Patterico's Pontifications

9/15/2019

Refighting Lost Battles

Filed under: General — JVW @ 2:19 pm



[guest post by JVW]

Since I see this is being discussed on the open thread, I thought I would start a new post. Saddled with a Congressional agenda that is going nowhere so long as the GOP controls the Senate and the White House, and given a bunch of Democrat candidates who are, to some degree or other, senile, phony, or nuts (My Little Aloha Sweetie exempted, silly though her economic platform may be), the academia/media/entertainment blob that controls progressive thought in this country has decided to refight the Brett Kavanaugh hearings. You can follow the details without giving the crappy New York Times a pageview at the following links:

John McCormack at National Review Online

John Hinderaker at Powerline

Roger Kimball at Spectator USA

Naturally, most of the major reprobates running in the donkey party primary want to impeach Justice Kavanaugh for allegedly lying during his Senate testimony. What’s to be said about a party so brain-dead, so unmoored, so desperate that they have to recycle last year’s losing campaign in order to try and unite their party?

– JVW

79 Responses to “Refighting Lost Battles”

  1. Cute Crazy Hippie Crystals Chick appeared on MSNBC this morning and was not asked about Kavanaugh, nor did she bring up the topic herself. The media left appears content to report only on the Dem candidates’ calls for his impeachment, rather than the worthiness of the “new” allegations themselves.

    JVW (54fd0b)

  2. I mean where would jane mayer and jill Abramson’s careers be, if they didn’t run over Clarence Thomas, every five years or so, mayer had already plumbed the depths but she can still dig deeper,

    narciso (d1f714)

  3. I know my views on this are tainted by being a right-winger, but how is the House of Representatives spending this fall discussing the impeachment of Brett Kavanaugh not a victory for Donald Trump, especially if they are at the same time discussing his impeachment? Would you want to be a freshman Congressperson in a swing district and run for reelection in 2020 having watch your party leadership waste most of your first term on petulant grandstanding?

    JVW (54fd0b)

  4. yes the laser pointer is firmly, and Pelosi seems a little bored with it, like they are asking ‘are we there yet, are we there yet’

    narciso (d1f714)

  5. “What’s to be said about a party so brain-dead, so unmoored, so desperate that they have to recycle last year’s losing campaign in order to try and unite their party?”

    Yep, some need to let go of losing campaigns from years gone by.

    Anyway… so, what’s the latest from NeverTrump on Trump collusion/obstruction/stormy/impeachment?

    Munroe (732181)

  6. Sounds like it has the potential to become another Benghazi.

    John B Boddie (11ac33)

  7. Democrats have been the party of degeneracy for the last fifty years.

    nk (dbc370)

  8. 6. Since I never accused Trump of “collusion” “obstruction” or any of the other standard Trump Humper tropes, I assume your criticism of NeverTrump(TM) doesn’t apply to me.

    Gryph (08c844)

  9. Sigh. As far as I can tell from everything I’ve heard about Kavanaugh, he was a jerk frat-bro type in HS and college. If being a jerk frat-bro type when in your teens and early twenties disqualifies you from everything ever we’d have a far more unemployed basement dwellers. People are idiots when they are young, hopefully they grow up and are less idiotic. (Kavanaugh has not struck me as an excellent person and he doesn’t seem to handle pressure all that well, but I’ve only seen him in high stress situations and handling stress poorly or being not-excellent as a person isn’t impeachable.)

    Nic (896fdf)

  10. Anyway… so, what’s the latest from NeverTrump on Trump collusion/obstruction/stormy/impeachment?

    Lock him up!

    nk (dbc370)

  11. Someone accuse you of rape, show me how much reservation you would have,

    Narciso (7658f4)

  12. An awful lot of people have been less graceless about it. Including the current occupant of the oval office and an occupant several administrations ago. (and I don’t think either of them are excellent people either.)

    Nic (896fdf)

  13. ??

    Nic (896fdf)

  14. The Left are going to re-fight everything until they get the result they want.

    Andrew Sullivan lays it out on Brexit:

    I get this. I would have voted Remain. I find London to be far more fun now than it was when I left the place. But allow me to suggest a parallel version of Britain’s situation — but with the U.S.

    The U.S. negotiated with Canada and Mexico to create a free trade zone called NAFTA, just as the U.K. negotiated entry to what was then a free trade zone called the “European Economic Community” in 1973. Now imagine further that NAFTA required complete freedom of movement for people across all three countries. Any Mexican or Canadian citizen would have the automatic right to live and work in the U.S., including access to public assistance, and every American could live and work in Mexico and Canada on the same grounds. This three-country grouping then establishes its own Supreme Court, which has a veto over the U.S. Supreme Court. And then there’s a new currency to replace the dollar, governed by a new central bank, located in Ottawa.

    How many Americans would support this? How many votes would a candidate for president get if he or she proposed it? The questions answer themselves. It would be unimaginable for the U.S. to allow itself to be governed by an entity more authoritative than its own government. It would signify the end of the American experiment, because it would effectively be the end of the American nation-state.“

    http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/09/andrew-sullivan-ny-times-abandons-liberalism-for-activism.html
    _

    harkin (58d012)

  15. And what contenporaneous was there, just crazy people like jean carroll and other of alreds rent a mob.

    Narciso (7658f4)

  16. “The Left are going to re-fight everything until they get the result they want.”

    I think that’s kinda nonsense. Gorsuch went through without a fuss. Given that Merrick Garland was not even given a hearing, they could have fought tooth and nail against him but they did not. Obviously Kavanaugh is seen as problematic for other reasons.

    JRH (52aed3)

  17. RIP Rick Ocasek
    _

    harkin (58d012)

  18. 12, I wouldn’t go that far, he seemed more like a wannabe who might be a nerd in a public suburban HS and he might be that randy dude that got humbled away from a rest of life in douchebro-dom by having daughters instead of sons. When you get pushed you are going to react. I still say his weak spot might be his exposure to women in athletics which might engender some white knight tendencies and perhaps empathy to the point of weak defense of life.

    urbanleftbehind (c78994)

  19. They wanted an example made, they didnt particularly care who it was.

    Narciso (7658f4)

  20. It took the nuclear option to get Gorsuch in and I would be interested to know what about Kavanaugh (other than baseless smears) are ‘problematic’.

    harkin (58d012)

  21. @20 Just correcting myself on no fuss for Gorsuch. I had forgotten the filibuster.

    JRH (52aed3)

  22. 22 and 12:

    It never ceases to amaze me the behavior/personality/faults projected on Kavanaugh by the Clueless.

    harkin (58d012)

  23. He was who could reasonably get through the possum senate, at the time. If amy barrett comes after ginsburg departs it will be ragnarok.

    Narciso (7658f4)

  24. I mean the guy said boofing was about flatulence and “devils triangle” was a drinking game. And “Renate Alumnius” was a term of affection, not a reference to having been with Renate. He was lying. now, lying about stupid sh*t sure.

    JRH (52aed3)

  25. “I think that’s kinda nonsense. Gorsuch went through without a fuss.”
    JRH (52aed3) — 9/15/2019 @ 5:51 pm

    You’re forgetting some things.

    Gorsuch replaced Scalia, thus no shift on the court. Kavanaugh replaced Kennedy, the “swing” vote.

    Also, Gorsuch came early in Trump’s term. Kavanaugh was just before the midterms, which many were predicting (wrongly) would result in a Dem Senate majority. A rejection or even a drawn out delay would, it was thought, give Dems control of the process. Thus, the timing of Ford’s allegations at the eleventh hour.

    Munroe (4dce03)

  26. Deja vu all over again. They’ll flap their gums for a week and move on to their next lie. Kavanaugh will be on the Court for the next thirty years. Longevity is the best revenge.

    nk (dbc370)

  27. @26 What have you seen of him (other than his politics) that causes you to think he’s an excellent person?

    Nic (896fdf)

  28. As it has been with thomas for 28 years, but anita hill isnt a pariah, mayer and abramson havent ended up in utter disgrace, hence the lesson.

    Narciso (7658f4)

  29. 31 – you mean besides everything in his professional record, the testimonials from people he worked with and the fact that Christine Blasey-Ford’s own father supported him?

    harkin (58d012)

  30. Trump should task the FBI to investigating the college behavior of the House leadership. I bet you that Pelosi was a total s.kank in college.

    Kevin M (19357e)

  31. But then, I thought, why investigate. Just find someone who remembers how Pelosi had so many different men in her dorm room, day and night.

    Kevin M (19357e)

  32. @33 Sure, why is that any better than all the testimonials that he’s a jerk, and his own ridiculously obvious lies as detailed in 28?

    Nic (896fdf)

  33. Harkin, history is full of fathers who opted for the rapist of their daughter over their daughter. So that’s a weak argument.

    My own opinion is that Kavanuagh was guilty of Fordxs rape. This is based not so much on any evidence as on his reaction/defense. He acted exactly as a man who was guilty would be expected to react. He didn’t act like a wrongly accused man would react. Perhaps he forced himself on one or more girls, but wasn’t sure if Ford was the girl.

    That is of course subjective, but I think it’s accurate. He knew the GOP would degend him, so he had nothing to lose and everything to gain by playing the falsely accused. But he did not act like falsely accused people act.

    Of course, the episode demonstrates the brain-deadness of the Democrats. They could hage targeted his apparent corruption and financial improprities, but did not. (If you don’t remember the questions about his finances…well, that proves my point. Had the Democrats been smart, you would have remembered them.)

    Kishnevi (2dabdc)

  34. 37 is a demo of how many typos you can cram into a post

    Kishnevi (2dabdc)

  35. @35 You remember what her constituency is, right? I’m pretty sure the SF bay area wouldn’t care if she was promiscuous in college, even if she was participating in *cough* a devil’s triangle *cough*.

    Nic (896fdf)

  36. No they wanted to destroy his life, get him off the court, possibly get him disbarred, thats the garden slugs you are still defending

    Narciso (7658f4)

  37. Narciso, just because Democrats lie does not mean Republicans tell the truth.

    I do find it strange that you defend an approach to immigration that, were it in effect at the time you came here, would not have allowed you in.

    Kishnevi (2dabdc)

  38. 36 – lol – you’re the expert on stupid sh*t.

    harkin (58d012)

  39. And so it continues …

    Colliente (05736f)

  40. “My own opinion is that Kavanuagh was guilty of Fordxs rape. This is based not so much on any evidence as on his reaction/defense

    Let’s all give thanks you’re not a judge.

    harkin (58d012)

  41. He didn’t act like a wrongly accused man would react.

    Please tell us how wrongly accused men act so we can eliminate the need for presumption of innocence and evidence.

    harkin (58d012)

  42. I said earlier that I thought people projecting on Kavanaugh was amazing.

    I’m even more amazed at the inane insistence to double down.

    harkin (58d012)

  43. @42 Very convincing.

    Nic (896fdf)

  44. Just keep telling yourself that a smear with no evidence is worth destroying a man’s life.

    harkin (58d012)

  45. And oh yeah…..

    Latest Kavanaugh Accuser Was Hillary’s Lawyer in Clinton Impeachment

    https://pjmedia.com/trending/latest-kavanaugh-accuser-was-hillarys-lawyer-in-clinton-impeachment/
    _

    harkin (58d012)

  46. @48 which part of “handling stress poorly or being not-excellent as a person isn’t impeachable” are you having trouble with?

    Nic (896fdf)

  47. Gosh a man who was being smeared for his presumed political views and future actions to the point of destroying him professionally got angry, he’s unfit.

    Then let’s chuck his impeccable professional record because people disagree over esoteric teenage terms from four decades back.

    Yup, sounds solid. So what if the ‘witness’ claimed it never happened? HE MUST GO DOWN.

    I’m amazed that people fed hot garbage by the left not only consume it readily but insist on seconds and thirds.

    harkin (58d012)

  48. So all of it then. Ohhhhhh Kayyyyyyy.

    Nic (896fdf)

  49. Well maybe some of you ahould be accused of a felony, by unstable and/or unscrupulous people, good grief,

    Narciso (7658f4)


  50. James Hasson
    @JamesHasson20
    ·
    The resurrection of the Kavanaugh saga and the calls for impeachment are—like the push to pack the Court and the naked attacks on its legitimacy—designed to intimidate the Court and undermine its authority.

    This from the folks who talk about “attacks on our institutions”

    Nailed it.

    harkin (58d012)

  51. I hope this bullschitt is sobering for CJ Roberts… helps him better understand the sort of people he allows to cloud his judgement.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  52. I dont think so, he keeps feeding the crocodile, hoping it only takes a leg.

    Narciso (7658f4)

  53. 50… the people involved with this have no decency. It’s fully political in nature and to them, “by any means necessary” is a credo.

    Ghouls.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  54. It’s a little crazy that Democrats are calling for the impeachment of a judge who was guilty of doing obnoxious things as an undergrad in the early 1980s, yet the party’s top elected leader has passed on impeaching a president who committed multiple felonies while in office. There’s some serious lack of perspective here.

    Paul Montagu (dfd657)

  55. R.I.P. Ric Ocasek

    Icy (6abb50)

  56. Paul Montagu (dfd657) — 9/15/2019 @ 10:49 pm

    Amazing what a two year unlimited scope investigation can uncover versus a one week limited scope mail-it-in sort of thing.

    Munroe (732181)

  57. Aoc says you better support impeaching kavenaugh and trump or we will primary you! Most democrats would vote to primary their establishment corporate stooge representative. Young AOC’S are getting ready to primary them right now as the tea party did to rino’s in 2010. remember eric kanter.

    lany (6c1578)

  58. Lany, that approach has its limits…with AOC targeting Cuellar and Lipinski next spring, you might create a worst case scenario that not only results in 2 GOP pickups but the margin that keeps TX red and forces illinois dems to keep the buses out of MI and outof WI and IA.

    urbanleftbehind (e008cb)

  59. #37

    Harkin, history is full of fathers who opted for the rapist of their daughter over their daughter. So that’s a weak argument.

    My own opinion is that Kavanuagh was guilty of Fordxs rape. This is based not so much on any evidence as on his reaction/defense. He acted exactly as a man who was guilty would be expected to react. He didn’t act like a wrongly accused man would react. Perhaps he forced himself on one or more girls, but wasn’t sure if Ford was the girl.

    A) Christy Ford displayed mental stability issues, Which her father was very familiar with. hence the likely support for the accused
    B) the FBI interviewed two separate reported incidences of individuals claiming similar the Ford would have mistaken for the alledged kavanugh. The second allegation was deemed credible

    joe (debac0)

  60. Harkin, history is full of fathers who opted for the rapist of their daughter over their daughter. So that’s a weak argument.

    Good lord. Do you even hear yourself? Speaking of weak arguments there Mr. Kishnevi, I am still wondering where you got the idea that you can see any Bahamas lighthouse, let alone the Nassau one, from Ft. Lauderdale beach even in daylight. It’s one of those things that is so astoundingly bizarre that I find it fascinating. I am real curious if you “observed” this yourself or if you read it somewhere. It does sound vaguely like something I’ve seen published before (I used to live down there), though not the “in daylight” thing but night. That is IIRC. Which was still ridiculous but in a funny kind of way. It seems people will believe nearly anything that they see in print.

    PTw (894877)

  61. > What’s to be said about a party so brain-dead, so unmoored, so desperate that they have to recycle last year’s losing campaign in order to try and unite their party?

    https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/422535-republicans-face-2020-repeat-on-health-care

    john (cd2753)

  62. They have to insist it is all true.

    Because it (the accusations against Brett Kavanaugh in this case) are either all true, or all false. (theoreticaly, of course, false accusations could be added to one or more true ones, but it is highly unlikely for any of them to be true. Kavanaugh went through a number of background checks before.)

    Sammy Finkelman (8dcc71)

  63. The problem for the Democrats and why this battle is beibg re-fooght.

    It’s a matter of faith, of course.

    People used to argue about Giod; now they argue about Clinton and Trump.

    Sammy Finkelman (8dcc71)

  64. One of the arguments on the Democratic side is a general argument aaginst conspiracy theories.

    Now if it the accusations aaginst Kavanaugh are all false, you might have a hard time arguing against belief in conspiracy theories.

    And if people pay attention to conspiracy theories that might lead to the unraveling of some real conspiracies. (not fantasitical ones)

    And if peopple thought some kinds of conspoiracies could be true, the best defense against just moving along here would be eliminated.

    The question isn’t whether any conspiracy theories are true – the question which
    conspiracy throries are true or partially correct.

    It is not possible for any well infofrmed person to not believe in any and all possible conspiracy theories. But we do have to get it right.

    Sammy Finkelman (8dcc71)

  65. Carol L Moore qwrote to me in 1997:

    > As with many other things in life, one must
    > be discriminating in giving credence to
    > various conspiracy theories. Some are totally
    > on target, others off the wall, with a whole
    > range in between. Some are enragingly true,
    > some fun, some tedious,
    > some just plain annoying.

    Sammy Finkelman (8dcc71)

  66. Thanks for posting on this yesterday.

    DRJ (15874d)

  67. Narisco @ 27…

    If another vacancy occurs while Trump is still President and the Republicans still hold the Senate, the next nomination fight will be Ragnarok no matter WHO the nominee is, or who the nominee is replacing. The Gorsuch and Kavanaugh fights will look like strolls in the park in comparison.

    Jeff Lebowski (c3d021)

  68. #71 EVERY Replacement of EVERY Judge is a fight – when its a Republican President. The only exception is when its a Fake_Con like Souter or Stevens. Roberts – despite being a moderate and replacing O’Connor – got 22 negative votes. The R’s if you remember had a 55-44 advantage with 1 independent. So, 50% of the D’s voted against him, including Kennedy, Obama, and Joe Biden.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  69. JRH (52aed3) — 9/15/2019 @ 6:23 pm

    “Renate Alumnius” was a term of affection, not a reference to having been with Renate.

    It had to be since none of them in fact had “been” with Renate, aside maybe from a date or a dance.

    There was a whole trend going on about that time (1983) about making making yearbooks into revlations and support of beibg bad, mainly bad boys. (that they in fact weren’t, was the big inside joke)

    Ralph Northam got caught up in that too (1984)

    Apparently the cause was yearbook publishing salesmen.

    Sammy Finkelman (102c75)

  70. 41. kishnevi to narciso

    Narciso, just because Democrats lie does not mean Republicans tell the truth.

    I do find it strange that you defend an approach to immigration that, were it in effect at the time you came here, would not have allowed you in.

    Republicans are postively evil, and they lie to defend evil policy. Democrats are unethical and they smear people, and they’re much better organized and they want to entrench bad or disputable policy (as with the courts)

    I don’t think I could vote for any Democrat for President unless he or she says:

    1) The accusations against Brett Kavanaugh are a lie.

    2) The accusation that the policeman in Fergsuon Missouri did anything wrong to Michael Brown is a lie. (and no less than a Department of Justice report while Obama was president said so.)

    3) The climate policies being advocated are irrational, no matter what you believe about climate change.

    Sammy Finkelman (102c75)

  71. What about George Zimmerman, Sammy? I doubt I could find a dozen so-called republicans/conservatives willing to publicly state that they believe he was innocent.

    PTw (894877)

  72. The reason I say that Democrats need to say things like that because otherwise they’ll be presumed to support the lies. They need to take some affirmative action to separate themselves from that. And they’ll be asked to endorse it.

    George Zimmerman was innocent (although maybe he could have been a little but more patient and not pulled out his gun – he, after all, had managed to move things so that his head was being banged against the earth, not asphalt and I think he knew the police were coming)

    But anyway, irrational as it may be, Trayvon Martin attacked George Zimmerman.

    Most likely, in my opinion, because he took George Zimmerman for a Blood who was going to summon his buddies to maybe kill him because he had recognized him as a Crip. That’s the life he knew in his high school in Miami. He was only going on 17.

    Not going into Trayvon Martin’s background doesn’t serve anybody’s interest except the slanderers.

    Sammy Finkelman (102c75)

  73. they needed to secure the black vote, so they picked this case, al Sharpton and the crump firm gave it play, the julian firm did the messaging, the community resource agency, organized the protests, and abc, nbc and the times, sculpted the narrative, also coates at the atlantic, blow at the times, et al, added their special sauce,

    narciso (d1f714)

  74. they needed to secure the black vote

    And so the republicans/conservatives threw an innocent man under the bus. OK, they didn’t throw him there, and granted the guy was a loyal Dem voter, but no one deserved what has happened to him. The republicans/conservatives could have shown some backbone there. But no, they ran from that situation. Thus AGAIN undermining both GZ and their own integrity. Because they ride the weak horse. It’s easier that way. They’re safe and secure behind their walls and such. Why stick their necks out for the most fundamental human right there is, the right to self defense. Not the right to hope that the police show up in time.

    Also, Sammy…On what do you base “I think he knew the police were coming”? How do you know presume to know that GZ “knew” that even though his head moments earlier as being bashed into the concrete sidewalk, that he “knew” with this young punk sitting on top of him, still bashing his head into the (soft?) ground, that it was impossible for the punk to “manage to move things” back?

    PTw (894877)

  75. there had been 400 calls, from that complex over an 8 year period, the times had abbreviated it to one year,

    narciso (d1f714)

Leave a Reply

Comment moderation is enabled. Your comment may take some time to appear.


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3125 secs.