To Hell with Fairness!

“The men of America need to shut up and step up!”  -Senator Hirono (D) from Hawaii

“Since his judicial philosophy is outcome determinative (Where the hell she came up with this is beyond me), he is not entitled to due process.”  -Senator Gillibrand

“Potzie!  The Fonz jumped the shark!”  -Ralph Malph

So… Judge Kavanaugh is now Justice Kavanaugh.  Because of this, the Republic is stronger.  The Constitution is safer.  The precept of limited government has been advanced… and we are more divided than ever.

This has not been a war between the Republicans and the Democrats.  It has been a war between the Collectivists, or the Statists if you like, and those who are either motivated by Constitutional principles or conservative values. 

Senator Lindsey Graham stated it best, “Never before has the disparate parts of the Republican party been so united.  Fiscal Conservatives, Religious Conservatives, and Libertarians are all united against the outrageous display presented by the Democrats.”

He is right. 

It might also be enough to keep these disparate groups motivated enough to go to the ballot box in November and slam the Democrats. 

Why the vitriol against Kavanaugh?

If you think it had anything to do with sexual assault, you have not been paying attention.

The sexual assault allegations did not become public until the Democrats realized they were literally running out of options.  There are two potential reasons that Senator Feinstein sat on the letter from Dr. Ford.  It was either that she thought it was wholly without merit, or it was meant all along as a method of derailing the confirmation at the very last minute.  The first option shows the Democrats’ desperation, the second one belies their Machiavellian nature.  We will never know conclusively which option controlled.

There were some gems, though, to come out of this chaos.  Most telling was a belief system that is entirely morally bankrupt, with literally trillions of dollars at stake.  Yes, this is at its heart a financial gambit.  A majority conservative court could potentially upend trillions of dollars in regulatory control and attendant industries that exist to navigate the regulatory network.  Power is obviously always at stake, but power and money are inexorably linked.

As referenced above, Senator Gillibrand claimed that Justice Kavanaugh was not entitled to due process.  Since the Senate does not act as a court, she stated, the rules of evidence do not apply, nor does the presumption of innocence.  She went further to state that since his judicial philosophy is “outcome determinative” (probably one of the greatest examples of psychological transference ever displayed), he should not be entitled to a presumption of innocence.

Let me be clear:  The court system did not create the presumption of innocence… basic moral philosophy did.

The courts have adopted the underlying moral tenant, for the very basic rationale that it is the highest form of good.

To suggest that the presumption of innocence should not apply outside a courtroom belies a morally bankrupt philosophical belief system.  A presumption exists regardless; it is up to us as a society to determine if the presumption should be of innocence or guilt. 

Senator Gillibrand would just assume that all people are presumed guilty, and must independently prove their innocence.  To be fair to her, this is consistent with her and her party’s social policy.  We are, by definition, all “guilty,” and as such are all simultaneously victims.  This victim culture requires a third party arbiter to enhance the power of the victim class to counter the burdens they deal with on the part of their oppressors. 

This, frankly, does nothing to enhance the putative victim, since she is more interested in enhancing the power of a class of victims, as opposed to the actual singular victim. 

What it does do is create a Byzantine, and often contradictory, regulatory environment that promotes wealth creation.  Wealth, on the part of the Mandarines, who are knowledgeable enough to navigate or modify the regulatory environment on behalf of clients. 

When the presumption of innocence is erased completely, and the presumption of guilt is used as a replacement, the power of the state is dramatically increased. 

But what about the Fonz?

Happy Days was a consistently top-rated show.  Season after season viewers tuned in and accepted the reality of the Cunninghams, and saw their own lives mirrored in theirs.  Then the show traveled to Hawaii for a special series of episodes.  There, the writers had the iconic Fonz character avoid being eaten by a shark while waterskiing by literally jumping over it.  Viewers immediately began leaving the show in droves.  This was not their life.  This was not relatable to them.  This was… well… silly.

When a story arch pushes too far, too beyond what the audience is willing to accept, it is now said to have “jumped the shark.”

This last week we saw the Democrats “jump the shark.”

We will see if any of their constituents tune in for the midterms.