Starker on 30/7/2024 at 01:03

---

Kavanaugh's accuser has a stellar reputation and her story was credible and consistent.

Biden's accuser contradicted herself, dozens of people who had met her said she was deceitful and manipulative, and she later defected to Russia with the help of her friend Marina Butina -- y'know, the Russian spy who was having relationships and dealings with Republicans.

Now which woman should be believed? Obviously both. Sexual assault victims are still victims even if they don't have a perfect personality, if they don't recall all the details, etc. This is why these kinds of stories should be taken seriously and followed up on (which is what is meant by "believe women"). This is what the press did in the case of Biden's accuser, digging up records and trying to corroborate the story, but in the case of Kavanaugh, Republicans notably stonewalled and cut short the investigation into him.

Moreover, during the hearings, Kavanaugh demonstrated that he doesn't have what it takes to be a supreme court justice -- he absolutely lost his shit in the hearings, frothed at the mouth, swore to take revenge, etc.

lowenz on 30/7/2024 at 06:05

---

Here's in Italy we got plenty of that type of women (SPIES being female) put in the political system by Putin's (and Trump) servants......and you always hear "Where's the Left dedication to women defense when it comes to XXX!?!?!?!? Hypocrites!!1111"

(https://www.ilmessaggero.it/schede/irina_osipova_chi_e_putin_senato_salvini_lega-7619996.html) (please translate in english)

It's how the "patriots" (ahahahahah) work.

heywood on 30/7/2024 at 20:03

---

I wouldn't expect anything less if Trump loses. I've heard enough conservative talk radio to know there are plans to do it all again, but better organized and funded, and using methods that the conservative SCOTUS majority might accept.

-

Regarding the Kavanaugh accusation, I consider the severity of the accusation itself separately from the handling of it.

To Kavanaugh, getting drunk and trying to get girls into bed was normal behavior that he considered harmless teenage fun. Being an intoxicated 17 yo male, he probably misread the situation, and after she rejected him, he probably thought that's all there was to it and forgot about it. But to her, it was a traumatic experience that led to therapy. We know that's true because it was backed up by polygraph and records of her therapy sessions.

Christine Blasey Ford waited until the best time to get her revenge on Kavanaugh, and got a book deal out of it. That makes her an opportunist, and that's all the Republican side sees, not the victim. Regardless, she is a victim and Kavanaugh's response was a test of his character. He showed none. To me, he came across as just another entitled douche bag with an under-developed sense of empathy.

Thinking about it more broadly, the whole point of MeToo was to make people aware that sexual assault and forms of coerced sex short of rape are not OK because they cause harm to people, in some cases lifelong harm. The response from the right overall has been tone deaf and tinged by victim blaming and juvenile displays of masculinity. Things sure have changed since the 1990s when Republicans used to police sexual misconduct in their ranks while Democrats were fond of saying it's just sex.

More broadly than that, immigration is the only systemic problem the current Republican party seems to have a consensus in favor of solving, and that's undermined by big business donors who don't want any labor law enforcement, so it's all about border control. Otherwise, it's more like the party of un-solvers. It seems so different from the neoconservative movement that Reagan led.

Starker on 31/7/2024 at 07:16

---

Sure seems to me they like keeping it around as an issue to scaremonger with way more than actually solving anything.

heywood on 31/7/2024 at 14:26

---

Starker, it depends on which 'they' we're talking about, because there's a disconnect between the party rank & file and the major donors.

Immigration is the strongest issue the Republicans have because of this:

https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2024/07/SR_24.07.22_immigrant-facts_1.png

By the late 1800s, the US was suffering from boom & bust business cycles, trusts & monopolies controlling the economy, poor working and living conditions, exploitation of labor, extreme inequality, corrupt "bosses" running cities as political machines, ethnic and religious conflicts, intense xenophobia, and the rise of white supremacy and nationalism. Look what's happening now. The US is in the gilded age again. Economic and social stability is negatively impacted by global mass migration. Most people feel that connection even if they're ignorant of the history.

So among the populace, there is a consensus in favor of reforming our immigration system and border control so that immigration can be controlled by an orderly and efficient legal process that's more resilient to waves of economic migration. There is broad support for enforcement to shut down the smuggling operations and the black market for labor, and enforcing requirements for work visas so that temporary workers aren't used to suppress wages and undermine labor standards. There's a general feeling that we should be more selective, though no agreement on how selective. I also suspect a majority of people probably support vetting potential refugees before letting them in, but that's a hot button and nobody seems to have a good model to follow for it.

However, we're divided about what to do about all the people who are already living and working here illegally. We tried an amnesty before in the 1980s and it changed nothing, so there's little appetite for that again. But mass deportations aren't realistic, so what else are you realistically going to do?

Big business interests love to exploit divisions like that, because of how rich they are getting while the system remains broken. And they are allied with the utopian wing of the left on this issue, who seem to think that since all doors will be open once we have achieved a global egalitarian meritocracy, that opening them all now will lead us there. I see it leading to global recessions, ethnic conflicts, humanitarian crises, and world wars over resources. We have to level the field before we can open the floodgates otherwise all the people and wealth will try to concentrate in one place.