A Telling Lie
A Telling Lie
Watching the political smear of Brett Kavanaugh, I can only shake my head in wonder. I’m not really surprised, though. People take sides. It’s what we do. We form an opinion based, in part, on what we know. But, more often than not, what we believe, is the real source of our opinion. Some mixture of personal experience and individual temperament, mixed with bits and pieces of information, which we select because we are simpatico with an idea. That is our reason. Personal Affirmation. A sense of righteousness. More reasonably, self-righteousness. Since “Our” thoughts, are the primary source of evidence for “Our” faith. Just ask me, I’ll tell you.
Five accusations were made against Brett Kavanaugh. Two immediately turned out to be false. A third was so absurd on its face, that no reasonable person would believe it if you did something as simple as changing the players just a bit and remove the political angle.
But politics is deeply involved. Meaning, every opinion is layered with a deeper subtext, one thick with partisanship. This is the moment when people become willfully ignorant. Ideas that they would never support, if the circumstances were even slightly different, suddenly become fair game for clinch-jawed, righteous indignation. The facts? Evidence? No thank you. Those arcane concepts just get in the way. At that point, the likelihood that the lynch mob will turn back is almost non-existent.
The second allegation against Brett Kavanaugh was, possibly, the most absurd of all. The woman in question wasn’t sure it even happened. By her own admission, she was stinking drunk, passed out on the floor. Not one of the witnesses that she alleges might have been present, agreed with her, about any of it. Leaving us with Dr. Ford’s allegation as the basis for Brett Kavanaugh as a potential serial rapist.
From the very beginning, Dr. Ford’s version of events was corroborated by no one but Dr. Ford. Of the five people she says were present, (of which she was one,) no one, in any way, confirmed her story. This did not stop the media from running wild with speculation, using language that pitted men against women, while asking absurd questions with a carefully cultivated sense of indignation; “Are you saying that you don’t believe a woman when she says she was sexually assaulted?” The question was a form of significant journalistic malpractice. It drove a profitable news cycle, however, so ethics were as superfluous as a pack of matches left in the rain.
As a substitute for evidence, the media inserted the word “Credible.” It’s as though the press were taking their cues directly from The Democratic National Committee, who’d fostered this whole charade. Confirmation bias was everywhere.
In the absence of evidence, Ms. Ford’s testimony would never hold up in a courtroom or even pass the litmus test for a potential prosecution. Media talking heads tried to deflect this by arguing that in a civil case, the standard of evidence is not nearly as stringent as it is in a criminal one. What they left out, though, was the demand for some evidence, even a little bit, which might, maybe, corroborate Ms. Ford’s allegation. But there was none.
Apparently, about half of all Americans believe that we should throw out the rule of law, and the need for evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to establish criminality—and, instead, we should vote thumbs up or down, like we were in The Roman Coliseum, watching gladiators murder one another for our entertainment. All, based on identity politics. They also appear to believe that the repugnant use of Brett Kavanaugh's “Oldness, his Whiteness, and his Maleness, are sufficient indicators of guilt to justify publicly crucifying the man, any evidence to the contrary be damned.
USA Today printed an article suggesting that Brett Kavanaugh should never again be allowed to be around children. The New York Times, likewise, implied that his coaching girls basketball was suspect, because of his predilection for young girls. Brett Kavanaugh’s daughters play basketball, which is why he coaches girl's basketball. It didn’t matter how easy it was to access this salient fact because they weren’t looking. It certainly didn’t factor into their big story, either, because that was driving ad revenues, creating a highly profitable news cycle. The political outcome was simply the icing on the cake.
Essentially, the debacle was a feeding frenzy of partisanship so political in nature, that only a person truly blinded by their own bullshit couldn’t see it. But the blind were everywhere. Blind White people. Blind Black people. Gay people. Straight people. Transgender people. Blind Eskimos. Willful blindness, rising like a stinking mound of dog shit to a place of consecration by a media so corrupt that nothing could stop them. It more closely resembled an episode of The Walking Dead, with the dead everywhere, typing away, offering conjecture as truth—and fully half the nation seems blind to it.
Am I really surprised? History is filled with public lynchings and crucifixions, carried out at the behest of a money-grubbing press and politicians, who would sell their own mothers for an ounce of power. This is why the media and politicians love young people, and why anyone with a sense of history is considered the enemy. Because those ignorant of history are doomed to repeat it. And repeat it is exactly what you want if that’s how you profit.
It should be obvious enough, then, that Old, White, Men are not the enemy. Since Old, White Men, tend to be married to Old, White, Women. Sometimes Old, Black and Brown Women. Sometimes even other Old Men. Young Men, as well. How many of these Old people have children who are young, who, like their parents, will be old someday? Eventually, this kind of repulsive thinking leads one place. That too is a matter of history.
Now, go look in the mirror and ask yourself “Which side am I on? Am I on the side of justice, as tenuous a concept as that might be? Do I believe in the rule of law? Or, am I on the side of sectarianism, of bigotry, of relentless partisan bullshit for political gain?” The answer isn't that hard to come by. But only if you’re really looking. Few apparently are, and that ’s probably the greatest tragedy of all.
Mark Magula
Watching the political smear of Brett Kavanaugh, I can only shake my head in wonder. I’m not really surprised, though. People take sides. It’s what we do. We form an opinion based, in part, on what we know. But, more often than not, what we believe, is the real source of our opinion. Some mixture of personal experience and individual temperament, mixed with bits and pieces of information, which we select because we are simpatico with an idea. That is our reason. Personal Affirmation. A sense of righteousness. More reasonably, self-righteousness. Since “Our” thoughts, are the primary source of evidence for “Our” faith. Just ask me, I’ll tell you.
Five accusations were made against Brett Kavanaugh. Two immediately turned out to be false. A third was so absurd on its face, that no reasonable person would believe it if you did something as simple as changing the players just a bit and remove the political angle.
But politics is deeply involved. Meaning, every opinion is layered with a deeper subtext, one thick with partisanship. This is the moment when people become willfully ignorant. Ideas that they would never support, if the circumstances were even slightly different, suddenly become fair game for clinch-jawed, righteous indignation. The facts? Evidence? No thank you. Those arcane concepts just get in the way. At that point, the likelihood that the lynch mob will turn back is almost non-existent.
The second allegation against Brett Kavanaugh was, possibly, the most absurd of all. The woman in question wasn’t sure it even happened. By her own admission, she was stinking drunk, passed out on the floor. Not one of the witnesses that she alleges might have been present, agreed with her, about any of it. Leaving us with Dr. Ford’s allegation as the basis for Brett Kavanaugh as a potential serial rapist.
From the very beginning, Dr. Ford’s version of events was corroborated by no one but Dr. Ford. Of the five people she says were present, (of which she was one,) no one, in any way, confirmed her story. This did not stop the media from running wild with speculation, using language that pitted men against women, while asking absurd questions with a carefully cultivated sense of indignation; “Are you saying that you don’t believe a woman when she says she was sexually assaulted?” The question was a form of significant journalistic malpractice. It drove a profitable news cycle, however, so ethics were as superfluous as a pack of matches left in the rain.
As a substitute for evidence, the media inserted the word “Credible.” It’s as though the press were taking their cues directly from The Democratic National Committee, who’d fostered this whole charade. Confirmation bias was everywhere.
In the absence of evidence, Ms. Ford’s testimony would never hold up in a courtroom or even pass the litmus test for a potential prosecution. Media talking heads tried to deflect this by arguing that in a civil case, the standard of evidence is not nearly as stringent as it is in a criminal one. What they left out, though, was the demand for some evidence, even a little bit, which might, maybe, corroborate Ms. Ford’s allegation. But there was none.
Apparently, about half of all Americans believe that we should throw out the rule of law, and the need for evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to establish criminality—and, instead, we should vote thumbs up or down, like we were in The Roman Coliseum, watching gladiators murder one another for our entertainment. All, based on identity politics. They also appear to believe that the repugnant use of Brett Kavanaugh's “Oldness, his Whiteness, and his Maleness, are sufficient indicators of guilt to justify publicly crucifying the man, any evidence to the contrary be damned.
USA Today printed an article suggesting that Brett Kavanaugh should never again be allowed to be around children. The New York Times, likewise, implied that his coaching girls basketball was suspect, because of his predilection for young girls. Brett Kavanaugh’s daughters play basketball, which is why he coaches girl's basketball. It didn’t matter how easy it was to access this salient fact because they weren’t looking. It certainly didn’t factor into their big story, either, because that was driving ad revenues, creating a highly profitable news cycle. The political outcome was simply the icing on the cake.
Essentially, the debacle was a feeding frenzy of partisanship so political in nature, that only a person truly blinded by their own bullshit couldn’t see it. But the blind were everywhere. Blind White people. Blind Black people. Gay people. Straight people. Transgender people. Blind Eskimos. Willful blindness, rising like a stinking mound of dog shit to a place of consecration by a media so corrupt that nothing could stop them. It more closely resembled an episode of The Walking Dead, with the dead everywhere, typing away, offering conjecture as truth—and fully half the nation seems blind to it.
Am I really surprised? History is filled with public lynchings and crucifixions, carried out at the behest of a money-grubbing press and politicians, who would sell their own mothers for an ounce of power. This is why the media and politicians love young people, and why anyone with a sense of history is considered the enemy. Because those ignorant of history are doomed to repeat it. And repeat it is exactly what you want if that’s how you profit.
It should be obvious enough, then, that Old, White, Men are not the enemy. Since Old, White Men, tend to be married to Old, White, Women. Sometimes Old, Black and Brown Women. Sometimes even other Old Men. Young Men, as well. How many of these Old people have children who are young, who, like their parents, will be old someday? Eventually, this kind of repulsive thinking leads one place. That too is a matter of history.
Now, go look in the mirror and ask yourself “Which side am I on? Am I on the side of justice, as tenuous a concept as that might be? Do I believe in the rule of law? Or, am I on the side of sectarianism, of bigotry, of relentless partisan bullshit for political gain?” The answer isn't that hard to come by. But only if you’re really looking. Few apparently are, and that ’s probably the greatest tragedy of all.
Mark Magula