Kavanaugh Can Join Thomas.

[John V]

Do you know what 'boofing' and a 'devil's triangle' are? Most of the rest of America does now and they're not at all what Kavanaugh said. And even he doesn't seem to know the rules to a 'drinking game' called 'Devil's Triangle', and apparently neither does anyone else. It was seventies and eighties slang for a threesome with two straight men and one woman, though. Kavanaugh claimed (to a Senate Committee) that the first was a euphemism for farting and the second was a drinking game.

Funny thing is - I posted correct examples of these in this thread and it went on ignored by AM and his Trump supporters. Why? Because they knew Kavanaugh was clearly lying about those terms and they didn't have the balls to admit as much.

No, because I don't care about extraneous issues, whether for Kavanaugh or Ford.

Ford lied that she couldn't testify on Monday due to a fear of flying. Ford lied in calling herself a psychologist. That's a licensed profession in CA, she's not licensed, and it's illegal for an unlicensed person to call themselves that. I haven't mentioned these because they have nothing to do with the alleged assault.

So, if your standard is that once a person is caught in a lie, we can't trust anything they say - fine, Ford can't be trusted about the assault.

Personally I'm concerned with the inconsistencies in the time when the assault allegedly happened, or the number of people there. Those are the lies that matter.

---

Jor posted the demographics on how conservatives tend to be more invested in authority and liberals tend to be more invested in fairness.  I think that's what we are seeing here.

Or that's what researchers want to believe:

How Social Science Might Be Misunderstanding Conservatives

Imagine you and I are out for drinks at a bar. A couple beers in, apropos of nothing, I announce to you, “You know, liberals are way more authoritarian than conservatives.” “No way,” you respond. “Way,” I say, confidently. I pull a sheet of paper from my shirt pocket and slide it to you. “This is my Jesse Singal Authoritarianism Scale, or JSAS for short,” I tell you. “I had 500 people take this short scale and liberals scored way higher than conservatives.”

You look down at the scale and it reads:

For each of the following items, please indicate your level of agreement, from 1 (disagree completely) to 7 (agree completely), with a score of 4 indicating neither agreement nor disagreement.

1. In certain cases, it might be acceptable to curtail people’s constitutional rights in order to stop them from spreading climate-change denialism.

2. The government needs to do a much more comprehensive job monitoring Christian-oriented far-right terrorism.

3. Some people want to act like the causes of racism are complicated, but they aren’t: Racists are moral failures, and that’s that.

If you’re a thoughtful reader, you will, of course, find my claim ludicrous. By dint of the subject matter of my questions the test is basically built to “discover” that liberals are more authoritarian than conservatives. All my questions are rigged in a manner that will, in almost all likelihood, cause political liberals to score more highly than political conservatives on the scale, thus spitting out the “finding” that liberals are more authoritarian.

The above, fictional questionnaire is an extreme example, but a growing insurgency within social and political psychology has begun to argue, credibly, that a version of this has been going on for decades — only the other way around. Liberal psych researchers, centering their work on liberal values and political opinions, have built up a body of knowledge that is fundamentally flawed and biased. As a result, certain false ideas about conservatives and how they differ from liberals may have taken hold.