From the beginning the Kavanaugh hearings before the judicial committee of the Senate have provided high drama and outrageous spectacle. Most of that spectacle has occurred outside the formal hearings themselves. The allegations of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford that the Supreme Court nominee attempted to rape her when she was 15, came after the conclusion of the hearings but not before the vote. Another woman has stepped forward to claim that judge Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her while they were freshmen at Yale. Michael Avenati, the lawyer for Trump accuser Stormy Daniels , claims that he has a client who will testify that while in high school the nominee was present while she was gang raped . Whether you believe the claims of these accusers or Kavanaugh's claims of innocence is determined largely by whether you supported Kavanaugh before these accusations came to light, or believed he must be stopped.
One Senator on the committee, Mazie Hirono, D. of Hawaii, has made up her mind. When asked by Jake Tapper of CNN, whether Kavanaugh warrants the presumption of innocence she said that she would be putting into context his attitudes and legal opinions, particularly his stance on women's reproductive rights. The correct answer to this question is an unequivocal yes. I think a yes answer is the least we could expect from a lawmaker representing Hawaii, or any other State sworn to affirm the Constitution. Her answer demonstrates either ignorance of ,or contempt for it's principals and plain meaning. Her implication is that because the judge does not share her views on abortion he no longer falls under the protection of the bill of rights. It's one thing to declare that a person is guilty after an investigation has taken place, or after they have admitted guilt, or even when evidence exists making their claims to innocence ring hollow, but prior to that, condemning them over a political disagreement is astonishingly callous. For the record, judge Kavanaugh has not made his personal views on abortion public except to affirm that Roe v Wade is the law of the land. She basis her inference that he is hostile to abortion and will seek to overturn Roe v Wade on statements by Donald Trump who suddenly became pro- life when contemplating running for President as a Republican.
David French, of National Review writes about the place that the presumption of evil plays in today's politics and particularly in the argument over judge Kavanaugh. He uses as examples of this trend Senator Hirono and others, some on the right , some on the left. People who care deeply about national issues are often prone to assume the worst about those they disagree with. It's as if they're always asking themselves " what's the most diabolical reason I can come up with to explain my opponents actions? " and then going with that. You might expect this sort of thing from politicians. They're always throwing out stuff about opponents and hoping it sticks. What's shocking is when you notice how far this virus has spread among the rest of us.
Abortion opponents don't care at all about unborn babies, or federal encroachments on State power, their sole agenda is to keep women in their place. Someone who wants to do that would probably be likely to molest a woman while they were both drunk at a teenage party years ago, or stand by as another teen girl was gang raped. Anyhow if you question the claims being made against the judge you are further victimizing the victims. Victims ought to be heard! I believe survivors! There you go, that's how the opponents to Kavanaugh sound to me. Am I mischaracterizing the opposition to Kavanaugh? I hope so. I hope they're more rational than that, but I wonder.
Here's the funny thing ,I'm writing this before the hearings into the Ford accusations on Thursday. I'm writing this before the committee vote on Friday. For all I know Dr. Ford may drop some bomb shell she's been hiding and there will be some shred of evidence, or corroborating testimony for the committee to con beyond just her words. For all I know judge Kavanaugh will withdraw himself from consideration. For all I know the apocalypse will occur on Thursday night and hold up the Friday edition. But all of that seems pretty unlikely. What does seem likely is there will not be a Perry Mason moment where the accused admits " Yes, yes, I did it" as they're dragged off the stand sobbing. What does seem likely is that even after the hearings and the vote we'll continue in our divisions, easily believing the worst about each other, dividing into tribal identities, waging tribal warfare, and believing the "facts" that best suit us. That's an easy one to predict.
One Senator on the committee, Mazie Hirono, D. of Hawaii, has made up her mind. When asked by Jake Tapper of CNN, whether Kavanaugh warrants the presumption of innocence she said that she would be putting into context his attitudes and legal opinions, particularly his stance on women's reproductive rights. The correct answer to this question is an unequivocal yes. I think a yes answer is the least we could expect from a lawmaker representing Hawaii, or any other State sworn to affirm the Constitution. Her answer demonstrates either ignorance of ,or contempt for it's principals and plain meaning. Her implication is that because the judge does not share her views on abortion he no longer falls under the protection of the bill of rights. It's one thing to declare that a person is guilty after an investigation has taken place, or after they have admitted guilt, or even when evidence exists making their claims to innocence ring hollow, but prior to that, condemning them over a political disagreement is astonishingly callous. For the record, judge Kavanaugh has not made his personal views on abortion public except to affirm that Roe v Wade is the law of the land. She basis her inference that he is hostile to abortion and will seek to overturn Roe v Wade on statements by Donald Trump who suddenly became pro- life when contemplating running for President as a Republican.
David French, of National Review writes about the place that the presumption of evil plays in today's politics and particularly in the argument over judge Kavanaugh. He uses as examples of this trend Senator Hirono and others, some on the right , some on the left. People who care deeply about national issues are often prone to assume the worst about those they disagree with. It's as if they're always asking themselves " what's the most diabolical reason I can come up with to explain my opponents actions? " and then going with that. You might expect this sort of thing from politicians. They're always throwing out stuff about opponents and hoping it sticks. What's shocking is when you notice how far this virus has spread among the rest of us.
Abortion opponents don't care at all about unborn babies, or federal encroachments on State power, their sole agenda is to keep women in their place. Someone who wants to do that would probably be likely to molest a woman while they were both drunk at a teenage party years ago, or stand by as another teen girl was gang raped. Anyhow if you question the claims being made against the judge you are further victimizing the victims. Victims ought to be heard! I believe survivors! There you go, that's how the opponents to Kavanaugh sound to me. Am I mischaracterizing the opposition to Kavanaugh? I hope so. I hope they're more rational than that, but I wonder.
Here's the funny thing ,I'm writing this before the hearings into the Ford accusations on Thursday. I'm writing this before the committee vote on Friday. For all I know Dr. Ford may drop some bomb shell she's been hiding and there will be some shred of evidence, or corroborating testimony for the committee to con beyond just her words. For all I know judge Kavanaugh will withdraw himself from consideration. For all I know the apocalypse will occur on Thursday night and hold up the Friday edition. But all of that seems pretty unlikely. What does seem likely is there will not be a Perry Mason moment where the accused admits " Yes, yes, I did it" as they're dragged off the stand sobbing. What does seem likely is that even after the hearings and the vote we'll continue in our divisions, easily believing the worst about each other, dividing into tribal identities, waging tribal warfare, and believing the "facts" that best suit us. That's an easy one to predict.
No comments:
Post a Comment