"There were many strange things taking place, but the strangest of all, to Clevinger, was the hatred, the brutal, uncloaked, inexorable hatred of the members of the Action Board . . . . They would have lynched him if they could."
--Catch-22, Chapter 8
The nation is being torn apart, and we don't know what to do about it. A nation founded on Judeo-Christian values, as the politicians always describe it to us, can't ignore accusations of physical sexual abuse, even if decades old. A nation founded on the Constitution, in an attempt to create a more perfect union, in fairness and freedom for all, can't convict a man on accusations alone.
A college campus, or a radio call-in show, might not be the best places to look for reflection and honest debate. Those places are echo chambers. But take a look at your Facebook feed. Unless you're one of those (rare) people who never communicates with folks who might have different points of view, you see what we mean. Cousin Betty thinks a vote this weekend would be a travesty. Uncle Fred thinks waiting this long for a vote has been a travesty. Our interactions with people from coast to coast show not only a divide, but a canyon.
Our considered editorial opinion, and it's more considered than other opinions lately, is that the U.S. Senate should confirm Brett Kavanaugh. Not because the accusations against him aren't serious, but because they're uncorroborated. And the witnesses his accuser lists say they'd all testify against her version of events. We think we might agree with Bret Stephens, a national columnist, who said on this page Wednesday: "If Kavanaugh were to step aside in exchange for a deal in which Donald Trump nominates conservative federal judge Amy Coney Barrett and Democrats agree to vote on her nomination before the midterms, the country might find a chance for compromise, closure and even a moment of grace. But that's not likely to happen."
Not likely, to say the least. Even if that deal was proposed--and accepted--the Democrats would find a reason to oppose the nomination tooth and nail. For this is the swing vote on the United States Supreme Court, and they won't go down without a nasty fight.
Of course, the opposition to Brett Kavanaugh's nomination, if not to his existence, makes him a more sympathetic figure. Take Dianne Feinstein's holding of that letter until the last hour for optimal political affect, or the grandstanding of all those Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee using the process to launch presidential bids. Now take North Dakota's Heidi Heitkamp, who's up for re-election next month. After a couple of Republican senators came out Thursday to say they'd vote for confirmation, that Democrat in good standing decided to come out agin, because the hearings raised questions about Brett Kavanaugh's "current temperament, honesty and impartiality."
Yes, the temperament argument. It's all over the opinion pages.
Call it today's Catch-22. Brett Kavanaugh heatedly, and believably, defended his honor after being accused of a terrible thing. Since he was heated, he's too partisan to be a judge, and doesn't have the temperament?
But imagine if he would have sat down during his testimony, just after his accuser spoke, and smiled for the cameras. And did his best Joe Biden imitation to laugh off the questions. And seemed calm, even slick. We can see the op-eds now. And the front-page headlines. And even hear the outrage on the TV talk shows. He doesn't take attempted rape seriously. He thinks this is all a joke. Typical reaction from a privileged Yale guy.
One gets the feeling that no matter how Brett Kavanaugh testified last week, senators like Heidi Heitkamp, Chuck Schumer, Dianne Feinstein & Co. would have held it up as proof of his being unfit for the court. It's his own Catch-22. And he never had a chance to avoid it.
Editorial on 10/05/2018