  arctic Assistant Commissioner

Location: Zurich
It's like saying "I'm allergic to peanuts and if I eat one I'll die. So I only eat them occasionally".
this has to be a joke. if you are allergic to peanuts you have a actual high chance of physical harm if you indulge in eating them. not so for the other two, you can overcome the fear and do the activity and be fine.

apples and oranges.
Totally valid analogy. For a disability to be disabling it really has to have some kind of impact on your day-to-day functioning. What kind of a disability did Dr Blasey Ford's fear of flying present to her?

None.

Therefore it doesn't actually have any impact on her ability to function the same as any other adult, that is, it's not a disability. It's a phobia.
don_dunstan
Well....One is psychological (fear of flying and fear of public speaking), the peanut thing is physiological. Could not be further from each other.

Yes it is a phobia. Thankyou. Ever had a panic attack? - this would be a similar thing.

So once again: You cant have the job and interests she has and not travel, for sure some of the travel is discretionary, but again many people who fear flying, fly, - they overcome it. get it?
  don_dunstan Minister for Railways

Location: Adelaide proud
Well....One is psychological (fear of flying and fear of public speaking), the peanut thing is physiological. Could not be further from each other.

Yes it is a phobia. Thankyou. Ever had a panic attack? - this would be a similar thing.

So once again: You cant have the job and interests she has and not travel, for sure some of the travel is discretionary, but again many people who fear flying, fly, - they overcome it. get it?
arctic
But I'm not the one walking into a court to testify that someone caused my fear of flying 35 years ago - and that it has subsequently become a very disabling condition.

Get it? She lied about how disabling the condition was - she said she was unable to get on the plane to go to California to testify against the appointment without the help of several friends who accompanied her to the airport. Apparently on that occasion Dr Blasey Ford needed people to cuddle and cheer her on as she got on that scary, frightening aircraft.

Which makes you ask the question: If she was going on holidays does she need to same cheer squad to see her off at the airport? Apparently not, she testified herself that she didn't have a problem with flying for holidays. See what's going on here? Her fear of flying suddenly flared up from being a phobia to a full-on disabling condition when she need to fly to California to testify against Kavanaugh's appointment but apparently had remained well hidden for most of her adult life. What a convenient disability, one that only emerges when you're going to court to testify how disabling it is.

Can you see now why they threw out what she was saying?
  ParkesHub Chief Commissioner

Well....One is psychological (fear of flying and fear of public speaking), the peanut thing is physiological. Could not be further from each other.

Yes it is a phobia. Thankyou. Ever had a panic attack? - this would be a similar thing.

So once again: You cant have the job and interests she has and not travel, for sure some of the travel is discretionary, but again many people who fear flying, fly, - they overcome it. get it?
.....Can you see now why they threw out what she was saying?
don_dunstan
The Senate didn't "throw out" what she was saying at all. Even Cadet Bonespurs was sympathetic. Of course, they could be as the outcome was predetermined.
  don_dunstan Minister for Railways

Location: Adelaide proud
The Senate didn't "throw out" what she was saying at all. Even Cadet Bonespurs was sympathetic. Of course, they could be as the outcome was predetermined.
ParkesHub
No - they just decided she wasn't a credible witness. That's all.
  Groundrelay Deputy Commissioner

Location: Surrounded by Trolls!
The Senate didn't "throw out" what she was saying at all. Even Cadet Bonespurs was sympathetic. Of course, they could be as the outcome was predetermined.
No - they just decided she wasn't a credible witness. That's all.
don_dunstan
But for you this was never about "The Truth". It’s all about Tiny and as far as you're concerned he’s always truthful.
  Groundrelay Deputy Commissioner

Location: Surrounded by Trolls!
Faced with Thump's rising deficit, Republicans have started banging on about entitlement; Medicare and Social Security.
Not surprised!
  don_dunstan Minister for Railways

Location: Adelaide proud
The Senate didn't "throw out" what she was saying at all. Even Cadet Bonespurs was sympathetic. Of course, they could be as the outcome was predetermined.
No - they just decided she wasn't a credible witness. That's all.
But for you this was never about "The Truth". It’s all about Tiny and as far as you're concerned he’s always truthful.
Groundrelay
The opposite: It's about the complete irrationality and banality of the Trump-haters in continuing to try and derail his Presidency two years in. Frankly I think the whole effort to try and smear Kavanaugh's character back-fired on them and made them look desperate and silly.

Trump is President - he'll be President for at least two more years, they need to focus on what's going to happen after that rather than continue to look like pathetic spoilers.
  arctic Assistant Commissioner

Location: Zurich
Well....One is psychological (fear of flying and fear of public speaking), the peanut thing is physiological. Could not be further from each other.

Yes it is a phobia. Thankyou. Ever had a panic attack? - this would be a similar thing.

So once again: You cant have the job and interests she has and not travel, for sure some of the travel is discretionary, but again many people who fear flying, fly, - they overcome it. get it?
But I'm not the one walking into a court to testify that someone caused my fear of flying 35 years ago - and that it has subsequently become a very disabling condition.

Get it? She lied about how disabling the condition was - she said she was unable to get on the plane to go to California to testify against the appointment without the help of several friends who accompanied her to the airport. Apparently on that occasion Dr Blasey Ford needed people to cuddle and cheer her on as she got on that scary, frightening aircraft.

Which makes you ask the question: If she was going on holidays does she need to same cheer squad to see her off at the airport? Apparently not, she testified herself that she didn't have a problem with flying for holidays. See what's going on here? Her fear of flying suddenly flared up from being a phobia to a full-on disabling condition when she need to fly to California to testify against Kavanaugh's appointment but apparently had remained well hidden for most of her adult life. What a convenient disability, one that only emerges when you're going to court to testify how disabling it is.

Can you see now why they threw out what she was saying?
don_dunstan
Not really, I can see she would have more difficulty getting on a flight to go and testify about the thing that gave her the phobia in the first place, in the same room as the man who allegedly assaulted her and to be judged by the world a liar.
  don_dunstan Minister for Railways

Location: Adelaide proud
Not really, I can see she would have more difficulty getting on a flight to go and testify about the thing that gave her the phobia in the first place, in the same room as the man who allegedly assaulted her and to be judged by the world a liar.
arctic
Ultimately what you're doing is opening the door to evidence-free prosecutions. There was no corroborating evidence for what this woman was saying.
  arctic Assistant Commissioner

Location: Zurich
Not really, I can see she would have more difficulty getting on a flight to go and testify about the thing that gave her the phobia in the first place, in the same room as the man who allegedly assaulted her and to be judged by the world a liar.
Ultimately what you're doing is opening the door to evidence-free prosecutions. There was no corroborating evidence for what this woman was saying.
don_dunstan
No, I'm not. The hearing was not a court prosecuting this assault case. Its also not the topic we are discussing. We are arguing why it might have been more difficult to get on the flight.
  nswtrains Chief Commissioner

Not really, I can see she would have more difficulty getting on a flight to go and testify about the thing that gave her the phobia in the first place, in the same room as the man who allegedly assaulted her and to be judged by the world a liar.
Ultimately what you're doing is opening the door to evidence-free prosecutions. There was no corroborating evidence for what this woman was saying.
don_dunstan
No Don, nothing new. Lots of cases are decided on circumstantial evidence. They became more difficult if the penalty outcome is considerable gaol time but murder trials without a body are not uncommon. Take the Kylie Lane case where she received a substantial sentence even though the baby's body was never found.

I really think the standard required for judges in the USA is far below what applies in Australia and England. This recent appointment to the US Supreme Court would not make it onto our High Court because his experience is a bit skimpy.

I must admit when I learnt that the sexual accusation was from some time ago and not recent I thought the accuser might face a few problem. I actually believe her because these fraternity clubs in the US are vile and misogynistic cesspits.

If the jury believes the evidence tendered by a witness is truthful beyond a reasonable doubt then its in unless the judge excludes it because it is prejudicial to the accused.

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: