REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Modern Conservatism as Mental illness.

POSTED BY: FREMDFIRMA
UPDATED: Monday, June 13, 2022 18:36
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 2899
PAGE 1 of 1

Wednesday, September 19, 2012 6:11 PM

FREMDFIRMA



More fuel for that fire, this.

Attorney seeks psychological tests for Andrew Shirvell
http://www.freep.com/article/20120919/NEWS06/120919030/andrew-shirvell
-attorney-asks-psychological-tests

Quote:

Attorney Deborah Gordon wants a judge to order a mental exam for former Michigan State Assistant Attorney General Andrew Shirvell to prove that he is “a disturbed young man who needs counseling.”

The request, made in a federal court filing earlier Monday, is the latest in a years-long dispute between Shirvell, Gordon and Gordon’s client, former University of Michigan student body President Chris Armstrong.

Armstrong recently won a $4.5-million judgment in U.S. District Court in Detroit against Shirvell, who published a blog attacking Armstrong, the first openly gay student body president at U-M, for his “radical homosexual agenda.”

Shortly after Armstrong filed his federal lawsuit against Shirvell, Shirvell filed a defamation suit against Gordon in U.S. District Court. Shirvell alleged Gordon ‘s statements to the news media about him — including he was “troubled and immature young man” and “seems to be delusional” — were defamatory.


Of course, in this case it's more the usual Republican squeazeling to try and avoid the consequences of their actions, which is all too typical, but I really do think there's something to it, even from a meta point of view.

Modern Conservatism and RightWing-Authoritarianism really do strike me as an offshoot of Sociopathy and/or Narcissistic Personality Disorder, simply given a thin veneer of acceptable politics, a fictional gloss to excuse behavior that would be to any sane, empathetic and humane person... unthinkable.
And certainly unacceptable.

I however am dubious of what to do about it, cause the whole notion of pyschologically reconditioning people in defiance of their will strikes me as unconscienable even if it were my bitterest enemy, certainly I've stood against it long enough to feel that way - but how then do you treat this awful disorder ?
Me, I reccommend rope....


How MUCH of that is tongue in cheek, I ain't tellin.

-Frem

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 20, 2012 7:57 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


I've sometimes wondered, myownself...

Isn't there something in sociopathy about "inability to empathize", too?


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 20, 2012 8:01 AM

STORYMARK


This is the party of "personal responsibility" (as long as it's someone else).

AND the party of Jesus (as long as they're not expected to actually follow any of his teachings).

So, yeah.


Note to anyone - Please pity the poor, poor wittle Rappyboy. He's feeling put upon lately, what with all those facts disagreeing with what he believes.

"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum


"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 20, 2012 8:12 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:
This is the party of "personal responsibility" (as long as it's someone else).

AND the party of Jesus (as long as they're not expected to actually follow any of his teachings).

So, yeah.

"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum


"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"




Republican Jesus only has to care about the richest 53% of the people.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 20, 2012 8:30 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


I loved Santorum's comment when I heard it (Daily Show I think?). At least he admitted that the people who supported him are stupid. It's about time.

Do these people REALIZE some of the things they say?? Romney's different, because he wasn't saying it publicly, he was talking to guys like himself, but that comment by Santorum is hysterical.

If I WERE to choose a mental illness for these guys, it would be Narcissistic Personality Disorder, a condition in which people have an inflated sense of self-importance and an extreme preoccupation with themselves. Some of the symptoms are:

• React to criticism with rage, shame, or humiliation

• Take advantage of other people to achieve his or her own goals

• Have excessive feelings of self-importance

• Exaggerate achievements and talents

• Be preoccupied with fantasies of success, power, beauty, intelligence, or ideal love

• Have unreasonable expectations of favorable treatment

• Need constant attention and admiration

• Disregard the feelings of others, and have little ability to feel empathy

• Have obsessive self-interest

• Pursue mainly selfish goals

Sound like anyone we know?
Quote:

Republican Jesus only has to care about the richest 53% of the people.

Uh, only as long as those people aren't homosexuals, illegal immigrants, favor birth control, or, or, or...


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 20, 2012 2:39 PM

OONJERAH



Psychotic self-righteousness has, for quite a while, been the sin that boggles me most.

I may be a liar, cheat, thief, bully, baby raper and torturer of animals. I am able to
ignore my own sins completely by pointing out the sins of others. I seek sins where none
exist that I may accuse the innocent. When I can convince others of these non-existent
sins, I feel vindicated and Godlike. What's weird is I've become able to believe my own
lies.

AKA hypocrisy. If you're a complete prick, pass it on, pass judgement on others.

• Avoid self-honesty at all costs.

• Cultivate rage.


=========================
I am convinced that life is 10% what happens to me and 90% of how I react to it. ~Charles R Swindoll

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 20, 2012 3:13 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA:

More fuel for that fire, this.
Of course, in this case it's more the usual Republican squeazeling to try and avoid the consequences of their actions, which is all too typical, but I really do think there's something to it, even from a meta point of view.

Modern Conservatism and RightWing-Authoritarianism really do strike me as an offshoot of Sociopathy and/or Narcissistic Personality Disorder, simply given a thin veneer of acceptable politics, a fictional gloss to excuse behavior that would be to any sane, empathetic and humane person... unthinkable.
And certainly unacceptable.

I however am dubious of what to do about it, cause the whole notion of pyschologically reconditioning people in defiance of their will strikes me as unconscienable even if it were my bitterest enemy, certainly I've stood against it long enough to feel that way - but how then do you treat this awful disorder ?
Me, I reccommend rope....


How MUCH of that is tongue in cheek, I ain't tellin.

-Frem



Truly disturbing that , from this one case, you're more than willing to cast a net over anyone and everyone who is a conservative. Further, you go on to talk about authoritarianism, all while blissfully blind to this Thought Police assessment of anyone you see as YOUR enemy.

And THEN to suggest conservatives KILL themselves...

Talk about the crazies running the nut house!


This strikes me as similar to the reprehensible act of when the American Psychiatric Assn once surveyed over a thousand 'doctors', who responded on whether Barry Goldwater was mentally fit to even BE President.

Quote:

The survey, highly unscientific even by the standards of the time, was sent to 12,356 psychiatrists, of whom 2,417 responded. The results were published as a special issue: “The Unconscious of a Conservative: A Special Issue on the Mind of Barry Goldwater.”

The psychiatrists’ assessment was brutal. Half of the respondents judged Mr. Goldwater psychologically unfit to be president. They used terms like “megalomaniac,” “paranoid” and “grossly psychotic,” and some even offered specific diagnoses, including schizophrenia and narcissistic personality disorder.

Only 27 percent of the respondents said Mr. Goldwater was mentally fit, and 23 percent said they didn’t know enough about him to make a judgment.



Even back nearly 50 years ago, the lack of ethics of the ASA was on full parade. To diagnose an individual, w/ out ever doing any sort of personal assessment, study, or interview, and then go public w/ any sort of a " finding ", is Orwellian to the hilt.


Modern socialism and Left-wing authoritarianism really do strike me as an offshoot of Sociopathy and/or Narcissistic Personality Disorder, simply given a thin veneer of acceptable politics, a fictional gloss to excuse behavior that would be to any sane, empathetic and humane person... unthinkable.

And certainly unacceptable.


" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 20, 2012 3:27 PM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Modern socialism and Left-wing authoritarianism really do strike me as an offshoot of Sociopathy and/or Narcissistic Personality Disorder, simply given a thin veneer of acceptable politics, a fictional gloss to excuse behavior that would be to any sane, empathetic and humane person... unthinkable.

And certainly unacceptable.

I was about to dissect and expose the irrationality behind this statement, but all that work would be to no avail; you will still believe what comforts you most, and the rest here already are aware of what the truth is, so I'll just say: BOLLOCKS.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 20, 2012 3:35 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


You were gonna dissect the quote until you realized that I wasn't the one who originally said it, is what you really mean.

If Frem says it, you're cool w/ it. But if I make 1 small change, it becomes " irrational "?


Double bollocks , right back to you, my good sir!




" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 20, 2012 3:41 PM

STORYMARK


Because Chris is a grown up, and grown ups understand that changing the wording of something... changes the meaning of the thing. That's why we have different words for different things.


Note to anyone - Please pity the poor, poor wittle Rappyboy. He's feeling put upon lately, what with all those facts disagreeing with what he believes.

"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum


"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 20, 2012 3:42 PM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
You were gonna dissect the quote until you realized that I wasn't the one who originally said it, is what you really mean.


No, but it doesn't matter.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 20, 2012 3:44 PM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:
Because Chris is a grown up,

Whoah ho ho wait! I wouldn't go THAT far!
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 20, 2012 4:03 PM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by CHRISISALL:
Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:
Because Chris is a grown up,

Whoah ho ho wait! I wouldn't go THAT far!
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!



It's all relative, and look at the comparison.



Note to anyone - Please pity the poor, poor wittle Rappyboy. He's feeling put upon lately, what with all those facts disagreeing with what he believes.

"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum


"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 20, 2012 4:08 PM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:
It's all relative, and look at the comparison.

Oh, okay, that's valid.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 20, 2012 4:55 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:
Because Chris is a grown up, and grown ups understand that changing the wording of something... changes the meaning of the thing. That's why we have different words for different things.



Yeah, and grown ups also understand that the comment , as originally stated, is every bit is absurd as when I repeated it, with the minor alteration.

That point flew right over your head, I see.

Crassic.


" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 20, 2012 10:57 PM

OONJERAH



Oonj's in-depth appraisal of politics in the USA today:

The authoritatian Right is nuttier than the authoritarian Left.
So much nuttier, that the Left can't catch up even when they try.

i.e., Modern conservatism to a degree of true Mental illness.

• Rigid and incapable of learning from their mistakes.

• Lacking in common sense.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 20, 2012 11:46 PM

FREMDFIRMA



Oh please, Rappy - how would you find it disturbing when you KNOW I want them dead ?
I mean, it's not like I ever made any secret of wanting a massive, bloody, Robespierrian PURGE, is it ?

Newsflash: Modern so-called Conservatives would burn folks like me at the stake if they could only get away with it, and would in a heartbeat deathmarch or rendition those who disagree with em.
They have made no secret of this either.
YOU see any room for common ground there any more ?
Cause I sure as hell don't - so when the other guy wants to do you and cannot be negotiated with, the smartest plan is to DO THEM FIRST.

But fucked if I would put even that plan in the hands of a Government, hell no.
I find it amusing that your tremendously gaping psychological blind spot does not allow you to see that I stand against forced psychological conditioning of anyone, even folks whom I'd see dead.
But if you wanna whine about the APA busting Goldwaters chops - how about kids who are sent to religious indoctrination hellholes like Teen-challenge and having religion BEATEN into them under conditions which would bring a fucking war crimes trial if you did that shit to adults - sentenced for petty bullshit which amounts to more or less being young and without rights, and by american fucking courts, our so-called justice system, tossed in these places.
Right here, in america - and GUESS who the dickheads supporting this are, hmm ?
Helpful hint: They're all Conservative, every single one.

Makes your how-dare-they-examine whimper in regards to Goldwater look a bit like a feather tickle in comparison, dunnit now ?

I am also neither left wing, nor authoritarian, nor socialist, you dumb cowardly quisling, milquetoast pissant - if you're gonna take a flamethrower to my politics at least have the goddamn good sense to AIM IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION you moronic, knuckle dragging mockery of a prefrontal lobotomy.

PROTip: Frem is an ANARCHIST, say it with me now, AN-ARCH-IST, come on, you can do it.

Also, I by no means suggested they do themselved in, although I wouldn't mind a bit saving us the effort, but that would require a degree of introspection, personal responsibility, and moral decency they do not, and never have, possessed.

But go on, sure whine and pule and point the finger anywhere but yourself, go on and on about how much you hate those damn liberals and socialists and leftwingers, but you might wanna consider this if you can find some remaining vestige of coherent thought in that echo chamber you use for a head.

THEY are willing to negotiate with you.
*I* am NOT.
And if some day in your wildest, lonely and pathetic dreams you should some day crush them under the heels of your mass hysteria psychosis masquerading as a political movement, you will then remove the only real barrier that keeps people like me, away from people like you.


Enjoy THAT thought, willya.

-Frem

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 21, 2012 12:19 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!



Yeah, responding to that crazy drivel is going to be productive.



" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 21, 2012 3:29 AM

M52NICKERSON

DALEK!


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Yeah, responding to that crazy drivel is going to be productive.



Well Rappy at least I can say I've never heard you suggest anyone to hang themselves.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 21, 2012 4:34 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


This part of the story disturbs me.

Quote:

Shortly after Armstrong filed his federal lawsuit against Shirvell, Shirvell filed a defamation suit against Gordon in U.S. District Court. Shirvell alleged Gordon ‘s statements to the news media about him — including he was “troubled and immature young man” and “seems to be delusional” — were defamatory.

Gordon, a Bloomfield Hills-based attorney, said those statements were her opinion, but were also true.


She asked Shirvell to submit to independent medical exam by a psychiatrist or psychologist, but he declined. Now she wants the court to get involved.


“Shirvell has alleged that these statements are simply untrue,” Gordon’s attorney Sarah S. Prescott, who works for Gordon’s law firm, wrote in her motion. “In doing so, he has plainly put his mental health into controversy and (Gordon’s) ‘good cause’ for the suggested psychological examination is simply that there is no better way to get to the root of Shirvell’s actual mental and emotional well-being.”



So if this request is approved, it seems to suggest that you can accuse anyone of being crazy (or make any other claim, no matter how baseless), and, if they disagree and sue you, have the court order them to take a psychological evaluation (or otherwise prove they're innocent of the accusation).

Actually sounds like some of the 'discussions' here.

"You're crazy/a liar/a socialist/a facist/an apologist for the 1%/someone who wants something for nothing/ugly and your sister smells funny/etc.ad nauseum."

"No I'm not."

"Prove it."


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, September 26, 2012 7:13 PM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht


Boy, since I haven't been around this place has gone way downhill, (speaking of narcisism, :))

Saying that about conservativism makes no more sense than Michael Savage's "Liberalism is a Mental Disorder" book a few years back, everyone likes to slag and diss on each other by calling the other mentally ill. Very unproductive and does absolutely nothing to create understanding, productive consideration or introspective thought of any substance. In short its lamo.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 27, 2012 3:42 AM

BYTEMITE


I don't understand what exactly is so difficult about the rules of debate. Burden of proof is always on the person making the allegation. Also, a person refusing to take a psychological evaluation is not evidence in favour of them having a mental illness.

Of course, I suppose lawyers of the same cut as Ms. Gordon regularly ignore logical form and, indeed, logic itself. Who bets money that the reason for this little set up game, not only to slander the plaintiff and sway public opinion, was in fact a trap and the court appointed psychologist is predisposed to find against the plaintiff?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 27, 2012 7:07 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


The point being missed is that the person was sued for defamation. "Burden of proof is always on the person making the allegation." Isn't it true that, in legal matters, if someone says/writes that another is or does such-and-such, and the person they said/wrote that about sues them, it's up to the person suing to prove the statements are lies?

I'm not sure how psychological evaluation comes into this, it seems kind of absurd to me, but then a lot of litigation seems absurd to me.

As far as mental illness, I was saying IF I were to ascribe a mental illness, not that I thought it was so--it was mostly in jest. The simple fact remains that it's only a "mental illness" if it "severely interferes with the person's ability to function"...seems to me conservatives function just fine (well, conservatives in general anyway, not right-wing nutjobs, who are in my opinion about as "mentally ill" as left-wing nutjobs), so the point is moot.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 27, 2012 12:32 PM

BYTEMITE


Quote:

"Burden of proof is always on the person making the allegation." Isn't it true that, in legal matters, if someone says/writes that another is or does such-and-such, and the person they said/wrote that about sues them, it's up to the person suing to prove the statements are lies?


Technically yes, which is yet another reason why this is so backwards: it makes allowances for abuses like this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_burden_of_proof

Note: "The burden of proof is often associated with the Latin maxim semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit, the best translation of which seems to be: "the necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays charges."

Also: "When debating any issue, there is an implicit burden of proof on the person asserting a positive claim. "If this responsibility or burden of proof is shifted to a critic, the fallacy of appealing to ignorance is committed"."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_burden_of_proof

Now to me, the argument starts with Ms. Gordon calling this guy crazy, this guy saying he's not and suing her, and then her saying, "prove it." Logical fallacy, see?

But that's not how the system sees it.

Quote:

I'm not sure how psychological evaluation comes into this, it seems kind of absurd to me, but then a lot of litigation seems absurd to me.


It's because she's particularly smarmy person and it's almost certainly a trap. It's also an irrelevant, but often times effective tactic to ruin the credibility of the opposition.

I'm not going to bother commenting on left wing or right wing; from my point of view we're ALL crazy. And I'm the craziest. *haughty*

lol good luck to anyone trying to take THAT title from me. XD

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 27, 2012 7:26 PM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht


I'm not going to be around much until the elections are over. Have fun guys.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 27, 2012 11:05 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.



Apparently it's pretty hard to prove defamation against a public figure b/c you have to prove MALICE.


I did run across this.

The Milkovich standard

The U.S. Supreme Court adopted the legal standard for statements of opinion in its 1990 seminal opinion case Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co. The Milkovich Court described two broad categories of opinion protected by the First Amendment.

The first involves statements that are not “provable as false,” meaning the language cannot be proved true or false by a core of objective evidence. This category of opinion also involves a statement of subjective belief based on disclosed true facts. The Milkovich Court offered the following example of a statement of non-provable opinion: “In my opinion Mayor Jones shows his abysmal ignorance by accepting the teachings of Marx and Lenin.”

The second category described by the Milkovich Court involves statements that “cannot reasonably [be] interpreted as stating actual facts,” meaning “loose, figurative, or hyperbolic language which would negate the impression that the writer was seriously maintaining” an actual fact, or where the “general tenor of the article” negates the impression that actual facts are being asserted.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 27, 2012 11:32 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


"I'm not sure how psychological evaluation comes into this, it seems kind of absurd to me, but then a lot of litigation seems absurd to me."

"It's because she's particularly smarmy person and it's almost certainly a trap.* It's also an irrelevant*, but often times effective tactic to ruin the credibility of the opposition."


*In terms of burden of proof, from the small bit of reading I've done,

someone makes unflattering statements about you
Gordon called Shrivell a “troubled and immature young man” who “seems to be delusional”

you sue them for libel
Shrivell sues Gordon

the burden is on you to show the statements are false
the burden is on Shrivell to show the statements that he is a “troubled and immature young man” who “seems to be delusional” are false.

It's actually a legal necessity for Shrivell to prove he is not a “troubled and immature young man” who “seems to be delusional” in order for his lawsuit to go forward. Also, as a public figure, in addition he must prove malice.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 28, 2012 8:59 AM

BYTEMITE


1kiki: that's how it works legally, yes, but in a logical argument, which it's increasingly (and increasingly hilariously) clear that this legal case is not, it's the person making the affirmative claim who has the burden of truth. The affirmative claim in this case is that Shrivell is mentally unsound.

In an actual argument, and not a mudslinging contest that just turned the justice system into a farce (not that it ever wasn't one), Gordon would have stated evidence in support of her claim. If the evidence were completely fabricated (say she claimed he spent time in a mental institution when he hadn't), THEN Shrivell would have had a solid basis for suing her for slander. As it is, her comments are actually just an ad hominem attack, and equally as irrelevant to the conversation as this slander case.

However, I do have to point out how smarmy and tricky it is to trap someone into a catch-22 of losing credibility either way through a psychological evaluation like this. I reacted towards this in particular mostly because I've seen the tragic outcomes of tactics like that against far more sympathetic individuals.

On the other hand, because the guy in question is not all that sympathetic, I admit it's hard not to laugh at the reactionary response of clueless people with money laying around to just sue people whenever they get the slightest heartburn.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 28, 2012 1:52 PM

FREMDFIRMA



Worth remembering this creep was an assistant State Attorney General who used state resources to stalk and harrass an individual for no better reason than personal agenda and homophobia (we'll leave aside that he was employed by the apallingly corrupt Mike Cox) - up to and including trying to get him fired, showing up at his residence repeatedly, once at 1:30am, and a laundry list of behavior that is ENTIRELY consistent with having something seriously wrong in between his ears.

WHY people seem to give him a free pass boggles me, it does.
http://www.annarbor.com/news/andrew-shirvell-fired-from-job-at-attorne
y-generals-office
/
http://www.freep.com/article/20120815/NEWS06/120815041/andrew-shirvell
-no-hatred-for-chris-armstrong-testimony-lawsuit


The dude was flat-out-fired, at one time banned from UofM property, is under consideration for disbarment, and his behavior then and during is in fact sufficient to question his mental stability.

I mean, what does it TAKE to realize some of these folks in politics are a couple cans short of a sixpack ?
(Admittedly, being in politics to begin with is an indicator, sure)

And yeah verily, all this I-dun-wanna-hear-it attitude is offensive to me cause it results in lunatics being in charge of our country, disastrous consequences both on a national socio-political-economic scale, and more importantly, DIRECT consquences for some people under the lash... ffs I "don't wanna hear it" either, but when the shit these assholes get away with comes back and slaps me in the face repeatedly, in personal, unignorable ways....

Nor was it my choice to wind up at full-salvo aggressive odds with em, anyone who wants to shovel that takes-two-to-tango bullshit should ask a crime victim about that one - when a particular faction makes no bones about wishing to utterly destroy all you hold dear, or their intent to pitch you in a death camp somewhere just cause you ain't one of their jackboot lickers, WTF you expect folks like me to do, lay down and take it ?
Them who's been around here long enough knew this was coming - if they were gonna MAKE it them or me...
I'll do my utmost to make sure it's them.
Wasn't my choosing.

-Frem

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 29, 2012 8:03 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


"... it's the person making the affirmative claim who has the burden of truth ..."

That means nothing. Maybe it means something to the person being discussed, but until it comes to court, it's without weight.

And once it comes to court in this country there are two countervailing constitutional rules that protect the speaker: 1) freedom of expression and 2) innocent until proven guilty. The person who claims that you libeled them has to prove to the court that you are guilty of going beyond the bounds of free speech AND of libel. If they can't do that, then you're innocent. The burden of proof is on the person MAKING THE CHARGE IN COURT. In this case, it's on the person making the accusation of libel.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 13, 2022 5:27 PM

JAYNEZTOWN

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 13, 2022 6:36 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


A teaser from your link

Quote:

Isaac Newton’s third law of motion states that for every action in nature, there is an equal and opposite reaction. It can operate in politics, too. For example, Harvard law professor Jack Goldsmith recently wrote, “It is part of Trump’s evil genius that he elevates himself by inducing his critics to behave like him.”

Call it Trump derangement syndrome, and recognize it for what it is: something that could end up snatching defeat from the jaws of victory for the Democratic party once again in 2018 and 2020.

Signs of that possibility are apparent in the polls. President Donald Trump’s job approval has remained low, by historical standards, but it has also remained pretty steady — and has been rising, just a bit, in recent weeks.



-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE someone poor - William Blake


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Wed, November 27, 2024 23:34 - 4775 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Wed, November 27, 2024 17:47 - 7510 posts
What's wrong with conspiracy theories
Wed, November 27, 2024 17:06 - 21 posts
Ellen Page is a Dude Now
Wed, November 27, 2024 17:05 - 238 posts
Bald F*ck MAGICALLY "Fixes" Del Rio Migrant Invasion... By Releasing All Of Them Into The U.S.
Wed, November 27, 2024 17:03 - 41 posts
Why does THUGR shit up the board by bumping his pointless threads?
Wed, November 27, 2024 16:43 - 32 posts
Joe Rogan: Bro, do I have to sue CNN?
Wed, November 27, 2024 16:41 - 7 posts
Trump, convicted of 34 felonies
Wed, November 27, 2024 16:38 - 43 posts
Elections; 2024
Wed, November 27, 2024 16:36 - 4845 posts
Biden will be replaced
Wed, November 27, 2024 15:06 - 13 posts
Hollywood exposes themselves as the phony whores they are
Wed, November 27, 2024 14:38 - 45 posts
NATO
Wed, November 27, 2024 14:24 - 16 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL