What the Kavanaugh Hearings Tell Us About America

Looking at the Kavanaugh nomination circus, anyone who has half a brain knows the process is broken, though sadly many choose not to see what they know.  So, what does this tell us – not only about the Kavanaugh hearings, but about America itself?  Let me suggest a few things.

We are losing America as we know it.   The original motto of our Country, adopted by act of Congress, in 1782, is “E pluribus Unum.”  That means “From many, one.”  Even though changed to "In God we trust" in 1956, "e pluribus unum" has been for 200+ years a perfect description of our country:  many diverse people with diverse views come together under one rule of law, set forth in the Constitution.  That Constitution’s guidelines allow us to hold our individual beliefs yet bind us together as one people who believe in liberty and justice for all.  It sets forth principles of due process which provide for fair and equal treatment and which are essential for any form of democracy.   Because we held our Constitution and the rule of law in high esteem, we were able to disagree, sometimes heatedly, about policy and actions of the country while at the same time all believing in and hoping for the success and vitality of our democracy and our country.

We have lost this.  With the rise of identity politics we have devolved into tribes, each concerned primarily with their own interests and not with the good of the country or of the individuals who make up one or another tribe.  We have become willing to ignore the rule of law and the Constitution as tribe fights against tribe.

The Kavanaugh hearing has become about women and the MeToo movement.  Dr. Ford has lost her individual identity to become simply a representative of the tribe of MeToo women.  That tribe seems to be at war with the tribe of white, conservative men as represented by Judge Kavanaugh, or simply the tribe of non-activist judges that one would anticipate a non-liberal president to appoint. 

Dr. Ford is not all women; she is one woman, one individual and this is one alleged event.  This is not a trial of all women vs. all men.  Yet that is what it seems to have become.  And, in so becoming we have thrown out the core democratic principles of due process.  Now, rather than evidence, what matters is who puts on the best show – who is the most “compelling” witness, who cries or does not cry, who is the most sympathetic.  We ask “should a man be brought to tears by what he claims is an unfounded allegation?”  Does that mean he is weak?  What we are doing is painting all men with one brush, not seeing each person as the individual he or she is.  We are one tribe against another.

We see the rise of tribes playing out in our elections as well.  We are told to vote for someone because they are a woman or a Native American or a Black or an Hispanic or an Immigrant or a Republican or a Democrat or a veteran or a Muslim or – the list goes on.  We no longer look for the candidate who is best for America, but the one who will represent the tribe that we may happen to favor.  Similarly, in the Kavanaugh nomination, we have forgotten about the Constitution and the qualifications of a Justice.  It has become nothing more than a battle for tribal power.

Looking at the Kavanaugh hearings, we should be alarmed by how little the Constitution means to so many.  We should be alarmed at how the media, rather than present facts objectively and fully to the people, participate as propaganda machines for one or another tribal interest.  It has almost become a game – whom do you believe?   It is little more than a reality show; I’m surprised they haven’t asked people to call in with their judgment – text 1 for Kavanaugh, 2 for Ford.  This is not justice, this is not due process, this is not representative of what the Constitution and this Country stand for.

The Kavanaugh circus, which has turned into a Show Trial and which ignores the rule of law demonstrates how easily we are able to ignore the Constitution.  This ignoring of process began when the Democrats sat on Dr. Ford’s allegation when they could have brought it forth in closed session during the original hearing.  The Democrats chose not to do so, but instead held it as a weapon, meanwhile finding a lawyer and Democrat operative to advise Ford.  Only when it seemed that Kavanaugh would be confirmed did the Democrats bring the allegation forward – not for Ford, but as a weapon against Kavanaugh.  At that point I wish Sen. Grassley had said, “too bad, too late, hearing closed.  Go bring your allegation in court.”  But he did not.  Because of fear of the MeToo coalition he put the rules aside and reopened the hearing.  Then, when the Democrats weren’t yet ready to present Ford we had delay upon delay upon delay as hearing deadlines came and went for things like her “fear of flying” which we learned from her own testimony is bogus.  Her lawyers wouldn’t agree to the committee's offer to come to Dr. Ford when they were under the impression she feared flying, but again, from Ford’s testimony it appears she was never told this was a possibility.  This all reeks of stall tactics not for justice or concern for Dr. Ford, but as part of the attack on Judge Kavanaugh and the tribe he represents, a tribe which has been declared the enemy of the Democrats.

This ease with which we ignore the rule of law that once held us together sets a very dangerous precedent.  In the Kavanaugh circus we have thrown out the rules because of fear of various tribal interests and emotional hysteria.  There is no due process for either party and the Constitution and rule of law have become a casualty as people justify the use of any means necessary to achieve their end goal of victory for their tribe.   This has become an example of mob rule, not rule of law.  In this case, by following the precedent that the rules don't matter, the vote on Kavanaugh could be delayed forever as the Kavanaugh opponents parade out allegation after allegation and demand investigation after investigation. Like Stalin's Beria, they have their victim, they will continue to search for the crime.  This case is especially troubling because of the way the Democrats have used Ford, demonstrating that they care less about the individual and her anguish than about their own political power.

But, beyond this case, we are seeing a precedent where we are willing to ignore the rule of law – the constitution – to serve political ends.  If we are willing to do that here, then really that document, the Constitution, that binds us all together with rights and responsibilities that apply to all, has lost its meaning.  And when it has lost its meaning then we as a country have lost our meaning – we are no longer one people, but a bunch of tribes each fighting for our own interests. 

This crisis of America did not begin with the Kavanaugh hearing.  It has been building for years – years long before Donald Trump even became a politician.  It is fueled by lack of education about the fundamentals of our government and objective history of our country and its place in the world.  It is fueled by a media that cares less about truth than about ratings and that is more than willing to become a propaganda machine for one or another group.  And, it is boosted by the use of identity politics that raise a tribal identity over the individual and then foment the hatred of one tribe against another.

America is now, however, at a true and important crossroad.  Will we continue on the path of tribalism, or will we stand against it and for the unified America that holds the Constitution and the rule of law as its unifying and guiding principle?  Will we assume that all people of a particular tribe think and act the same, or will we recognize people as the individuals that they are?  Are we willing to sacrifice our individual voices and the reason and fairness of the rule of law to a world where tribe fights tribe by suppressing all opposing voices?  Or, are we able to accept our imperfect democracy and work to save it?  Are we still able to welcome diverse voices and viewpoints all with a common cause of protecting and defending the Constitutional freedoms, rights, and responsibilities that have made America a shining example to the world for over 200 years? 

Now is the time to decide, because once we throw out our common purpose and its guiding principle, then it will be very hard, if not impossible, to get it back.   I truly believe that anyone who cares about this country and the freedom, justice, and fairness for which it stands needs to stand up and speak out now or I really fear what we will become.

What We Learned From Today's Hearing

The testimony of Ford and Kavanaugh ended about an hour ago.  So here are my initial observations about what have we learned today:

1. That some people do not find Ms. Ford credible while others do, and some feel that they must defer to her simply because she is a woman.  Some find Ms. Ford credible in the sense that something happened to her or that she truly believes that something happened.  As Sen. Booker said, she “told her truth.”

2. We don’t really know what “her truth” is.  There is absolutely no proof that her truth is actually the true facts of what happened.  Ms. Ford has produced no corroborating evidence and the supposed witnesses she produced have all denied under penalty of perjury that what she claims happened did not happen.

3. Once the allegation that the Democrats held secretly for weeks was made public, the Republican members have conducted investigations that the Democrats refused to participate in.  The senate judiciary website documents the investigations in detail.  These investigations are not unlike the investigations that would be conducted by the FBI; an FBI investigation would simply ask the same questions that have already been asked.  An FBI investigation does not make conclusions about the testimony.

4. Judge Kavanaugh steadfastly denies the accusations against him.  He actually has some contemporaneous evidence in the form of his calendar/diary for the period of time during which Ms. Ford claims the event occurred.  That calendar/diary records the events, including gatherings and parties, that Judge Kavanaugh attended during the summer of 1982 (when the event allegedly occurred).  The party that Ms. Ford describes is not listed.

5. What we have is two people whose testimony conflicts.  The accuser has brought forward no corroborating evidence and that which she proffered to the committee did not support her testimony.  It is not Judge Kavanaugh's duty to prove himself innocent, but the duty of an accuser to prove her allegations.

6. The Democrats could have brought Ms. Ford’s allegations forward to the committee and had them investigated out of the public eye as was Ms. Ford’s wish, but instead they chose to use them politically as a means of stalling the appointment of a Justice to the Supreme court.  Their plan, long before Ms. Ford came forward, was to keep Kavanaugh from the court by any means necessary.  Ms. Ford, sadly, became a weapon of the Democrat’s political agenda.

7. Democrats do not believe that these accusations entitle Kavanaugh to due process.  Yet, these are criminal allegations and while they may have been brought forward in the wrong venue (i.e. not the court of law where she still could have brought the charges), in this country under our Constitution, an accused is entitled to due process.  One is not found guilty of criminal charges without proof beyond a reasonable doubt.  To determine, based on allegation alone, that Ford's story is true in essence finds Kavanaugh guilty of the accusations, requiring him to live with that pronouncement for the remainder of his life.

8. The argument that this is not a criminal prosecution so no need for proof just does not fly.  It reeks of McCarthyism and Communist Show Trials.  Yes, it is not a criminal trial in the sense that it is not taking place in a court of law, but rather in some way attached to the nomination hearing.  Nonetheless, the effect is the same on the accused; in fact, it is really worse because if a decision is made just on who is “more believable” then there is never a definitive decision about the guilt or innocence of the Judge and he will live the rest of his life with this question hanging over his head.  Similarly, Ms. Ford will spend the rest of her life with the question of whether he story was provable or not/whether it was really true or not.

9. Democrats’ search and destroy mission continues as they have already obtained a URL for the next website dedicated to stopping the next judge.

10. To keep a qualified jurist from the Supreme Court because of unsubstantiated allegations is a new low for the politics of hatred and a serious wound to our Constitution and our Democracy.

11. There is also the effect on women and the MeToo movement which I have previously addressed.  Suffice it here to say that demanding all women be believed or that all men must be guilty not only destroys a basic tenet of our Constitution, it also has a way of minimizing the true and serious allegations of sexual misconduct while at the same time demeaning women with the implication that they must be so weak that they can’t stand up to the demands of proving their case.  It also has a way of creating a victim mentality in all women.

12. This is a completely unsubstantiated allegation against the nominee (note, I am not saying that Ms. Ford did not suffer some sort of sexual encounter with someone, nor am I saying that she does not believe it was with Kavanaugh, nor am I saying we should not have sympathy for whatever it is that she is going through).  An accusation, without more, is not enough to give rise to a no vote against an otherwise qualified candidate.  That is true regardless of one’s political views or views about women or the MeToo movement or anything else.   We know what the votes were going to be before these allegations were made.  Despite delays and efforts to find some sort of corroboration, they still have no proof other than the words of the accusers. The Democrats would have us delay further, conduct duplicate investigations,  as they search for something/anything to completely destroy the judge. What they are doing is making a mockery of the nomination process.  Anyone who changes their vote based on the flimsy accusation presented here should not be reelected; it is clear that they have no understanding of fairness or our constitution or our democracy.

Kavanagh – Today’s Thoughts.

So, now the Thursday hearing is in jeopardy and suddenly more accusers have discovered their memories.  Just a few points:

1. Ms. Ford has received far too many concessions already.  If this accusation had been brought in a court of law (as it should have been if the goal was justice and not political gain), a hearing date would have been set, Ford would have had to appear or her claim would be dismissed, and she would have no choice about who would question her or the format of the questions or of the hearing.  Fairness and due process would have been afforded to both parties.

2. This is not about justice for what Ms. Ford alleges happened.  This is about destroying a man whose views are not in accord with those who are now using Ms. Ford and a smear campaign to keep a qualified jurist from the bench.  They are willing to throw out rules of fairness, justice, democracy in order to further their own power.  They don’t care about Ms. Ford or the American people.  They just want to destroy their opposition.

3. The question before the Senate is whether or not Judge Kavanaugh should become Justice Kavanaugh, not whether rules of fairness and justice, including the concept of innocent until proven guilty, should be waived for any woman with an unsubstantiated accusation.

4. Nor should this one alleged incident be the sole criteria for the nomination.  Even if this were proven true, it would be one event – one teenage act of poor judgment – to be weighed with 30+ years of adulthood, and with especial emphasis on his proven abilities as a judge.  If one incident during the teen years when the mind is not fully developed is enough to destroy one’s life forever, than there are few people on earth whose lives should not be ruined.  In a court of law, crimes, including murder, that take place before adulthood are usually tried and sentenced in juvenile courts with likely expungement of records when adulthood is reached.  The law recognizes the difference between a teen indiscretion and an intentional adult act.

5. Women are not victims as the MeToo movement would have us believe.  Giving a MeToo accuser everything she wants simply because she brings forth an accusation does nothing for women’s rights.    We all know that not all accusations are true and that there are many reasons for bringing an accusation forward.  But to treat all accusations, especially those with no supporting evidence, as true cheapens those that are true and provable and in a way makes them more suspect.  Additionally, demanding that a woman be believed without more, without the due process that justice demands, in a way makes all women victims – they are apparently unable to stand up for themselves but instead must be coddled and believed with nothing more.  This is unfair to both men and women and horribly contrary to the justice that we all should demand.

6. I think women are strong – stronger than the treatment of Ms. Ford would have us believe.  When she decided to come forward (and especially because she had hired legal counsel) she knew what she was getting into.  She is a well educated woman; it is time we stopped babying her.   While she may or may not be emotionally distraught, this is America; we do not let any type of accuser (even those who represent some cause or identity group that many support) destroy another human being without far more than an accusation.  I suspect that Ms. Ford knows that even if she is being counseled otherwise.

7. Perhaps what Ms. Ford claims happened indeed did happen.  Perhaps there is more to the story.  Perhaps different individuals were involved.  Perhaps this is a memory that she has somehow constructed in her mind over the course of 36 years and truly believes it is true, even if it is not.  Or perhaps it is all a fabrication.  Since she has brought this allegation forward, she must allow her allegation to be questioned and examined in a way that is fair and just to both individuals involved.

8. This is a criminal allegation and should be given the due process standards that criminal allegations deserve.  It should not be tried in the media or the court of public opinion or based upon a political or identity group’s agenda.

9. These hearings are a complete farce.  Before they began we had the Democrats in unison telling us they would not vote for Kavanaugh no matter what was said at the hearings.  They had Ms. Ford’s accusation but did not bring it forward.  They waited, hoping it would look like Kavanaugh would not get the votes he needed, but, when the hearings ended and he had proven himself to be an outstanding jurist and the vote seemed certain in his favor, the Democrats then brought forward the unsubstantiated allegation and demanded a hearing.  That served as a nice delay.  And delay.  And delay.  And still delay.  The accuser and her Democrat attorneys made demands for the hearing that essential threw out any semblance of fairness, instead weighting the hearing in the accuser’s favor before it has even begun.  Sadly, the Republican leadership, apparently fearful of this woman who can’t stand up for herself or show up at a hearing, caved to many of the demands.  Yet we still have no certain hearing as demands continue.  And now, the call having been put out for more, we have other accusers.  Yet, all the witnesses named by the accusers have said nothing happened.  No matter.  It’s all about delay and keeping a good jurist from the bench.

10. We can easily infer that the Democrats’ concern is not with Ms. Ford or women victims of violence when we look at their reactions to members of their own party who have been accused with actual substantiating evidence, unlike this case.  When it is one of their own, the women are ignored, shamed, or in some other way silenced while excuses are made and inquiries are not held.  In those instances it is rare that there is a demand that the woman must always be believed.

11. This has really got to stop.  I don’t care how many more “memories” are suddenly found.  I don’t care what other concessions Ford and her attorneys demand.  There is a hearing set for Thursday.  She can come testify or she can go home.  Anyone else has had plenty of time to come forward.  They have lost their chance to testify here.  If they really feel aggrieved, let them go to a court of law and seek justice as Ms. Ford should have done.

12. This smear campaign, in addition to making a mockery of the judicial nomination process, has a frightening chilling effect on the future of our democracy.  If those who step forward to serve are forced to face what Judge Kavanaugh is now enduring, how can we expect good people to come forward?   This is a way of silencing those views with which one party does not agree.  A democracy requires diverse views.  It deserves good public servants who do not have to go through the equivalent of a Salem Witch trial and risk the destruction of their lives as well as the lives of their families in order to serve.

13. This whole circus is a full out attack on Democracy.  It is time that it stop, that a vote is taken and that decisions are made based on the criteria for sitting as a Justice, not on the basis of a 36 year old unsubstantiated teenage allegation and the undemocratic demand that all women must be believed, period, without more, without proof,  without due process for the accused, and in direct opposition to democracy’s core belief in innocent until proven guilty.  Proof does not and cannot consist of someone’s accusation alone.

14. I have trouble keeping up with this ridiculous spectacle.  I want to ignore it, but no American should.  Rather, we should all stand up against what is going on and demand a return to fairness, justice, and the rule of law.

My past 3 blogs have addressed some of the above and some other points in more detail – I encourage you to read them:

https://ps.pinkspolitics.com/2018/09/this-is-crucial-moment-for-america.html  This addresses the convergence of tactics used by the Left for over 30 years to keep conservative, non-activist jurists from the Appellate and Supreme Court benches with the use of identity politics and its companion hatred as a weapon against those standing in the way of a political agenda.

https://ps.pinkspolitics.com/2018/09/purging-enemies-of-party-with.html This includes the parallels between this demand of a guilt sentence upon accusation alone to the same tactics of accusation alone used by dictatorships to silence and remove the opposition.  It discusses democracy’s need for due process and fairness and a real belief in innocence until proof of guilt is shown.

https://ps.pinkspolitics.com/2018/09/its-about-more-than-nominee-its-about.html  This is about the broader implications for our country of this nomination and the farce that it has become.  If we let the Democrats get away with their antics, if we let them stop a perfectly valid nomination based on accusation and innuendo alone, then we are empowering further their assault on our democracy and we are well on the way to losing America as we know it.

See also: https://ps.pinkspolitics.com/2017/11/me-too-does-not-empower-you.html, a post from last year about the MeToo movement

This is a Crucial Moment for America

There are two major political practices in our country today that are converging to make the circus that is the Kavanaugh nomination a frightening and serious moment in American history.

One is the historical (beginning at least as long ago as the 1980s;  for a summary of some of the most egregious see: http://video.foxnews.com/v/5839042505001/?#sp=show-clips)  efforts by the Left to keep from the bench (both Supreme and Appellate Courts) judges appointed by non-Leftist administrations; judges that hold the view that a judge must focus on law, not policy, and should interpret and apply but not create law.  This view, while consistent with the Constitution, contrasts with progressive views that would like to have more partisan judges willing to make, change, or ignore law when policy demands; that is, they seek activist judges.

The trouble with this is that the attempt to destroy via unsubstantiated accusations just because one doesn’t agree with the philosophy of the nominee is totally un-American.  In this country we have elections and when a more conservative party wins, of course they will appoint more conservative jurists.  The answer is not to smear these nominees with false and unfounded accusations, but simply to win the next election.  And, in the meantime, to use the actual criteria (as laid out in our Constitution) for choosing a Justice.

The other practice is the use of identity politics to stir up hatred that can then be channeled against those standing in the way of progressive power as well as assist in the unfair and unfounded attacks against those with differing views.  This method creates an identity group, finds affronts to members of that group, and then demands that any accusation of that group be believed without more.  The Left uses these identity accusations to gin up a sort of mob-hatred against anything that might keep them from power.  (An interesting piece on the underpinnings and beginnings of the hatred that goes hand in hand with identity politics is: https://outline.com/TXW6L8)\

There are historical parallels to this mob-like hysteria.  Of course the Salem Witch Trials come to mind.  But also, what about the lynchings of Blacks in the south?  A white woman could claim a Black man sexually assaulted her and without more he would likely be lynched.  More recently, the instigation of anti-white and/or anti-law enforcement hatred reached a peak during the Obama administration as many believed any Black person arrested or injured by law enforcement was wronged and the police became targets of both verbal and physical assaults including murder.  Individual incidents and their facts become no longer relevant as an entire identity group is urged to rise up against another group.  And now we have MeToo where “women must be believed.”  That command goes directly against our Constitution.

America was founded as a democratic republic.  It has stood as a shining light to other countries, especially those whose people live under dictatorial regimes with little if any freedom of thought or speech.  One key underpinning of our democracy has been the principle that one is innocent until proven guilty.

That phrase, uttered often and easily, actually has great and deep significance.  If one can be found guilty without proof or evidence, without any sort of due process, without an opportunity to face his or her accuser and tell his or her side, without the opportunity to cross-examine the accuser to pull out additional or questionable facts, without all the procedures that we equate with fairness and justice, then the many freedoms and rights that we hold dear fail and fall.  And without those rights, our country as we know it must also fall.

Allowing one to be determined guilty on the mere accusation of another  silences all our First Amendment rights.  One cannot speak freely, hold religious beliefs, express those beliefs, associate with others if someone else who finds those words, beliefs, actions offensive can simply accuse with the result that the accused is in someway cast aside and silenced.

Yet isn’t that what we see happening now?  The accusation against Brett Kavanaugh should not be used as a political tool to thwart the Constitution and our Democratic Republic form of government.  If the accusation actually occurred, or even if Ms. Ford simply believes it occurred, her claim should receive the due process that our Constitution demands.  That includes both due process for the accuser and due process for the accused.  And, that is why this accusation belongs in a court of law where the goal is justice, achieved through due process, rather than a goal of revenge and political gain.

There is another concern with the use of these tactics (questionable accusations to derail nominations of otherwise qualified jurists and identity politics to foment mob hatred against those standing in the way of the fomenters’ power).  As it becomes clear that those qualified individuals on the wrong side of the hatred will be vilified and destroyed, it becomes less and less likely that they will come forward to serve their country.  How many people are willing to put themselves and their families through the ordeal that Judge Kavanaugh is currently enduring?

Without diverse voices and the freedom to express them we lose a key ingredient of our democracy and instead begin to approach the necessary environment for a thriving dictatorship.  My two previous blog posts have discussed some of these points further.  I encourage you to read them.  Today I want to encourage everyone who cares about this country to open their eyes and see what is happening.  If your political leanings are on the Left, please open your eyes and see what your group is doing to America.  I realize that some on the Left no longer believe in America and seek to fundamentally change it.  I argue that this is a huge mistake.

I urge people to review history.  Countries which silence opposing viewpoints – by accusation and by intimidation – end up being a very unpleasant place for the majority of their people.  It seems to me that the convergence of political hatred and quests for power with ignorance of the very nature of our country and its constitution along with a willingness to ignore what it stands for have reached a critical mass; this is the time to either take a stand and say STOP or to acquiesce in the movement of this country to a very different and far less free place.  It is time to look beyond today and see the direction we are headed; if we allow this country to continue to veer Left to the point that it is no longer recognizable as the great country that it is, then it will be its own people that will have extinguished its shining light and they will have no one to blame but themselves.

Purging “Enemies of the Party” with Accusation Alone

In Communist Russia under Stalin, people were sent to the Gulag on accusation alone.  If there was a trial, is was a kangaroo court where the accused was already guilty.  This was the way that the country was purged of “enemies of the party.”  People's lives and the lives of their families were destroyed based on nothing more than a whispered accusation.

We like to think this wouldn’t happen here, that our country stands for freedom and justice.  A person is innocent until proven guilty.  Mere accusation alone is not enough; justice requires proof.  That justice, that freedom, is part of what our country stands for.

Or, so we thought.

This past week we have watched the destruction of a man’s life based on the accusation of one person alone.  No proof.  No evidence.  No innocence until proven guilty.  Brett Kavanaugh has been sent to the gulag of public hatred and his life, along with the life of his family, will never be the same.

To demand that a woman provide more than just an accusation – here one that is about something alleged to have happened 36 years ago – is not an attack on that woman.  It is simply a demand for the fairness and justice that our country demands. 

I don’t know if some incident happened or did not, but if it did, it apparently did not have enough impact to cause the “victim” to have any sort of contemporaneous reaction.   Aside from her word, there is apparently no evidence that the incident did indeed occur.  This may change now that we have a group of Democrat operatives hired who are putting out the call for something more, though new evidence suddenly appearing at this point should be suspect.  Essentially, we now have her word against his.  If we get more sudden memories on both sides it is still just their word against their word. 

In this country we require evidence.  We have rules.  We do not have lynch mobs.  Or at least we didn’t used to.   But what is the press and the Democrat behavior but that of a lynch mob out to destroy Judge Kavanaugh?  Of course, that destruction is part of a greater plan.  Just as Stalin and his right hand man Beria rounded up and destroyed all enemies of the party – anyone with any kind of dissenting viewpoint – so the Democrats are one by one trying to destroy anyone associated with Trump and his policies because those dissenting views are enemies of their party.

Does anyone really think that the Democrats care at all about Ms. Ford other than as her use as a weapon in their own fight for power?  Or that they really even care about the act of sexual abuse?  If they do, why are they not investigating their own darling Rep. Ellison for the far more substantiated allegations against him?  Why do Democrats including Feinstein and Hirono (both of whom are so “outraged” about Kavanaugh’s behavior of which they have already and without proof determined him guilty) take campaign funding from a fellow Democrat who admitted hitting his wife?  Why do the same Democrat lawyers and operatives who are working with Ms. Ford defend Al Franken and Bill Clinton for the again far more substantiated claims against them? 

This has nothing to do with MeToo or women’s rights or sexual abuse.  It has everything to do with the Democrats' unquenchable thirst for power.  And, more importantly, in taking a page from the playbook of Stalin and Beria, it is a direct assault upon our freedom and our system of government.

Today I thought that this circus would be on its way to being over.  But the farce continues.  Ms. Ford was given a deadline of 10 am this morning to indicate if she would testify, but that deadline has passed and yet, as of this writing,  “negotiations” continue. 

We have rules for a reason.  In the Senate they allow for an orderly process.  In the case of the Kavanaugh nomination, a hearing was scheduled, Kavanaugh was questioned, witnesses appeared, and the hearing closed.  The next step should have been a vote.  The ranking Democrat on the Committee, Diane Feinstein, had received the accusation from Kavanaugh’s accuser before the hearing began.  She still refuses to share the letter she received with the full committee, but apparently she had shared it with her Democrat colleagues because they asked questions that in hindsight were obviously intended to be able to catch him in a lie about the accusation.  Feinstein could have brought the accusation forward at the hearing so that the committee could consider it, possibly seek more information from the accuser.  She chose not to.  The hearing ended and then, as a vote was scheduled, she raised the issue.  Instead of saying "you had your chance, too late," the vote was canceled and a date was planned for the “victim” to testify or tell her story.  Then the accuser started making demands:  FBI investigations; security; who could question her and how; more time to meet with her Democrat handlers; more accusations of insensitivity against anyone who will not meet her demands.  Finally, she was given a deadline to simply state if she would appear or not.  She said she needed more time (for what?  She has a story, it’s not going to change, so either tell it or be quiet).  The delay goes on.  Justice does not.  The rules are forgotten as sympathy for the “victim” becomes the calling card and rule of the day. And we the people are being denied a vote on a highly qualified nominee.

We have processes for victims that protect both victim and accuser.  When someone is a victim, the proper place to seek recompense is in a court of law.  When someone seeks revenge, then one will avoid a court of law because the law seeks justice, not revenge.  This “victim” has had 36 years to seek justice.  But, justice would require that she actually prove that the person that she is accusing is guilty of the alleged crime.    I don’t know what this accuser’s motive is – revenge, power, attention, or something else.  It certainly is not justice.

Many courts have statutes of limitations on some types of claims, and there is a reason for that too.  People’s memories fade, evidence is lost, memories change or are generated.  Similarly, teenage crimes are treated differently than those of adults.  We know that the teen mind is not fully formed and so most juvenile crimes up to and including murder are tried in juvenile courts and, if convicted, the sentence is usually in a special juvenile facility with an end date of the sentence corresponding to the date the juvenile becomes and adult.  At that time the record is often expunged so that the individual can begin adulthood with a clean slate. 

Here we have something that allegedly happened at a teenage party 36 years ago.   There was allegedly alcohol involved.  A boy allegedly grabbed at or tried to kiss a girl.  She was allegedly frightened; perhaps he was going further than she had expected.  She ran away.  He did not pursue her.  Her story does not suggest rape or anything close to that.  This is just not a big deal, or at least not the big deal that the media is making it.  This happens at teen parties every weekend in America.   Should it?  Probably not.  But it is part of what goes on in the teen years as young people begin to discover who they are, what their values are, and how they incorporate those values into their lives and the lives of others.  It is called growing up. 

This accusation should not be permitted to ruin a man’s life.  Even if her fuzzy story were true, can any of us say that we did not have one less than honorable incident during our childhood or teen years?  Is this really the sort of thing that should keep an outstanding jurist from the Court?  If so then there is truly no one on this earth qualified for the position of Justice.

What we have here is the Democrat party using and blowing out of proportion a simple allegation of teen misbehavior.  I do not know what the accuser’s mental state is in regard to this alleged incident.  I do know that she had 36 years to seek justice or make a claim against Judge Kavanaugh in a venue that would have allowed him due process.  She has had 36 years to deal with whatever psychological traumas she believes stem from this alleged incident.    Did it happen?  I don’t know.  Does she believe it happened?  I don’t know.   Do the Democrats care?  I don’t think so.  Does the media care?  Only so far as it gives them a good story.

What is lost in all this?  Justice.  Our Country.  Our Democracy.  Our rule of law.  When we start convicting people in the kangaroo court of public opinion based on mere accusation alone we have lost the fairness, justice, and due process that make this country what it is.   

This nomination may actually be a watershed moment for all of us.  I hope that Kavanaugh will not be driven to withdraw (as I am sure the threats to him, his wife, and his family are intended to cause).  Anyone who cares about this country or justice should demand that this kangaroo court, this lynching by the Democrats and the media stop immediately.  If we do not, then are we any better than those who stood silently watching their fellow citizens be sent to the gulag on questionable accusation alone?

It's About More Than the Nominee; It's About America

This is more than a fight for the Supreme Court.  It is a fight for America itself.

It is hard to keep up with the allegations as the Democrats try to block the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.  They made a mockery of the hearings, using innuendo and misleading if not false statements in their accusations against him during the questioning.  They have tried to stir up fear that he will take away all important rights if he is a Justice.  None of this seemed to work; the confirmation seemed to be certain, so what happens?  They pull a 36 year old, completely unsubstantiated sexual allegation out of the hat.  And, in this MeToo era we must indulge every possible statement by anyone.  Soon I suspect others will have sudden “memories” as they jump on the bandwagon to smear the nominee with completely unprovable and unsubstantiated charges and no way for the accused to defend himself since the current view seems to be guilty until proven innocent – an impossibility with a fuzzy 36 year old allegation that essentially amounts to he said – she said with no witnesses to substantiate either side.

This should remind one of the Salem Witch trials, but it is the Desperation of the Democrats that leads the circus here.  They lost the election.  The president has appointed a conservative judge – one who will follow the Constitution and the law rather than go with and make popular policy of the day.  That is, he will do what a Supreme Court Justice is supposed to do – apply and interpret the law, leaving law-making to the legislative branch.  The Democrats cannot abide this rule of law, this basic Constitutional principle.  They will only tolerate someone who will join them in their jihad against the president.

So, we have a woman come forward with some fuzzy recollection of a teenage party where some teenager that she now identifies as Kavanaugh made some sort of advance towards her.  And, what happens?  We indulge her.  There is so much wrong with this; let me make just a few points:

First, this was a bunch of high school kids at a party in the early 80s.  No one should be surprised that there might have been alcohol there and a boy might have tried to kiss a girl.  What high school student has not been involved in a situation where things started to go too far?  This is just part of growing up and learning one’s limits and values.   If it was anything more than that then one would expect there would have been some contemporaneous reporting to someone.

Apparently the accuser first recalled this event during some sort of marital couples therapy in 2012.  Now, it would seem that since she, her husband, and the therapist have all now agreed that she mentioned it then, that any therapist-client privilege has been waived.  I would certainly like to see records from that therapy, especially the context in which the statement was made and what else she might recall.   For example, was this alleged incident used to explain or excuse the problems in her marriage that had brought the couple to therapy?  Or as an excuse for some other behavior of hers?  What else did she recall about the incident?  What else could she recall about that period of her life? Is her personality of the sort that would enjoy the attention from the reporting of such an incident or the power of having the ability to bring down someone important?  (These are not “blame the victim” questions, but legitimate questions when one suddenly has a 36 year old recollection that has the potential to destroy someone else’s life.)

Beyond the specific allegation, I have a real problem with looking at someone’s high school record as if that somehow has some bearing on one’s ability 30 years into adulthood.   We all know that teenagers do some stupid things.  Some even do illegal things.  Psychologists tell us their brains are not yet fully formed.  For these reasons we have juvenile courts and juvenile sentences, most of which end when the child reaches adulthood.  Juvenile records are frequently expunged in order to allow the juvenile a fresh start.  And, yet, we are allowing one woman’s foggy recollection to destroy a life.

We have no idea what the accuser’s motive is in bringing this accusation now.  What we do know is that it is unsubstantiated and that there is really no way for Kavanaugh to clear his name; even if the allegation does not keep him from the Court, he will always walk with this cloud over his head, this scarlet letter on his chest.  He has been denied the due process that any criminal defendant receives; rather, he is tried in the court of public opinion fraught with hysteria churned up by Democrats and the media.  He is guilty until proven innocent.   This is not the way America should work.

When I was in grade school a classmate gave me a valentine every day for a couple of months, then kissed me twice when we were alone on the steps of our classroom.  Today I guess we would call that stalking and sexual assault.  Perhaps I should check to see if he is rich or famous or perhaps up for some important nomination.  I know his name and actually have told many about it  extemporaneously both at the time of the incidents and through the years.  Just think,  I could suddenly realize the trauma this caused me and come forward to ruin this man’s life while enjoying my 15 minutes of fame, maybe get a book deal, and help the cause so as to be today’s darling of the resistance.

This is really where we are.  Anyone who does not speak out is complicit in the practice of doing whatever is necessary to destroy anyone who stands in the way of another’s goals.  Complicit in using anything from any moment in one’s life, substantiated or not, to destroy another human being.  In the days of Stalin, the Communists were famous for finding the most minor spot on the record of someone as an excuse to send them to the gulag for years.  The current behavior of the Democrats would seem to be taking us in that direction.

The Desperate Democrats, still not able to accept the simple fact that their candidate lost the election for President, will do any and everything they can to make sure that their opponent does not succeed.  They will not accept the Constitutional and Democratic process of our government.  Like little children they want their way and they want it now and the American people be damned.  They seem to fully believe that the end justifies the means.  Their end is restoration of their power, and they will lie, cheat, use people, and destroy people in order to achieve that end.  They have no regard for the Constitution or the rule of Law or Democracy.   They just want their way and they want to impose it on everyone else; elections seem to mean nothing to them.

So back to the nomination.  Every American citizen and anyone who cares about our Country and its form of government should be appalled by the Democrats' actions regarding the Kavanaugh hearing.  They have already revealed their ignorance of the role of a judge in our 3-branch form of government.  They have revealed that power for their Party is their primary if only goal.  They have revealed that they cannot accept or tolerate views and policies that they do not approve.  They have revealed that they are willing to deny to the people someone who will likely be one of the finest justices ever to sit on the Court simply as a way to “resist” a president they do not like.  This “resistance,” with their regular disparaging of Trump supporters, reveals that they do not understand how our democracy works or that, if they do, they are willing to destroy it for their own power.  Their encouragement of using unprovable and decades old allegations to destroy the reputation of a fine jurist reveals that they care nothing for the American people.

Someone needs to explain to the Democrats that this is not a game the goal of which is their power.  This is about our Country and what is best for its people – all of its people, deplorables included.  If we let the Democrats get away with their antics, if we let them stop a perfectly valid nomination, then we are empowering further their assault on our democracy and we are well on the way to losing America as we know it.

It’s Time To Demand Our Representatives Represent Us

How many times have you or someone you know written to an elected representative and received nothing more than a form letter in response?  While the form response is usually signed by the official, I think most people assume that it was prepared by a staff person likely without the actual official having ever read the initial letter.   Why do we accept this?

I recently emailed my senators about the Kavanaugh hearing and my hope that they would vote for the judge.  The one that replied did so with a compilation of boilerplate paragraphs that were nothing more than the talking points that he had used before the hearing began.  Beyond the fact that the form paragraphs each related to the Kavanaugh nomination, there was no direct response to the specific points raised in my email. 

Why do we accept these sorts of form responses?  We pay the salaries of our elected officials; they represent all of their constituents whether or not an individual constituent voted for them or not.  Our representatives have an obligation to listen to us (for without listening, how can they represent us?).  Rather than just send us the pre-made talking points on whatever issue we are writing about, they should respond to us in a way that indicates that they actually read our correspondence and respond to that rather than just reading the subject line and sending the appropriate form.

Whether our elected official agrees or disagrees with our position on a particular issue, we are entitled to a thoughtful individual response to our correspondence.  But unless we demand that, we will continue to write letters that may or may not be read and then receive generic responses to our letters.  It amounts to a tacit approval on our part that our officials go about doing what they want to do rather than representing the wishes of those who elected them.

Do they not understand that we are capable of finding their talking points without sending a personal correspondence?  I think that most people write to their elected representative in an attempt to share their individual view on an issue and perhaps to try to persuade that representative to take a particular action on an issue.  It is an attempt to have a dialog with someone who has been elected to consider the views of all the individuals within his or her constituency.  One would hope that the response would reflect that the representative had some interest in that – some interest in hearing constituents’ thoughts and responding to them.  That does not mean that the constituent should expect the representative to take the constituent’s  position, but it does mean that the representative should listen to that position and, as in any dialog, even a written one, the constituent should be able to expect a response to what was specifically said, including perhaps an explanation (beyond talking points) of why the representative will not adopt the constituent’s position. 

When I received my most recent reply, I was inclined to think, “well, typical” and consider that the end of it.  But, instead of accepting this as I usually do, I replied, asking if the senator had even listened to the hearings and, then, once again making my points.  We will see what, if any, response I get.  I plan to continue writing to this elected official, my elected representative, until I receive something more than a form letter response.  I hope to eventually get some indication that he actually read my letter/listened to my thoughts.

I do not think that it is too much to ask that an elected official listens to his or her constituents, for, without listening how then can they actually represent us?  A reply that is specifically responsive to a constituent’s piece of correspondence and the specific concerns raised therein is some indication that the official has listened and, if the representative actually does listen to all of his or her constituents then those constituents are more likely to be represented by that official.  I think it is reasonable for we who pay their salaries to demand this of our elected officials, and I hope that we all begin to do so.

It is only when our officials listen to us that can they represent us.  That is their job.  We should all demand nothing less than that they do their jobs.

Where are the Flags?

In the days following 9-11 and in the first few years on its anniversary flags were flying from so many homes on our street.  These flags were our way of showing solidarity with one another and with our Nation.  This morning there was one other flag on our street besides mine.  I walked around much of the neighborhood – several streets, many many homes – and counted a total of 11 flags including mine.

It’s not just the flags.  In my morning paper, aside from an editorial that was more about the current Colin Kaepernick controversy than it was about 9-11, there was nothing to remember this date.  We still get at least one story on the anniversary of Pearl Harbor, reminding us of its history and telling us what happened, so why not 9-11?

I understand that many these days seem to take pride in not taking pride in their Country or in being American.  It’s fashionable to deny our Country’s many successes (most recently planting the American flag on the moon), and to blame our Country for a world’s anger, including blaming ourselves for the terrorist attack on our country 17 years ago today.

But still, what are we teaching our children?  I live on a street that is the direct route to a middle school, so many young students pass by the homes on this street, walking or in parents’ cars.  Imagine the pride that might well up inside of them seeing a street lined in the flag of their country.  Imagine their curiosity and demand they might have to understand the history of the event that gave rise to such a display.    But, instead, what do they see?  Just another day.  These young people may not even know about 9-11, and apparently it is not something that many think is worth remembering or teaching.  If they do know about this historical date, they see from the actions of their neighbors that it really doesn’t matter.

Being proud of this Country, showing solidarity with it and its people, recognizing that despite imperfections we are one Nation, indivisible, and always striving for liberty and justice for all are not bad things. One can be proud of this Country and hold views that differ from one’s neighbors.  Disagreements are not something that should result in shame about the Country that fights for and protects the rights to have such disagreements.

Yes, the flag is a symbol.  But our flag is a symbol of all the rights and freedoms that we hold dear. It represents our solidarity as a Nation.  Let us teach our children that.  And let us never forget 9-11.

The Crisis of the Crisis Song

Daily the Left tells us in one way or another that we are in a political crisis.  The song has many titles:  The Constitutional Crisis; the Crisis of Leadership; The Crisis of Democracy; The Partisan Crisis; The Resistance; Impeachment, The 25th Amendment, The Abnormal Political Times; and many others.

Any “political crisis” has been manufactured by those who want you to believe there is a political crisis.    That is not really a crisis, or if it is, the crisis is that so few understand how our democracy works and so are willing to blindly accept the daily assertions of crisis.

A few short examples are in order.  First, the Kavanaugh hearings.  Many of the Democrats seem to believe that the people are uneducated about our democracy and they were willing to try to exploit that.  There was the grandstanding of releasing “confidential” documents that knowingly had already been cleared for release, claiming it was to avoid the “constitutional crisis” of lack of transparency.  There was the edited video used in an attempt to smear the nominee.  But, beyond that there was the use of sad stories, court opinions that followed the law but ended up with a ruling against the more sympathetic party.  Anyone who would believe that a judge should ignore the law to instead rule in favor of currently popular emotion and policy knows nothing about our judicial system and is at best unclear about the Constitution.  And then of course there were the assertions that despite all evidence to the contrary, the Judge would somehow take some outrageous action against one or another identity group.  Finally, the Democrats seemed to want to talk more about the President, perhaps in an effort to discern whether or not the nominee would assist them in their never ending quest to remove Donald Trump from office; when the judge would not buy into this game of theirs they again asserted the “constitutional crisis.”

Another example is the anonymous letter in the New York Times claiming a deep state resistance within the President’s inner circle.  Aside from supporting the until now often dismissed claims of the existence of an anti-Trump deep state, what this letter and much reaction to it reveals is a frightening lack of understanding about our government.  While many on the Left cheer this “resistance,” do they not understand that in this country regime change comes via democratic election, not via white house intrigue and attempted coups by those who did not see their candidate prevail?   If this inner circle “resistance” actually exists, it is treasonous and is more befitting of dictatorships than our Democratic Republic. Failure to understand that is the "Constitutional crisis" if any such crisis exists.

But more than specific examples such as the above, is the fact that there is a constant assertion in this country by the Left that things are bad and it is all the fault of the President and that therefore we are in a “Constitutional Crisis” calling for removal of the President by Impeachment or other means.  But, other than the fact that those asserting this are still bitter about the 2016 election, there is really nothing on which to base their crisis song.  Depending on one’s perspective,  some things are better than before the election, some things are the same, some things are worse.  Certainly, the economy is thriving, and that gives us another example.  When the crisis singers have good news to deal with, they then announce that it will not last, and therefore there is a crisis so dire that we must remove the President.

We now have the former President breaking all precedent to go on a sour grapes tour not unlike that which Hillary Clinton embarked upon following her loss.  He who once said the jobs are gone, deal with it, and that he did not know how to bring them back, now claims that their return is somehow his doing and we should thank him and remove the current President who is in fact bringing us jobs.  Barack Obama has now joined the crisis chorus, seemingly simply because the current President does not agree with or continue the former's policies.

There are songs about the partisan hatred.  Well, in my opinion this did not begin in 2016, but I do believe it has been and is being fueled by the identity politics practiced so well by the Left.  If one wants to see hatred behind every corner, every misplaced smile or thoughtless word, so be it.  Again, that is not reason to remove a president.

The only crisis, really, is in these crisis singers’ heads.  The crisis is that they cannot deal with the fact that someone they did not choose was elected president and that his policies are often different from theirs.  These overwhelming emotions over their failure to get what they wanted are no more a crisis than are the histrionics of the teen who sees the end of the world when he or she does not get the desired date for prom.   Not getting one’s own way is simply not a crisis!

The real crisis is that so many who benefit from the many blessings of our government do not understand how that government works.  What they don’t understand is that in this country we elect a president and the winner often has policy positions that differ from those of the loser.  We do not oust the sitting and duly elected president by making everything into some sort of crisis that requires his removal.  We do not oust him by some sort of back room resistance.  We do not attack and demean those who voted differently or hold different positions on issues important to us.  And we do not attack our very form of government just because it did not work in our favor this time.

There is no Constitutional crisis but there clearly is an educational crisis.   Making every action or policy or person one does not like into a Constitutional crisis is not a mature way to deal with loss, nor is it a rational campaign strategy.   Rather than hours spent plotting for the removal of the President based on some crisis that exists only in their head, many would better use those hours reading the Constitution and taking a civics class.   And, those who do understand how our government works need to start demanding that those who delight in singing the crisis songs explain how they are anything more than emotional outbursts from those who are not getting their way and who do not understand why that is not a crisis in a democracy.

In the end, the crisis is not a crisis.  The song is nothing more than an emotional wail.  We need to start listening to something else.

Who is Thwarting Democracy?

All the Democrats are hollering that for the sake of democracy we must get rid of Trump and to do so we must vote against his supporters in November.  But, let’s just look beyond the surface of that assertion.

The Democrats are doing everything in their power to thwart our democracy, beginning with their refusal to admit that Donald Trump is the president of the United States of America.  I just saw (again) a meme on social media asking folks to share if they were proud that they had never called Trump the president.  Huh?  That is the proud stance of many Democrats – we wanted the other candidate, so we will refuse to recognize your presidency.  Wow, that’s really democratic (Not!).

Consider how democratic the actions and agenda of the Democrats really are.  At every chance they get they try to silence voices that disagree with them:  they shame people into silence; they demean the views of opponents; they twist the words of opponents to make them in some way offensive; they shout down opponents who are trying to speak; they base their positions on half-truths and opinions rather than facts; they assert that supporters of the president should be harassed in public simply because of their affiliation with the president; they state opinion as if it were fact while condemning any contrary fact as mere opinion; they make up their minds on important issues such as confirmation of Supreme Court Justice based on the fact that he was appointed by Trump and is not a Democrat, rather than on his sterling record as a judge;  they make up their minds on every issue based on party agenda even before hearing facts; they punish anyone who supports or is affiliated with the president, perhaps in payback for the fact that their own candidate lost; they believe their feelings and their agenda outweighs the rule of law. These are not the actions of people who support democracy.

Our democracy requires tolerance.  It requires an acknowledgement that there exists more than one view on an issue.  It requires respect for diverse views and an ability to listen to those views rather than simply silence them.  It requires objective examination of relevant facts prior to reaching a conclusion.  One thing that can certainly thwart our democracy is the silencing of diverse voices and views.

So, let’s look at the actions rather than the words of the Democrats.  Their words may sound as if they care about the country, its people, and our democracy.   Their actions, however, speak to a desire for a society that is anything but democratic; a society in which their views must be accepted by all.  Is there any reason to believe that if the Democrats take power their actions will be any different?  I suspect not.  Rather, it is more likely their words that will change as they use new words to mandate a far less democratic country: a country that places their party and its views in power, rather than the many diverse views of the people. 

The actions reveal the true color of the agenda.  It is not democracy, but a world where only the “approved” view exists.  The words, the emotional arguments, the crocodile tears and cares, the attacks all serve one purpose only:  power to the party.   For the “sake of democracy” it is not the legitimate president that must be removed.  It is the Democrat view that opposing views may be legitimately silenced.  It is the Democrat view that any election that does not result in their power is in some way illegitimate.  Pay attention to the actions:  is that really how you see a democracy?  If not, why would you in any way empower those who approve and carry out those actions?

Of Outbursts, Free Speech, Mob Rule, and Democracy

Today, watching the Senate hearing on the confirmation of Judge Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, we are witnessing a coordinated effort by the Democrats to disrupt the proceedings in a manner more fitting of a political rally than the civilized manner of our halls of government.  What’s going on?  We hear daily from the Democrats about how they long for a dignified statesman as president.  They are offended by his outbursts.  And yet they seem to be playing for the cameras – provide some self-righteous entertainment for the evening news – rather than having a dignified and honest hearing about a nominee for Justice to the Supreme Court.

As an aside, let me be clear that I am not opposed to political demonstrations.  For example, I have yelled “We don’t want your f**king war” about both Vietnam and Iraq.  But that was while marching on the streets, not in the Senate Chambers where rules of civility ensure everyone has the opportunity to present their views and have those view heard in an orderly fashion. 

To shout down those rules of civility is in essence a shouting down of our government.  It reflects both a misunderstanding of and a disrespect for our government.  I expect better of our elected senators.

But, then, these are the Democrats who weaponize anything in their war on Trump.  We recently saw that funerals are not off limits for use in their political attacks.  I look at social media posts from Democrats and their supporters.  Those posts, while complaining about the “base” words of the president, proceed to attack him with name calling like infantile schoolyard bullies (a typical example from today: “he is an idiot wrapped in a moron and smothered in imbecile sauce”).  Rarely, if ever, do the posts actually address an issue or if they do, they never have anything more substantive than the bumper sticker phrase supportive of the Democrat position.  Instead, it seems that it is all just about ad hominem name-calling against a president they don’t like, who they will do almost anything to unseat.

I now hear the speeches by the Democrats in the Kavanaugh hearing talking about Trump as an “Illegal co-conspirator” and other similar name calling that has nothing to do with the nominee supposedly under consideration.  The failure to produce 100% of documents is being used as more cover for their vicious attacks.  This failure to produce some sensitive documents is not new and sees precedent in the Obama administration’s nomination of Justice Kagan.  Yet, the Democrats are screaming Trump coverup.  These Democrats are more concerned with attacking Trump than in actually considering the nomination of Kavanaugh as a Supreme Court Justice.  Indeed, many have already announced their vote and have no intention of asking legitimate questions or listening to answers from the nominee.  They have also admitted a weekend meeting/teleconference to strategize their disruptions of the hearing.

Under cover of outrage (over what exactly is unclear) the Democrats justify such outbursts.   They claim these are “not normal times” though what is not normal is their laser focus on using any and everthing to stir up hatred for Trump.   They claim it is in the name of transparency, but that argument falls short.  “The Democratic goal here isn’t transparency. It’s to create enough of a public fuss that a Republican Senator or two gets the political jitters and helps to stall a confirmation vote past the election. The hope is that, as the fight drags on, something will turn up that causes skittish Republicans to vote no.”  (See https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-kavanaugh-document-fight-1534202892)

The Democrats tell the nominee he will be under a cloud unless he joins with them in trashing Trump and delaying the hearings.   (Actually, I suspect they see him as under a cloud simply because he was appointed by a President they dislike.)  This is a standard tactic of the Democrats these days.  They threaten those with whom they disagree, telling them they are anti-American, against the people, mis-informed, or just plain stupid in an effort to make them give up their own beliefs and values.  They try to shame those who do not support the anti-Trump agenda into denying their own values and beliefs.  That is, they attempt to silence the opposition by name calling and by disrespecting, demeaning, and disregarding their legitimate beliefs, and, if that doesn’t work they simply shout them down. 

The Democrats claim that this riotous behavior, including their disruptions of the hearings today, is a demonstration of democracy in action.  Well, it is, I suppose, proof that we are not living in a dictatorship (as they would have us believe we are under President Trump).  But, it is their actions, their disrespect for process and for listening to the diverse voices of others, that is more akin to a dictatorship.  The failure to follow the democratic rules that allow all voices to be heard, the shouting down of those with whom one disagrees is more a demonstration of desire for mob rule than for democratic process.    It is not what we expect to see in a functioning democracy.  It is not the behavior of those who truly understand, value, and respect our democratic form of government.

The Hypocrisy is Showing: The Weaponization of John McCain’s Funeral

John McCain may have bravely served his country, but he could also at times be a small, vindictive man.  That vindictiveness was continued by his family and “friends” at his funeral.   Did he, do these people, realize how he is just being used?

In her excellent essay about the changing winds of love and hate by the Democrats towards McCain (https://www.reviewjournal.com/news/politics-and-government/mccain-was-darling-of-democrats-until-he-ran-for-president/),  Debra J. Saunders notes that “Democrats love Republicans who attack Republicans, just like the press love Republicans who attack Republicans.”  She further reminds us that when McCain ran for president, the words of the Democrats about him were far different than those we heard at his funeral.

Back in 2008, the Democrats “couldn’t stand the guy” as they accused McCain of such things as not having “the temperament to be commander in chief” and of being “reckless” and “dangerous.”  They warned us that he was a “modern day George Wallace.”  Obama and Biden attacked McCain for his positions on tax policy, the war in Iraq, healthcare, terrorism, the minimum wage, Russia, and many others.  They attacked his character.  While paying tribute to his military service, they said that did not qualify him for office.  Candidate Obama said that McCain would “endanger us.”  In an August 2008 campaign speech, Obama questioned McCain’s judgement and said he was out of touch with the American people.  Campaign ads implied McCain was anti-Hispanic.  To be fair, the 2008 campaign was ugly on both sides, but there certainly was no love lost between the Democrats and McCain.

Flash forward to the campaign animosity of McCain towards Donald Trump.  McCain was able to use both his voice and his vote as senator to play a game of payback to the President.  That, of course, made him the darling of the Democrats.  This man, who was previously so disliked and demeaned, so unqualified to hold office or speak for the American people, now became the friend of all those Democrats.  Apparently there is truth to the phrase “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.”  So, the Democrats now embraced McCain and used him to further their own attack on the President.

And, sickeningly, this overshadowed the funeral of a man who did indeed serve his country and who should have been remembered for his entire life and not simply for the part he played in the Democrats’ anti-Trump campaign.  Yes, that was a part of his life, but it was so much more.  That his funeral should be co-opted into an anti-Trump event cheapens the depth and breadth of McCain’s life.

It also cheapens the Democrats and reveals them for what they are:  hypocrites who will use any person and any event to further their own agenda.  Regardless of their proclamations at his funeral, I don’t believe they gave a damn about McCain.  I don’t believe they were his “friends.”  Rather, I think they are just selfish people who will use anything and anyone to further their own interests.

Now, I happen to think that McCain tarnished himself somewhat when he gave in to that very human characteristic of vindictiveness in response to his dislike of Trump.  He had other failings along with successes throughout his life, all of which simply made him human.  And, he also served his country and gave a significant part of his life in service to us all.  That is a greatness that few can claim.  In the end he was a human being, to be honored upon his death for the entire life that he lived.

But the crocodile tears and phony proclamations of friendship at his funeral were nothing more than insulting to a man who so often argued for ethics and truth.  Perhaps this was what he wanted:  his own funeral requests before his death made a point to give his final slight, his final paybacks, to Donald Trump.  Perhaps that was his OK for this show of hypocrisy at his funeral.  I don’t pretend to know what might have gone on in his mind, and if this was the send-off he wanted, then so be it.

What I cannot abide is the ease with which so many can stand up and spew such false words and I cannot abide the ease with which so many are willing to accept the falsities.  The hypocrisy is deafening.  And yet no one seems to hear.  As Saunders notes in her article, the Democrats are using McCain “as a cudgel.”  That cudgel is just one more weapon in their never-ending attack on President Trump.  It is certainly not reflective of any sort of honesty or true friendship.  When one can so eloquently take such contradictory positions simply to serve their own purposes how can anyone trust or respect anything that person says?

It is sad that the funeral for John McCain became weaponized for use in the anti-Trump campaign.  I don’t know if that was McCain’s intent in his final wishes.  I don’t understand why his family and true friends would allow it.  I don’t know why the media would focus on that aspect of the services.  And, I don’t understand why the supporters of those who participated in that weaponization are silent and continue to accept such blatant dishonesty and hypocrisy.  Sadly, it is just another reflection of the hatefulness, dishonesty, and hypocrisy that seems to be defining the character of our times and the agenda of those who seek only to regain their own power.