The Difference between Fools and a Fear of Flying

In case you are wondering, there is a difference. Fools, for example, are a group of senators who could not tell the difference between an ass and stonewalling a confirmation process for a SCOTUS associate justice. A fear of flying, on the other hand, is something some people have and some people fake so they can help in stonewalling a confirmation process for a SCOTUS associate justice. The difference should be obvious, but for some strange reason - other than the 24/7 drivel of the mainstream media - it isn't. 

   There are other things that should have been obvious from the moment that the substance of life-long trauma of  Dr. Blasey Ford was leaked to the WaPo. One, it was timed for maximum effect with the same objective as the false claim of a fear of flying. Two, there was no freaking way a claim like the one levelled against Brett Kavanaugh could be substantiated. The only material witness to the alleged assault on the high-schooler, was a friend of the accused and by the artful scenario, an accomplice in the act, and therefore someone hugely unlikely to corroborate the thirty-six year old trauma of the distraught doctor. The other two (three ?) people present in the house had nothing substantial to add since by Dr. Ford's own testimony she did not share with them the horror story. But this, of course, assume, that neither of the two would-be rapists bragged in their presence and colored the outrage perpetrated in the upstairs bedroom. Therefore, a thorough FBI investigation would be needed to confirm that no-one other than Dr. Ford remembers anything about a party sometime in the summer of 1982, somewhere around Washington D.C.  Surely, this could not be done in a week, since now there is already another credible victim claiming that the prospective SCOTUS associate justice at another party had his dick in her face, literally and figuratively.  You see, Anita Hill, had the disadvantage of fighting Clarence Thomas alone, and therefore never quite managed to make people comfortable with the notion that she followed him from job to job, despite all the petty harassments because she had no other career options open to her. The internet and #MeToo wasn't around and therefore the twisted sisters' were limited in generating mass assaults on the politically undesirable favoured by the basket of deplorables.  But you can't stop progress, even though this surely is the smelly sort that George Orwell said "causes bluebottles to flock to a dead cat".

      Like the real fear of flying, the foolishness of GOP senators relates to a loss of nerve. Instead of quickly assessing the situation, concentrating on the leak from senator's Feinstein's office and discrediting the preposterous and contradictory claim that the Kavanaugh's accuser wanted to remain anonymous, they allowed themselves to be shanghaied into a Monty Pythonesque Flying Circus. Now, in the third week of the melodrama, the senators will have to rely on the clean bill of health of the nominee by the FBI investigation, which is by no means assured. All it would take at this point is some ambitious, closet Clintonite in the ranks (preferably a woman of color), to uncover some untold tale of debauchery relating to excessive beer consumption in the judge's sophomore year for this sorry saga to come to a sad end.

      There are very few middle-of-the-road, and intelligent conservative voices that have this story right. The always-entertaining Jim Kunstler, who has most things right, went a step too far when he dismissed the alleged incident as "awkward teenage necking".  No, I would not go there. The woman might really believe in the reality of the incident, and we do not know her background to cast aspersions. I would say, though, that if this incident was really the most serious traumatic sex event of her life, then she has lived a charmed life. Tucker Carlson's line I like; he is direct and as usual cuts through the nonsense. He and Mark Steyn understand the problem well.  Unfortunately, most of the commentators in the middle and on the respectable right are just ....having a fear of flying.

      The respected Canadian commentator Lorne Gunter is one who would have it both ways. He deplores the lack of process in delivering the Ford charges before the Senate committee, but he cannot bring himself to dismiss them precisely because they cannot be handled by a process that can claim impartiality and integrity. He says,  "[It] does not diminish these allegations that they are for an attack more than three decades old."  He is dead wrong. Not only is this allegation (a single one, of a minor sexual assault) diminished by the nearly two generations that transpired between it allegedly occurring and now, it is unequivocally "lapsed".  It simply cannot be belabored in a manner that would do justice to a fair and impartial process. Period. End of story.  The only reason that one would want to raise this incident in any public forum with such a delay is to impugn the character of the person against whom such charges are brought - outside of a judicial process.  Mr Gunter evidently wants to play the gentleman here, but unfortunately, the committee hearing accusation against Mr.Kavanaugh does not proceed by standards of civility, and the writer cast himself into the role of a gentleman who gives away too much. His plea, to preserve the presumption of innocence, is miscast and frankly, foolish, because he is giving it away by agreeing to a crazy process. It appears to be a case of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing. Mr Gunter protests procedural changes to Canadian criminal law (Bill C-51) which further erode the rights of the accused in cases of sexual assault. But he does not understand that this is just a step in dismantling the legal framework which began long ago. In Canada, for example, we no longer have the doctrine of "recent complain" in sex crimes, which allows inquiry into why a complaint about an old incident was not raised earlier. Mr Gunter appears to subscribe to it, even though it severely disadvantages the defense in real cases, let alone the kind brought forth against Brett Kavanaugh.