There were some signs before now, especially in how I witnessed some women react to the results of the 2016 presidential election. But it has only been since the confirmation battle over Brett Kavanaugh began that I have seen what was mostly inner distress manifest itself in more open ways, like spontaneous sobbing and sudden expletive-laced expressions of despairing rage. I’ve been trying to figure out a way to express what this sad saga is doing to women in this nation, but it’s hard to know if I’m really grasping it myself. Sometimes it seems like its better to let women speak for themselves. Children’s books author Lisa Schroeder seemed to capture it in a tweet when she said, “Every day, it feels like I am facing a gigantic bully who is punching me over and over again.”
Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Chuck Grassley has dutifully rammed Kavanaugh’s confirmation through all obstacles and he predicts that Kavanaugh will be confirmed within forty-eight hours. He also says, “This is almost rock-bottom. I would like to have the future of mending things so that we can do things in a collegial way that the U.S. Senate ought to do — and particularly when it comes to the Supreme Court nomination.”
That’s a completely fanciful ambition. Justice John Paul Stevens retired from the court when he was 90 years old. Brett Kavanaugh will 90 years old on February 12, 2055. That’s how long this wound could fester. This isn’t a momentary decision, but a potentially 37-year decision. And we couldn’t even spend a couple of extra days to have a satisfactory investigation into the accusations that have been leveled at Kavanaugh.
I read what New York Times columnist Bret Stephens wrote this morning about how is grateful that Donald Trump is president (for once) because “ferocious and even crass obstinacy has its uses in life” and “he’s a big fat hammer fending off a razor-sharp dagger.” I understood some of his points and even had sympathy for a couple of them, but he doesn’t spend any time contemplating what it will mean to have Kavanaugh sitting on the Supreme Court, decade after decade, after his demonstrable display of dishonesty and unfitness during these proceedings.
To be sure, there would be costs on the other side if he were to be denied confirmation, and I don’t dispute that this has been one of the nastiest and no holds barred spectacles in the history of the country. But another Justice would eventually take this place on the Court and the wounds would slowly heal over time. That’s not going to happen with Kavanaugh sitting on the bench after he promised payback to the Clinton conspiracists he falsely claims have been behind the allegations against him.
I suppose it’s possible that Kavanaugh may one day be impeached, but that would be a rending national debacle all on its own, and absent that remedy this is a sore that is going to weep without end. It’s a mistake to confirm this man because his rulings will not be accepted and his mere presence will destroy the credibility of the Court.
The Republicans are thinking very short term right now, looking at a temporary uptick in the Senate race polls and thinking they’re on the right track. But I can tell, just by observing the women in my life, that this has set off a determined revolt and activated formerly apathetic people into a lifetime of activism and an absolutely unshakable thirst for payback.
Sen. Grassley says we’re at “rock bottom” and he wants “a future of mending things,” but if he actually interacted with the people he’s bullying he’d find out that he hasn’t seen rock bottom and their idea of mending things will not be to his liking.
In Grassley’s mind the silent rejection of Merrick Garland was preferable to am actual debate, and nice people don’t call out the perjury or investigate credible assault claims against other people in the club.
In my mind, the silent treatment of Merrick Garland is a bigger problem than an angry debate.
Also, if there are any women who come forward with claims of assault or harassment in the future, every one will lead to a store of ugliness
. . . against booman’s statement that
This one may have felt, in some ways, “nastie[r]” or more “no holds barred” than the theft of Garland’s seat. But that’s only because of the different “holds” available in this case to minority Dems versus majority Banana Republicans with Garland’s nomination.
Specifically, the “hold” not barred from the BRP* was the raw, brutal, violent abuse of raw majority power in simply refusing to act, at all, in performance of their Constitutional “advise and consent” duty.
I give booman a pass since he wrote “one of the”, not “the“. But in my view, the theft of Garland’s seat was in fact the “nastie[r]”, more “no holds barred” of the two abuses of power, though both are extreme. The current charade just had more and longer-lasting dramatic public spectacle. That was precluded in Garland’s case by the all-out dereliction of duty, announced while Scalia’s body was still stiffening and cooling (so pretty clearly planned and agreed-to in advance). I.e., the all-out brutality of that abuse ended the fight (though not the outrage) before it ever got started.
*Banana Republican Party
Indeed, agree 100%. Kavanaugh’s nomination has been ugly, but Garland was far worse in hte scheme of things. Its huge brick in the wall they’ve been building to de-legitimize democrats entirely. Here you had a sitting president who had his Constitutional right to nominate a supreme court justice and have a hearing for his confirmation summarily denied. And this was a man they previously approved of!
McConnell even gloated about it:
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/mcconnell-gloats-over-blocking-garland
Think about it this way: McConnell leads a senate majority that represents 18% of the voters. And a party that is a minority in the country. Kavanaugh’s nomination may have been ugly, but that’s mostly his own fault. Gorsuch was nominated with nothing approaching the angst and drama Kav’s did, so clearly democrats wasn’t picking on Kav just because he was a republican or because Trump picked him.
First Garland, now Kavanaugh. Grassley can stick his be still while I beat you “mending” where the sun don’t shine!
What Mr. Grassley and his fellow nazis are about to find out is that our side isn’t going to play high road anymore. We’re quite able to bring a nuclear bomb to this knife fight. Moderates will cease to exist. There won’t be anymore better angels to encourage compromise.
And (hopefully) he will never have a peaceful moment in a restaurant or any public place in Washington ever again.
In her FreshAir episode with reporter Greg Miller of Washington Post, Terry Gross said the following:
That was a bit disconcerting, because Terry usually is very circumspect about her phrasing. I am usually much less so, and would gladly use that term for Mitch and others in the GOP. But increasingly people opposed to the GOP fascist behavior will feel that use of that term is appropriate.
My wife used to say I was too leftist, but now even she is so angry that she is thinking the same thoughts as me – for the Republicans it is always party above country now!
If you read the WaPo from today, we learn that it wasn’t just McConnell trying to subvert any unified response for political gain. No, he sounds more like a paranoid John Bircher:
My wife used to say the same thing about me (she was always a liberal Democrat). Now she is a veritable fury. We live in furious times.
Court packing is overdue. All (soon-to-be) five GOP Supremes are illegitimate.
Anybody Trump selected would be horrible, jurisprudence wise, and would probably rule exactly as shitsquib O’Kavanaugh will, minus the belligerent drunk act.
Either way, a correction is required, whether by impeachment, in the case of Boofman Bart, or expanding the court in the case of anyone else. Two sub-optimal choices that will lead to a deeper, darker place than we are already at.
or both. 😉
I like the idea of shrinking the court by using the last in first out rule and kicking off the last two justices confirmed…
I think in the past when congress reduced the size of the court, they waited for justices to leave on their own, but screw that.
Kavanaugh would richly merit impeachment for perjury – by his own standards even, remember? Nothing dark about that, although maybe it would be impossible to get enough Republican Senators to go along.
I don’t think increasing the Court size would put us in a worse place than we are now. McConnell has shown the Republicans are totally shameless and will do anything to gain power – look at Garland and Kavanaugh. The only reason they didn’t pack the Court for Trump was that they didn’t need to.
Impeachment would be harder, but it has one overwhelming advantage; American women would see justice done. The pain Boo mentioned could start to heal.
I just had lunch with my gf (I am an old man).In the next booth, a 20-ish son kept telling his mother that “it will be all right” and “I’m sure the FBI has investigated him thoroughly” in regards to Kavanaugh. She refused to be mollified. I wanted to punch him. Or, talk some sense to him. My gf would have crucified him (thanks god for bad hearing!) I’m afraid we are sailing past the point of putting things back together again. I can see (I’m a professor) that young people are refusing to put up with this crap any further. I fear a violent uprising is right around the corner (one of the places I teach is known by a particular violent cataclysm some years ago, so I have already had a ringside seat to such action). It will come from the left in response to the conservatives’ crazy and unbending points of view. That, and Nazis. I never thought it would come to this. But, I see the breakdown coming. Poor people, brown and back people, young people, and now women.There is too much despair. Too much of the Republican way or the highway. This may be the time where being rich and powerful won’t help. Won’t mean much. Rock bottom is coming faster than any of us could have predicted.
Someone saw it coming…David Simon (12/7/13):
“We’re either going to do that in some practical way when things get bad enough or we’re going to keep going the way we’re going, at which point there’s going to be enough people standing on the outside of this mess that somebody’s going to pick up a brick, because you know when people get to the end there’s always the brick. I hope we go for the first option but I’m losing faith.”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/08/david-simon-capitalism-marx-two-americas-wire
And Ian Welsh (1/12/14):
“The Gandhian resistance method is very similar to general strikes: it requires hundreds of thousands to millions of people to be willing to shut down the economy and dare the police or army to kill or imprison them all. When you have only a few hundred or thousand people, the police can deal with that easily enough: worst case they call in the national guard. Hundreds of thousands: not so much.
What all of these actions had in common is that they genuinely hurt the interests of the rich where it mattered, in the pocketbook.
You can also get change through making the lives of the rich unpleasant, or making them fear for their very lives. Social peace has often been bought by treating ordinary people better, when the rich genuinely feared the army and police couldn’t protect them.”
http://www.ianwelsh.net/the-problem-of-resistance-to-the-oligarchy/
Martin, would you expand on your statement:
Do you objectively feel that this nastiness has been evidenced on both sides? From my partisan viewpoint, I see that any pushback from our side was a direct result of the ramming through by McConnell (I think he’s calling the shots;not Grassley) and the departure from fair and equitable disclosure of all background information normally a part of the process. All of the nastiness seems to me to belong at the feet of the GOP. Am I wrong?
Plus I view the demonstrations by women in the committee hearings as entirely justified and are a necessary expression of citizens’ participation in our democracy.
. . . with respect to this travesty would be as ludicrous and Reality-Denying as it’s possible for a thing to be.
Don’t do both siderism.
My grammar sucks. Not suggesting to booman that he not do both siderism. I’m stating (badly) that he doesn’t engage in both siderism.
“Charlie don’t surf!”
. . . though it still seems kinda non sequitur to my comment (i.e., didn’t suggest he does).
I think Boo means not that the Democrats have been vicious like the Republicans, but that if Kavanaugh is rejected it will help bring Republican voters to the polls and reduce the height of the blue wave. The polling seems to indicate he’s right.
Except for the polls being interpreted as “if Kavanaugh is confirmed that will bring out GOP voters.”
OT, but I am now Team Menendez. He tweeted: “Just read the FBI report on Kavanaugh – if that’s an investigation, it’s a bullshit investigation.”
https://twitter.com/SenatorMenendez/status/1047924865427263488
Because I read the whole thing and I thought it was a load of manure. There is no both sides here. Ds have been asking reasonable due diligence questions. Like did he lie about leaks being given to him or his involvement in vetting judges for Bush.
. . . reading the whole (what a tedious chore!) Stephens piece myself, I agree, so chiming in with same question.
This is pure delusion. Any judge Trump nominated would repeal Roe. They’ve been preparing for this for 30 years and have plenty of candidates.
And any candidate they nominated would rule that Gerrymandering is perfectly constitutional, but Obamacare isn’t. The Civil Rights Act is unconstitutional because.
The GOP is trying and succeeding in locking in their minority control over our country for the next 30 years. It’s going to take a revolution to reverse things.
We’re going to be arguing over abortion politics for the rest of my life. It’s even possible the nation may simply break apart like in 1860. Not symbolically. Literally.
Because the new Alt-Right racist and reactionary S.Ct. might well rule any progressive legislation unconstitutional – just like they did in response to New Deal.
That video yesterday where the Black motorcyclist dropped those two entitled white guys like stones with one punch each…that’s every Dem-leaning voter on November 6th.
Saw on Twitter a little bit ago. The FBI report is a sham bc they did not interview the two principals,Kavanaugha and Ford. Why do you suppose? Could it be Trump did not want to take the chance Kavanaugh would lie and the FBI would write it up? Or that they would read his testimony and discover he lied. How in hell do,you conduct an investigation and not interview the two main witnesses? It’s a sham. And we, the people, get to live with it. Trump keeps on making a mockery of our legal system just like he and his father did for years and years. And what manner of evil did he engage in with Russia? The nice guys let him off the hook, Every. Damn. Time.
From my porch in Baltimore, it looks like there’s serious thunder & lightning in the DC area. Seems appropriate.
No, McConnell and the rest of those fuckers ain’t seen nothing. I’ve had the sense that the emergence of Trump would finally cause at least those of us on the left to eventually get it that the problem isn’t just with him but the entire corrupt edifice of the Republican party. This is what it takes to get there. Had they destroyed the ACA, it might have caused the scales to drop from the eyes of even some of their own supporters. This will mobilize women and young people.
Don’t be surprised if polls continue to show Republican women supporting Trump and the party. I’m not saying that everyone’s going to wake up. Just that a significant number will shift now in a way that’s irrevocable. And I believe that shift will be enough to create a sea change.
If I’m not correct, then there will be more of the same. Obviously Garland wasn’t enough. A lot of stuff hasn’t been enough though it seems to all thinking people that it should have been. But this will be hard to live down. If they repeal Roe or Griswold all hell will break loose.
Would it not be cutting social security and Medicare that breaks the dam?
I actually still think that the Dems will take the HOR in November despite all this. If that happens, SocSec and Medicare won’t be cut. Trump also said he would oppose that in the campaign but, of course, we know Trump is the distillation of bullshit.
been down so long it looks like up to me
“It is a mistake to confirm this man because his rulings will not be respected and his mere presence will destroy the legitimacy of the court.”
Exactly.
The court is already on a thin thread, given that the people voted AGAINST republicans in 6/7 of the last presidential elections, and yet there is not just a republican majority, but an ultraconservative republican majority.
Add to that:
-One justice who is clearly unqualified, and who perjured himself to get his seat (Thomas)
-One justice who sits in a stolen seat, who was appointed by a president who lost the popular vote (Gorsuch)
-One justice who perjured himself, might be a sexual offender, and was appointed by a president who lost the popular vote (Kavanaugh)
The Kavanaugh court will have no legitimacy and there is no reason that we should respect it.+
Also, both Roberts and Alito were appointed by a President who was falsely “selected” to be President by a Republican majority of the SCOTUS in 2000. Those should have beeen Gore appointments. So actually all five are illegitimate.
Except…both Roberts and Alito were appointed after Bush’s re-election, in which he won the popular vote.
So, much as I hate them (especially Alito) for their ultra-conservatism, I don’t think they are illegitimate.
In contrast, even for someone like me, who is respectful of procedures and institutions, Thomas and Gorsuch are on dubious grounds, and Kavanaugh will be completely unworthy of respect.
But for Bush v. Gore there is no Prez Bush in 2006. Roberts and Alito are thus fruit of the poisonous tree. And Roberts lied his way onto the Court at least as much as any nominee in history.
But whether we have 2 illegitimate Repub justices, or 4, or 5 is not terribly important, as the 5 man Repub majority is illegitimate under any calculus one wishes to employ.
. . . “ultraconservative” — “conservative” applied to the radical regressives currently mislabeled “conservative” requires those “scare quotes”. There’s nothing conservative (nor “ultra”) about “conservatives against conservation” (to pick just the most obvious, glaring example), yet it’s a central pillar of current, so-called “conservatism”.
Good point. Today’s conservatives are not conservatives. They are radicals.
. . .
. . . in place of
See the difference that makes?
I have asked Flake and Collins, among others, the following question. Just what are you trying to conserve? Which I follow up with a long list of questions beginning with “Do you want to conserve outdated 18th and 19th century religion based moral codes? White male privilege? Do you want to conserve slavery? Do you want take back the vote from women? Do you want to conserve mindless destruction of land and water?
As you say, they are in favor of radical regression and not conservation of anything
Sigh…
Precisely, rae.
I have been saying the following since I read a great deal of Bannon’s writing.
Trump’s real goal is to totally tank the governement and take over as Boss of All Bosses.
Capo di Tutti Capi
When I hear well-meaning Dems being outraged about the various little machinations Trump takes as he heads for his goal but nothing at all about the real, ongoing collapse of the government…the death of a thousand cuts…I am always surprised.
We complain about his tacitcal decisions.
We mock him.
We hate on him.
Meanwhile, nothing is being said about his strategic goal. The mainstream media don’t say much about it. Too scary…they might lose clicks. Meanwhile, the federal government is bleeding out.
It looks to me that he’s survived yet another set of misplaced attacks. I will bet that the November elections will be witness to this. Almost the same results as 2016, after all of this badly aimed tsuris. If just one powerful Democrat stood UP and and said “Looka here, folks. We’ve been aiming at his diversions instead of his goal. He wants to be King, and it’s past time that we call him on it!!!” that politician would be catapulted to the top of the Dem pile in about three days.
But NOOOOooo…
Tippy-toeing around the real truths of the matter.
The Dem tactic since at least the assassination years.
And look where it got us.
Clinton I, Bush II, Obama (At best a neocentrist in neolib clothing.), and now an aspiring Caesar.
I simply don’t know how to say this in order to get it through the heads of media tranced-out Dems.
We are headed for the endgame!!!
Stop pussyfooting around.
WTFU.
Please!!!
Thank you and goodnight…
AG
But…but…but your man Rand Paul is supporting Kavanaugh.
True.
I much prefer his father.
And I think that both of them have no shot at real power. Never did.
So it goes.
And the Empire continues to implode.
Have you noticed?
AG
It’s going to be Season 5 Episode 1 of Endeavor.
Rage all the way down.
I work in an office with 40 women and 1 man (it’s a self-selecting field). Its a wonderful place to work.
But we don’t talk about IT or HIM, because we know we couldn’t stop if we did. We wouldn’t get any work done at all. But I’m not sure that anyone at all will be at work on November 6th.
It’s a mistake to confirm this man because his rulings will not be accepted and his mere presence will destroy the credibility of the Court
That’s what I find amazing about all this… The Republicans have so little self-awareness, or just don’t give a crap about how damaging this is going to be to the Supreme Court, which has currently been rendering an almost constant stream of 5-4 decisions going their way even with their hated swing voter Kennedy sitting on it. Now they are going to get 5-4 decisions that will be viewed as illegitimate by the majority of the country as the best option and a packed court rending their Federalist society approved clowns irrelevant at worst. But hey, at least abortion will be illegal in a bunch of states for some (hopefully short) period of time.
Yeah, they would be far better off withdrawing Kavanaugh, and nominating someone else who wouldn’t have the same baggage. But, in their shortsighted desire to “win” the latest political battle, they don’t see this.
. . . doesn’t have a mirror?
(“Rock bottom”, that is.)
Good ole Manchin , a reliable republican vote when you need it.
Typical idiot Repub thinking—that after they have crammed another of Der Trumper’s illegitimate Right-wing Judge Boyz through to obtain a total radical far-right Court majority, it’s now time to heal the wounds of the senate (barf) and return to happy collegiality in the fucking senate elevators. If the hapless Dems go along with this suggestion then they need to be destroyed as well.
Listened to Schumer’s speech this morn, which was fine, but noticeably absent was any suggestion that ramming this (second) partisan hack through in this manner will render the Supreme Court completely illegitimate in the eyes of an enormous section of the nation. The big question is whether any Dem senator will go there in the upcoming “debate”, even though it is now an open topic of discussion practically anywhere one wants to visit on the internets.
The rule of law is on its deathbed and the death rattle is plainly audible. It’s extremely difficult to see how it can be resurrected. There simply is no practical mechanism for doing so, absent a national revolt and destruction of the legislative filibuster. As many have long predicted, the “conservative” movement has finally destroyed the last threads that hold the nation together.
We have returned to the 1850s, Dimwit Grassley, and your pious pleas for a return to senatorial collegiality better be falling on deaf ears in the appalling national disgrace that is the US Senate.