OPINIONS: Thoughts on a battle that tears us apart

We either witnessed a woman telling her hardest truth or a man defending himself against the most devious sort of lie. And we are seeing this as a focal point in our national demise, where our country seems to be rotting in a profound way with blistering hatred in our hearts.

Brett Kavanaugh was seething mad about what he faced — no surprise as a reaction to allegations. But here’s something that perplexed me about his response. If Kavanaugh felt Ford was lying and falsely calling him a sexual attacker, why did he dance around talking about her as a liar? He expressed sympathy to her mental turmoil. That’s where the alarm bells rang for me.

Here’s why: If a woman goes on national television and falsely accuses me of something I know to be a complete fabrication, I’m not playing nice with her. No! If it’s a complete fabrication, then it’s a form of fraud. There’s no middle ground. It’s either truth or fraud. And I’m straight calling her on that directly by name. I don’t care if that person is “believable” or “sympathetic.” In fact, the more “believable” the lie, the worse it becomes in my own head, if I’m innocent. I am directly confronting that person as a horrible liar.

But Kavanaugh was scared to do this, wasn’t he? Why? Why sidestep explicit fraudulence if it is indeed fraudulent?

I understand the delicacy of speaking at all, male or female, in the “me too” age. I feel that very much. But if it’s me, (and I’m talking me) I only avoid fighting my accuser directly if I have either guilt or doubt about my own actions. It’s not a matter of what’s the “correct political play” in that moment. It’s right and wrong. False accusations are wrong! So, so very wrong. Just as sexual assault is so very wrong. And if you are legitimately the victim of false charges, then your inner sense of worth is on the line, not just your job, no matter how important a job. Yes, Kavanaugh was raging over the politics of the moment, which are certainly real, too. No doubt. Both Republicans and Democrats are scheming all over the place. But where was his direct outrage at the person who is a big-time fraudster if he’s actually innocent? If this is truly a political hit job by Ford, then where is the rage at the assassin? If I’m attacked in that way, I’m never backing down to that person — unless something else is on my mind.

The truth is, she was no fraudster. She was no political assassin. She was genuine. And he knew her account had the ring of truth so he avoided directly condemning her as a liar, which is telling. If she wasn’t credible on that stage, I think he would have sensed the weakness and addressed her directly to tear down her account. But Ford seemed like all of her emotional life was on the line, like she was teetering between some version of inner salvation and annihilation and it could go either way in a moment. That vulnerability was palpable. It hit a lot of people hard, including me. She seemed very real.

Of course, Kavanaugh’s emotions were very real, too. I don’t think those tears were faked. Extreme emotion about his predicament is understandable, whether he’s guilty or innocent. I’d probably break down under such a spotlight. But I’m also not trying to be a judge in the highest court of the land. And the wild emotions seemed unsettling from someone who is essentially being voted on as a national referee. Show me the crying football referee, fiercely pointing at one team as the bad guys, saying “what goes around comes around,” and I’ll show you a ref that might need to sit this next game out. That’s how I feel now about Kavanaugh as a judge. He needs to be in the stands, not on the field of play. He’s too compromised, simply from his own statements. Think of all the motions for recusal that will be filed against him due to his angry political statements.

As I type this Monday, I don’t think Ford’s testimony, or the FBI investigation into her allegations will keep Kavanaugh from the Supreme Court. And if Kavanaugh is ultimately denied, I think another Republican nominee will be presented quickly and pushed through. Whatever your feelings about Roe vs. Wade, which is the central Supreme Court issue for many, I expect it to be overturned. When Republicans refused to hold hearings on Merrick Garland, the balance of the Supreme Court was set to turn once Trump was elected. I still expect that to hold true, because I think Republicans will take action soon no matter what happens with Kavanaugh. But let’s be clear, Garland not even getting a hearing for many months was a baseball bat to the knees of the entire nomination process. And the cancer of Mitch McConnell’s decision on that will extend for many years, complicating what should be relatively simple. Garland couldn’t be considered because an election was many months away. Now, with just over a month left before the midterms, the Republicans are racing to confirm a justice. That shows the GOP delays on Garland were never about “wait until the elections and let the people decide.” If so, there would be no rush right now. And obviously, the Democrats are following the same delay game right now. They are the team now stalling to “let the people decide.” So, the whole process seems crippled under such partisan warfare. And this is just one of many political processes tainted by that partisanship these days. It’s a national cancer.

But the Supreme Court itself is supposed to be different. Supreme Court justices don’t wear Republican red or Democratic blue robes. They wear neutral black. This symbolizes impartiality. They are supposed to be the final voice on human fairness in this country. Strip away the legalese and that’s what the law is at the core — an elaborate framework for establishing human fairness. The Supreme Court is designated as the ultimate American stamp on what’s fair.

Kavanaugh was against the ropes Thursday, but when he ripped off the neutral black and declared loyalty to a team, he may have salvaged his nomination to the Supreme Court. It could be called going “full metal Trump.” And it plays well to one set of jerseys, while enraging the other. Kavanaugh’s partisan rhetoric seemed in lockstep with the red/blue identity crisis of modern American culture.

And yes, I know beer has been a focus this week. He likes beer. I do, too. Do you? But can Kavanaugh pass the legal field sobriety test as a justice? Can he walk the straight line of interpreting law while wearing beer goggles of partisanship? And what exactly are “beer goggles?” Ha, that has to do with actual swimming, right, at least that’s what our yearbook glossaries tell us, isn’t it? Nothing sexual in it, just like those phrases we heard last week. Um, yeah right.

Ultimately, can Kavanaugh rule on big issues, like appropriate limits of executive power, without being compromised by this utterly insane confirmation process? Maybe, but I’d wager a beer the other way.

Zach Mitcham is editor of The Madison County Journal. He can be reached at zach@mainstreetnews.com.