This was not about guilt or innocence. It was about advising and confirming suitability for the President's nominee to be confirmed to a SCOTUS appointment.

One wishing him to be innocent is not proof the charges are false. And absence of of evidence is not evidence of absence.

I've been curious. Is it usual to bring ones spouse and take ones children to a confirmation hearing? I truly dont know the precedent for this.

But it seems the Justice should have had an forshadowing it would not be suitable for children in his case. Complaints about the effect of his own decision on his children are on him.

There is a credible death threat to every public school child in the USA from gun violence.

His are not more special.

Actually it is totally the convention for public appointees to have their spouse and children involved in the appointment ceremony. Why on earth you would think this appointment should be any different just because your party wishes the smear campaign against him had been successful, is outrageous.

If you want to know exactly what was going down during the two week confirmation circus, here is a video of Nancy Pelosi giving a course on how to craft a “wrap up smear”. That is what the Democrats were doing for those two weeks.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3j0MXE2DDic

I’ve also posted for you a meme of Dianne Feinstein intimidating the only Republican dissenter to the nomination. Is this really the party you want to associate with?

Or is it possible you are just another paid Soros shill?

Party polarization is tearing at the fabric of American society. The partisan reaction to sexual assault allegations against Brett Kavanaugh demonstrates how far the threads have frayed. An Economist/YouGov poll shows Democrats by about an eight to one margin believe that Kavanaugh committed assault, while Republicans by a similar margin believe he didn’t.

Republicans, for example, have demonstrated an incredible capacity to see, hear, and speak no evil even when it comes to President Trump’s most questionable actions and assertions. According to a Quinnipiac poll in January 2018, about three-quarters of Republicans think he’s a good role model for their children.

Democrats, for their part, don’t seem willing to acknowledge inarguably positive developments for the country. A Gallup poll from July 2018 found that Republicans were more than twice as likely as Democrats (78 to 36%) to rate the economy as “excellent” or “good,” realizing full well that Trump and the Republicans benefit from the strong economy.

Before the 2016 e******n, a survey asked Americans which came closest to their view – “our lives are threatened by terrorists, criminals and immigrants, and our priority should be to protect ourselves” or “it’s a big, beautiful world, mostly full of good people, and we must find a way to embrace each other and not allow ourselves to become isolated”. About 80% of Trump supporters chose the first. About 80% of Clinton supporters chose the second. Talk about worlds apart.

On the Republican side of the worldview divide sit those who prefer children who respect their elders, are obedient, have good manners, and are well-behaved. They have what we call fixed worldviews. Because the world is dangerous to them, traditions and conventions should be fixed in place to maintain order. This worldview sees male authority figures such as Judge Kavanaugh sympathetically because male authority has always stood at the top of the cultural hierarchy. As such, they are concerned about new immigrants and threatened by the prospect of unconventional groups such as t*********red people sharing their bathrooms.

On the Democratic side are those who prefer independent, self-reliant, curious, and considerate children. They have what we call fluid worldviews. Because the world is, to them, safe to explore, challenging old folkways is feasible. Sometimes-discriminatory traditions and hierarchies must be swept away. This worldview sees traditional male authority as an unfair privilege that has allowed men to get away with anything and everything, including sexually assaulting women, without punishment. Fluid types celebrate new approaches and champion those who challenge old norms.

Worldviews operate at the gut level, shaping opinions before conscious thought begins. When it comes to the Kavanaugh allegations, specifically, fixed-worldview Republicans reflexively want to believe the man and will search for evidence to support that first impulse. Fluid-worldview Democrats reflexively want to believe the woman and will perform the same biased search for information to buttress their first impulse.

The fluid tend to be city dwellers, secular in their approach to religion and prefer the vanguard in both their politics and consumer choices. Biryani and a pinot gris sounds nice. Their grandparents’ coffee is boring to them and light beer is swill. And they’re predominantly Democrats.

When feelings are this deeply negative, it is little wonder that partisans seem so blind to obvious t***sgressions of their own leaders and that one side roots for the other to fail when that side is in power. The dynamics should be familiar to any reader who has ever h**ed another person. You always see yourself as virtuous and your enemy as villainous. And, if the feelings are sufficiently strong, you may even root for bad things to happen to your nemesis.

When worldviews divide partisans, it is best not to expect much to change. All the hatred has caused partisans’ political identities to become central to how they see themselves. The cognitive dissonance associated with giving an inch to their opponents overwhelms Americans’ rational selves. Partisans will perform Olympic-caliber mental gymnastics to maintain their beliefs and will seek information sources not in order to discern the t***h, but to reinforce their existing beliefs, even – perhaps especially – when a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court is on the line.

Marc Hetherington and Jonathan Weiler are the co-authors of Prius or pickup: How the answers to four simple questions explain America’s great divide (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt), which is out on October 9 2018

Pennylyn, this is how you view HUMAN BEINGS? As unworthy as cruelly and abominably treated deranged rats.

Deplorably obscene ideas and opinions like these which I perceive you to express here do often lead others to react by increasingly obscene and polarized rhetoric.

CRUCIAL in this polarizing environment, those who wish to stabilize and progress as the family of mankind must realize that the center will not hold without some desire for rapprochement. Have you any?

Perhaps I have totally misread your intent and the message intended was not consistent with my drawn inference, but my initial reaction to your post actually makes ME wish for a real deity to whom one could successfully pray for your deliverance from such miserable notions and to secure the past due insertion of an obviously missing in action human heart.

No people do NOT get arrested every day on someones unsubstantiated say so. And how would you go about investigating the t***h or falsehood on an accusation with no time (even the year was a guess), place (not even the neighborhood), or witnesses (all named witnesses say they do not recall any such event).
You wrote;
"From the very start the right was saying the man was innocent of any wrong doing."

I don't know what your source is, but that is NOT what most on the right, including here on OPP, have been saying. We have been saying a person is innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. And a reasonable doubt is not based on how compelling their story is if not backed by any evidence. Not even circumstantial evidence.

Not to mention, it is actors and liars who are best at telling compelling stories.

This cop out that it was a job interview so falsely accusing someone is okay is despicable. In the first place, have you ever had to undergo a grilling by a panel out to find fault in a job interview? In the second, have you ever gone to a job interview where you hiring depended on you having to refute a malicious rumor about yourself to be hired? Third, this affects the children and spouse of the accused to the point of death threats. And finally, it sets precedent that due process can be set aside for political reasons.

Being well behaved with respect for their elders does NOT exclude children also being independent, curious, etc. Being disciplined in turn teaches self discipline. Being well behaved and having good manners in turn teaches children to treat others with respect and compassion. Such children are more likely to grow into independent and curious adults than not. Today we clearly see the adult results of no discipline, no self restraint, no manners, no compassion, no respect for others as we watch the words and actions of our radical ultra liberal citizens of all ages including many of the so-called adult professional men and women in our congress. You speak of well behaved, well mannered children as a bad thing but with such characteristics, we have chaos and bedlam.