Don's Tuesday Column

         THE WAY I SEE IT   by Don Polson   Red Bluff Daily News   10/2/2018

Destroying judicial nominations

It was, and remains, a spectacle unlike any we’ve witnessed in our adult lives, and worse by degree than the Robert Bork or Clarence Thomas Supreme Court hearings. For Bork, it was a Ted Kennedy-generated litany of future social and judicial catastrophes. It was all conjecture driven by hysterical fear over having the carefully-constructed edifice of “judicial review”—the power to rule over the supposedly co-equal branches of the legislative and the executive—“compromised” by adding a justice who believed in the supremacy of the Constitution. Weak-willed Republicans caved; Bork lost.

The same political animus drove the campaign against Clarence Thomas but Democrats found that, rather than run with “fear and loathing” over judicial leanings, they could use the circus-like scenario of sexual harassment of Anita Hill through made-up workplace incidents to sully his sterling reputation. Republicans didn’t take the bait, or the intimidation. Some Democrats bolted from their increasingly leftist leadership and joined the majority vote for his confirmation. Will “red-state” Dems follow that example?

Know this: The manipulated, drawn-out tactics of delay, obstruct, accuse, “what if-ism” and “can’t we just have another FBI review?” (of the same material)—this abomination of a confirmation process, driven by behind-the-scenes machinations, has proven Trump voters right to put him in the office. The man fights, even when he presents his softer, “We’ll see what happens, I’m for whatever the Senate wants,” side.

We may have found the one man that believed, even knew in his bones, that the supposedly inexorable tide of history toward the socialist, “America in decline” left, could be not just resisted and fought—but defeated. Trump’s value is that he stands between us “normals” and the deranged, hateful left.

The polling proves that the media-driven surveys resort to diluting the pro-Kavanaugh side by including “all adults” rather than “likely voters”; they also use unbalanced samples weighted for Democrats. For instance, a Reuters/Ipsos poll used a 54% to 46% Democrat tilt (leaving out Independents) and found (surprise!) support for the accusers at 55%; if you simply reversed that for a 54% Republican, 46% Democrat mix, you came up with (sit down for this) 54% support for Kavanaugh. Yes, they created the result that drove the headline “Majority support for his accusers.”

In the Missouri U.S. Senate race between incumbent Democrat Claire (used a private jet for the charade of an RV tour of her state) McCaskill, and her Republican challenger, Josh Hawley, he now leads her by 2 points, 48 to 46. For emphasis, he leads by 7 points (49 to 42), among all groups when asked if the confirmation process favors Hawley or McCaskill. Other fair and balanced polls also show leads forming and growing for Republican Senate candidates against their red state Democrat incumbents. That goes for West Virginia, Indiana, Ohio, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota and others. Red Wave? That’s the way I see it.

Any reference to polling must be taken with a big caveat about media bias, and not just their overwhelmingly partisan voting patterns, contributions and positions. What does it say about their even-handed treatment of Kavanaugh when a straight analysis of coverage shows that nearly six hours were devoted to his accusers and their accusations, versus minutes (a quarter hour) for his defense against what have been uncorroborated (by witnesses), unproven and unsupported charges.

So Kavanaugh drank/drinks beer and farted in high school, all obsessed over by Democrats. As when President Lincoln, upon hearing of General Grant’s whiskey consumption, said a case of Grant’s whiskey should be sent to all of his generals, I say let’s send a case of Kavanaugh’s favorite beer to other judges.

Remember the kerfuffle over having a female Arizona sex crimes prosecutor ask questions of Ms. Ford? Her analysis is now available (Washington Post) and, for anyone with an open mind, it destroys Blasey-Ford’s credibility with the same conclusions evident to Kavanaugh’s supporters for some time.

“In the legal context, here is my bottom line: A ‘he said, she said’ case is incredibly difficult to prove. But this case is even weaker than that. Dr. Ford identified other witnesses to the events [who] either refuted her allegations or failed to corroborate them…I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the Committee. Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard.” Have your news sources told you that?

John Hinderaker: “I think that Judge Kavanaugh’s pristine reputation is one reason why the Democrats have unleashed against him a smear campaign unparalleled in American history. This is the message they are trying to send: If we can do this to the Boy Scout Brett Kavanaugh, we can do it to anyone…Because our smear machine will reach back to middle school if necessary. If we can’t find any dirt on you, we will manufacture some.

“There is no depth to which we will not stoop, and your honesty, integrity and spotless reputation are no match for our control over the media and our determination to dredge up ridiculous allegations against anyone who stands in our way…If we can accuse Brett Kavanaugh, one of the most respected lawyers and judges in America, of gang rape, we can accuse anyone of anything! And our insane accusations will dominate the news.” They want you to think twice before serving in a Republican administration or judiciary.

Finally, consider this: “Why have Republican high-court nominations brought out the worst from the left…The short answer is that liberals fear their major cultural victories of the past half-century are democratically illegitimate. Not a single one was won at the ballot box…from the right to contraceptives, abortion and gay marriage, modern liberalism has lived by the Court. And liberals fear their cause will die by the Court.” (Sohrab Ahmari, NY Post)