The best online Debate website - DebateIsland.com! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free!
Another woman accuses Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct: Report
in News
Debra AI Prediction
Arguments
I do not think there is any kind of a dark conspiracy by Democrats. Democrats have been accusing Kavanaugh of all sins, but intentionally throwing around fake legal accusations is not really their style. Not to mention that sexual misconduct accusations have zero relation to his ability to do his job and cannot affect his standing in the government.
  Considerate: 77%  
  Substantial: 90%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.22  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 99%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 56%  
  Substantial: 83%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 99%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.14  
  Sources: 2  
  Relevant (Beta): 39%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 93%  
  Substantial: 78%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 95%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8.54  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 96%  
  Learn More About Debra
However with the revelation of the yearbook kavanaugh looks really bad now. Whether it's even true or not, Republicans should drop him and appoint another judge with less controversy before the midterms hit. It's not like there is a lack of conservative judges, and it would be simple to cut kavanaugh loose and still support the conservative agenda. If not the supreme Court is in jeopardy of being further delegitamized, probably the greatest threat to our democracy.
  Considerate: 81%  
  Substantial: 97%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.78  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 99%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 35%  
  Substantial: 52%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 4.76  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 95%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 39%  
  Substantial: 51%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 90%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 7.22  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 99%  
  Learn More About Debra
There is this legal principle called "presumption of innocence". Knowing how often people exploit the flawed legal system for personal gain, and refusing to consider a person guilty without any solid evidence, coupled with the high standing of Kavanaugh in the society - it is only reasonable to assume that, quite likely, this is a form of financial extortion. At the same time, like I said, it may be a genuine case as well.
Emotional approach to the system of justice is highly inconstructive and should not be practiced in a modern society.
  Considerate: 76%  
  Substantial: 99%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 93%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.66  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 93%  
  Substantial: 99%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 97%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.42  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 39%  
  Substantial: 79%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 90%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8.5  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 96%  
  Learn More About Debra
Democrats are creating false rape claims to take Republicans from power, which is insulting to real victims of rape. Because if this continues, no one will be able to tell if someone is faking, or a real victim.
The victim took 35 YEARS! Real evidence is gone by that time. Hell, she forgot literally everything that happened and only said "He did something illegal" with no irrefutable evidence.
Blues and Raptors handed two very toxic teams embarrassing losses, 95% of the sports world is rejoicing in the news
Repealing the Second Amendment is the first step to Totalitarianism, and it needs to be prevented to protect our freedom
http://www.atheistrepublic.com/
  Considerate: 45%  
  Substantial: 87%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 91%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8.82  
  Sources: 1  
  Relevant (Beta): 97%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 82%  
  Substantial: 75%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 97%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8.64  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 95%  
  Learn More About Debra
@YeshuaBought This attribution is irrelevant. I have been assaulted and beaten by a group of thugs so hard, I could not get off my bed for a few days - but that never caused me to treat every assault accusation as a proof of someone's guilt.
Burden of proof is a universal concept. Unless someone proves that Kavanaugh took unlawful action against them, their claims are moot. I do agree that this claim warrants an investigation, but it is unreasonable to take a stance on what actually happened in the lack of solid evidence.
  Considerate: 79%  
  Substantial: 94%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 95%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 11.34  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 97%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 71%  
  Substantial: 94%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 97%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.04  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 99%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 68%  
  Substantial: 31%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 92%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 6.02  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 98%  
  Learn More About Debra
That’s your counter argument.
Blocking people
10/10 would debate again
Blues and Raptors handed two very toxic teams embarrassing losses, 95% of the sports world is rejoicing in the news
Repealing the Second Amendment is the first step to Totalitarianism, and it needs to be prevented to protect our freedom
http://www.atheistrepublic.com/
  Considerate: 55%  
  Substantial: 35%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 64%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 7.3  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 92%  
  Learn More About Debra
https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/justice/supreme-court/article218939200.html
Also a question to further debate on this topic. Take this question outside of this specific context and try to answer it on a more philosophical level.
If you were to lead a smear campaign weaponizing fake sexual assault accusations, what steps would you take to make it as effective and likely to succeed as possible? How many people would you employ to make accusations? What details would you want them to include/exclude? How many corroboraters would you employ to back up the stories, if at all, and to what degree? What would make you consider taking the approach of sexual assault claims over claims of any other crimes? What goals would be easily achieved via sexual assault accusations, and what goals would be hard to achieve with sexual assault accusations? how risky would you consider it to approach people to make false claims/corroborate without them taking the offer to the public? The claim of fake claims is easy to make and happens often but I feel like these deeper questions are rarely explored if ever, and I truly believe in getting into the smallest of details.
Please take a lot of time to consider these questions and don't just respond with your first reactions.
  Considerate: 83%  
  Substantial: 79%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 97%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 11.02  
  Sources: 2  
  Relevant (Beta): 7%  
  Learn More About Debra
Somehow we still, in the 21st century, live in the environment where people's careers are destroyed with a few accusatory words alone. Strauss-Kahn had a very good chance to become the president of France, over the disastrous Hollande with one of the lowest ratings among all presidents throughout the whole human history - however, a hotel worker from NYC accused him of sexual harassment, and even though his name was cleared of everything and the worker was proven to have made the entire story up, Strauss-Kahn's name was forever tainted and his presidential nomination was no longer considered.
This is a very serious problem, and, in my opinion, taking a hard stance against it is much more important, than giving in to the pressure from people who judge others based on emotions and not facts - in favor of the Court that "looks good".
  Considerate: 83%  
  Substantial: 92%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 13.4  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 93%  
  Learn More About Debra
I'm seriously concerned about the standing of the supreme Court in the public eye. We've already had many county clerks refuse to issue marriage certificate to gay couples even after the supreme Court settled the issue. The courts job isn't to enforce the law but to tell us what the law is. If half the voting public doesn't believe in their ruling, or worse if those that enforce the law don't adhere to the ruling, then we are no longer a society of laws. I'd rather 100 people's lives be ruined by fake claims, including my own, than to have a significant portion of the public refuse to respect the ruling of the supreme Court.
I also think there isn't a distinction between what is worse, allowing innocent people to have their lives ruined by a false claim, or being so skeptical of all claims that many victims never get Justice. There are so many factors that go into whether a claim is believed or not and it's important to consider those factors in every case. However that discussion would be an entire other post if you want to get into the factors that influence believability.
  Considerate: 88%  
  Substantial: 98%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 98%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.14  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 95%  
  Learn More About Debra
We can't control how individuals consider the claims of the accuser and the accused, but what I think should change is how our elected officials engage with issues like this. In particular, an investigation like this shouldn't turn into a political football. Democrats shouldn't assume that Kavanaugh is or has been a sexual deviant. Republicans shouldn't (though many have) assume that the accusers are actively lying. Respecting that an investigation has not yet been carried out, and therefore that enough uncertainty exists as to warrant a stay on any remarks regarding the outcome of such an investigation, should be a given. Apparently, it's not. Similarly, without any public remarks from the accusers and the accused, many are already assuming the validity of those remarks. I don't think it should be so difficult for our elected officials to show a basic respect that comes with active consideration of the statements from both sides, yet many have already made clear that they have strong biases for one side. That's not how they should approach it before the investigation because it colors their ability to respect what they hear from the investigation.
  Considerate: 79%  
  Substantial: 97%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 13.12  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 75%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 85%  
  Substantial: 68%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 92%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.22  
  Sources: 1  
  Relevant (Beta): 75%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 83%  
  Substantial: 91%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 94%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 11.9  
  Sources: 1  
  Relevant (Beta): 80%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 88%  
  Substantial: 90%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.92  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 97%  
  Learn More About Debra
As for questioning "former classmates, friends, teachers, etc.", I think it's safe to assume that that list is a) not exhaustive, b) did not include these women, and c) did not include every potential witness of these incidents. The fact that investigations occurred and that they found no evidence of wrongdoing is not evidence that these incidents never happened. It is up to these women to furnish support for their claims, and we certainly should not assume that Kavanaugh committed these acts, but these investigations do not absolve Kavanaugh of any wrongdoing. The fact that the Senate is refusing to allow any potential witnesses beyond Ford and Kavanaugh themselves doesn't exactly show a willingness to get to the bottom of this specific case.
As for your last question, I personally don't think that being young and drunk makes for a valid excuse, particularly when we're talking about nominating someone to the highest court in the country. While some members of the Supreme Court may not be beyond reproach, I think it behooves our government to screen out anyone who has been guilty of sexual assault. Honestly, I don't care if he was 17 (at least with the Ford case); sexual assault is awful regardless of when it happens, and accountability for such acts doesn't end simply because someone got older. This isn't a speeding ticket, and it shouldn't be treated as though it doesn't matter.
  Considerate: 88%  
  Substantial: 97%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 95%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.72  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 89%  
  Learn More About Debra
All named eyewitnesses dispute Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford’s story
  Considerate: 88%  
  Substantial: 78%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 93%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.5  
  Sources: 4  
  Relevant (Beta): 67%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 81%  
  Substantial: 32%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 95%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.8  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 70%  
  Learn More About Debra
Regarding hearing from the witnesses, I am honestly just wondering why further witnesses aren't being included in the proceedings. Based on the information in those articles, I'm surprised that the Republican-controlled judiciary committee isn't calling these 3 people as evidence against her claims. The same holds for Ramirez. You would think that, if the claims of support that each has don't hold up at all, they would want to showcase just how faulty their case is and sweep both of these accusations out of the way with as much clarity at possible. Maybe they're just concerned about running up against the midterms, but I would hope that Republicans would be chiefly concerned with ensuring that their candidate is vindicated in the public eye before getting a vote. Maybe the investigation would turn up nothing, but that seems like all the more reason to pursue it. Some people may always think that Kavanaugh is guilty, no matter how much investigation is done, but most of us just want to see the due diligence done.
As for that last comment... well, you're right that there's precedent against doing something like this. I personally think that precedent is pretty awful, and I think it needs to be changed. Honestly, I don't care who it takes down, but all elected officials need to be held accountable for sexual assaults like these. Politicians may only explore cases like these only when its politically advantageous, but just because that's how it is doesn't mean that that's how it should be.
  Considerate: 81%  
  Substantial: 98%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 98%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.18  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 95%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 32%  
  Substantial: 33%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8.94  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 90%  
  Learn More About Debra
Blues and Raptors handed two very toxic teams embarrassing losses, 95% of the sports world is rejoicing in the news
Repealing the Second Amendment is the first step to Totalitarianism, and it needs to be prevented to protect our freedom
http://www.atheistrepublic.com/
  Considerate: 42%  
  Substantial: 55%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 88%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.56  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 91%  
  Learn More About Debra
"Americanism not Globalism, will be our credo." ~Donald Trump
"A communist is like a crocodile" ~Winston Churchill
  Considerate: 64%  
  Substantial: 77%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 93%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.1  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 98%  
  Learn More About Debra
I think the questions you posed, while valid, do not override the principle of presumption of innocence. It is not that I assume that the women are lying; it is that I do not take their words as expressions of truth until a properly conducted investigation collects evidence and confirms their claims. But to respond to the questions nonetheless, I would say that the primary reason to falsely accuse a rich person of sexual harassment is to force them to settle the suit with a large payment, as it tends to be less damaging to their reputation and, hence, finances than actually going through a due court process - even if that process in the end concludes that they are innocent. Again, Strauss-Kan's example shows that the damage done to the reputation of a person due to having to defend themselves against a sexual offense accusation cannot by any stretch of imagination be reversed by legal confirmation of their innocence: people do not remember Strauss-Kan as someone who was falsely accused, they remember him as someone who they thought could have been a sexual offender, and even if in the end he turned out not to be, that first image will forever cloud their judgment.
I also do not think that your assertion on the comparable entities is correct. You said that it is better to have a public trust in court, even if it ruins 100 people's lives. But I do not think it is just the lives of the 100 people that are ruined; it is the lives of everyone that are in danger, when a due legal process is no longer seen as required in order to assert that someone is guilty of something. The more this negligence spreads, the more and more people will be affected by it - and eventually we will live in a state similar to any third world country, where the due legal process does not exist, and courts serve merely the interests of a certain class of people, at the expense of everyone else.
On a similar note, what will the public trust in court will be like if the court is no longer seen as needed in order to assert that someone is guilty? These matters are interdependent, and letting dirty tactics revoke the candidacy of Kavanaugh right now is a big step towards making the legal system itself be easily manipulated though dirty tactics.
  Considerate: 84%  
  Substantial: 98%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 99%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 13.1  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 95%  
  Learn More About Debra
http://www.middlebury.edu/media/view/240971/original/sable—article.pdf
You're essentially treating these women as less believable on the basis that they weren't the perfect victims, i.e. that they didn't seek justice for the abuse in a short period of time. In the words of a woman who was raped and chose not to report the crime for many years,
"We are so often blamed: 'Why didn't you come forward? Why didn't you tell someone? Why did you tell someone but not in this way?'" Turkos said. "It makes us fall back into this 'perfect victim' narrative: this is how a rape victim should look like, this is how they should act, this is how they should behave, this is how they should report."
https://abcnews.go.com/US/women-report-sexual-assaults-survivor-speaks/story?id=57985818
It's fine if you don't believe them because of a lack of evidence. Frankly, that's a judgment call based on the person with whom you sympathize/empathize. But it's altogether different to dismiss them outright for how long it took them to report their abuse. Wherever you're setting your arbitrary deadline for reporting assault, it seems incredibly dismissive of the struggle women face after such abuse.
  Considerate: 72%  
  Substantial: 88%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.8  
  Sources: 2  
  Relevant (Beta): 68%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 90%  
  Substantial: 95%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.36  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 98%  
  Learn More About Debra
That is a reasonable notion though. If someone was silent for over 3 decades and then suddenly, exactly when the person is running for a high public position and such an accusation can hurt him the most, accuses them of a sexual assault - then it is very-very unreasonable to believe that their accusation is genuine. We do not have any evidence either way, but due to presumption of innocence, and due to this extremely unlikely "coincidence", the best assumption to make is that the accusation is false.
There is no "victim shaming" involved here, because nobody has been proven to be a victim. There is simply a reasonable doubt involved. Much like some people started accusing Obama of having been born in Kenya due to some "uncovered evidence" exactly during his campaign, and were quickly proven wrong - it is most likely that here the outcome will be the same.
On a side note, there is something wrong with our society when we question the individual's professional competence based on their possible misbehavior in a drunken state 30+ years ago. I would like to see anyone who 30 years ago was representative of who they are today. People change, and 30 years is a very long period for change (in fact, it is more than has passed since my birth).
This whole story is a large political spectacle having nothing to do with whether Kavanaugh is actually guilty or not, nor with whether he is fit to occupy the position he is applying for. It is a usual "political scandal" that serves interests of a group of politicians, and Brett is caught in the middle of the show. Most people on both sides of the political spectrum have already decided what the answers to both "is he guilty?" and "is he fit for duty?" questions are. It is a sad state of affairs when these "controversies" have become a regular occurrence, rather than a rare aberration of the political system.
11 Republicans voted for his candidacy, and 10 Democrats voted against it. They do not even pretend any more that they are in any way objective; they just do whatever their party leadership expects them to do.
  Considerate: 77%  
  Substantial: 98%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 94%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 11.92  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 97%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 84%  
  Substantial: 92%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.58  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 85%  
  Learn More About Debra
On a similar note, what will the public trust in court will be like if the court is no longer seen as needed in order to assert that someone is guilty? These matters are interdependent, and letting dirty tactics revoke the candidacy of Kavanaugh right now is a big step towards making the legal system itself be easily manipulated though dirty tactics"
  Considerate: 70%  
  Substantial: 88%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.24  
  Sources: 2  
  Relevant (Beta): 57%  
  Learn More About Debra
There are so many things in here that I want to address, but I'm going to break it down to a few key points.
What you're talking about is the question of motives, and I think the fundamental assumption you're making is that she's doing this for some kind of gain, whether for herself, a political end, or whatever else it might be. I don't doubt that that's possible, but it is also reasonable to assume, like so many victims of rape and sexual assault, that she delayed making the accusation for psychological reasons. As for the "why now" question, it's honestly not that surprising that someone who was victimized by a then-unknown figure might feel triggered to take action the moment that figure becomes a major presence on the national stage. Suddenly, this person whom Ford says assaulted her is showing up on news across the country, set to become one of the most powerful legal professionals in the nation. It seems entirely reasonable that they might, given the benefit of hindsight and the distance from the trauma itself, revisit their decision not to report it previously and choose to do something in the present.
There is a reasonable question as to whether the motives of Ford or the other two women move beyond a need to seek justice for themselves and for other women they believe have been harmed by Kavanaugh. Again, I don't doubt that they may have other motives, though I don't think we should automatically assume that other motives were in play. Questioning their motives for coming forward and engaging with questions of how believable their arguments are on the basis of the actual facts of the case are not victim shaming.
That being said, what I was responding to was the accusation that, because these women decided to do so after many years, which was the point @George_Horse was making. His argument, and I'll quote him now, is as follows:
"I don't believe those women, and not because of their gender, but because when they claimed to be 'sexually assaulted' by Brett, that they did not confront the authorities about the supposed 'rapes' that occurred long ago."
That is victim shaming, the argument that because a victim chooses not to come forward immediately after the crime, because they are, in effect, not the "perfect victim" who pursues justice rapidly in the wake of a crime, they are less believable in their accusation. You say there's no victim shaming going on here because there is no certainty that anyone was victimized, but I never specified that the kind of shaming I was talking about was directed at Ford or the other women. I'm talking about all victims of sexual abuse who did not come forward in a short time after an assault because his argument applies to all of them. Your argument is more focused on engaging with the issue of reasonable doubt, but again, that's evidence-based. It's not based on how long it took for someone to come forward. I won't argue that the availability of evidence changes over time and that it affects the ability of the individual to support their case objectively. What I do find problematic is the notion that, because they waited, a sexual assault victim is inherently less believable.
The political situation is one where we agree. I don't think we're getting anywhere near a reasonable engagement with the situation, and much as I disagree with you on the importance of this particular allegation, I do believe that both sides could have handled this better. Party politics have been on full display from the start of this process, and it really should have been more objective, particularly on the part of our elected officials. We may not be able to control public opinion, but they certainly should have held themselves to a higher standard.
As for your other point, I'm a little more torn. I understand the argument that someone should not necessarily be branded for life by something they did 30+ years ago. My problems are two-fold. One, the goal here isn't to make the 17-year-old Kavanaugh representative of his current self. I don't think anyone is arguing that all of the character traits he displayed at that age should be on the table as reasons to turn him down as a candidate for the USSC. What is being argued is that a specific behavior displayed at that age (and potentially at others shortly thereafter) is disqualifying. We can argue back and forth about the importance of that behavior (though I won't argue that his professional competence is entirely separate) in making future decisions, but I think characterizing this as you have is pretty off-base. Two, if Kavanaugh is guilty of having done this, I think there is an appropriate question of how he has handled the situation. This is hypothetical, but assuming that Kavanaugh did this, it speaks quite a bit to his character in regards to how he's engaged with his accusers. Again, it may not reflect on his professional competence, but there are other factors that may be relevant to the decision to appoint him to the USSC. I have no doubt that Kavanaugh has changed with time, and he has had the opportunity to show that through these hearings. I don't think he came off particularly well.
  Considerate: 73%  
  Substantial: 87%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.8  
  Sources: 1  
  Relevant (Beta): 72%  
  Learn More About Debra
"If I wait and tell them 30 YEARS later they'll believe me for sure!"
"Americanism not Globalism, will be our credo." ~Donald Trump
"A communist is like a crocodile" ~Winston Churchill
  Considerate: 64%  
  Substantial: 81%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 89%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.86  
  Sources: 1  
  Relevant (Beta): 97%  
  Learn More About Debra