I'm pretty nihilistic about the whole thing (the whole thing being the US). One of the things that I've encountered on Facebook is the simple refusal to acknowledge what progressives are trying to do. "You want to hang Kavanaugh, no we want and investigation. Oh so you want to hang Kavanaugh." The same thing with Kaepernick: "Why do you hate the troops? No we just want cops to stop shooting black guys. Why do you hate the troops.?"
So Rich Lowry's all on board with false memories now? Seems like just a few years ago conservatives were in high dudgeon that there's no such thing as false memories because those children accusing people of Satan worship were a convenient political cudgel. Conservatives: Steadfast in their beliefs until those beliefs are inconvenient.
I watched it all the way through. What I saw hasn't come up in the commentaries I've read today. First, Rachel Mitchell made Kavanaugh admit a man could both have lots of of woman "friends" and sexually assault at least one woman. Then she pointed to an entry in his precious calendar for July 1, 1982, scheduling "skis" (beers) with Mark Judge, Squee (?) (the guy Blasey was going out with that summer) and some other dudes. The first instance shot the legs out of his "I have lots of women friends" defense. The second, to my mind, pointed to the day his assault on Blasey happened. It was no coincidence that that was when Graham decided to hijack the proceedings and start wailing about Democratic perfidy. The FBI wouldn't have any problem finding out about July 1, 1982, IMHO, which is why Kavanaugh and the Rep Sens will never support an FBI investigation. Anyway, while I didn't think much of Mitchell during her questioning of Dr. Ford, I concluded she saw through Kavanaugh's kabuki act and was systematically destroying his defense when she was yanked away.
Where does Flake go from here? My—perhaps unduly charitable—take is that he is a weak, vacillating man with a vestigial conscience, who wants to think well of himself. Of course, his record to date has been noted for the size of the hat, the absence of cattle, and, given that, a remarkable volume of manure, so optimism in the present instance must needs be not merely guarded but enrolled in the Federal Witness Protection Program.
But where does he go from here? But for his attack of the vapors, the GOP might have been able to ram this thing through yesterday. Surely, win or lose, that won’t be forgiven. If he folds again, he will have secured the contempt and loathing of all sides. If he votes “no,” providing needed cover for Murkowski and Manchin, he has the eternal enmity of the GOP, but preserves, perhaps, some self-respect—and a certain segment of the Village will swoon over his “principled conservatism.”
I’m not holding out much hope: I think it’s likelier that when the FBI fails to turn up hi-def video of the assault, Flake will prate about the presumption of innocence, and will vote to confirm. But a lot can happen in a week.
I'm pretty nihilistic about the whole thing (the whole thing being the US). One of the things that I've encountered on Facebook is the simple refusal to acknowledge what progressives are trying to do. "You want to hang Kavanaugh, no we want and investigation. Oh so you want to hang Kavanaugh." The same thing with Kaepernick: "Why do you hate the troops? No we just want cops to stop shooting black guys. Why do you hate the troops.?"
So Rich Lowry's all on board with false memories now? Seems like just a few years ago conservatives were in high dudgeon that there's no such thing as false memories because those children accusing people of Satan worship were a convenient political cudgel. Conservatives: Steadfast in their beliefs until those beliefs are inconvenient.
I watched it all the way through. What I saw hasn't come up in the commentaries I've read today. First, Rachel Mitchell made Kavanaugh admit a man could both have lots of of woman "friends" and sexually assault at least one woman. Then she pointed to an entry in his precious calendar for July 1, 1982, scheduling "skis" (beers) with Mark Judge, Squee (?) (the guy Blasey was going out with that summer) and some other dudes. The first instance shot the legs out of his "I have lots of women friends" defense. The second, to my mind, pointed to the day his assault on Blasey happened. It was no coincidence that that was when Graham decided to hijack the proceedings and start wailing about Democratic perfidy. The FBI wouldn't have any problem finding out about July 1, 1982, IMHO, which is why Kavanaugh and the Rep Sens will never support an FBI investigation. Anyway, while I didn't think much of Mitchell during her questioning of Dr. Ford, I concluded she saw through Kavanaugh's kabuki act and was systematically destroying his defense when she was yanked away.
Where does Flake go from here? My—perhaps unduly charitable—take is that he is a weak, vacillating man with a vestigial conscience, who wants to think well of himself. Of course, his record to date has been noted for the size of the hat, the absence of cattle, and, given that, a remarkable volume of manure, so optimism in the present instance must needs be not merely guarded but enrolled in the Federal Witness Protection Program.
But where does he go from here? But for his attack of the vapors, the GOP might have been able to ram this thing through yesterday. Surely, win or lose, that won’t be forgiven. If he folds again, he will have secured the contempt and loathing of all sides. If he votes “no,” providing needed cover for Murkowski and Manchin, he has the eternal enmity of the GOP, but preserves, perhaps, some self-respect—and a certain segment of the Village will swoon over his “principled conservatism.”
I’m not holding out much hope: I think it’s likelier that when the FBI fails to turn up hi-def video of the assault, Flake will prate about the presumption of innocence, and will vote to confirm. But a lot can happen in a week.