I was pretty set against Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination from the start. He was part of the right-wing hit brigade in the days of the Clinton impeachment – chasing Vince Foster murder conspiracy theories, leaking Ken Starr investigative matters to the press, and fixated on maximizing the focus on the most salacious details of the Clinton/Lewinsky affair. Wrote Kavanaugh about Clinton, “It may not be our job to impose sanctions on him, but it is our job to make his pattern of revolting behavior clear — piece by painful piece.” He then went on to suggest that Starr ask questions about, among other things, where Bill Clinton may have ejaculated when Clinton and Lewinsky were having sex. This didn’t have anything to do with the legal issues in question, Kavanaugh just wanted it to be painful for Clinton. I’ve said before that I think Gingrich and his group of partisans have been damaging to this country. Kavanaugh is from that group. If conservative judges are your thing, I think there are plenty of them without this level of baggage.
But, I think after today’s hearings with Professor Christine Blasey Ford, the opposition has deepened into something altogether stronger. This is true for me to some extent. Her testimony was credible while his demeanor was altogether unsuitable for a judge — particularly one with a lifetime appointment to the most powerful court in the world. He indulged his anger and mused about a Clinton-revenge conspiracy. This was, at the end of the day, a job interview.
But my thinking is a little abstract when I compare it to the women I know. Their reaction to these hearings has been visceral. (And, no, I’m not implying women are more emotional — Ford had much better control over her emotions than Kavanaugh. It’s just that today’s events hit more women where they live.) Ford’s testimony squares completely with a level of abuse that is pervasive and mostly invisible to a lot of men, including myself. Their reaction to Professor Ford was raw. I can’t speak for them, but I got the sense that, as she testified, they re-lived the gropes, the catcalls, the rapes, the attempted rapes, the coerced sex, the men laughing at their discomfort, the times they were told to smile, the times they were judged for what they were wearing, and on and on and on.
Then, in contrast to the very credible testimony from Professor Ford, a person who seemed like she was kind, honest, and trying to do the right thing; there were angry denials and claims of conspiracy. There was a resolute refusal to probe further. The absence of Mark Judge — a man who was allegedly in the room when Ford says that Kavanaugh forced himself on her and covered her mouth as she attempted to scream — spoke loudly about the Committee’s interest in fact-finding. The Senate Judiciary Committee has subpoena power. The committee could easily have compelled Judge’s testimony. They are evidently afraid of the clarity Judge’s testimony could bring.
Judging from what I’ve seen among many women I know, the familiarity of the sexual assault described by Professor Ford, Kavanaugh’s attempt to avoid consequences by deploying anger, and the Committee’s determination to look the other way in the face of Ford’s allegation will, I think, turn mere political disagreement into implacable opposition on the part of those women.
I have in my drafts, a post I never finished entitled “Donnelly’s dilemma.” At the time of the nomination, I thought he’d have a difficult decision to make. As a Democratic Senator in a conservative state, what to do with a Republican Supreme Court nominee can be a difficult balancing act. I think it’s easy now. Given how the Ford hearings played out, Sen. Donnelly might lose if he votes against Kavanaugh. However, I think he certainly will lose if he votes for Kavanaugh. Most Democrats will forgive a lot to keep a Senate seat, but not that.
Amen to this in its entirety.
THIS is why you have a blog and I don’t. Well stated. I hope Joe Donnelly is listening.
Thanks. But it’s times like this I wish I still blogged more frequently on less contentious and less consequential matters. That’s what (hopefully) builds an audience and credibility so that, when times like this come along, maybe my opinion can provide a nudge in the right direction.
I’m afraid that when I only resurface to add to what’s already a din of opinion, I’m just howling into the void.
Nice job. The belligerent aggressiveness mentioned by his former roommate came out in full bloom, capped off by the stunning off-the-rails conspiracy claims. He could have preceded his remarks with “Watch how I demonstrate why I shouldn’t be a judge” and things couldn’t have been clearer.
I was imagining how I would have stepped on him if I were a Senator. Years of collections has made me familiar with handling dudes with no defense but plenty of anger. (Of course, there’s a certain Walter Mitty quality to those imaginings — hard telling how I’d actually react under the full glare of that kind of moment.)
Great, great post. I will take a little lower road, but not as low as one could. Nearly all of the allegations against Kavanaugh are consistent with his adolescence and college career. He is an upper middle class privileged kid in an exclusive all male prep school. He imagined himself as a cool kid among the coolest and he likely was. Except maybe for the attempted rape, a fungible view of females and a belief in their unchallenged availibility is consistent with his experience. Joining an drunken and whoredoging frat and club at Yale is also consistent with his experience and character. We should not be surprised that Kavanaugh is a shallow sexual predator. We should be surprised if he isn’t a sexual predator.
To dismiss and exclude all of the claims of sexual misconduct and attempted rape and fawn over his unctuous lies outs Republican male senators as little better than Kavanaugh’s frat rat bros.
In determining the qualifications of someone like this, listening to his rant, I asked myself, “Would I want him to be the judge who handled my appeal?” Sort of like Trump, where I ask, “Would I want this guy to be my supervisor, employee or assigned partner in a job where he’s the only one I have to rely on in an open field?” I tremble at the thought.
Good points. If a guy like Kavanaugh or Trump has you back you had better have eyes in the back of your head.
Joe Donnelly announced he will vote against Kavanaugh’s approval. https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/28/politics/joe-donnelly-kavanaugh-nomination/index.html
Well, good. I’m seeing a couple of anti-Trump, Republican friends say that they were going to sit out Donnelly/Braun, but now they’ll vote for Braun. I kind of suspect they would have found their way to pulling the lever for Braun in any case. Regardless, I think that pales in comparison to the Democrats who would have left Donnelly in droves if he cast a “yes” vote.
Testing. Someone got a 403 Forbidden error message.
Another test.
Testing.
It worked!