As the FBI prepares to present its findings in the Kavanaugh matter to Congress today, the grumblings of insufficient depth of investigation grow ever louder. Last week, even as his accusers’ stories started to unravel or fall apart entirely, Trump and the GOP agreed to delay a confirmation vote so that the FBI could investigate Kavanaugh (again). This demand was fueled by the opposition’s control of the narrative, abetted by a highly partisan press. The drip-drip-drip of a thousand innuendoes had its effect. While it didn’t (yet) kill Kavanaugh’s chances to be seated on the Court, it certainly tarred his reputation forever in the eyes of millions, and should he win confirmation, he will forever be looked at with counterfeit horror by people whose real reason for opposing him is purely on ideological grounds.

That was going to happen anyway. In many quarters, Clarence Thomas, who went through a similar spate of allegation during his confirmation, is reviled. Make no mistake, however. That revulsion has nothing to do with the Anita Hill allegations, and everything to do with his daring to, by being a black conservative, go off the plantation. The Left saves its worst umbrage for apostates – the people who, by dint of skin color, gender, or other identity marker, are supposed to be part of the liberal tribe but choose not to embrace the orthodoxy and liberal dogma.

Therein is the source of opposition to Kavanaugh. As a white man, he’s expected to own his original sin, wear a hair shirt, and defer to all things progressive and all those who rank above him in the grievance hierarchy (i.e. everyone else). Because his track record as a jurist does not conform to progressive mandates, it was a given that the Dems would oppose his nomination.

A laundry list of justifications for this opposition have been put forth, and in a conversation with a Kavanaugh opponent, it’s virtually certain that, like whack-a-mole whataboutism, knocking down one will merely spawn another. It started with the Garland non-vote, something that the Democrats are portraying as little short of outright treason (the Garland matter is merely a tu quoque fallacy, and a synthetic one at that. Were it not about ideology, no one would care). My response to that? Y’all shouldn’t have lost the Senate in 2014. Whatever one thinks of Garland, fact is the GOP won, and as Barack Obama observed, elections have consequences.

Ditto for Trump, and the 2016 Senate. The GOP won, therefore the Untethered Orange Id gets to nominate Kennedy’s replacement, and therefore the GOP controls the process of his confirmation. Elections have consequences.

As for Kavanaugh, specifically? He’s not my ideal vision of a SCOTUS candidate, particularly on Fourth Amendment matters and deference to law enforcement, but by any rational measure he’s qualified to sit on the bench. None of that is even slightly germane, as far as the Democrats go. Their opposition predates even the announcement of his name.

That’s the crux of the matter, and why the demands for more investigatory time are farcical. There isn’t a single Democrat who will change his or her planned “no” vote even if the FBI spend a year, devoted 10,000 agents, and turned over every rock on the planet only to find no substantive support for the allegations made against him. What they hope for is that, with more time, something will turn up that can be used to, via public pressure and nasty tactics like face-screaming, bully or embarrass a couple GOPers into voting no. Any declaration that they need time to have these allegations vetted by the FBI is hogwash. Even if they didn’t believe them or are told convincingly by investigators that there’s nothing there, they’d still vote “No” en masse. Their minds are made up, and were made up the moment Kennedy announced his retirement.

With deference to the specific matter of abortion (if Kavanaugh were pro-choice, the Left would have one less bogeyman and might not have gained as much traction in its opposition fight), for the Left, this Supreme Court confirmation battle is about one thing: power. The Court is a last bulwark against unbridled government power, because, and especially with Congressional fecklessness, it is where the executive branch (and its malignant offshoot, the administrative state) gets told “no.” Progressives, believing in unchecked government power when they are in charge, hate being told “no.” That’s not new – it dates back to FDR’s threat to pack the Court in order to have his way, and possibly even before that. Progressives figure they can win the House in 2018 and take over the Senate and the White House in 2020, and wipe out Trump’s actions just as Trump has been wiping out Obama’s, but a court that is stacked with limited government types could thwart their dreams for a couple decades.

This is why the fight isn’t about Kavanaugh’s past acts, or his temperament, or his possible dishonesty about something written in his yearbook. The fight would be the same no matter who Trump nominated. And it’s why the Dems’ demands for more time are dishonest. They’re voting “no” no matter what. When someone’s mind is made up, with zero chance of alteration, granting demands for ever more time is a waste of time.

Peter Venetoklis

About Peter Venetoklis

I am twice-retired, a former rocket engineer and a former small business owner. At the very least, it makes for interesting party conversation. I'm also a life-long libertarian, I engage in an expanse of entertainments, and I squabble for sport.

Nowadays, I spend a good bit of my time arguing politics and editing this website.


Like this post?