Kavanaugh endorsement rescinded

[Augustinian]

For Christine, this was a traumatic experience. She thought she was going to be raped, possibly killed.

For Brett, this was just another party in a long, long string of drunken parties.

You are assuming that the event actually happened. There is no proof at all of that.

 

[Augustinian]

This is a guy who was in a bar fight–where police were called–in his junior year at Yale. A fine young man indeed.

So what, really? There are fights in barrooms all the time. The allegation that Mr. Kavanaugh was in a bar during a fight isn’t earth shaking at all.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

Regarding Dr. Ford’s testimony, Lifesitenews points out most of the following:

I read the article last night. Lifesite is simply citing a Breitbart columnist. I read that, too, although it made me nauseous. The Breitbart article simply gives a list–you have quoted it accurately in your post. There is absolutely no evidence provided for anything on the list. Nor is there even an attempt to explain any item on the list. It’s simply a list that the columnist believes.

If I wrote a column that said

Trump is an alien from Mars.
Sarah Hukster is really 80 years old.
Melania is a Russian agent.

And someone else took this nonsense and posted it on Lifesite News, then you would come along and say, “My God, look at this! It must all be true!!!” Sad.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

So what, really? There are fights in barrooms all the time. The allegation that Mr. Kavanaugh was in a bar during a fight isn’t earth shaking at all.

He wasn’t just “in the bar.” He started the fight. Maybe it’s OK with you if Supreme Court justices are in bar fights, but as for me, I’d prefer a judge who has NOT been in bar fights.

As I said before, there is no question that the Republicans can ram a conservative justice down our throats. They have the power to do it. But just not THIS justice, please. Pick another one–I’m sure that somewhere out there there must be a conservative judge who actually is an admirable person in his private life. Or are you saying that ALL conservative justices have shady private lives?

 

[Erikaspirit16]

You are assuming that the event actually happened. There is no proof at all of that.

Once again, like a mantra, you come back to “there is no proof.” Of course not. How could there be? And “proof” is a red herring. We don’t need “proof.” It’s not a trial–and even then “proof” is a relative term. Guilt is not “proven” in the same way a mathematical theorem is. This is a job interview. And not just for any job. For a lifetime appointment to one of the most powerful positions in the country. Shouldn’t the qualifications be just a little teensy bit higher than for a counter clerk at Burger King?

 

[Augustinian]

And not just for any job. For a lifetime appointment to one of the most powerful positions in the country. Shouldn’t the qualifications be just a little teensy bit higher than for a counter clerk at Burger King?

It wasn’t a “job interview” at all. What job interview has the interviewer accusing the job seeker of Gang Rape and other vile crimes? None I’ve ever seen.

The advice and consent of the Senate isn’t a “job interview” by any stretch of the imagination.

It is, however, a high stakes, highly political and partisan process, no holds barred, like Mad Max and Thunderdome. The idea of doing anything and saying anything to destroy those who would be nominated for high office is going to have consequences for the country.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

The idea of doing anything and saying anything to destroy those who would be nominated for high office is going to have consequences for the country.

At least he had a hearing. Garland didn’t even get that. Just remember: what goes around, comes around. It’s going to start Nov. 6. You think THIS was “highly political”? Just wait.

 

[Augustinian]

At least he had a hearing. Garland didn’t even get that

The hearing was designed to destroy Kav, Garland should be glad he didn’t have his reputation dragged through the mud. The bible says “all have sinned”, I’m sure that they could have found plenty of things on Garland, enough to still be investigating him to this very day if they did have hearing.

 

[Mark121359]

I look for at least one good thing to come from this, especially after Lindsey Graham’s meltdown, that is that we stop calling liberals “snowflakes,” seeing that everyone has their sensitive points.

But with all due respect, it’s kind of hard to forget what happened to a sizeable portion of our country after the Trump election. Especially on college campuses. To say there was a meltdown has to be the understatement of the century! And these people are our future leaders? Our future decision makers?

I mean come on, “cry-in,” rooms, complete with hot chocolate and tissues for disappointed Hillary Clinton supporters? Coloring books, legos, blowing bubbles, sculpting with Play-Doh…for stressed-out college students? Puppies and kittens for therapeutic cuddling…again, for college twenty somethings??? Now, I don’t know what you’d call that, but “snowflakes” seems rather tame by comparison!!! But maybe it’s just judgmental me.

Coddling campus crybabies: Students take up toddler therapy after Trump win

Teddy bears, Play-Doh and coloring books are staples of nursery schools, but now they are turning up on college campuses to help distraught students cope with the election of a president they don’t like.

www.foxnews.com

 

[pnewton]

This is not a court of law, and Kavanaugh is not on trial. It’s a job interview.

Actually, it is a Christian internet forum. Here, presumption of innocence is described in the Catechism as, “To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor’s thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way.” For us, this should apply to both the accused and the accuser.

 

[Gingersnaps4]

If you are really curious about Beach Week, all you have to do is watch the movie “The Graduates” (2008) about what happens at Ocean City MD during Beach Week. It’s notorious. A week of underage drinking and sex. Kavanaugh attended. It doesn’t “prove” anything, except that he wanted to put himself in that milieu. What happened to “Lead us not into temptation”? Would you let your son who just graduated from h.s. go?

No. Stop relying on gross stereotypes and movies when informing yourself. It’s hard to take people seriously when they do that. “Beach week” is for graduating seniors in HS and college where they go to spend time with their friends. Sure there can be partying, these are young people after all. But it is by no means well known as being a week full of sex and drugs or black out drinking!!! I should know as I went on a beach week myself and had a great time! A little drinking but No sex whatsoever and no Drugs or stumbling drunkenness! People here where I live still go on graduation and spring break trips when they graduate HS and college. It isn’t necessarily some ridiculous scene out of a comedy/party movie.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

For us, this should apply to both the accused and the accuser.

Exactly. And Christine? Obviously a liar according to almost all posters here. With no “evidence” in sight. Again, double standard. You can’t treat one person one way and the other person the opposite way. There are words for that.

 

[Gingersnaps4]

The other thing is, kavanaugh was a Virgin through HS and much of college he says. If he were lying about that at least one woman would have come forward by now and set the record straight on that, and that’s a fact. So it is t guaranteed how any one individual will behave on spring break and graduation trips.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

No. Stop relying on gross stereotypes and movies when informing yourself. It’s hard to take people seriously when they do that. “Beach week” is for graduating seniors in HS and college where they go to spend time with their friends.

There are Beach Weeks and there are Beach Weeks. I don’t know where you went, but in Kavanaugh’s case it was Ocean City Maryland. Here’s an article from the Baltimore Sun from over a year ago–when no one cared about Kavanaugh. http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bs-ed-beach-week-20160615-story.html There is also a youtube video where they point out the hotel where he and his friends stayed.
Inside Maryland’s ‘Beach Week’ Marked on Brett Kavanaugh’s Calendar - YouTube

But it is by no means well known as being a week full of sex and drugs or black out drinking!!!

It is if you’re referring to Ocean City Maryland.

Stop relying on gross stereotypes and movies when informing yourself.

OK. You’re about to hire a guy. Then you find out he put himself in the company of undesirable people. His friends call him an “aggressive and belligerent drunk.” Someone you don’t know comes forward and claims he sexually assaulted her years ago. Meanwhile you have a list of candidates with pristine personal backgrounds. Why on earth would you hire the guy with the cloud over his head? Do you need to “prove” the allegations? Of course not. You would be seriously [insert your own adjective here] to hire him. Same with Kavanaugh. Why the adoration of him? Aren’t there any conservative judges around who don’t have all this baggage?

Why didn’t I vote for Hillary? Because I had “proof” that all the accusations were true? Of course not. There was no “proof” of anything. The fact that she approved a big deal for GE when she was Secretary of State and they hired Chelsea for $250,000 two weeks later could have been pure coincidence. As could all the other clouds over her head. But I’m not an idiot. Why would I vote for someone like that? I wouldn’t.

 

[Augustinian]

There are Beach Weeks and there are Beach Weeks. I don’t know where you went, but in Kavanaugh’s case it was Ocean City Maryland. Here’s an article from the Baltimore Sun from over a year ago

Kavanaugh didn’t attend Beach Week last year- he’s a middle aged judge, he attended it more than 30 years ago.

Events evolved over time, a story from last year’s event means nothing.

 

[HarryStotle]

Gingersnaps4:

“A DRUNK” as opposed to “one who drank (heavily) in his teens and early 20’s?”

To quote Brett: “I like beer.” NOT “I used to like beer.”

So still liking beer is sufficient to make him a drunk? And make him guilty of everything Ford claimed?

What I find interesting is that those people who claim that things like temperament and liking beer are sufficient to disqualify him seem to be implying that this is a reasonable standard of justice.

I cannot imagine Kavanaugh or anyone else, as judge ruling from the bench that an accused brought before him should be found guilty of the crime merely because they showed emotion in their testimony, tried to defend themselves or like beer.

And yet this is the standard those who want him disqualified are insisting should be the standard used to disqualify him.

Yeah, that makes sense.

We seem to have completely lost touch with what justice is.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

The other thing is, kavanaugh was a Virgin through HS and much of college he says. If he were lying about that at least one woman would have come forward by now and set the record straight on that, and that’s a fact.

You’re right on one point: “He says…” We have no idea. “At least one woman would have come forward…” Really? After what’s happened to Christine? I can see the posters on this forum now: “Where’s her proof?” And of course she wouldn’t have any proof. How could she? So why would she offer herself up to–in Christine’s words–try to stop a train that’s not going to stop?

What amazes me is that almost all of you believe every word that comes out of Kavanaugh’s mouth and at the same time think that Christine is lying about everything. “Where’s the proof?”

 

[Gingersnaps4]

My husband is from Montgomery county MD and would make day trips to ocean city all the time and spent spring breaks there etc so yes I think I have a better idea about it than someone who has no connections with that area. Today my dh is a great Catholic husband and family man, thank you very much.

Do you really think kavanaugh was a person having sex, at a beach week or otherwise, and yet somehow no woman has come forward to say she was with him, with as highly publicized as this has been? I’m not saying he didn’t drink and have fun at a beach week or wherever, but do you really think he was sexually active based on the evidence shown? He isn’t ugly either. If he were really actively trying to have sex, especially while deunk and with girls who were drinking, don’t you think it would have happened at some point? Yet we have no one contradicting him. I don’t adore him, I am just using logic here. And I will not ever be willing to crucify someone for drinking and partying in their youth when years later they have obviously outgrown it and become a productive member of society. That’s just madness in my eyes.

 

[PetraG]

Because stupidity has consequences and sometimes those consequences are lifelong. The idea is not to be stupid - and the vast majority of young people do in fact know better than to drink to the point of memory lapse or blacking out.

If he did indeed assault these women then that is something that they will suffer consequences from for life, regardless of whether he did it maliciously or not. Why shouldn’t he likewise suffer lifelong consequences if he inflicted trauma on them?

Many a drunk driver has to. For example if they seriously damage property or injure people in an accident caused by their drink driving they may find themselves with a lifelong criminal record and/or a lifelong driving ban. Doesn’t matter whether they meant to do it or not.

As the Gladwell video explains, it is not reasonable to expect someone to believe you when you claim they did something 30 years ago that you never accused them of to their face at the time. Dr. Ford said that Mark Judge acted funny around her at the time. This may be true, but of course it is possible that someone is going to act funny around you because you are looking at them in a way that is very different but they don’t understand. She was 15 years old and he was 17 years old. Their ability to mind read would’ve been even worse than the abilities of an adult (which are notoriously poor).

I’m not someone who is willing to hold an incident such as was described against someone for the rest of his life, particularly when there is no picture of what happened except one memory. Even if the incident was perpetrated by the person she believes perpetrated it, we don’t know the particulars of the situation. I certainly don’t think it is evidence that he is or ever was a sexual predator.

After all, are you saying that if someone commits a serious crime as a 17 year old and is tried and convicted that the offense ought to preclude the person from holding public office for the rest of their lives when there has been no indication that the proclivity to commit such an act has followed them into adulthood? I don’t.

In Oregon, someone who is convicted of a 2nd DUII is liable to lose their license for three years IF the second offense is within 5 years of the first. They don’t lose their license for life because their driving resulted in a fatality accident unless the accident followed a repeating pattern of DUII, reckless driving or both.

 

[Augustinian]

Meanwhile you have a list of candidates with pristine personal backgrounds.

There was no one on the list with a “pristine personal background” (Romans 3:23) and with a whole party willing to say anything to destroy whoever the nominee was-- anyone nominated by President Trump would have been trashed.

Before Mr. Kavanaugh’s name was even mentioned, the Democrats announced they were going to fight whomever was nominated by Trump to replace Kennedy, and defeat and destroy the candidate by any means necessary.

Suppose, just for a second, that President Trump and Sen. McConnell had a powwow this afternoon and decided to pull Kav’s name and submit someone else on the list instead for the vote later today. The Dems still wouldn’t be satisfied.

The goal is, and was, to push this past the election next month-- and if the Democrats win, confirm no one else nominated by President Trump for as long as Trump serves and they are in the majority.