My thinking covers a few things:
- I believe Dr. Ford, even though there this is no corroborating evidence (but without that evidence, it’s not enough to oppose him)
- I don’t think teen drinking to excess is a sin or a reason not to vote for someone
- I do believe he lied to Congress and I think that, alone, would be reason enough to not seat him in the most important court in our system
- I believe he is a true partisan and while many of our justices and former justices also were partisans, Kavanaugh has taken that partisanship to excess
Before serving on his current court, Kavanaugh held politically appointed jobs, most recently in the Bush II White House. Not a reason in itself to oppose him. But he acted like a partisan then (when it was acceptable) and has carried that behavior over to now, when it is not acceptable.
Asked a question by Sen. Amy Klobuchar, a Democrat, about whether he ever blacked out after a night of drinking, his retort was, “have you?” Not the right answer in that setting, Judge. His performance during that hearing, crying, yelling, and likely lying is a disqualifier. President Trump, I’m sure, loved his performance because Trump also has believed in his adult life that when you are attacked, attack back harder. And that’s what Kavanaugh did in his hearing. That performance came from a partisan background and a desire to please the President who nominated him. Don't get me wrong, it may also have felt good but it was the wrong time and the wrong place. The op-ed tries to correct that behavior -- a tactic we see in political campaigns but not during the Supreme Court nomination process.
His hearing personal may not be his typical approach to cases, or life, but he knew enough to pull out that quiver to please a President. And it looks like it worked.
He may be a wholly different man now than he was a teen. Most of us are. I drank in high school and college, most of us did in my generation and many did more than drink.
We’re past, I think, when that is a disqualifier for public office. But lying about it when sitting for confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court is not okay. Does that mean that lawyers that come before him can lie and it’s okay? Does that mean briefs based on falsehoods in Supreme Court cases are okay? Does that mean he can cite a lawyer for a lie and be credible?
So, while my guess is there is truth to his alleged attack on Dr. Ford, she can’t prove it. And he says it didn't happen. Her story is a factor in my opposition but not a determiner.
Lying to Congress is a disqualifier. Yelling and screaming at Senators in your confirmation hearing is a disqualifier. We’ve seen more of his college-mates come out and say he’s lying than say he didn’t. So there is corroboration there. That corroboration is being ignored. Lying to Congress is breaking a law. Lying to the FBI is, too.
In this case, liar, liar your robe is on fire and you shouldn’t sit on The Court.