Bart O’K: Not Even Close to Judicial

The Trump fiasco has in part become a raging fire bursting open the seeds in the pinecones of female indignation lying in gestation on the forest floor. Which helped fuel #MeToo. Which will eventually bring him and the testosterone-centric worldview down.

I’m not usually inclined to write about politics. There’s an ample supply of it around already, and besides my mission is more closely aligned with probing how to better unite reason with imagination — something I regard as deep a culturally mission-critical topic as anything within the political realm. And I will make clear my leanings before continuing. I love all sorts of traditions but find conservatism in general to be out of place and out of touch as an attitude if one wants to have a living and moving society, propelled forward by a plaurality of voices.

I found Kavanaugh to be evasive and unwilling to frankly answer reasonable lines of questioning well before the matter of his high school escapades became a thing in the Senate hearings. He dissembled from his usual studied manner of speaking when two Democratic senators probed him on his decidedly partisan activities around several topics: his opinions relating to Roe-Wade, his role in legally justifying various Bush white house policy goals during the falsely explicated Iraq War (which gave us Isis and is a gift which is still giving), and his efforts on Kenneth Starr’s inquiry into Bill Clinton during his administration. Although I do not believe Kavanaugh concerning Christine Blasey Ford’s allegations (and do believe her), and in fact have seen several examples of directly lying about issues surrounding this during his statements and testimony, I do not think one has to go to the rape and sexual abuse charges to disqualify Kavanuagh from consideration. And this is because of his partisanship, which flows quietly beneath the surface of his judicial demeanor in usual conversation, but flares up without temperance when under duress.

And this is precisely what the author of the recent Atlantic article I am about to reference is concerned about. He too feels the need to clarify his political bent at the outset before getting into his thoughts. Interestingly enough, he has long been a colleague of Kavanaugh in the legal profession, has admired and likes him, and states that he does not mind a conservative coloration to the nation’s highest court. Yet he opposes Kavanaugh’s nomination and distrusts his hyper-partisanship, and details why with a sharp eye on the proceedings. An eloquent voice well worth reading:

Atlantic Monthly article by Benjamin Wittes, Brookings Institute fellow and admirer of Kavanaugh

Since 2000, the Judicial branch has become a unique focus of the ‘culture war’ playing out in the minds and hearts of Americans (and external interested observers). This body, with these nine officials, who serve at their own pleasure for life if confirmed, wield an inordinate amount of power. We don’t need this kind of shit on the U.S. Supreme Court.

P.S. Isn’t great that one of Trump’s own accusers (of sexual abuse) is now running for the House of Representatives in a district in suburban Ohio? Rachel Crooks comes off as an articulate and civically-minded lady, who normally would never dream of entering the political fray. Obama gave her his public endorsement yesterday.


Handy INDEX — scan through all available ||SWR|| articles

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s