Our public discourse is shameful. The (outdated) adage “say your peace and depart as friends” no longer exists in US culture. As this applies to governance (and its impostor politics), the dysfunction is intuitively obvious to the most casual observer. We need politics better than usual.
Since the election of Mr Trump, this dangerous phenomenon has become more pervasive. I remember lesser occurrences from 2000 thru 2016. IMHO, there is a direct correlation to fill-in-the-blank derangement syndromes. US politics is certainly divisive… leading to dysfunctional governance.
Public dirty laundry tends to violate Amendment IV as well - privacy of personal records.
We must move away from guilty until proven innocent.
To be transparent, Judge Kavanaugh is qualified to become a Supreme Court Justice. He has served in the federal circuit court for 12 years. He has been congressionally vetted for prior federal judgeships. HOWEVER, if he committed murder, embezzled, or raped a woman, he is NOT exhibiting good behavior. If found guilty in a court of law, his federal judgeship should end.
The media is trying this nominee in the courts of public opinion. A SCOTUS nomination is a constitutional process incumbent upon the Chief Executive using the advice and consent of The Senate. There are NO other parties specified by the Constitution - Article II, Section 2, paragraph 2.
Let’s consider the possible “outcomes”. Sadly, salacious drivel preceeds legal decisions or gov't "action". Keep in mind, this is a legal determination that should properly be decided within our legal system.
Guilty of Attempted Rape – certainly, this is bad personal judgement by a teenage boy. Today, “NO means NO” is clearly part of the culture. It was also true 40 years ago when I was also a teenage boy; my parents taught the lesson consistently. An attempted rape is NOT an actual rape and (I’m guessing) NO physical injury occurred.
Guilty of Actual Rape – while this is NOT being alleged, I have a point to make. Federal appointees (Legislative, Executive, and Judicial) cannot be guilty of high crimes, nor misdemeanors. They must also serve in good behavior. If convicted of rape (certainly a heinous crime), a federal nomination should be denied or an office holder censured and dismissed.
Innocent – if innocent of the accusations, there is still the public spectacle. Can the public ignore the false claim and the lengthy circus than ended in acquittal? False accusations linger against the falsely accused. The false accuser is often forgotten.
Admittedly, sports should NOT dictate society or law. However, sports rules are (now) exceedingly legalistic. A clearly-defined infraction occurred and the offending player is penalized. In this light, sports are an apt metaphor for law and justice.
Consider the media frenzy with Mr Trump and Stormy Daniels. Both sides acted improperly. Mr Trump’s use of a nondisclosure agreement covered poor judgement... but NOT a crime. Ms Daniels’ violation of the agreement is a crime – she accepted money for silence (a contract) and then violated the voluntary contract. Should public opinion pick up the penalty flags and move forward without this recycled, salacious drivel… as though it did NOT happen?
In US society there are 48 murders each day (2016) - 5.3 per 100k people. That is a large human tragedy! 17,000 murders each year.
Amidst this widespread tragedy, 1 person is murdered by an illegal alien… and something has to be done?!? Admittedly, there is a real tragedy to the family and loved ones. But the other 47 people (per day) are also dealing with loss and tragedy. What is done for them?
IMHO, the “action” is to restrict immigration is overly emotional. 17,000 US murders each year should spark outrage and demand public debate. Why doesn't it?
IMHO, much gov’t action is taken amidst knee-jerk emotionalism. If you disagree, please refute this assertion …. Talkwithmike2014@yahoo.com. The dialog will bring both of us understanding.
If an emotional-decision (¿ an oxymoron?) is right, it will be right 30, 60, or 90 days later. I suggest, that sudden decisions be noted and re-assessed when the emotion has subsided. If the decision is still valid, legislation or action is then appropriate. All public servants should be interested in the public good and want to ensure good governance. In many situations, taking impulsive action is worse than doing nothing.