I try to read both sides but "thinking outside the bubble" is hard. I try to be empathetic to the R. Side, but it's just hard to construct an empathetic response to conspiracy theory and legal reductionism. Where is the evidence of compassion and understanding for a vulernable 15 year old girl? Where is respect to the victims of sexual crime who often do struggle to come forward in a timely manner?
The D. Side has not achieved a high legal bar. It wasn't a court of law, and the onus of political proof isn't the legal one, and smear is a word with two readings, a claim thrown in to deflect attention from serious doubt about somebody and a literal truth: unproven allegations hang in the air.
I'm partisan. I believe implicitly in a right for women to control their own reproductive state including the decision to terminate pregnancy and I do not want this judge on the supreme Court bench. Probably I can't get distance from the bubble in part because it that. I don't believe in moral equivalence across left and right.
I will say that I don't think the candidate is a good one for a lifetime of service on the supreme bench. He fails to show the mind of a neutral judge. Same as Thomas btw.
The D. Side has not achieved a high legal bar. It wasn't a court of law, and the onus of political proof isn't the legal one, and smear is a word with two readings, a claim thrown in to deflect attention from serious doubt about somebody and a literal truth: unproven allegations hang in the air.
I'm partisan. I believe implicitly in a right for women to control their own reproductive state including the decision to terminate pregnancy and I do not want this judge on the supreme Court bench. Probably I can't get distance from the bubble in part because it that. I don't believe in moral equivalence across left and right.
I will say that I don't think the candidate is a good one for a lifetime of service on the supreme bench. He fails to show the mind of a neutral judge. Same as Thomas btw.