tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7465072391199760560.post1588098468684998822..comments2024-03-26T14:30:49.660-05:00Comments on The Wifely Person Speaks: Entitlement, Thy Name Is KavanaughThe Wifely Personhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03255569339784573469noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7465072391199760560.post-32770347405815125152018-10-02T20:09:19.076-05:002018-10-02T20:09:19.076-05:00Ed, Due process is a great thing. In a criminal pr...Ed, Due process is a great thing. In a criminal proceeding, a person is presumed innocent. In a job interview for a lifetime appointment, you have to prove your worthiness. So, we can all agree that unless more comes, we're not going to put him in jail. At the same time, it might also be appropriate to agree that unless he can show that he doesn't lie about the little things, hold partisan judges, etc., he doesn't get to be one of the nine. I'm not even going down the "he's guilty or not" road. I don't know that we'll ever know the answer there. <br />You suggest that this was "designed to get a negative reaction from him..." Do you really think that the Democrats on the SJC are so crafty that they figured that a highly respected, long-time circuit court judge would lie about stupid things that don't really matter? Probably not. I find it hard to believe that even the biggest Feinstein sycophants would think that. Instead, I think they were just as surprised as the rest of the world that this seeming example of all that is right in the conservative world would lie about stupid stuff (e..g, "I have a week stomach"). <br />Regardless of if we learn anymore about the sexual assault allegations, last week's hearing showed the real man, the one behind the mask. He's a partisan who thinks he can act above the truth when it suits him. Are there enough facts to say that Beyond a Reasonable Doubt? No, probably not. Are there enough to say it such that You Are Not the Best Candidate for Our Open Position At This Time? Yep. Pretty sure every HR department would back me on that one. <br />POTUS likely can and will appoint another less controversial conservative judge who will rule similarly to Kavanaugh on 99% of cases. That's life and politics. However, that eventuality doesn't mean we need to just let things pass. SCOTUS is a big deal. No one "deserves" to be there. Lukenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7465072391199760560.post-29193176438383956022018-10-01T20:16:52.219-05:002018-10-01T20:16:52.219-05:00This hearing may have brought into question his t...This hearing may have brought into question his temperament, (although he has been a high level judge for 12 years) which makes his confirmation questionable. There are other candidates; however the next one in line scares me more, based upon her strong religious advocacy. If she has a clean background and gets confirmed then we all have a bigger issue.<br /><br />He was obviously instructed to keep to certain talking points and pushback with some emotion, and I don’t link his responses to entitlement, since he was responding to a criminal allegation. However if this whole allegation is a pack of lies, designed to get a negative reaction from him, then - mission accomplished. The problem is that it doesn’t further the cause of discovering the truth. You essentially could make up any unwarranted allegation about a candidate and then when they react viscerally to it, you say “ah ha” you see they don’t have the temperament to be a judge. <br /><br />The whole thing has been handled poorly by both sides, including the ranking Dem, DF, who could have had this dealt with weeks ago.<br /><br />Ed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7465072391199760560.post-37088084147173710212018-10-01T20:14:35.348-05:002018-10-01T20:14:35.348-05:00If you were conducting the interview, would you hi...If you were conducting the interview, would you hire that guy? After he yelled at you?<br /><br />I think you misidentified the entitlement issue. It was directed at his disrespectful behavior toward committee members, not the broader entitlement issue. His behavior resembled a kid interviewing at place where his dad knows the CEO. He thinks it’s just a formality. <br /><br />Sandwiched between the information in his yearbook and her statements, there is enough to question. And if he was clean, why would he not _want_ the investigation?The Wifely Personhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03255569339784573469noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7465072391199760560.post-50962837223839687322018-10-01T20:13:31.257-05:002018-10-01T20:13:31.257-05:00WP,
I am quite disappointed that you have gone do...WP,<br /><br />I am quite disappointed that you have gone down the rabbit hole of an “entitlement” argument with regard to BK. <br /><br />I listened to the hearings last week and although not surprised by the partisan nature of the process, I found myself frustrated by the lack of understanding (even among senators) around due process.<br /><br />There are many reasons that people may either support or disapprove of the candidacy of Brett Kavanaugh. Whether these are political, ideological, lack of diversity, entitlement, background etc. reasonable people may disagree.<br /><br />However, this was a hearing about a very serious allegation of sexual assault, which may or may not have been committed 36 years ago. Senators are being asked to vote (unless the subsequent FBI investigation turns up new evidence either way) on “believability”. Essentially, whether you believe the candidate or Dr. Ford. That is utterly and completely irrelevant to this conversation. The idea that we should be voting for a Supreme Court justice, based upon historical wrongs and rights is entirely anthetical to the rule of law. <br /><br />Lindsay Graham was correct that if this was being heard in a court of law, it wouldn’t get out of the batter’s box. Now I realize that a senate hearing is not a courtroom, however there was absolutely no evidence to support the claim. No eyewitnesses, no corroboration, (only corroboration of her statements to others, which is hearsay and inadmissible) no DNA, no dates, times, places. If this comes to the fact that he is an entitled male candidate (who may be guilty btw) and we must take the side of Dr. Ford, because she sounds credible, AND because women have been historically oppressed (absolutely true) so ergo she MUST be believed. That is a slippery slope WP, that I am not sure you want to go down?<br /><br />Ed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7465072391199760560.post-37968508981678694312018-09-30T18:49:44.656-05:002018-09-30T18:49:44.656-05:00I worry about the same thing. But I'm hoping t...I worry about the same thing. But I'm hoping the election will happen before there is a chance to move forward with a new nominee. OR, they could get the message and bring in someone more reasonable. That said, it's still scary stuff. The Wifely Personhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03255569339784573469noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7465072391199760560.post-27978699131918675132018-09-30T18:46:20.995-05:002018-09-30T18:46:20.995-05:00I worry that he is a decoy. I get the feeling tha...I worry that he is a decoy. I get the feeling that if he’s confirmed- it’s a win for the old boy network. If he isn’t - no biggie. They have an ultra conservative, anti-choice woman in the wings who was on the original list. They can say, “All right. He’s someone you can’t accuse of sexual assault. Kavanaugh is expendable.Funny Hunnyhttp://seeyouinthefunntpagez.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.com