It’s Not Kavanaugh. It’s Roe.

In this Sept. 6, 2018, file photo, President Donald Trump's Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C.

By Jennifer Hartline Published on September 20, 2018

I do not know if Brett Kavanaugh is guilty of what he’s accused of doing when he was a teenager. His innocence or guilt is a separate matter.

What I do know is that the anti-Kavanaughs — i.e. the Left, the Democrats — could not care less whether he’s innocent or guilty. They do not care what he may have done as an intoxicated teen. Nor are they racing to defend the honor of Ms. Ford.

These, after all, are die-hard supporters of Bill Clinton, who committed adultery in the Oval Office as President. Clinton also remains credibly accused of rape and sexual assault by multiple women, all while he was a married adult, not an immature teenager.

That undying support is also extended to Hillary Clinton, whose “women should be believed” motto only applies to certain women, provided they are accusing the right man.

Help us champion truth, freedom, limited government and human dignity. Support The Stream »

Before Clinton, it was the “Lion of the Senate” Ted Kennedy who enjoyed the same undying adulation and support. Kennedy literally left a woman to drown, and still he spent decades as the Democrat’s hero. Mary Jo Kopechne died trapped in Kennedy’s car under water, while Kennedy saved his own life and career. And how the people loved him. Manslaughter is such a teensy little mistake.

No, I don’t believe for a nanosecond that the Democrats care one whit about Kavanaugh’s innocence or guilt. Their moral indignation is phonier than a $3 dollar bill. (By the way, does Rep. Keith Ellison still have a job?)

Roe. That’s It. Nothing Else.

This is about abortion. It’s about the larger sexual ideology as well, but abortion first and foremost. This is about nothing more than demolishing a candidate for the Supreme Court whom they did not choose, and who poses a serious threat to their golden idol. Abortion is both sacrament and god.

Any honest observer has to be repulsed by the histrionics displayed during Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings. Screaming women raving like lunatics about one thing: abortion-on-demand. At the thought that they may not be able to extinguish the natural results of their sexual encounters, that the child they help create is a human being they are obligated to protect, the pelvic Left becomes absolutely unhinged. Unhinged is even too inadequate a word. It’s like the behavior of demons about to be exorcised.

A country that shrugs off the evidence of what abortion really is and chants all the louder about “freedom” and “equality” can never claim to achieve either.

A country that shrugs off the evidence of what abortion really is and chants all the louder about “freedom” and “equality” can never claim to achieve either. Roe v. Wade is the litmus test to end all litmus tests. That’s because abortion is the moral “issue” to end all issues. It is uniquely defining of a culture and an individual. People who support the act of butchering the most defenseless and innocent of all human beings, blithely calling it “choice” can hardly plant their flag on a civilized hill.

A nation that considers killing its own children to be the pièce de résistance of its fight for empowerment and justice is suffering a suicidal delusion.

Modern Paganism

And that’s precisely what we’ve got here in America. The delusion is so hypnotic and addictive that nothing must be permitted to question it or come against it. There must be sexual pleasure without price. Nothing matters more than sexual gratification. The god of the groin is perpetually unsatisfied and greedy.

They served their idols, which became a snare to them. They sacrificed their sons and their daughters to the demons; they poured out innocent blood, the blood of their sons and daughters, whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan; and the land was polluted with blood. Thus they became unclean by their acts, and played the harlot in their doings.

Psalm 106:36-39

So the modern sophisticated pagans want to continue exposing the unwanted child to birds of prey on a rock in the midday sun. The allegiance they require to abortion-on-demand is no different and no better. Except that today they remove those lucrative brains and organs first. (I guess our ancestors didn’t know there was money to be made from baby body parts.)

After 45 years of this demonic delusion, with millions of babies picked apart by vultures in lab coats, along comes the possibility that finally the most sickening injustice of all time may be undone, and the pelvic Left is twelve different kinds of hysterical.

They don’t hate Brett Kavanaugh because of anything he may have done over thirty years ago. Any transgression can be forgiven if fervent devotion to abortion is manifest.

They hate Kavanaugh because they love abortion and he does not. Hell hath no fury like “women’s rights” scorned.

Print Friendly
Comments ()
The Stream encourages comments, whether in agreement with the article or not. However, comments that violate our commenting rules or terms of use will be removed. Any commenter who repeatedly violates these rules and terms of use will be blocked from commenting. Comments on The Stream are hosted by Disqus, with logins available through Disqus, Facebook, Twitter or G+ accounts. You must log in to comment. Please flag any comments you see breaking the rules. More detail is available here.
  • Ray

    Seems to me that when a person buys into Roe v. Wade, that they also are buying into special rights, and anything goes. It all comes in the same package doesn’t it? Hence, an open door to whatever corruption awaits, and this is certainly contrary to our constitution which says nothing about endorsing special rights of a mother over the father, who might want his offspring to be born and have the right to live. Where in our constitution does it give support for unequal protection under the law? I can’t find it anywhere.

    Some even seemed to think that a person’s right to privacy somehow legally covers for them taking the life of another human being, even as it is only beginning to develop in the womb of it’s mother. By that sort of thinking, should “right to privacy” be extended to cover and protect someone who stabbed someone in a back alley somewhere? Are they saying that as long as it happened in private, it should be an excuse to kill? Really, I can’t make any sense of it. Roe v. Wade is not in accordance with America’s constitution. It supports none of that.

    Some people say that states should have the right to decide if they should allow abortion on demand, or if they should marry people of the same sex. But what line of our constitution does it say that as long as it’s state’s power, that anything goes? Where is that line in our constitution? Ain’t never seen it.

  • ImaginaryDomain

    Right on the money.

  • JPM4Truth

    Spot on. You nailed it. Thank you for revealing the impetus of this attack. Demonic motivation. The unhinged left (or whatever the latest title they deserve) does not realize they are only doing “their father’s” will (John 8:44). Truth always prevails. Yes, pray, and continue be “doers of the word”, lest our nation become a heap of ashes (2 Chronicles 7:14).

  • Donald McLaughlin

    Roe is a big motive for it, and I agree with that. But it is NOT the only reason. Beyond Roe is the horrible fear of the leftists that they are going to lose the ability to use the courts to achieve their leftist aims and bypass the messier legislative process. The thought of having to actually have open debate in public through the legislative process to achieve their goals terrifies them. Roe is but one part of that. A large part to be sure, but not the whole.

    • Steve

      Yes. Both good points. The Progs know all about using the court to “make law”.

    • As I said in the other thread, do you know the place “abortion” has in witchcraft?

      If you know it, then you will know how little the court actually plays in their schemes.

      • Cody

        It appears that you seem to know a lot about witchcraft, is there something you would like to tell us ?

        • That I have an interest in spiritual warfare.

          • Cody

            You can learn all you will ever need to know about spiritual warfare by reading the Bible.

          • No. Outside of Exorcists learning by apprentice/master system and Prophets/Daints making it up as they went along; organized spiritual warfare is very new.

          • Chip Crawford

            However, the Bible is a dead letter to those without. It takes the Holy Spirit to reveal it, bring it to life. He hooks up with an open heart. That wouldn’t be those who like to lord it over others, to “know it all,” or don’t care to see the contradiction to any of that. We’ve all been there. It looks like you have something to lose in admitting that the structure upon which you rely has no sound Biblical basis. It takes grace to humble oneself enough to be open to change. But it is essential, because it’s the humble who get the help.

  • Steve

    Why pray tell are the Progs so die hard on abortionist. Behind the storefront heavenly socialism bag they promote is a world of opportunism and a landscape of anarchy where only the evil doers survive perfectly willing to go down that road and drag everyone and everything into that waiting hell. And to think you get all that with one push of a button.

    • Ken Abbott

      Why do progressives fight so hard to protect access to abortion on demand? Because the risk of pregnancy stands between a woman and her freedom to be as sexually active as a man. In order for there to be real “equality” (or so the reasoning goes) between the sexes, women have to be able to enjoy having sex without consequences. Or if the consequence occurs despite use of contraception, they have a back-up plan.

      • Athena771

        yes and so what?

        What is wrong with women having freedom too?

        You have a problem with women enjoying sex, or do they have to fear pregnancy each time?

        What about married women, are you going to tell them to not have sex?

        This is ridiculous, sex is one of the few pleasures in this world, and being able to enjoy it myself as a married woman without the threat of pregnancy each time is VERY important.

        I

        • Andrew Mason

          If sex is one of the few pleasures you can see in this world I’m sorry for you. Your ability to enjoy it as a married woman is an entirely different matter however to that of an unmarried woman worried about getting pregnant.

          Is promiscuity freedom, or a matter of anarchy? And if it is the latter then shouldn’t your focus be on encouraging men to be gentlemen rather than protesting for the right of women to ‘sow their oats’.

          • Athena771

            Is promiscuity freedom, or a matter of anarchy? And if it is the latter then shouldn’t your focus be on encouraging men to be gentlemen rather than protesting for the right of women to ‘sow their oats’

            You have a problem with women “sowing their oats”

            why is that?

            Being married does not automatically equal wanting to be pregnant either, just so you know.

        • You gave yourself away, there. You have some kind of sexual obsession disorder.

          There are many, many pleasures in this world. Until you understand that, you will continually yelling at strangers on internet forums and doing things that lead to all kinds of consequences you don’t want, which you attempt to solve by doing worse things yet.

          You won’t be able to change reality, you know.

          • Athena771

            really are you a psychologist? you have never met me or know anything about me, yet you are diagnosing me with a disorder over the internet?

            You actually managed to make me laugh.

      • Steve

        What stands between a woman’s risk of pregnancy and her freedom is her choice. The same for a man who does the deed if he is a good father. Do not assume every man is a hit and run knock up artist. This abortion thing is so odd by the Progs and yet they will line up around the block to protest capital punishment. Its all a game with the Progs using people’s lives for agenda.

      • Steve

        I’ll keep that in mind as I contemplate the remains of the “products of conception” – PC used by abortionists. God made women as the bearers of the pregnancy so maybe that “freedom” of equality might just be a bit more risky for women. I’d take it up with God in prayer.

  • Hmmm…

    No, It’s everything, an entirely different world view …

  • This is about abortion.

    I agree–for the conservatives, it’s all about abortion.

    But here’s the weird thing. They’re focused on Roe, when they should be focused on unwanted pregnancies. Is abortion a terrible Holocaust? Then focus on the cause. Overturning Roe and making abortion illegal won’t do much–just look at abortion rates pre-Roe.

    If you don’t like abortion, focus on comprehensive sex ed + convenient access to contraceptives.

    • The cause? The delusion that sacrificing children to the devil will give superpowers.

      “sex ed” only seeks to sexualize kids and contraceptives are the same evil as abortion that leads directly to abortion. So your solution only exists to make abortion a worse problem.

      your argument is that of a certain German group herr “seidensticker.” That argument being: “we wouldn’t have to kill them if they were never alive, so it’s your fault!” Have you always been a satanist and eugenicist, or is this new?

      • The delusion that sacrificing children to the devil will give superpowers.

        No, I hadn’t heard that one.

        “sex ed” only seeks to sexualize kids and contraceptives are the same evil as abortion that leads directly to abortion.

        Children will get sexually mature bodies whether you like it or not.

        Imagine if kids got their own cars at age 16, and nothing you could do would prevent it. Would you deny that fact, or would you have them take driver’s ed so they knew how to handle the inevitable?

        Sounds to me like sex is the issue for you, not abortion.

        • Is that the excuse you use?

          your desire to sexualize children is the issue, and ou do it partly to fuel satanic sacrifice.

          • ?? Satanists are sacrificing children? Citation needed.

          • It is their MO. Clearly you have some connection to them, so I’m sure you know all about it.

          • So then you are just stringing words together and have no idea what you’re talking about. Got it.

          • Read my message. It is in plain english.

            It is their MO.

            Clearly you have some connection to them, so I’m sure you know all about it.

          • Uh, no, I don’t worship Satan. I’m an atheist.

          • your actions speak louder than your words. That is what makes me call you one. your intentions and hat you support are clear. you even capitalize the name of the devil.

            This Veberable Fulton Sheen quote describes you:

            Very few people believe in the devil these days, which suits the devil very well. He is always helping to circulate the news of his own death. The essence of God is existence, and He defines Himself as: ‘I am Who am.’ The essence of the devil is the lie, and he defines himself as: ‘I am who am not.’ satan has very little trouble with those who do not believe in him; they are already on his side.

            Also, if “doorknobhead” is the caliber of people you hang around with, I can see why you convinced yourself of your smugness.

          • I can’t imagine that I’ll agree with you on much of everything, since your mind is so wonderfully closed to new ideas. I wonder how you’ll explain that to God on Judgement Day, but I digress. For those reading who are not you, let me point out that “Satan” has changed with time. In Job, he’s God’s assistant, making sure that God is treated properly by Job. A thousand years later in Revelation, he’s a mighty force opposed to God who is nonetheless captured (and he participates even though he knows the charade).

            Satan is a literary figure who changes with time.

          • The pony of opening ones mind is to close it on something solid, as Chesterton would say.

            What will I have to explain to God, exactly? you brought it up then dropped the point immediately. So what is it? Will I have to explain challenging one more self-labeled “bearer of light” who claims to have usurped God by the capital sin of pride?

            The devil is a damned spirit and leads the group of damned spirits who have devoted themselves to doing nothing more than making mankind share the damnation of these spirits. It is an act of jealousy because these spirits thought they were superior to all else, and they clearly are not.

            The book of Job describes the devil trying to make Job blaspheme to prove that even the most devoted man to God is weak. God allows the devil to attack Job, and then the devil is tossed aside like the little b he is. Job is then taught what the epistles of the NT teach: that a man with God and everything else has no more than a man with God and nothing else.

            The devil is not a “powerful force,” though that is common among gnostics to claim that. The gnostic becomes evil out of fear of evil; you assume that just because you are weak to evil that evil is powerful. No, evil is just an absence of Good, and the devil is just a rabid dog tied to a chain.

            The devil wants to destroy mankind, and that is all he is capable of thinking about. The devil is about as successful with this as you are. Also, just like your dark master, you overplay your hand and outright admit you are a satanist with your rheroric; you’ll have an eternity to think that one over.

          • I thought that a serious Christian would be happy to go back to his Bible to check how “Satan” has evolved. Guess not.

          • The devil is as I said he is: a worthless adversary to mankind. No “evolution” there as the devil cannot change or admit he is wrong, such is pride.

            That you would refuse to read a message I put a lot of time into writing just because it challenges your satanism is telling.

            Here:

            The devil is a damned spirit and leads the group of damned spirits who have devoted themselves to doing nothing more than making mankind share the damnation of these spirits. It is an act of jealousy because these spirits thought they were superior to all else, and they clearly are not.

            The book of Job describes the devil trying to make Job blaspheme to prove that even the most devoted man to God is weak. God allows the devil to attack Job, and then the devil is tossed aside like the little b he is. Job is then taught what the epistles of the NT teach: that a man with God and everything else has no more than a man with God and nothing else.

            The devil is not a “powerful force,” though that is common among gnostics to claim that. The gnostic becomes evil out of fear of evil; you assume that just because you are weak to evil that evil is powerful. No, evil is just an absence of Good, and the devil is just a rabid dog tied to a chain.

            The devil wants to destroy mankind, and that is all he is capable of thinking about. The devil is about as successful with this as you are. Also, just like your dark master, you overplay your hand and outright admit you are a satanist with your rheroric; you’ll have an eternity to think that one over.

          • Who could read that and not want to be part of such a warm, welcoming, and thoughtful group?

          • Only thing my message was hostile to is demons and their puppets. Are you admitting something you don’t want to here?

        • MR

          I’ve been swamped doing genealogy lately and have been surprised at the number of 13-year-olds giving birth in highly religious communities.

          • What timeframe are we talking here? 1800s? And is the US or Europe?

          • MR

            U.S., definitely 1800s, but probably 1700s, too. Both protestant and catholic. Older generations are fond of reminding us that “things were different back then.” It kind of throws objectivity under the bus.

      • DoorknobHead

        > Good post, NigelTeapot. It is a good example of why religion is so terrible. Religion teaches people how to believe and maintain strong belief in fake news. Abortion is “Sacrificing children”? Fake news [with a soul at conception, also fake news], “devil”, fake news. “superpowers” fake news, “evil” arguably a form of fake news, a straw man argument of sexual education, fake news.

        > Implying Bob is equivalent to an archetypal Nazi [only took one post in this string to get there; I think that says something] is fake news. It’s also a good example of religion using naturally evolved mechanisms available in the brain to demonize others in out-groups. The reason religion (and the Nazi party) benefits from it’s adherents demonizing others, is that it dehumanizes them, and makes them seem like objects, animals and/or not human and not part of the preferred tribe. Humans dehumanizing humans is a way to “short-circuit” the part of the brain that keeps humans from causing unnecessary harm to other humans. Rules of decency in behavior and of action are therefore not universally spread towards all humans, but only to the “localized tribe”. This is a way those that are victimized by religion and dogma, to believe and maintain strong beliefs in fake news, can use tactics to “cut off the head” of others who don’t hold the same beliefs in their arbitrary brand of fake news promulgated by their arbitrary religion or dogma, without moral guilt, because harming an “object” is not a morality concern. This sometimes takes the form of unwarranted ad hominem attacks and sometimes takes on the form of actually “cutting of the heads of others” who disagree with the strongly held beliefs of fake news. All this fake news and dehumanization is like a tactic the Christian form a [mythical] Satan, the Great Deceiver, would use to get humans to do harm to other humans in perpetuity. So, it makes one wonder, who is it that is doing the work of “Satan”. How can we tell? Are some extreme Christians doing the work of ‘Satan’?

        > Thanx again for the post Nigelteapot — it helps give a reason to fight on behalf of the victims of religion [fake news] in the interest of all humanity.
        Peace.

        • It appears you have no idea what you are talking about. Also you seem to have lost connection to reality. you also seem to be hiding behind your ego to protect yourself from something, most liked the realization of what you have done.

          First you deny abortion is a satanic sacrifice. If it isn’t that then what is it?

          Second you deny life begins at conception, you claim the devil doesn’t exist, that evil doesn’t exist, and that you think it is good to sexualize children.

          That does not paint a pretty picture.

          The n@zi was a satanist and eugenicist so that is accurate; I don’t know what you think they were.

          you then proceed to deny all truth and thinking in order to push “morality” and “decency” while claiming all Christians serve the devil because I offended your support satanic sacrifice.

          What is “decency?” Is it people refusing to call out your evil?

          What foundation do you have for “morality” without God and while you deny all evil? Is it like neitzche and his “might makes right” satanism? So you claim abortion and child sexualization is defensible because you claim strength for yourself?

          No, evil is weakness. Guess what that makes you.

          This reminds me of something CS Lewis said: that people who are truly bad do not know what evil is because people who are asleep cannot know they are asleep.

          Also, if you are so eager to deny the devil and simultaneously claim others serve the devil, then why do you do whatever the devil wants of you without question? It seems like you project.

          • DoorknobHead

            Another great post! very entertaining.
            > An abortion is a way to terminate an unwanted pregnancy, often after things turn out unexpectantly, something I’ve never had to do, in part, because I had sexual education as a teenager which helps teach people how to avoid such an unfortunate circumstance. Also, I had a secular education background which tends to teach greater mutual respect between the sexes than some of the more extreme religious positions tend to do. Religion often discourages people from education that would mitigate the reason for abortion in the first place, which is a small part of why religion is often considered a “bankrupt” worldview by those on the outside, that is, those often with values from more enlightenment-based and humanistic perspectives.
            > It makes sense, considering the mental state that religion encourages, that an extreme believer might consider me delusional because, in part, I don’t 1) acknowledge a mythical devil [for which there is no verifiable and reliable evidence] and 2) it protects an inculcated worldview which is linked closely with the self. A person that is a victim of religion often has many challenges to overcome before they can extract themselves from the con.
            > I did not claim Christians actually serve the devil, because I don’t believe in the devil, it was just a metaphor that is made up that arguably might fit the situation. It was a metaphor, like how religious texts use metaphors and fake news that people are taught to be true.
            > Yes, I deny the fantasy that a viable and “sacred” life happens at conception, because that is part of the religious fantasy, aka fake news, that I don’t ascribe to — but only because of luck, because my education is different, and probably more comprehensive.
            > It is decent for the religious to try to protect people from the devil, if they believe the devil is real, the problem is, the devil is not real. In this way, both the religious and non religious are on the same side — trying to help others from making mistakes. Good for both sides.
            > Belief in a mythical god, or even a real god (not a thing) is not required for morality, and for people to determine right from wrong and bad behavior from better behavior. The natural reasons for why and how social animals (humans) related to one another in positive ways, and negative ways, has explanations that don’t require a god.
            > Yes, people often don’t consider themselves bad, even when they might be wrong and are taking actions which might be harmful to others. As I mentioned before, if people demonize others, they can justify bad actions they take against others that they might not take against members of their own in-group. Yet, how does one tell if they are the ones which are asleep verifiably and reliably that has a falsifiable component? Comprehensive and liberal education?
            > Religion might make it so you are unable to learn this, but I don’t believe in the devil as an entity, so if I make an analogy that someone acts in a manner described by their religion as the devil, I still do not believe a devil exists. Yet, here is something fun, for me, which might increase a devil-believers heart rate — although I am not a member myself, I do very much appreciate much of the work done by The Satanic Temple in regards to the separation of government and religion. Enjoy that nugget.
            Peace

    • Vincent J.

      The best way to reply to NigelTeapot is the challenge him to say, “Jesus is the Son of God.” He can’t do it.

      1 John 4:2-3 This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God.

      1 John 4:15 If anyone acknowledges that Jesus is the Son of God, God lives in them and they in God.

      • So then what are NigelTeapot’s religious beliefs? He’s not a Christian?

    • Jennifer Hartline

      Bob, sex causes pregnancy. That is Sex-ed 101. If I do not wish to be pregnant, then I do not have sex. It really is that simple. I didn’t say it was easy, but that it is that simple. Decades of access to every manner of contraceptive has done nothing to the eliminate abortion. Artificial contraception is not medicine or prevention. It’s the seed of abortion.

      As to the “unwanted” problem, a child in the womb is a human being whether he or she is “wanted” or not. It is a grave evil to kill an innocent, defenseless human being.

      As to your assertion that overturning Roe won’t do much, I ask you, why then did we bother to outlaw slavery? If abolishing a bad law is so unnecessary, then why not just let bad laws stand? Why fuss about justice?
      An unjust law must be abolished.

      • Athena771

        Women do not lose their rights to their bodies because of having sex.

        Yes i am pro-choice, the reason for it is simple, women own their bodies and have the right to refuse to continue gestating.

        I think women should have the choice to carry to term or not since it is her body doing the gestating (at the very least until the end of of the 1st trimester).

        I don’t care if pregnancy is caused by sex or if you can catch it like the cold.

        If pregnancy happened asexually, i would still be pro-choice, because women are not just incubators.

        Your do not have sex is not going to work in the real world.

        Just so you know i am a married woman and i chose to not have children? are you going to say to me to not have sex?

        Yes birth control works, i used it for many years.

        • Jennifer Hartline

          Who owns the child’s body? Is it the woman’s body being taken out in pieces during an abortion, or the woman’s body being flushed out by chemicals?
          Yes, women are to be in charge of themselves and their bodies. That’s what chastity is all about — self-mastery. Nothing in that gives them any “right” to kill another human being.

          Sexual intercourse has a specific purpose. It’s funny how nobody takes drugs to keep their lungs from expanding and taking in air, or wants coils shoved up their kidneys to stop them from making urine. We want the organs and systems of our bodies to work properly, doing the job for which they were created. Except for our reproductive system. Then suddenly women are happy to swallow carcinogenic chemicals, or shove metal objects into their tubes to injure their healthy organs and make their healthy reproductive system defunct. And that’s supposed to be empowerment. Go, women. Harm your body because you own your body.
          How stupid. No, I’d rather live in real freedom and health and wholeness.

          • Athena771

            Again tell me where it says that a woman that becomes pregnant has to stay pregnant?

            The uterus belongs to the woman NOT to the embryo or fetus.

            Since the woman owns her uterus she has the right to refuse to gestate.

            What part of you cannot force a woman to remain pregnant that does not want to be?

          • Jennifer Hartline

            I have never forced a single woman to engage in sexual intercourse with a man against her will. Sex makes babies. That’s the purpose of sex. Nothing you say or do can change that.
            The child in the womb is not disposable, but a human person with the same right to life that you have. Nothing anyone says or does can change that fact.

          • Karen

            Plenty of MEN force women to have sex, millions of them every day. Some of those attacks result in pregnancies that could kill the woman. Your response?

            Also, do you support mandatory paid maternity leave? Universal, government-paid for medical care and free college tuition, so that raising a child does not burden women?

          • Andrew Mason

            Who pays the maternity leave? Why should single guys for instance pay so that some bimbo who decided to get knocked up should have a free ride on the taxpayer? Or what of working grandparents, why should they pay for the children of other people? Shouldn’t the man who wanted the child be held solely responsible? Of course if the father doesn’t want the child then why is he responsible for the woman’s decision to gestate to term?

            If force is involved then you’re talking rape and the law should be involved. Where pregnancy occurs, the child conceived is a victim too.

          • My response is that rape leads to pregnancy so rarely that it is a statistical anomaly. If you knew anything about rape, you’d know this.

            No, I do not support paid maternity leave by the government. Nobody should. It’s a silly, one-size-fits all blanket approach. If an employer wants to offer it, sure. If an employer doesn’t, that’s fine.

            YOU CHOOSE your employer based on your needs.

            YOU SAVE your money to provide for whomever.

            Or better yet, get married so that you have two incomes to support children. You know, just like everyone else does and has done for centuries?

          • Athena771

            You know for the person that is raped and become pregnant, statistical anomaly does not mean didley squat. A person’s body has been violated and been traumatizied psychologically, and now is pregnant with the offspring of a rapist.

            No matter what their are women out there that DO get pregnant, does NOT matter how small that number is.

            But of course that does not matter to you, after all who cares right, only the embryo or fetus matters right? or pro-give birth agendas that certain busybodies have.

          • Athena771

            What part that you cannot force a woman to stay pregnant that does not want to be do you not understand?

            What part of the woman owns her uterus do you not understand?

            Nothing anyone says or does can change that FACT either.

          • Jennifer Hartline

            What part of the child in the womb is a human person with the same right to life that you have do you not understand?
            Explain to me why it is anyone’s “right” to kill an innocent and defenseless human being.

          • Athena771

            explain to me when the a woman stops owning her uterus? explain to me why anyone has any right to a woman’s uterus? and to be housed inside it even against her will?

            being human does not give anyone any rights to be inside a woman’s body against her wishes.

          • Jennifer Hartline

            Your beef is with God and His design for the human person, His plan for human reproduction. You are at perpetual war with your own body, and I’m sorry. Must be a scary and unhappy way to live. I wish you’d consider the fact that being female isn’t a ball and chain, and having a uterus isn’t a punishment. I wish you peace.

          • Athena771

            nice dodge, why don’t you answer my question? Please don’t start with religious talk, i don’t share your beliefs.

            I never said having a uterus is a punishment, i like being a woman thank you very much.

            Now are you going to answer my question?

          • Jennifer Hartline

            Which question? That women own their own bodies? Sure. A woman owns her own uterus? Sure.
            The child in the womb also owns his/her own body and every part. Being present in his mother’s womb doesn’t give the mother any “right” to kill her child. The child has no choice but to grow in his mother’s womb, and the child did not ask to be created by her.

          • Athena771

            Yes, but since the uterus belongs to the woman doing the gestating, she has the veto power.

            That means that the uterus owner has the right to evict.

            I know that sounds harsh to you, but that is how body ownership works within the laws of this country. Organ donation cannot be forced, and in pregnancy the woman is donating her uterus.

          • Jennifer Hartline

            “the right to evict.” You can’t even bring yourself to say it without euphemisms. It’s not eviction. It’s killing a child. Say it. It’s not “choice” or “terminating a pregnancy”. It’s killing the child in the womb. Say you want the right to kill a child.

          • Athena771

            Yes it is an eviction, that is what the abortion pill does is eject the embryo from the uterus. Women have been doing this for thousands of years using herbs and such.

            You cannot compell anyone to sustain a life in their body against their will, just like you cannot force someone to give blood even if someone dies

          • Jennifer Hartline

            I won’t keep arguing with you. You cannot refute the truth that the child in the womb is a human person worthy of life. You can’t admit it to yourself yet, but you cannot refute it.
            Go to Amazon and get “What We Can’t Not Know” by J. Budziszewski.

          • Athena771

            no i don’t consider an embryo a child, and no i don’t consider it to have more rights than the woman.

            I am willing to give it more consideration after the 2nd trimester, but not before hand, beforehand the woman’s right to not gestate should come first.

          • Cody

            Your wrong the embryo is a child and you just admitted by saying after the 2nd trimester proof you are lying and know it.all murders will go to hell no woman ever had sex with a man and had a baby chicken, cat or even a pig so you know its human, and yes you do have control over your body by not pull your pants off.

          • So you decide what life is and when it begins, huh? *shaking head*

          • Athena771

            by the way most abortions occur at 5-6 weeks, when the embryo is the size of an appleseed, it cannot live outside the womb, it has no rights, it has no brain activity

            Why would you place the rights of an embryo before a pregnant woman that is sentient , thinking and feeling?

          • Athena771

            ok that is fine, we just see this issue differently

          • Athena771

            you cannot compel a woman to gestate in this country, the laws allow for us to refuse even if someone dies. You cannot compel someone to give blood, organs, you cannot even take someone’s DNA without a court order, did you know that?

            Pregnancy is actually whole body donation, the woman is forced to give nutrients and endure bodily changes due to the gestation process, and endure childbirth.

            Pregnancy that is unwanted is gestational slavery.

          • Athena771

            women do not lose the rights to her own uterus because of having sex. Women retain the rights to her organs including her uterus even if she is dead, did you know?

          • Jennifer Hartline

            Does the female in the womb have the same rights over her body, her uterus, her life?

          • Athena771

            she has rights to her body, but not a uterus.

          • Athena771

            the embryo male or female, does not have the same rights as the woman doing the gestating. The woman doing the gestating has the right to not have her uterus occupied.

          • Tricia Cleveland King

            Then that woman has the right to not have sex or take all the necessary precautions to prevent it. You can’t just say after the fact, oh it’s my uterus and I have the right to say what happens to it. YOU had the right beforehand to NOT have sex if you were unprotected. If YOU cannot control yourself, then you are NO BETTER than an animal.

          • Athena771

            actually yes i do have the right to my own uterus even after the fact. I have the right to continue gestating or not.

            I agree better to prevent pregnancy in the first place, i am with you there.

            It still does not change the fact that i can refuse to gestate and terminate it AFTER THE FACT.

            i STILL OWN MY UTERUS.

          • Jim Walker

            Move yourself
            You always live your life
            Never thinking of the FUTURE
            Prove yourself
            You are the move you make
            Take your chances, win or loser
            See yourself
            You are the steps you take
            You and you, and that’s the only WAY
            Shake, shake yourself
            You’re every move you make
            So the story goes

            [Chorus]
            Owner of a UTERUS
            Owner of a UTERUS
            (Much better than a)
            Owner of broken womb
            Owner of a UTERUS

          • Athena771

            what?

          • Jim Walker

            3 sentences you need to reflect on :

            You always live your life Never thinking of the FUTURE
            You are the steps you take You and you, and that’s the only WAY
            Owner of a UTERUS

          • Athena771

            You don’t know anything about me or my life, so this song means nothing to me.

            You don’t know what i think about or anything i have done. Why don’t you talk to me like an adult and ask me questions instead of writing song verses?

          • Athena771

            by the way my uterus is not broken, it is perfectly fine thank you very much.

            I don’t know what you are trying to convey.

          • Jim Walker

            You own your Uterus and its much better than a broken womb but its useless to you because you abort your babies.
            Its as good as BROKEN.

          • Athena771

            you are funny, i have never had an abortion, my uterus has never been occupied.

          • Jim Walker

            I was referring those who subscribe to your beliefs.

          • Athena771

            oh so now you say it is not directed at me? interesting.

            You know you are making a blanket statement, their are millions of people in this country and you cannot possibly know each person individually that is pro-choice.

            Their are plenty of women like myself that are married and pro-choice and have never had abortions or have children.

            The number of women that have had abortions come from all walks of life and belief systems.

            You cannot possibly know the heart of each person, and or their reasons or motivations.

            You are just making a blanket judgement of individual people that you do not even know.

          • Jim Walker

            Oh I’m sure I’m also directed at you as well, you and your kind that can kill your own flesh and blood in your own womb, and called it “choice”.

          • Athena771

            i did not know thier was “my kind”, is their also a “your kind?

            So much animosity in you.

          • Chip Crawford

            Wow pot, you are really calling the kettle black with that. You and Elizabeth Decima should get together and form a haters club. It
            would keep you both off the street and out of contact with healthy minded people. Your level of vitriol combined will soon blow you both up. Go ahead – spit, splutter …

          • Athena771

            Maybe you cannot read, but Jim is the one showing hatred towards all pro-choicers. He thinks us are hateful baby killers.

            He does not know anything about me, nor do you.

            My reason for being pro-choice are valid and my own, yet the hatred that h as been spewed at me for simply believing that women have a right to terminate an unwanted pregnancy is really over the top.

          • Chip Crawford

            We do know about you, ugly. Words and attitudes are conveyed. I’m pushing back on it and your hypocrisy.

          • Athena771

            my hypocrisy, ? please explain, now who is being hateful?

            What exactly is your problem with me, please explain?

            If am pro-choice what is that to you?

          • Chip Crawford

            Hey, get the bilge water pump going, mates.

          • Athena771

            oh so you are not going to explain to me how exactly i have been hateful to you?

            Just because i believe differently then you?

          • Chip Crawford

            Aw shut up

          • Athena771

            how Christian like of you?

            so if don’t agree with you all, i have to shut up?

            I don’t have this is a free country

          • Chip Crawford

            Considering the stuff you are spouting, the advice is a total kindness and entirely for your benefit.

          • Athena771

            Do i not have the right to believe as i please? You may not agree, but hey this country was founded on freedom to spout things that others may not like or agree with.

            I have a right to believe what i want even if you or others don’t like it.

            Freedom of thought, freedom of belief and association .

          • Chip Crawford

            Yep, and you can go to hell if you choose, but you’re stu**id if you do. Get you last word here; your ilk always must. I haven’t run off all the people in my life, so I have higher alternates to move to other than trying to get a dope to stop shooting herself in the foot.

          • Athena771

            “my ilk” ?

            I am not your enemy for not sharing your belief.

            You have the right to believe in hell if you like, and I have the right to not believe as you do.

            Can you live with that?

          • Chip Crawford

            It’s not my living, but your dying that is of concern. Jesus is the Savior, the only savior, who calls to you to receive him as lord and your own substitute and savior. Without him, there is no atonement for your sins, for which you owe payment. Can you die with that?

          • Athena771

            don’t concern yourself with that, that is my business.

            Why don’t you worry about your own self. Worry about your own sins.

          • Chip Crawford

            Jesus took my sins. That’s the point. If you like keeping yours, well … not very smart to say the least. But don’t gripe at me if you make a bad choice.

          • Chip Crawford

            And the corresponding RESPONSIBILITIES that go with those rights and freedoms …

          • Athena771

            your hatred and self-righteousness is showing.

            Are you a sinner or are you a perfect person?

            As far as i know only one person was perfect and that is NOT YOU.

          • Jim Walker

            When women willingly pluck out their babies from their womb, it takes a lot of hate and justification of self-righteous. Some were remorseful later on, some treat it like going to a dentist.
            We are all sinners, I’m far from perfect and I was pro-choice until I came here reading about Pro-life and soon I was on my knees in tears asking God for forgiveness.
            I hope that you too will one day be Pro-life and stop others from killing the innocent babies in their womb.

          • Athena771

            so you are able to see into the heart of these women?

            Women that seek an abortion are seeking to be unpregnant, and many of them probably do regret it afterwards and or feel sad at the time, those are all legitimate emotions.

            You are judging all of these women and in your mind they are evil and full of hate.

            I guess it makes you feel better.

            Then to take into consideration their situation and maybe have a little compassion

            Whatever you hatred is showing towards me and other women that think differently then you about this issue.

          • Jim Walker

            I have no hatred for any women. I wish all these women can prevent pregnancy and if not, let their babies be given for adoption.
            Why is it considered hate for me to define my beliefs and women who kill their babies, of whom hate it enough to pluck it from the safety of the womb, is conveniently called “choice” ?
            A baby in the womb is not a piece of flesh, or a cancer tumour. It’s living human being at conception and it needs the protection. Just google Aborted babies and see the horrific pictures. Don’t you agree that is just murder?

          • Athena771

            I understand your position, i don’t hate you for being pro-life. You just have to accept that you cannot compel a woman to gestate an unwanted pregnancy.

            Since it is the woman that does the gestating and it her uterus in HER body, ultimately it is her choice.

            It is what it is.

            we will just have to agree to disagree.

          • Jim Walker

            I’m sorry Athena771, I cannot agree to disagree.
            This is not different opinions on philosophy, ideology or even climate change.
            This HER Body HER Choice is allowing the mother to kill the baby, a human being, legally.
            If I can be changed from being pro-choice to now pro-life, you can too and along with other people.

          • Athena771

            No, because you cannot force a woman to remain pregnant that does not want to be.

            To change the law , you are by default taking away a woman’s right to her OWN body and forcing her to gestate against her will.

            I agree with trying to persuade women and help them or whatever you want to do to try to convince them , but i will NOT be part of changing the law.

            To me the woman comes first.

          • Athena771

            Yes it is our body and our choice, it is OUR BODY doing the gestating.

            forcing a woman to remain pregnant is gestational servitude.

            You can be pro-life in your personal life, but if you try to change the law to try to TAKE away MY RIGHTS to my body, then yes i do have a problem with that.

            I will NOT help you try to change the law.

          • Jim Walker

            We wil fight to change it. Abortion is murder. You obviously put rights above life of a child more. Gestational servitude? You talked so callously, as if the baby is an intruder of the womb, hey Athena771, it’s the woman’s own baby.
            It’s sickening to even debate this with you.

          • Athena771

            Just like you cannot compel organ donation, you cannot compel gestation.

            It may sound callous, but it is also callous to not give blood to save someone’s life, but you cannot compel someone to give thier blood or organs.

            Pregnancy is donating your WHOLE body.

          • Athena771

            rights are not based on emotions or feeling or saving lives.

            That is why we have a right to due process even if somebody gets away with murder.

            That is why you cannot take someone’s organs or blood even if someone dies.

            We have the right to bear arms does not matter that it is a deadly weapon.

            The rights to one’s body supersedes anyone’s right to life.

            Try taking organs from a dead person and you will be prosecuted for desecrating a corpse.

            Why should women be reduced to less then a dead person

          • Jim Walker

            Question : Who does the baby belong to?

          • TJ Miller

            “actually yes i do have the right to my own uterus even after the fact.”

            Unless it’s rape, you partially but willingly gave those rights up to the owner of the penis that you allowed inside of you.

            Maybe you should be more careful about who you let in (and when, since pregnancy is only feasible for roughly 3 days out of every month on average due to fertility cycling… or are you so desperate for it, that you cannot hang back and avoid sex for 3-5 days out of 28-30?)

          • Athena771

            I willingly give up NOTHING when i have sex, i still own my uterus, it is still inside my body whether i have sex or not.

            Becoming pregnant is irrelevent, i still own my uterus and my body, thank you very much!

            Why don’t you worry about your own self .

            nosy busybody.

        • Tricia Cleveland King

          It’s not ending a pregnancy, it’s not allowing her body to quit gestating,…. It’s KILLING a human child. And you cannot say that and because you cannot aknowledge that, then you cannot have a legitimate argument over abortion. If you cannot control your desires, then you are no better than an animal and that goes for men also. The man can keep from getting someone pregnant is to wear a condom…have a vasectomy or to not engage in intercourse. Those are his options. Yours are about the same. If you don’t want children, have a tubal ligation done… then you can have sex anywhere, anytime to just please your base self! God you women on the left are a piece of work. Kill a baby, cause I cannot control myself!!!!

          • Hmmm…

            So right. They decry a return to back ally abortions …
            Hey!
            How about stop living like an Ally Cat ???

          • Athena771

            if pregnancy could be caught like the cold, i would still be pro-choice, this has nothing to do with sex, but with a woman’s right to her own body.

            So you want to force women to remain pregnant against their will?

            that is called gestational servitude.

            So you are basically saying the embryo or fetus has MORE rights then the woman to her own body/uterus?

            I can see this is all about sex for you, for you know nothing about me and yet you accuse me of wanting sex anytime, anywhere.

            Cannot stand women enjoy sex are you jealous?

          • Tricia Cleveland King

            nope not jealous.. but I took responsibility for my actions even at a younger age. I knew if I didn’t want to get pregnant and had no birth control, I shouldn’t and didn’t have sex. It was called controlling oneself. Is it that hard for you???? So no, it’s not about sex but being responsible and not killing your child!!!!! That little baby didn’t ask for you to have sex and surely shouldn’t have to pay with their life, because it’s inconvient for you. You know, you use all the wonderful words but you still can’t admit that you are killing your own child!!!! Gestational servitude… omg where in the heck did you come up with that one???

          • Athena771

            it is Gestational servitude, if the gestation process is unwanted and a woman is barred from terminating.

            By default you are forcing her to allow the gestation to continue which in turn makes her a slave to the embryo.

            You may find the idea of forcing a woman to remain pregnant against her will a small violation

            But to those of us that value our bodily rights it is not.

          • LOL. If abortion was illegal tomorrow and you didn’t want your child, do you think it would be somehow impossible for you to murder your child? Nope. You’d still physically be able to do so. You just wouldn’t get help in so doing.

            It’s simply ridiculous to think that the law is going to stop anyone bent upon doing something. That’s not the purpose of law nor how it works.

          • Ron Greenawalt

            You all seem to think if the ban guns criminals will be weaponless.. so there goes that argument try again cupcake

        • If you support abortion, you support murder.

      • Karen

        So when will you write a long article scolding men for wanting sex? Some of those women are actually in relationships but when pregnancy is either dangerous or a bad idea for other reasons. Will you tell those men that they are absolutely forbidden from having sex, suggesting sex, thinking about sex, and certainly from shaming, guilting, or otherwise having any opinion about sex to their partners? If women have to suffer all the consequences, then women should be the ONLY ones with any opinions.

        • Jennifer Hartline

          Karen, men are not exempt from the moral law. Catholic teaching, for instance, requires the same from both spouses. Men are not entitled to sex, and they must learn to master their passions by chastity just as women must. This is where we either love or we do not. Love is not greedy or demanding. Love is sacrifice. Love is willing the good of the other. Love does not misuse the gift of marital sex, nor does it demand that sex be sterile. Sexual intercourse has a very specific purpose, and we have no right to separate it from that purpose.
          No one EVER died from not having sex.

          • Athena771

            i agree nobody is entitled to sex, but explain to me what is a misuse of marital sex? if both husband and wife agree to have sterile sex what is that to you or anyone?

            I am not catholic, so i don’t care about that teaching

            Who are you to dictate how people should have sex, is this not a free country?

          • TJ Miller

            Don’t make me pay for the results (viz. tax money, starting with the $500m PP gets every year from the federal government), and I won’t dictate what you do that may potentially produce those results.

            Stay out of my wallet, and I’ll stay out of your bedroom. Fair enough?

          • Athena771

            I am not asking you to pay for anything, i will gladly pay my way, just want all of you busybodies to mind your own business and not tell me what to do with my uterus, thank you very much!

          • TJ Miller

            So you;re good with defunding Planned Parenthood then? Excellent!

          • Karen

            So you’re okay with women denying their husbands sex for any reason and he just deals with it?

          • Jennifer Hartline

            Karen, it’s hard to have a discussion when you’re being unreasonable. Stop putting words in my mouth just to accuse me of things.

          • Jim

            Pleasure and procreation but the latter is no requirement.

          • Andrew Mason

            I generally strongly disagree with Karen but she raises an interesting point – what of wives who cannot afford to have children? Must they deprive their husbands of their right to sexual relations contrary to Scripture, or are they permitted to enjoy sexual intimacy without ‘fear of children’? I know you said that “men are not entitled to sex” and yet Scripture clearly states that wives do not have authority over their own body but must yield it to their husband, as husbands do not have authority over their body but must yield it to their wife, and that they should not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a brief period of time for the purpose of devoting themselves to prayer. I personally knew a couple of single Christian girls who I understood to be on the pill due to women’s issues. Since marriage won’t solve those issues they’ll have to decide whether to live with their problems and have children, or treat their problems and do without natural born children, One of them (who is likely now married) talked of adoption as there was also significant risk of postnatal depression and she had no desire to inflict that on any children – she suffered enough as a child because of her own mother’s health and it contributed to the collapse of that family unit. Love may be sacrifice, but is it the same sacrifice for everyone?

            What is the specific purpose of sex? This should be obvious I know, but humans are not animals where the act is directly connected to reproduction or being in heat.

            This is doubtless one of those Catholic v non-Catholic issues but it is interesting to see exactly how the logic breaks down.

          • Athena771

            I actually agree with what you said here.

            I am tired of the attack on contraception and women’s rights to their own bodies by other Christians.

            a married couple should not be deprived of intimacy and sex (which is a psychological) need to avoid getting pregnant.

            Just because one has sex does not mean we have to be open to pregnancy, this is the 21st century, we also have anti-biotics, which means we can treat an infection, don’t have to die from infection.

          • Have you looked at the Old Testament to see how the patriarchs handled sex? Taking captured women as sex slaves, polygamy, rape, and very different sex rules for men and women.

            Your approach to sex and marriage might be sensible, but it’s not what God sanctioned.

        • James

          “So when will you write a long article scolding men for wanting sex”

          I’m pretty sure she’s written quite a few.

          • Karen

            Names? And let me be clear: I mean that males should never, ever, under any circumstances, including wedding nights and anniversaries, ask their wives for sex. If she wants sex, she asks. He says NOTHING. EVER.

          • Jennifer Hartline

            You’re being unreasonable and irrational.

          • Muggs37

            What stratosphere do you live on?

      • Bob, sex causes pregnancy. That is Sex-ed 101. If I do not wish to be pregnant, then I do not have sex.

        But you can anticipate how easy it is to turn this around. For example: Cars cause car accidents. This is Common Sense 101. If you don’t wish to have a car accident, then don’t drive in a car.

        But, oddly, you’re never turned away from an Emergency Room because your injuries were caused by a car accident. It was an accident; you didn’t intend to get injured. Whether you drove carefully or not, or whether you wore your seat belt or not, or whether your car had air bags or not, the ER patches you up. No doctor wags his finger and says, “Don’t get in a car, and you won’t have accidents!” and sends you home.

        This maps pretty clearly to the abortion question.

        It really is that simple. I didn’t say it was easy, but that it is that simple.

        Your “Well just don’t have sex then!” is rather naïve. I think we have lots of data showing that abstinence-only sex ed isn’t effective.

        As to the “unwanted” problem, a child in the womb is a human being whether he or she is “wanted” or not.

        Is it a child if it’s just one cell? I see a 9-month-long spectrum, with a single cell (not a person) at one end and a newborn (a person) at the other end.

        An unjust law must be abolished.

        You’re tilting at windmills. Roe isn’t the issue; unwanted pregnancies is the issue. Our rate is terrible compared to some other Western countries. Perhaps we can learn what they’re doing and copy it, assuming abortion really is the holocaust that you say it is (and it’s not just a cover for controlling sexuality).

  • Mel Carbon

    Spot on….

  • Athena771

    All i will say, i am so glad i am no longer fertile and don’t have to worry about getting pregnant anymore.

    All childbearing age women should be very afraid, is all i will say.

  • Cody

    Good article. and you are right.

  • Jh Peterson

    When I was growing up, I was told there were three topics never to argue – religion, politics and sex. Seeing how abortion manages to encompass this “holy trinity” of taboos, no wonder it commands our attention as it does.

  • Joel Stephen Shelton

    Along with freedom comes responsibility. For every action there is an equal reaction. Take responsibility for your own actions. You are not a victim.

  • Scott

    I am a pro-life conservative father of a beautiful 17 year old daughter. I am a brother of a sister who was forced to listen to her best friend being raped. I am also aware that there are liberals who are using the moral argument to attack this man instead of just admitting that they could care less about what Kavanaugh did and do not want Roe overturned. That’s cowardly and unacceptable. But what’s just as cowardly is for Kavanaugh not to man up and take responsibility for what happened. And what’s just as dangerous is that there are male college students who are watching this play out. The frat house boys are watching this play out and evangelicals should be leading the way in protection of women, protection of truth and wanting all that is hidden to come to service. In the grande scheme of things it’s not about Roe or left vs right. Conservatives should be concerned about one thing only: TRUTH! Forgive we must but the truth must come to the surface. Don’t miss this opportunity to tell the world that sexual abuse is not ok, even if you are young, drunk and a good ole boy. No especially if you are young, drunk and a good ole boy.

    • Jennifer Hartline

      No one is saying sexual abuse is okay, even if you are young, drunk, and a good ole boy. Certainly not me.
      I missed the part where proof of Kavanaugh’s guilt has been provided. You want him to “man up and take responsibility”, but that assumes he is guilty. What if he is innocent?

      • Scott

        All things hidden will come to light.

        • Muggs37

          No, you are ‘assuming’ he is guilty. How many times do the Democrats have to pull this little stunt with an individual not of their choice (and because they can’t accept losing) before you condemn THEIR actions? He (Kavanaugh) has already had a sufficient number of WOMEN come forward to dispute the allegation as well as the man who was supposed to be in the room when this travesty occurred. This is a brazen and disgusting ruse to sully a man who has already had at least 6 FBI background investigations where this supposed attack on Ms. Ford never came up. Diane Feinstein already had the information when she met privately with him – why didn’t she bring it up then? What, exactly is it, that he is supposed to ‘man up’ about? He has said he has never done such a thing either to Ms. Ford or anyone. Women who bring such unfounded charges against men should not get away scott free after they have ruined a man’s reputation and caused him disgrace, when the accusation is false. Whatever happened to “innocent until proven guilty”?

          • Scott

            Three questions that still bother me as a conservative who has witnessed the moral decline of its party the past two years. Why would Ford want an FBI investigation? Why would she still be willing to face the heat in front of the world knowing that she will be drilled by very difficult questions that will probably make her look bad? Why would she have told these same details to her therapist, husband and friends several years before this appt by Trump. No more conspiracy theories, just direct answers please.

        • Hmmm…

          Be open to this charge being badly mistaken or an orchestrated political stunt in a long line of delay tactics in this confirmation process.

        • EndTyrannyNow

          Yes,, but Scott you claim to already KNOW he is guilty. Do you think you are God or do you have some inside information the rest of us do not? People who totally discount the possibility these charges might be completely fabricated are either very naïve or, as the author of this article states, they just don’t care about the real truth.

        • Anne E. Reid

          Scott, you have already prejudged Kavanaugh in your first comment. You sir, don’t want the truth

    • In the grande scheme of things, truth is the most important thing. You, however, don’t seem to care much about truth.

      1. The evidence that Kavanaugh did these things 35 years ago consists of one woman’s recollection.
      2. Her recollection is so vague that it omits dates and times.
      3. Her recollection has been denied by everyone she claimed was present, including Kavanaugh.
      4. This charge was treated differently than any other charge heard during the confirmation process. In fact, Diane Feinstein did nothing with it for weeks. She only exposed it now, and still has not sent the whole letter to the rest of the committee.

      And that’s not even half of why this charge is wholly unbelievable.

      Before you get too outraged, you should ask why a Democrat woman decided to sit on evidence of sexual assault for weeks and weeks, since you so clearly believe that this was an assault.

      • Scott

        No actually it is those who want this thing to go away quickly and those that keep repeating “nothing to see here” that are not interested in truth. The writer of this article even admits that she does not know what happened and neither do you. I have not kept up with the details but did Ford share her story with anyone else before the Kavanaugh appointment? Her father or mother maybe? Would you be willing to wait until more details come forward?

        • jackrjohnson

          Good point, she did in fact share the details with her husband and with her therapist. From the Post, “In an interview, her husband, Russell Ford, said that in the 2012 [therapy] sessions, she recounted being trapped in a room with two drunken boys, one of whom pinned her to a bed, molested her and prevented her from screaming. He said he recalled that his wife used Kavanaugh’s last name and voiced concern that Kavanaugh — then a federal judge — might one day be nominated to the Supreme Court. This was in 2012. I believe the therapist has corroborated the testimony.

    • Jim Walker

      This is the same strategy the Dems use on every appointment, nomination or endorsement by President Trump.
      They have no message no direction no plans. Their only campaign message is : Resist Trump.
      It’s really unbelievable that there are still so many daft people in the US that are supporting this irrelevant Political party that is heading towards the socialisticpath to damnation.

      • Scott

        Jim I have never voted Democrat. I am not a socialist by any means but this is a sad day for Republicans. The Republican Party of integrity, humility and honor is fading fast. The Republican Party of Reagan is no where to be seen. I completely regret voting for a man who lies every single day, fires people through Twitter, questioned the courage of a war hero while he himself never served our country in any way, makes fun of people through name calling and facial expressions like a 7 year old child, brags about the size of his penis, brags about groping women, cheated on his current wife while she was pregnant and has never owned up to it, will become whoever evangelicals want him to be so that he can stay in power. He has even faked being someone else In order to find out what people thought of him. These are facts – not just talking points by the left. He is not the person who I thought he was. It’s not to late to save the integrity of a party that once placed honor and values before power and money.

        • Jim Walker

          So you are going to vote Democrat then ? Lies.. hmmm… seems they are all the same in government… but this one at least deliver his campaign promises. So which is more important, the presumably white lies or not fulfilling his promises ?

          • Scott

            Fulfilling promises remains to be seen. History will determine that. If one thing is true about history in politics is that you can’t get a whole lot done if you treat people you disagree with poorly. And how will he get anything done if he is found guilty of collusion or some other crime? How will the rest of his presidency go if he no longer has the votes in the house and senate to get things done? In other words, if the mid term elections leans heavily democratic then wtf has Trump accomplished? And his lies are not “white” lies. They are blatant toxic lies that hurt the Republican cause. No, I will not vote Democratic but if we continue to make excuses for his middle school type of behavior the next generation will take notice. But maybe that’s what we need. Maybe we need a peaceful political revolution where the young folks finally come out and say, “we are tired of hypocrisy, lies, unprofessionalism, materialism and greed. The first party to put honor, integrity, values, truth and compassion for people will get our vote. The first party that shows they are pro-life from the womb to the tomb will get our vote.” Maybe this is a good thing.

          • Jim Walker

            “If one thing is true about history in politics is that you can’t get a whole lot done if you treat people you disagree with poorly. ”

            I agree to this as well. Make Enemies your friends is better.
            However, you need to understand deeper. There is this unseen hand(s) driving their political agenda at all costs and you can see full force from the Dems but the RINOS are more dangerously hideous. I doubt even if Trump has kinder words to his attackers they will relent and make peace. But we are now at the point of No Return.
            So far, as long as the Republicans are standing up to conservative values, I’d cast my vote for them. I’d rather vote for a pig than to vote in a Dem right now.

            “And how will he get anything done if he is found guilty of collusion or some other crime?

            I think it is very clear to me now that the collusion was made up.
            FYI I was a Hillary supporter when I was totally apolitical. I was even Pro-choice, but was never pro-LGBT. This election move me to the right.
            Dems, Reps, all of them are the same, I don’t trust them until they fulfill their campaign promises.
            Trump’s power is limited but from what I observed, he isn’t gonna make things easier for himself with his rhetoric.

          • Jim Walker

            “we are tired of hypocrisy, lies, unprofessionalism, materialism and greed.”
            I see this daily from the Left and its really sickening.

    • Chip Crawford

      You are sensitive to this kind of hurt and harm to a woman due to your close experience of it. But that is part of the emotional blackmail being done here … Some of us have that tug on us due to what is being done to a good man who least deserves this, says hoards of his lifetime, that-time friends. We’ve seen that before as well. Can you say you know TRUTH in this, and that it is indeed one more example of sexual abuse by this man? You cannot. Keep in mind that this is going on in an extremely political arena, where this man has proven stellar in all respects, and the subject has been literally jerked to this venue from that. Observe the behavior of the political persons on both sides, who are also human beings. Open your eyes to the extremely unusual and strange behavior and conduct of the matter from the claimant’s side and those surrounding her. Be aware of a current and documented account of piggish abuse by one of this crowd’s own, whom they are patently discrediting and even threatening – these same banshees who are clotted behind microphones screeching how ugly and inadequate and grossly insensitive is every move, reaction the Judicial Committee makes concerning this. Please ask yourself if you actually KNOW this woman speaks truth, which the two persons she gives as witnesses cannot validate, but deny. How open are you to see this objectively?

    • Anne E. Reid

      many male college students who formerly played lacrosse at Duke are probably watching this ‘play out’

  • blondie236

    This is one of the best pieces I have read, because it is true…

  • Chip Crawford

    Another sucker bait play by the Dems, which sadly still works. If we do not even have a scintilla of provable truth that this even happened, then why is there this furor over all these issues being roiled. Because we have proven as a society over and over that we will trot along behind their insistent claims and emotional blackmail. The subject change is obvious. Nothing else they tried worked, so they pulled this out of the hat. Just say Karen Monohan, former girl friend of the Deputy head of their party, just awarded their New York Attorney General party nomination. Actual medical reports have been submitted and the matter is almost current. Where is all this tender nurturing and pillowing of a presumed victim with an actual witness and evidence? Why is there this shaming and threatening coming from this same crowd? JUST OBSERVE WHAT IS ACTUALLY GOING ON before automatically embracing what is being alleged went on half a lifetime ago on the slightest of premises.

    • jackrjohnson

      Jack Johnson
      8 hrs ·
      Some elementary questions for those who insists Ford is lying, or setting Kavanaugh up:

      “Why would Ford “set up” Kavanaugh when the cost of doing so is to have her name dragged through the mud and forced to flee her own home to avoid death threats? If she is setting up Kavanaugh, why would she take (and pass) a polygraph test and insist on an FBI investigation, knowing that lying to the FBI is a federal crime? If she was setting up Kavanaugh, why would she place his friend Mark Judge in the room, knowing that his testimony could contradict hers? And, why if this is a set-up, did she relay the sexual assault allegation to her marital therapist in 2012? Did she intuit years in advance that Kavanaugh would be nominated to the Supreme Court — but fail to foresee that, like every other woman who has made such allegations against a powerful man, she would be subject to character assassination?”

      These questions, btw, were provided by arch conservative, Max Boot.

      • Chip Crawford

        We don’t know what the PAY would be, whether what she is saying is actually true about having to flee her home. This may enhance her dream of living in a gaited community, having the “threat” as an excuse. Yes, why WOULD she go get a polygraph if she wanted to be anonymous as claimed originally. It’s an incriminating step actually, showing fore planning. And we don’t know how much she practiced for it, what questions, who administered it and how many “takes” were done before she could pass. Regardless, that is actually incriminating of her. Obviously, it is not the action of a person who planned not to be known, thus not involved.

        She may be very well aware or certainly told that the FBI wouldn’t do it at this juncture, not their function when there is not a crime chargeable due to the statute of limitations about which to pass on their results for prosecution. She didn’t know Judge’s testimony would contradict hers or that he would indeed be found or respond to inquiries. By the way, another person has contradicted her as well. But you know better, huh?

        She very well may have had an encounter, and found this useful years later. And, when the Dems found her in the high school records and posed the scheme, they would supply much of the know-how. Lying and denying are mother’s milk to them. The therapist’s notes claim four people were present, but they’re covering that, claiming error in the notes.

        People will do a lot for money, Jack, especially if they told her she would probably not have to get involved. Yes, a coordinated, orchestrated Democratic operative sting is well within the capabilities and record of this group. People are dead notably who have opposed them, especially since the Clinton days. I could drop bigger names than Max Boot?, whom I don’t even know, who are disgusted with the whimsical, offhand aspect of this accusation. They suggest her wanting an FBI investigation and wanting Judge Kavanaugh to testify first! (Did you just swallow that whole, by the way?) is so she could have something to work with, being so at a loss for any details other than this brief intense, near murderous assault on her innocent person.

        Please let me know when you and Max would like to look at this swamp front property I have for sale or some notable, famous bridges.

        • jackrjohnson

          You should get out more Chip, or at least read more. Max Boot is a very well known writer for major press outlets like the Wall Street Journal, and very conservative magazines like the Weekly Standard. He has blogged regularly for Commentary Magazine since 2007, and for several years on its blog page called Contentions. He has given lectures at U.S. military institutions such as the Army War College and the Command and General Staff College. If you don’t know Boot, you may very well be unfamiliar with the Weekly Standard or Commentary Magazine, but I would suspect you’ve probably heard of the Wall Street Journal.

          Your blithe assertion that Ford is being paid is a lie, or, if you prefer, unproven, unfounded and unnecessarily deceptive. When you say nonsense like that, you have to provide evidence to back it up. Otherwise, I’ll assume you are a liar and rather typical specimen of the sweltering swamp on the right that likes to make this nonsense up. Do you also chat regularly with Alex Jones?

          Btw, Chip, she took a lie detector test, and passed. Let me repeat that–she voluntarily took a lie detector test and PASSED. I think you may have missed that. Can Kavanaugh do the same? I don’t think so, but I would really like to see him try. Wouldn’t you? Wouldn’t you like to find out the truth, rather than being self satisfied with a lie? I mean, accepting a man who has been accused of attempting to rape a woman and then not even having the courage to ask him to take a lie detector test to ascertain his innocence. How dreadfully un-Christian of you!

          • Chip Crawford

            Can you read? I’ve addressed the “lie detector” (misnomer) test reveal on her motives. They are not admissible in court. I responded to your runaway assumption of this accuser’s accuracy and honesty and condemnation out of hand of Judge Kavanaugh. Where was your proof in your previous tirade? Absent. Get off the kool-aid, ravings from its effects are also not admissible in court. Your buds are headed that way having already stepped over into the criminal mindset and operation. Sorry for you. Again, you sophmorically return to the “lie detector” test, which is not admissible in court and the taking of such in advance incriminates your darling actually. The Judge doesn’t have to hire someone to fake it until we can make it, being an honest and upright man whom you have slandered and libeled without a shred of evidence. May your soul be saved in the day of judgment.

          • jackrjohnson

            Let me worry about my soul, Chip. I think I know it far better than you, and I think I know how the higher “law” will view this particular nominee. Position does not confer innocence, nor ‘uprightness’; the truth will out eventually, and Kavanaugh will not be confirmed, despite your delusions.

          • Chip Crawford

            Yes, your soul’s fate is on you for sure. No problem. I’ve heard loose cannons fire off recklessly at random before and probably will again.

      • childofjehovah

        Honest question Jack, why is this only a crime now. The moment Judge kavanaugh was an aid for president bush, or when he first became a judge, or even when he was being vetted for the current position he holds, why wasn’t this a crime then?
        and the timing of the allegation coming out. a week before the vote when senator Feinstein had the letter back in July. You seem like a very articulate and well spoken individual. Putting any party affiliations aside and just relying in pure facts. Doesn’t any of this concern you or sound fishy?

        • jackrjohnson

          A fair question, and I think one that gets answered often by victims of sexual abuse, who are ashamed of coming forward, until it becomes dire. In Christine Ford’s case, she wanted to remain anonymous, but her letter was leaked and she decided to come forward. There’s also corroborating evidence by her husband and a therapist. From the Post, “In an interview, her husband, Russell Ford, said that in a 2012 [therapy] sessions, she recounted being trapped in a room with two drunken boys, one of whom pinned her to a bed, molested her and prevented her from screaming. He said he recalled that his wife used Kavanaugh’s last name and voiced concern that Kavanaugh — then a federal judge — might one day be nominated to the Supreme Court.”

          Again, this was in 2012. I believer her.

  • George Lujack

    Great article. Sharing…

  • jackrjohnson

    So, presumably the premise of this article is that the accusation against Kavanaugh is a setup or a fraud? Or perhaps it’s simply to accuse the Democrats of being pagans lusting for abortion, without once addressing the substance of Ford’s claim that Kavanaugh attacked and tried to rape her while holding a hand over her mouth to silence her screams?

    This isn’t an argument, really. It’s deflection, suggesting that the ostensibly dark motives of a particular party doesn’t obviate a reported crime by another party. Just because you think Democrats are nefarious and pagan because they favor a woman’s right to choose, does not obviate or absolve Kavanaugh’s attempted rape of Christine Ford. Nor does it mean he should get a pass to the Supreme Court because you don’t like a woman’s right to choose. In point of fact, it’s an almost entirely irrelevant article, outside of possessing a nearly limitless degree of histrionic nonsense about folks who happen to be pro choice.

    I think the larger question for conservatives, and especially religious conservatives is this: is it okay to support a dissembler, a gambler, a one time heavy drinker and wanna be rapist, confirm that once entitled preppie boy to the highest court in the land based on the possibility that he will vote your way a single issue? The road to hell is paved with ‘good intentions’, overlooking a hundred bad qualities for one purported good, and really bad bargains with the devil, too. Keep in mind there are hundreds of better choices for this position, better men and women, more ethically grounded, more fair, more honest, more objective. I would not be so quick to abandon ethical discernment if I were you.

    • Chip Crawford

      Uh huh, so you are also unethically and illegally sliding into “guilty until proven innocent” diatribe as well. This is soo ignorant and soooo obvious. You Progs are twitting all over at the prospect of this man getting on the court because he is indeed the opposite of your slander. I wouldn’t talk of bargains with the devil, being you. Get away from that mirror! It’s showing you up!

      • jackrjohnson

        So Chip, why doesn’t Kavanaugh take a lie detector test like Christine Ford has done (and passed)? I would have more confidence in your opinion, and his innocence, if he would just do that one little thing? What is he afraid of Chip? I think he’s afraid of the truth–I think you are, too. This guy was a drunken frat boy with a history of misogyny and reckless partying (written about gleefully by his buddy Mark Judge who famously quoted Noel Coward in Kavanaugh’s yearbook, ‘Certain women should be struck regularly, like gongs’) Mark Judge, as you’ve probably read, was in the room with Kavanaugh when he tried to rape Christine. Let Kavanaugh take a lie detector test and prove his innocence if he wants to sit on the highest court in the land. Otherwise, let him go back to his bevy of ‘model’ like female law clerks and let the President choose someone more qualified, and more innocent.

        Why don’t you want to find out the truth, Chip?

        • Chip Crawford

          I’ll try this again: copied from my previous post which you either skipped or deliberately ignored:

          “Yes, why WOULD she go get a polygraph if she wanted to be anonymous as claimed originally. It’s an incriminating step actually, showing fore planning. And we don’t know how much she practiced for it, what questions, who administered it and how many “takes” were done before she could pass. Regardless, that is actually incriminating of her. Obviously, it is not the action of a person who planned not to be known, thus not involved.”

          • jackrjohnson

            You’re confused about the order of events. Read the Post article so you are not confused and then you won’t need to make silly assertions with no basis in fact. In case you refuse to read, the order of events are as follows:

            Earlier this summer, Christine Blasey Ford wrote a confidential letter to a senior Democratic lawmaker (Diane Feinstein) alleging that Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her more than three decades ago, when they were high school students in suburban Maryland. She asked for confidentiality because she didn’t want her life turned into a circus, but since last Wednesday, she has watched as that bare-bones version of her story became public without her name or her consent, drawing a blanket denial from Kavanaugh and roiling a nomination that just days ago seemed all but certain to succeed.

            Realizing that she was going to be outed anyhow (a Buzzfeed reporter had found her address), she engaged Debra Katz, a Washington lawyer known for her work on sexual harassment cases. On the advice of Katz, who said she believed Ford would be attacked as a liar if she came forward, Ford took a polygraph test administered by a former FBI agent in early August. The results, which Katz provided to The Post, concluded that Ford was being truthful when she said a statement summarizing her allegations was accurate.

            I hope you understand this order of events, and why your continued inaccurate portrayal of these events are a lie. Once you understand that, I hope you stop lying.

          • Chip Crawford

            Why should I believe you know what you are talking about this time as you have failed previously? Please complete the picture with details concerning the polygraph test – who administered it, what questions were asked, who paid for it, how many times was it administered? I think we will find you actually know very little of what you attempt to lord over all of us. You’re picking up the bully tactics of your overlords.

          • jackrjohnson

            You need to read newspaper articles that detail this information. If you don’t believe me, read the Washington Post or New York Times or Wall Street Journal. I can’t read for you. The quote above is from the Washington Post. You can continue to babble your delusions if you like, but of course, your credibility will suffer as you continue to misrepresent reality. Thus you will become known as a liar. Like the President, and so many of his supporters on the right. Being a Christian does not include denying reality or lying. Will you continue to lie to achieve political power? That’s a Faustian bargain. If you don’t know what that means, read the play Dr. Faustus by Christopher Marlowe. Good luck to you!

          • Chip Crawford

            You need to find reliable news sources and stop feeding on trash and relating it in a supercilious fashion to your more informed. It’s too late for any cautions for you, sorry. You’ve already established yourself on a rather low basis. There’s always repentance. Hey, take it. It’s your first step out of your swamp. Bye swamp creature. Glug, glug … there he went. Sad.

          • Hmmm…

            Sad sack’s just gullible. Notice his rush to get out at the end. He’d checked around some and found his facts weren’t so hot after all. That’s cause his feeds are giving him bogus bilge skewed to the Resistance movement these days, globalist garbage against the government of the people, by the people and for the people. He’s probably also looking around for some safer talking points. He needs the luck, but like his anti-heroes, it’s running out fast.

          • jackrjohnson

            Being a Christian does not include denying reality or lying. If you have other more reliable new sources, I’m sure you would be happy to share them. Is your new source FOX? InfoWars? Breitbart? All amazingly well oiled propaganda machines. Or do you have some super secret new source only the most higher up muckety mucks get to see? If so, I’m really impressed! Please share your super secret source of knowledge!

          • readteach

            WaPo? NYT? This is the best joke I’m likely to see today! There you go, talking down again. Maybe you should read Paradise Lost by John Milton or The Portrait of Dorian Gray by Oscar Wilde or Elmer Gantry by Sinclair Lewis, or House of Cards by Michael Dobbs–or just watch the original and American version of the last one on Netflix or wherever.

          • readteach

            Christine is the one who is confused. She can’t even decide when, where, and how to testify. She thinks she gets to tell the Senate what to do. She thinks she got elected to Congress, I guess.

        • Chip Crawford

          See Joe Biden’s 1991 (Clarence Thomas hearing) response to the lie detector (correctly, a polygraph) argument:
          “The next person who refers to an FBI report as being worth anything,
          obviously doesn’t understand anything,” Biden, then Democratic chairman
          of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said at the time. “The FBI explicitly
          does not, in this case or any other case, reach a conclusion, period.
          Period.”
          Your personal opinion is just that. Are you able to substantiate your claims and assignments of motives? Again, a lie detector as you refer to it, does not prove such things, is not admissible in court and insults judicial and authentic attorneys’ knowledge of that fact and its elements.

          The FBI returned the request from Senator Feinstein to the White House, stating it was not their jurisdiction. The alleged incident occurred in Maryland who does not have a Statute of Limitations for the alleged incident and would thus be the proper venue for an investigation. The real question is why hasn’t an investigation been requested in the proper place with the proper law enforcement agency?

    • readteach

      Well, I guess it’s OK to appoint him to the second highest court in the land. Your argument is ridiculous. You are asking the wrong people. You should ask the Dem/Libs. Is it OK to support a man who commits vehicular homicide, a man in high office who has girls “on call,” a man who creatively uses cigars in the Oval Office? I could go on, but there is no other person, man or woman, who Trump could nominate and satisfy the Left. The Kavanaugh investigation has nothing to do with morality. It’s all about hating Trump and impeachment. It’s about one issue–Roe v Wade, the Holy Grail of Democrat litmus tests. I hope that, one day soon, all Democrats and other pro-abortionists will be required to witness in-person an abortion where a baby’s body is ripped into pieces and pulled out of the womb, one leg/arm/head/torso at a time. Unless the aborted parts belong to their own child or grandchild, I doubt that would change their minds. Too gross, you say? Too much reality, you say? Life is real, death is final, a cruel death is inhuman.

  • Nanita Staley

    The god of the groin. That is the truth in a nutshell. And the whole earth is polluted with this evil fantasy that there is satisfaction in licentiousness. It is a lie that has been accepted because even the very “educational” system is soaked in this lie. Come, Holy Spirit, come and bring the cleansing we so desperately need, not just in this nation, but in the whole earth.

  • jackrjohnson

    Looks like it’s not just ‘Democrats’ who want to see Kavanaugh investigated. It’s also his alma mater, Yale University.

    “Nearly 50 members of the Yale Law School faculty are calling for the FBI to investigate sexual assault accusations brought against President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

    The faculty made the request in the form of an open letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Friday, writing that “allegations of sexual assault require a neutral factfinder and an investigation that can ascertain facts fairly.”

    “As the Senate Judiciary Committee debates Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination, we write as faculty members of Yale Law School, from which Judge Kavanaugh graduated, to urge that the Senate conduct a fair and deliberate confirmation process,” reads the letter, which was signed by 49 faculty members. “With so much at stake for the Supreme Court and the nation, we are concerned about a rush to judgment that threatens both the integrity of the process and the public’s confidence in the Court.”

    • Chip Crawford

      The FBI needs to investigate Ford. They’ve already done 6 background checks on Judge Kavanaugh. They have declined the request from Sen. Feinstein and turned the matter back over to the White House. It’s like the Muehler probe — raucous outcries for investigation, investigation, get to the bottom of this for almost two years now. All is translated to: I don’t care how many times you have looked into this, find a crime! dig up dirt and don’t report back until you do! The FBI check in the Clarence Thomas case yielded nothing definitive, and they did it with a current situation, before the matter was as public, with actual dates, times and places and people with which to relate. None of that is even remotely applicable here. They investigate crimes and the statute of limitations has run on this one. It is outside their jurisdiction. Go ahead and use your influence with them to twist their arm to investigate a blank unless your friend Ford finally gets a script with anything written on it. It should be the Maryland police department. The now grossly liberal and obviously ignorant Yale Law School fails to impress.

      • jackrjohnson

        I’m glad you see the wisdom of an FBI investigation. Happily, Ford has asked for an investigation herself. She asked for the investigation from the FBI precisely about her allegations, so, as you say, the FBI should indeed be investigating Ford and what happened that night that Kavanaugh attacked her. Here’s the interesting thing Chip, she could go to jail if the FBI determines it’s a false accusation. So …now follow closely…it’s very unlikely that Ford would have called for an FBI investigation about these allegations if they were false. On the other hand, if they are true, she absolutely would want the FBI to investigate. See how that works? See why that makes me think Ford is telling the truth and Kavanaugh is lying (along with his supporters and the President)? Good luck with your life, Chip. I think you’ll need it.

        • Chip Crawford

          Nope, dope. Her handlers got her to do that as a blind. They know the FBI would not do the investigation. See how that works? Probably not, but won’t admit. There’s actually no luck. Wow

          • Hmmm…

            He’s just another casualty of WaPo and NYT gone rogue. Thinks that’s all there is, so anyone not sing songing it like he does surely must be wrong. Flash: Fourth of Ford’s “witnesses” has denied her claim of being present at the faux party. Sheesh

        • John Smith

          Perhaps Ford called for an FBI investigation because she knew it would be impossible to find anyone who directly witnessed the alleged incident. Perhaps she’s lying because she knows she can get away with it. Talk about a “high tech lynching” this is one of the single worst cases of character assassination I have ever scene.

      • readteach

        Precisely, Chip. If Ford wanted her story investigated as a criminal matter, she should have gone to the Maryland police. The fact that she instead went straight to Senator Feinstein tells me her/their motive from the start was to make the issue political and delay the Kavanaugh confirmation. If it walks like a duck, etc. No one can prove anything one way or the other when it’s she said/he said. Dems know that, so they have to depend on swaying people’s opinions based on emotion, or “women don’t lie,” or men need to shut up. The last two items on that list are attributable to one of my own Hawaii senators, Crazy Mazie Hirono. Of course she’s being used as the face of this issue because, hey, she’s a woman! Gotta’ treat those women with kid gloves, especially one who is fighting cancer. Justice Thomas is right. This is just another high-tech political lynching and proves that even White men can get lynched.

  • Jeffery Leach

    They need to investigate it,or have we forgotten about Bill Cosby…His accusers went back 30+years..Give me a break…

    • NellieIrene

      It is being investigated by the Senate Judiciary Committee. Sans the democrats, of course, who ae refusing to participate in any way. Proving once again that it is about delaying the proceedings for political purposes rather than finding out if there is any truth to the allegation. An allegation that is crumbling on an hurly basis. Everyone that Ford said was at this “gathering”, including Leyland Keyser, who was reportedly a friend of Ford’s has said they weren’t there. I think the democrats should have taken a different tack in their attempt to stall the vote, rather than smearing the reputation of this man.

      • jackrjohnson

        In a statement to The Washington Post via her lawyer, Keyser confirmed that she and Ford are longtime friends. Furthermore, she stipulated that she believed Ford’s allegation even though she didn’t personally remember the party in question. In terms of Ford’s allegation the fact that Keyser doesn’t remember a party 30 years ago means exactly nothing.

        But I have an idea, why don’t we allow a disinterested party (like the FBI) to thoroughly investigate the allegation and then make a determination what happened based on interviewing multiple witnesses over an extended period of time? Or, if you’re worried about delays, why don’t we get Kavanaugh to take a lie detector test like Ford has done? It’s astonishing to me how quickly purported Christians are to whitewash attempted rape charges. Not to mention the fact that Kavanaugh has proven himself to be a liar, as well as a drunken frat boy, and, oh yes — that specialty among Christians — a hypocrite.

        • Chip Crawford

          The Washington Post and New York Times are no longer reputable news outlets, having moved from objective journalism to partisan Resistance fighters. They now project all their stories with that aim in mind. There are rare exceptions. They regularly, deliberately publish half the story, leave out key features against their partisan position, then issue slight correction when called out on it. They have almost as often failed to even correct their misrepresentations. Others represent the Keyser reaction opposite to yours in import and tone. Anyone feeding on these two particular news outlets on a regular basis is subject to their clear and obvious bias and degeneration from journalism to partisan punditry. We do not care for a mouthpiece for them exporting their jaded and corrupt product. If you supplement with CNN and MSNBC, it’s no wonder you are a walking talking point for the Democratic party line, since these outlets work hand in glove. Sorry, we know that here.

          • jackrjohnson

            No, again Chip you really have a flaccid grasp on reality. The NYTimes, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal are all worthwhile news sources. What they have been doing lately, which you call ‘partisan resistance fighting’ is pointing out when the President lies. Since Trumps lies more frequently than any President on record, it’s become necessary to point this out on a daily basis. The newspapers haven’t changed, but our President has. Trump is an astonishingly reckless liar and the enfeebled GOP congress is too cowardly (and power hungry) to set the record straight. If you would like a list of his lies to date, I would be happy to send you a few thousand links or so that can enumerate them.

          • Chip Crawford

            Sorry you are so complicit with being deceived. The Wall Street Journal is far better, but you need to get more to the right to have any kind of balance. Again, you are sucking it all up from the left bias, and I’m telling you that it is not accurate, enough of the story and unhealthy. You need lists of the amazing accomplishments of this President and administration beyond any President in modern record. Your unbalanced intake causes your unbalanced outgo. Again, spare us here. We do not have your gullibility level.

          • jackrjohnson

            The Washington Post is hardly ‘left’, I rail against them all the time for their neoliberal editorial nonsense (neoliberialism is essentially laissez faire capitalism), the New York Times is slightly liberal in its editorials, but is down the middle on facts, as is the Post, as is the Wall Street Journal. In the best national daily papers, (and these are the best national dailies, actually) there’s usually a firewall between editorial content and reportage. The Wall Street Journal’s editorial page skews far to the right, but thus far their reporting has been accurate. MSNBC and CNN do more broad reporting and are certainly far more accurate than right wing outlets like FOx News, which is essentially rightwing propaganda, but, because it’s television, it’s not terribly helpful. I like sticking to written content for understanding stories.

            As I asked downstream: If you have other more reliable new sources, I’m sure you would be happy to share them. Is your new source FOX? InfoWars? Breitbart? All of these are amazingly well oiled propaganda machines. Or do you have some super secret new source only the most higher up muckety mucks get to see? If so, please share them.

          • Chip Crawford

            Wrong again.

          • jackrjohnson

            I see, so you have no other news sources to share? You just make things up, then? That does not surprise me in the least, but I’m glad you’re finally being honest.

          • Chip Crawford

            You mistake the matter entirely. What else is new? Your WaPO and NYT are propaganda. Your opinion is not credible given your obvious bias and unfairness in all of this. I do not court your opinions of my news sources nor care to tolerate your abuse of them. Sorry about your angry blasts and hyped hatred. Do you have any love for your country, respect for the rule of law and basic acknowledgement of positive factors?

          • jackrjohnson

            Drop the histrionics, and answer the question, Chip. What are your news sources? If you don’t have any, than shut up and go home. You are just creating confusion.

          • Chip Crawford

            Back off, bully; you are not in charge here.
            you flunk the smell test along with your gang of Resistance outlaws

          • Hmmm…

            Poor thing’s getting confused by all this confrontation and difference in opinion. Just because he’s rude, crude and bombastic doesn’t mean he’s not a delicate snowflake that will melt with any hint of another view.

          • readteach

            WaPo isn’t Left? Please don’t insult my intelligence. It’s strange nowadays how fair and balanced reporting is considered biased and how biased reporting–lies, omissions, more emotion and hearsay than facts–is considered honest journalism. It makes me laugh to see Lefties on CNN, MSNBC, other mainstream networks pretend to be objective and never keep their personal opinions to themselves. I would have more respect for them if they just came right out and admitted they are anti-Trump, Democrat, and biased. Trash Fox all you want, but their straight news shows (Special Report, etc.) are true journalism. The commentary shows (Hannity, etc.) tell us exactly what their bias is, invite the opposition to debate, and do not pretend to be something they aren’t. Nowadays, it’s important to research everything from all points of view. Anyone who relies on TV news and newspapers isn’t doing due diligence.

        • NellieIrene

          Why did the democrats wait until now? They had the info about this woman’s alleged victimization since July. It’s too transparent why they waited. They knew it would not stand up under scrutiny. It was more useful to them as a delay tactic.

          What are the FBI going to investigate if the people who were allegedly at the party have absolutely no recollection of being there.and the alledged victim never mentioned it until 2012. And she gave a paucity of info about the incident when she did mention it. She doesn’t remember when it occurred or where it occurred. That in itself is unbelievable considering she has said the event caused so much trauma to her. I have been victimized and I can take you to the place where the event occured AND tell you the date. 01-27-93. I remember it like it was yesterday. And I used to smoke weed at that time so I spent a considerable amount of my time stoned.

          Lie detector;s are not admissable in a court of law. And for very good reasons. So her polygraph “means exactly nothing”. But I am curious about what Kavanaugh has lied about or been a hypocrite about.

        • TJ Miller

          “Keyser confirmed that she and Ford are longtime friends. Furthermore,
          she stipulated that she believed Ford’s allegation even though she
          didn’t personally remember the party in question.”

          Hearsay, yerhonor. next…?

          “…why don’t we allow a disinterested party (like the FBI) to thoroughly investigate the allegation…”

          Lack of jurisdiction, lack of evidence, lack of even a credible time and location where the alleged incident took place (seriously, when you don’t even know what month or even year it took place…) The FBI doesn’t do snipe hunts, and unlike TV crime dramas, they’re not going to be capable of getting any evidence based on some mysterious profiler’s skillset.

          “It’s astonishing to me how quickly purported Christians are to whitewash attempted rape charges”

          It’s astonishing how quickly you forget that suspects are presumed innocent until proven guilty – doubly so when the allegations are too vague and not sufficiently credible to act on.

    • Chip Crawford

      Cosby’s accusers had definite information, time and place and the normal background. Poor Dr. Ford has been unable to produce anything at all but her brutal charge. She’s very sure about that ONE thing. I don’t recall that being true of any of Cosby’s accusers, who provided the normal information.

  • BKB

    BRILLIANT!!!!!!! You have it! This is spot on. So well written and so well articulated. Thank you Jennifer Hartline! Thank You.

  • Zoran

    Molech is alive and well his hunger for babies never satisfied.

    • Ben Winchester

      Seems like he’s hungering for sexual assault right now, and the Republicans are more than willing to help him out.

      Hey, whatever gets you power, right?

  • jackrjohnson

    It’s not just Ford anymore. Kavanaugh appears to be something of a serial pig.

    BREAKING from the New Yorker Magazine: New allegations against Brett Kavanaugh and his party mate, Mark Judge.

    “She [Ramirez] remembers Kavanaugh standing to her right and laughing, pulling up his pants. “Brett was laughing,” she said. “I can still see his face, and his hips coming forward, like when you pull up your pants.” She recalled another male student shouting about the incident. “Somebody yelled down the hall, ‘Brett Kavanaugh just put his penis in Debbie’s face,’ ” she said. “It was his full name. I don’t think it was just ‘Brett.’ And I remember hearing and being mortified that this was out there.”

    ….

    After seeing [Mark] Judge’s denial, Elizabeth Rasor, who met Judge at Catholic University and was in a relationship with him for about three years, said that she felt morally obligated to challenge his account that “ ‘no horseplay’ took place at Georgetown Prep with women.” Rasor stressed that “under normal circumstances, I wouldn’t reveal information that was told in confidence,” but, she said, “I can’t stand by and watch him lie.” In an interview with The New Yorker, she said, “Mark told me a very different story.” Rasor recalled that Judge had told her ashamedly of an incident that involved him and other boys taking turns having sex with a drunk woman. Rasor said that Judge seemed to regard it as fully consensual. She said that Judge did not name others involved in the incident, and she has no knowledge that Kavanaugh participated. But Rasor was disturbed by the story and noted that it undercut Judge’s protestations about the sexual innocence of Georgetown Prep.

    “Another woman who attended high school in the nineteen-eighties in Montgomery County, Maryland, where Georgetown Prep is located, also refuted Judge’s account of the social scene at the time, sending a letter to Ford’s lawyers saying that she had witnessed boys at parties that included Georgetown Prep students engaging in sexual misconduct. In an interview, the woman, who asked to have her name withheld for fear of political retribution, recalled that male students “would get a female student blind drunk” on what they called “jungle juice”—grain alcohol mixed with Hawaiian Punch—then try to take advantage of her. “It was disgusting,” she said. “They treated women like meat.”

    • TJ Miller

      First allegation was saved until his nomination was imminent. When that allegation fired like a damp squib, they cut loose with as much as they can dredge up (and, not surprisingly, delivering it all with about as much credibility as an Amway salesman…)

      Come back when you have evidence, proof, actual corroboration (since no one so far can actually present any).

      Meanwhile, you and Ms. Rasor need to look up the definition of Hearsay, specifically the reason why it is universally rejected in any competent court of law.

    • TJ Miller

      PS: What will you nice left-leaning trolls do when Ruth Bader Ginsburg goes to the Great Beyond? Odds are good she’ll expire sometime before 2020 at the rate things are going (but hey, you might get lucky), and the so-called ‘blue wave’ is looking more like a blue ripple…

  • jackrjohnson

    This might be of interest to Christians wringing their hands and still trying to defend Brett Kavanaugh.

    It looks like Michael Avenatti is alleging that Mark Judge, Brett Kavanaugh and others targeted women at house parties in the early 80s and gang-raped them.

    ****************************************************

    FROM: Michael J. Avenatti
    SENT: Sunday, September 23, 2018 6:06 PM
    TO: Davis, Mike (Judiciary-Rep)
    SUBJECT: RE: SCOTUS — Avenatti claim of evidence

    Dear Mr. Davis,

    Thank you for your email. We are aware of significant evidence of multiple house parties in the Washington, D.C. area during the early 1980s during which Brett Kavanaugh, Mark Judge, and others would participate in the targeting of women with alcohol/drugs in order to allow a “train” of men to subsequently gang rape them. There are multiple witnesses that will corroborate these facts and each of them must be called to testify publicly. As a starting point, Senate investigators should pose the following questions to Judge Kavanaugh without delay and provide the answers to the American people:

    1. Did you ever target one or more women for sex or rape at a house party? Did you ever assist Mark Judge or others in doing so?
    2. Did you ever attend any house party during which a woman was gang raped or used for sex by multiple men?
    3. Did you ever witness a line of men outside a bedroom at any house party where you understood a woman was in the bedroom being raped or taken advantage of?
    4. Did you ever participate in any sexual conduct with a woman at a house party whom you understood to be intoxicated or under the influence of drugs?
    5. Did you ever communicate with Mark Judge or anyone else about your participation in a “train” involving an intoxicated woman?
    Did you ever object or attempt to prevent one or more men from participating in the rape, or taking advantage of, a woman at any house party?

    Please note that we will provide additional evidence relating to the above conduct both to the Committee and the American public in the coming days.

    Regards,

    Michael Avenatti”

    • Wareagle82

      Avenatti. Whose most famous client to date is a woman who has sex for money. In fact, she had consensual sex with Donald Trump and quite willingly took a large check in order to keep the event to herself. Pray tell, by what logic should anyone view Avenatti as much more than a living example of jumping the shark?

      Let’s recap: we have Ms Ford who told a tale and every ‘witness’ she named has, under penalty of perjury, denied her claim. We have a second woman who needed six days worth of sorting through an alcohol-clouded memory to determine that the penis she allegedly saw belonged to Brett Kavanaugh. And not just six days of hypnosis or something plausible; six days of meeting with her lawyer. And now Avenatti, who just could take being left out of the spotlight, and he, of course, must raise the stakes. Gang rape. Trains. Booze and drugs.

      Avenattis is welcome to his sexual fantasies, but I’m really not interested. Maybe he should just hire Stormy and a production crew, and have at it.

      • NellieIrene

        You beat me to it. I was laughing so hard when I read the New Yorker article where it said “After six days of carefully assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney, Ramirez said that she felt confident enough of her recollections to say that she remembers Kavanaugh had exposed himself…..”

        Isn’t it amazing! She recovered this memory at the exact same moment that the Senate Democrats want to delay the vote on confirmation.

        • readteach

          I know. It’s laughable. Hysterically, really.

    • Hmmm…

      Mr. Avenatti needs to go to church on Sunday. That would keep him out of trouble and from making a complete fool of himself altogether. (Would help you too!)

    • TJ Miller

      1) If he has “significant evidence”, then let him present it – first to the public, and if necessary under oath, under penalty of perjury (as a lawyer, I presume he knows what that word means). Otherwise it’s just hot air, and given his record, a rather unpleasantly-odored miasma of hot air at that.

      2) What the hell does Christianity have to do with this? Presumption of innocence until proven guilty is not only a base precept of common law, but is actually a Christian precept to boot.

  • Chip Crawford

    Guess what kiddies! The circus is coming to town! and Mr. Avenutti is bringing it – or so he hopes. Hey, he wants in on more of that Soros cash! Why should crazy Mazie and Silly Jillybrand and all these assorteds get it all. The elbows are sharpened and ready to go!

  • Elizabeth Decima

    “No, I don’t believe for a nanosecond that the Democrats care one whit about Kavanaugh’s innocence or guilt. Their moral indignation is phonier than a $3 dollar bill.” Thank you for slandering and stereotyping millions of our fellow Americans as liars and phonies, based only on your feelings of hatred and contempt. If you want to know why we Pro-lifers are not successful in changing attitudes on abortion, you need look no farther than the prejudiced, self-righteous, superior nose-thumbing of some of our spokespeople. With “friends” like Jennifer Hartline, the pro-life movement needs no enemies.

  • Elizabeth Decima

    If it were really about Roe for you, you would support choosing another nominee and doing it quickly, without wasting time. The fact that you are doubling down on this candidate shows that it is really about winning a political battle for you as that is the stupidest strategy ever. It is obvious you couldn’t care less about the unborn.

    • NellieIrene

      It’s not about Roe for the author. As her article states, it is about Roe for the left. That is why they didn’t bring this woman’s letter to the forefront before the hearing began, when they received it. They had no concern for an allegedly victimized woman. They wanted to use sketchy allegations and accusations to smear Kavanaugh into resigning, or force a delay of the vote because he represents a possible vote that could overturn Roe. We on the right just want someone who doesn’t find “penumbras and emanations” in the constitution.

      • Elizabeth Decima

        Well thanks. You are right. I always forget that some people can read the minds and intentions of thousands of people they never met. I guess the Good Lord didn’t see fit to give me that ability. Darn, I’m so dumb in comparison. Obviously no one actually cares about this woman, because the only human beings who exist are people on the Right. Everyone already told me that people on the Left all sold their souls to Satan for Twinkies when they were eight. I forgot. I guess that makes me a total freak because I actually do care about her and I am plenty mad what is happening to her….not sure if that makes me right or left.

        • Hmmm…

          You don’t actually know if what is “happening” to her is for real. She may be paid millions with a book coming out later. Do you care at all what is happening to the Judge and his family? They are under severe harassment and threat, presumed guilty by this accuser and her many political advocates and most of the media. Judge Kavanaugh is presumed guilty and the accusers have the mike so far. Do you actually think all these political leaders, female office holders who are bashing and condemning the Judge actually care about this woman? Are you aware that there is nothing but her claim with no proof? You should know that polygraph tests are not admissible in court because they are not reliable. So, are you omniscient to know whether or not this woman is on the level?

          • Elizabeth Decima

            You are quite wrong. Kavanaugh is presumed guilty by SOME people and defended by others. You cannot say that the accusers “have the mike”. Not only the Congress, but the entire country is divided on this issue, and both sides “have the mike”. Some people are accusing Dr. Ford of being a liar and worse things than that. She has as much to lose as he does. To treat him like a victim who is being “bashed and condemned” but not see what she might be living through ) is something I can’t even begin to understand. Do I feel sorry for Kavanaugh? That is a separate issue. The question I have is, do you not care about Christine Ford? Why is he the only one whose life matters?

          • Hmmm…

            The MSM are legion on the left side, both print and broadcast, cable. There are far fewer right leaning outlets of either type. I do say the accusers have the mike. The Democratic leaders and committee members are fanning out all over this large media spread. Their Hollywood liberal compatriots have joined in for the woman and against the Judge. I have to learn whether or not Dr. Ford is legitimate or not, and won’t have enough to add to that until I see her testify. What she has said and done so far and the way her “cause” is being ballooned does not favor her credibility. I did not say Dr. Ford’s life does not matter. We have had much opportunity to hear Dr. Kavanaugh and his friends of a lifetime, going back and including high school days, all favorable. You veer to your extreme beyond credibility yourself. I do not view the facts as you do, nor that the facts of the matter are indeed out there enough to do so.

          • Elizabeth Decima

            What she has said and done so far? She sent one letter to one person, and later she confirmed it because it had already become public. Other than that, she has done and said all of NOTHING. There is nothing suspicious or unseemly or inappropriate about that. Why don’t you just admit you already decided that she is a liar, and then you can lecture me about how my “veer to …extreme beyond credibility…” if you can even explain what that even means. Which is fine, if you decided she is a liar. You are entitled to your opinion. I am entitled to my judgment based on evidence. I spent literally hours reading every article and piece of data about the case, and I don’t want him confirmed. That doesn’t make me a leftist or a Democrat. That makes me a person with my own mind.

          • Hmmm…

            She accused Brett Kavanaugh of a criminal, brutal attempt at rape. And that’s all she said. You said she said nothing, which is close, but she did give the ugly, brutal charge. She did say nothing of time, place, date, month or even exact year, whose house, how she got there or anything else. What is there to even investigate by the way? Oh, yes, she did provide the names of three or four persons whom she said were there. Each one has denied that and some stated they never saw Brett Kavanaugh do anything like that. Have you heard his female friends from that time and through the years, college, work, clerking for him? If you just feed on CNN, MSNBC and the other hating outlets, you would not have.

            Fox News have aired them, along with the other side. They invite the Democratic committee members and those making the loudest accusations, but they don’t come. They are fair and listen, but they present the other side as well. One has to be able to answer questions and counterpoints. That’s part of a Democratic society. You can’t just haul someone out in the public square and hang ’em high. ED: Why do you hate Brett Kavanaugh so virulently and blindly?

          • Elizabeth Decima

            Please produce the evidence that I “hate Brett Kavanaugh […] virulently and blindly.

          • Hmmm…

            Your own words and complaints against anyone being on his side. Do you have evidence of his guilt? So, you have not even had the benefit of watching Judge Kavanaugh in his Senate hearing testimony before the Judicial Committee for the SC nomination. Yet you are all for the accuser. How have you heard about her? Do you just listen to people who have watched news and the hearing? That’s all more blind than I knew before. I’ve accommodated your love of argument enough. Your stuff is spurious and unreasonable. Good evening.

          • Elizabeth Decima

            Good night and have fun in your little world of people exactly. like. you.

          • Hmmm…

            Good night Twinkle Toes.

          • Elizabeth Decima

            Good night Fairy Fingers

          • readteach

            Good night, John Boy.

          • Hmmm…

            lol

          • readteach

            I can’t find here your remark to me about TV vs books, but please stop putting yourself down. It’s fine if people watch TV and also read books.

          • readteach

            You are making the case so much better than I.

          • Elizabeth Decima

            neither one of you made any kind of a case. And I don’t watch news because I prefer to get my news by reading. Sorry if reading instead of watching TV makes me uneducated but luckily there is not law in this country that says we have to watch TV. Thank God you can’t control me!!

          • Elizabeth Decima

            You are just making a case with people who already think and believe exactly as you do. That’s not really that impressive.

        • NellieIrene

          What would you have done if you were on this committee and you had received the letter from Ford?

          • Elizabeth Decima

            I would have called her to testify and done in FBI investigation.

          • TJ Miller

            FBI doesn’t have jurisdiction, and the man went through six full FBI clearance investigations (I had two of those, they’re pretty thorough and go back 10-15 years.) What would you think would have come up?

            I agree that I would also call her to testify: Under oath, with C-SPAN broadcasting it (but no public gallery involvement.) If she’s being truthful, no worries, and it’ll keep the riff raff from sprouting out of nowhere to glom onto the fame train.

          • Hmmm…

            The FBI was given the letter from Dr. Ford by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who requested they investigate. They said no and gave it back to the White House. They investigate crimes; this matter is beyond the Statute of Limitations. They have refused the matter.

          • Elizabeth Decima

            If she is being truthful, then she was sexually assaulted and she does not need to be forced to testify on C-Span. That’s disgusting to do that to someone who has suffered assault. No, if she wants, she can testify in private or not at all. This is not a trial-by-mob of her credibility. The ones who need to decide are the members of Congress, not the American public via television. If I were on the committee, I would gather the facts and then decide and then vote. I was 17 years old when Anita Hill testified, and I will always remember how they humiliated her. This is a worse case.

          • TJ Miller

            Court proceedings are public information – I can settle for a transcript provided to the public after a closed-door session.

            As long as it’s done under oath.

          • Elizabeth Decima

            The vote belongs to the Congress, not to the American public. We elected them and that is their job. She is a citizen like any other citizen. She has a right to say what she says and she has a right to testify or not testify. She has the same rights as any other American.

          • TJ Miller

            I’m okay with it staying closed-door, as long as it’s under oath and the transcripts are made public afterwards.

          • Melody Warbington

            I remember how they humiliated Justice Thomas.

          • NellieIrene

            I also would have called her to testify. I would have contacted her immediately. Which is why I question Feinsteins motives in holding this information.

            But what exactly is the FBI going to investigate? Even if it were within their purview, which it isn’t. The principals themselves can’t even accurately remember the alleged incidents. The FBI does background investigations of which Kavanaugh has had six. They also investigate federal crimes. This alleged event was not a federal crime.

      • Elizabeth Decima

        and how about everyone just stop the caterwauling and pick another nominee. I don’t think they will find skeletons with the woman who was on the short list.

        • readteach

          Oh, come on, Elizabeth. So, the litmus test should be gender? Trust me, the Dems can cook up plenty of dirt on a woman, whether truth or fiction. The Dems are using a really old playbook that started with Bork, reached its height with Thomas, and was resurrected to crucify a highly-placed judge these women had no complaints about until Trump nominated him. Even then, they only complained after he had been subjected to a circus of a hearing–even RBG thought that–and after Dems weren’t getting the result they desired from their histrionics at those hearings. Pick another nominee? You have got to be kidding! Dems don’t want another nominee because Trump could easily nominate someone even more of a conservative and constitutionalist who would be, in the eyes of Dem/Libs, the devil incarnate. Dems don’t even want Ford to testify because they know, based on the vagueness of her accusation, that she would make a fool of herself. I suspect that the next woman will claim to be the mother of his love child, then the next one will accuse him of cross-dressing, then the next one will say he used a cigar. . . no, wait, that was the other guy, the leader of the free world who Dems barely slapped on the wrist for his sexual escapades. I don’t understand why Democrats are fomenting a morality mud-slinging contest when they’ve go so much mud in their own front yard. They’ve got a former president with numerous affairs and, reportedly, call girls on demand even during his presidency. They’ve got a guy who committed vehicular homicide and rose to be known as the Lion of the Senate. Wow! So moral! Go, Gary Hart! Go, Weiner! Go, abuse-enabler Hillary!

          • Elizabeth Decima

            You know what? I am not a Democrat, but I am really sick and tired of listening to people “on the right” say “Democrats this” and “Democrats that”. Something is wrong with your heart and soul if you see people as a label instead of a. human being. You can’t just paint millions of people with the same brush and claim you can read the minds and intentions of all of them. That’s ridiculous. How many friends do you have that are Democrats, and you have heart-to-hearts with them to know how they really think and feel, or why they think and feel that way? You must be God. Why don’t you run for office, then? We need more people who think they are God.

          • NellieIrene

            What would you have done if you were on this committee and you had received the letter from Ford?

          • readteach

            Any group is known by its leaders and the public faces it offers on TV and elsewhere to represent the group. Sadly, those people are usually not moderates or those willing to reach across the aisle if any such politicians still exist. I do not consider myself a Republican but an Independent, preferring to think for myself. I do have Democrat friends. Unfortunately, it’s virtually impossible to have a civil conversation with them so I simply avoid discussing politics with them. Too much of their political philosophy is based on emotion–compassion, “who we are,” slogans, and soundbites–instead of rationality and facts. They seem uninterested in opposing viewpoints, so it’s not worth destroying a friendship. Calm down, Elizabeth. Fear not for I am not God. The Trump Haters have made Trump into God. According to them, Trump controls the universe and is responsible for everything. Of course, they approve of nothing he has done, even if it is obviously in the best interest of the American people and the country. I’m 75, well past my time to run for office. I spent most of my professional life as an educator striving mightily to help students learn to be critical thinkers.

          • Elizabeth Decima

            Well, that’s funny. Most of my friends and family are Republicans, and I find that most of the time it is impossible to have a civil conversation with them because much of their political philosophy is based on emotion, slogans, and soundbites, instead of rationality and facts. That’s not to say they don’t THINK of themselves as the “rational” ones. However, thinking and proclaiming you are rational doesn’t make you rational, but rather, using reason. I am happy you spent your life trying to teach students to be critical thinkers. I am also an educator. Unfortunately, I don’t think our collective education has “worked”. I don’t find that many people who can have a civil conversation…except with people who already agree with them. Based on your interaction with me, I am guessing you aren’t one of them, either. You throw around a lot of accusations about a lot of people. Talking like that, how do you expect anyone to have a civil conversation with you? There’s nothing to discuss once people start talking like that. It ends everything.

          • Hmmm…

            As to the civility point — it is interesting that you are uniquely lacking in that aspect yourself. You come across bitter with a chip on your shoulder. You’ve offered no soft or ameliorating aspects throughout.

            In your own words, which exactly apply to yourself:
            ” You throw around a lot of accusations about a lot of people. Talking like that, how do you expect anyone to have a civil conversation with you? There’s nothing to discuss once people start talking like that. It ends everything.”

          • Elizabeth Decima

            I AM bitter with a chip on my shoulder! And I don’t apologize! At least when it comes to people who talk like you did, my patience is already gone. I already learned from long experience that conversations with people who already made up their mind to judge other people get absolutely nowhere! I am happy you know how to apply my words to me. I agree that I deserve them in this case, but the funny thing is, you still can’t apply them to yourself! Ah, pride! It is a lovely and blinding thing. We are always the innocent ones.

          • readteach

            Come on Elizabeth. Try to be more creative. You see, I don’t think it is necessary to reach agreement, although I’m sure there are some basics we can all agree on, like telling the truth is better than lying. If you want civil conversation, join Thomas Sowell Foundation on Facebook. Try WalkAwayCampaign as well. Lots of good thinking going on at many places that are a welcome respite from the the crudeness of today’s public discourse. In terms of just thinking and living, try some Jordan Peterson interviews. Is an accusation bad if it is based on critical thinking and substantiating facts? Anyway, you seem to take everything I say as an insult, so I’m happy to relieve you of the burden. Please feel free to interpret that as copping out. It won’t offend me one iota.

          • Elizabeth Decima

            I did not ask for a civil conversation with you. I did not ask for a conversation at all. Your first post annoyed me because it was so judgmental. It turned me off so I just responded in that light. If you were a liberal making judgmental sweeping statements about conservatives, I would be equally annoyed. I don’t even read when people talk like that. I just skim it and get annoyed. I am sick of judgmentalism and finger-pointing. I don’t really care about your liberal/conservative war. It’s not my war and I don’t want to be included.

          • Kelly B

            “Most of my friends and family are Republicans, and I find that most of the time it is impossible to have a civil conversation with them because much of their political philosophy is based on emotion, slogans, and soundbites, instead of rationality and facts.”

            Thank you for being honest about who you are – that explains everything. Please go troll elsewhere.

        • NellieIrene

          “I don’t think they will find skeletons with the woman…..”

          So….you have decided that Kavanaugh is guilty based on the accusations?

          • Elizabeth Decima

            It is not my place to decide if Kavanaguh is guilty so please don’t change the subject or put words in people’s mouths. I do think he is guilty of one thing: I think if he really cared about this country, he would step down now instead of dragging us through this whole thing. Being a Supreme Court Justice is about serving the country; it isn’t a right. There are other people capable of holding the position who don’t have controversy.

          • NellieIrene

            I didn’t change the subject. I misread your intent. I thought you were implying that Kavanuaugh had “skeletons” in his closet with your comment. If that was not your intent, than I apologize.

            “There are other people….who don’t have controversy.”

            The “controversy’ has been created by accusations which have no evidence to support them. And if you are honest than you will admit that the ones who have their panties in a twist are largely on the political left. My hope and prayer is for Kavanaugh to continue. I would expect an honest man who has been accused of things he did not do to do just what he is doing now.

          • Elizabeth Decima

            First of all, I AM honest. Second of all, thank you for recognizing your error in interpretation. Third, “panties in a twist” is demeaning. Fourth, I don’t pay a lot of attention to the “political left” so I don’t know how they feel about this, but I do pay a lot of attention to the “political right” since that includes a lot of people I am close to, and they are the ones I hear from. I would not have even begun to investigate this topic except they were all whacked out about it….and when I investigated and came to a different conclusion than they did, they freaked out even more. The problem is, I don’t get all my news from T.V. and I take time to actually read from a variety of sources, which they don’t and they don’t want to. They want to make their decision after a five minute T.V. news report and then accuse everyone who doesn’t agree with them as being “full of hate” or some such thing. The idea that someone can actually read and think for themselves isn’t accepted. That’s all I can say. If the the political left is as bad as the political right, I prefer to avoid both of them.

          • Kelly B

            You act as if Cavanaugh were the cause of all of the leftist histrionics – don’t you remember them screaming “NO!” to the nominee before he was even announced? As long as the nominee is chosen by a Republican, the demonic left will do their kabuki theater because it’s what they do. The left are the only ones dragging anyone through anything – Cavanaugh just happens to be the nominee.

            You act as if you grew up with him and he was the neighborhood bully – you have either been brainwashed by the demonic mainstream media, or you have some sort of personal vendetta against the author.

        • Will

          No, Elizabeth. Whether you want to admit it or not, the left will slander any nominee they do not want. Your side would slander Mother Theresa, and then you would say her supporters were caterwauling. There will not be another nominee, so you stop your caterwauling.

          • Kelly B

            Thank you – anyone with half of a brain knows that the lefties were screaming “NO!” to the nominee before he was even chosen. The actual nominee has ZERO to do with their demonic histrionics – and everything to do with, as the author says, their favorite sacrament, murder of the most innocent among us.

      • Elizabeth Decima

        I don’t know you, so please forgive me and excuse me if I question this, but are you interested in the truth of this case, even if it makes the person you previously supported look bad? Or are you looking to defend your point of view at all costs? Because I have valid reasons why I don’t want Kavanaugh confirmed but I find that people who already have their minds made up just want to argue, because it is not about right and wrong to them, it is just about feeling they are superior and right. I got cynical about how people think and behave so I don’t bother answering anyone I suspect is baiting me.

        • NellieIrene

          Truth? It is highly doubtful anyone is going to get truth out of two incidents that occurred over three decades ago with one alleged victim who can’t remember some pretty basic details and with “witnesses” who have no recollection of the party, and another who just conveniently (and recently) remembered Kavanaugh exposed himself to her after six days of “assessing her memories” and ” consulting” her “attorney”. These cases are “he said, she said”. She will get to air her grievance and he will get to rebut it.

          Jennifer hit the nail on the head when she said that this is about Roe. The democrats themselves have said their objection to this nominee is about their fear that Roe could be overturned. Abortion rights is in the Democratic platform. How is she “stereotyping” anyone? I’m sure there are democrats and other members of the left who don’t support abortion. But it doesn’t change the fact that the democratic party does.

          • Elizabeth Decima

            You know what? If you aren’t even interested in the truth of what happened, why are you discussing it at all, and why did you ask me what I thought about it? That’s why I have learned not to even answer people on these kinds of forums. Most of the time they are just baiting or trying to start some kind of argument. It is something about people I just don’t understand, honestly.

          • Are abortion rights part of the Democratic platform? The easy answer is yes. Are there many people on the left that are against Kavanaugh mainly because they fear Roe will be overturned? The easy answer is yes. We saw the protest with women dressed like The Handmaid’s Tale. Why did they do that if not to protest against their “rights” being taken away? You may be disgusted with the term “the pelvic Left” but I hope you were also disgusted when Clinton called Trump supporters deplorable or when Joe Biden called those supporters the dregs of society. I know two wrongs don’t make a right, but don’t pretend the language mentioned in this article is too heinous to be taken seriously. If you accept the premise that these women are lying in order to prevent Kavanaugh to be on the Supreme Court, would you say that is a complete miscarriage of justice? If we accept the premise that the women are telling the truth, why are they delaying the process that puts their allegations under oath? The delay is done intentionally so that Kavanaugh has no chance to be on the court before the midterms. Explain to me why their delay is part of the path in obtaining the truth.

          • Elizabeth Decima

            Don’t you have someone in your family you can start an argument with? I think her writing is disgusting. Can i say that again to be more clear? It is disgusting to me. If you like demeaning people, go do it with someone face to face. Name calling and verbal abuse are what they are. Doing it on internet is cowardly. I think her talk is disgusting. Am I allowed to think that, or I have to think exactly like you? Just wondering. What are the rules?

          • I know I shouldn’t be surprised that you didn’t even answer any of my questions, but I thought you would actually want to debate the issue since your comments are all over this article. I never said you shouldn’t feel disgusted. I’m just saying your disgust of the language shouldn’t affect the underlying truth of the article. It’s as if you’re willing to ignore what’s plainly obvious by simply focusing on the dialogue that hurts your feelings. Allow me to drop some knowledge on you with respect to this whole abortion issue. The woman that was Roe later became pro-life and admitted in public that her lawyers convinced her to stick with the lie that she was gang-rapped in order to gain sympathy. If a woman could lie about being gang-raped in order to make abortion legal, don’t you think it’s at least possible that a leftist activist could lie in order to prevent the possibility of abortion being overturned? If you’re not going to answer my other questions, at least answer that last one. I sincerely want to know your answer. No judgement.

          • Richard A

            This is obviously not about “the truth of what happened in that woman’s life”, which does not need its presentation before the entire country to adjudicate. This is not in any way an attempt to redress a 36-year-old wrong done to her. There are other more appropriate venues for that.
            This is only comprehensible in terms of what benefit does she get from bringing this accusation forward now. Ms. Hartline is obviously correct about that.

          • Elizabeth Decima

            I disagree but let’s agree to disagree. I want a Supreme Court justice who didn’t assault a girl either now or when he was 17. If you don’t care, fine for you. But some people care and want a pro-life justice TOO. But since everyone who disagrees with Miss Jennifer is Satan Incarnate, i will just take my pitchfork and go slink away and let her admirers continue to congratulate each other on their righteousness against the rest of the evil world. Boys will be boys

          • Richard A

            Disagree about whether this is an attempt to redress what was done to her 36 years ago? Or disagree about the advisability of having Supreme Court Justices who have never assaulted females? What are we disagreeing about?

          • Melody Warbington

            I’m a lot more disgusted by abortion than any terms used to describe those who support it and will do anything to protect it.

          • Barry Brunner

            If you are disgusted by abortion … then don’t have one. LOL

          • Elizabeth Decima

            Abortion is not disgusting, it is heartbreaking and tragic. This writer is disgusting

          • Barry Brunner

            Elizabeth … you are absolutely correct in your assessments. There really is no point to attempt a logical, intelligent conversation with folks who only have one mindset. What is enjoyable is to see the masks come off and know who thinks the way they really do. Just get out in November and vote … so very important !

          • Elizabeth Decima

            Their motivation is the same as the Pharisees.

          • NellieIrene

            ——“If you aren’t even interested in the truth of what happened in that woman’s life…”—-

            You completely ignored what I said. This case is classic she said/he said. The truth is not going to be found because too much time has elapsed, she didn’t talk about the alleged incident until decades later and then the details were sketchy due to the time gap and the fact that, apparently, everyone was drunk.

            ——“I think her article is disgusting, and the fact you admire it makes me feel a little like vomiting”——

            I’m so sorry my agreeing with the author has made you feel like vomiting. The ripping apart of babies in the womb makes me feel like vomiting. Babies born alive from abortions being wheeled into soiled utility rooms to suffer and die makes me want to vomit. Calling those who support such things the “pelvic left”, doesn’t bother me at all.

            ——-“I should have just assumed that people who hang around admiring this kind of writing are not going to be people who know how to treat others with respect or dignity”—–

            That statement of yours is the epitome of self-righteousness. It reminds me of the Pharisee who said “Thank you God that I’m not like other men.” You want to be able to express your own opinion as you see fit, while looking down on others who do the same because YOU don’t like the way they express themselves.

            You want me to leave you alone? No problem. It will be my pleasure to leave you alone.

          • Hmmm…

            Critical, quarrelsome spirit …

          • Elizabeth Decima

            Woe to ye Pharisees…..

          • Hmmm…

            Yes, that too. Glad you know where you are, oh pot calling every kettle in sight black, but yourself.

          • Elizabeth Decima

            Excuse me, but Kavanaugh is not the answer to abortion. Equating Kavanaugh with the savior of the unborn is craziness. Abortion will NEVER end in this country until peoples minds and hearts change. Even if the supreme court rules, the people will end up doing what Ireland just did. The more you push people away from the pro life movement with hateful, demeaning, sexist rhetoric, the more you assure the death of the unborn. This woman writer just shows people that we pro lifers are judgemental, hateful, hypocritical people. Because of people like her, others dont want to listen to any of us. People like her ruin the pro life cause. I believe she isnt even really pro life. No one can be that stupid as to think demeaning and degrading women will save their children. I call BS

    • Kelly B

      You act as if the dems would vote for ANY nominee put forward by a president with an R after their name. Ridiculous.

  • Chip Crawford

    Update: The latest next accuser was passed up by the NYT (who loves dirt on the administration) due to lack of corroboration of the story. Looks like a fizzle.

    Martha MacCallum of Fox News is interviewing the Judge and Ashley Kavanaugh on her program, The Story, tonight at 7 p.m. on Fox News.

  • Jack Devaney

    You read my mind about this whole thing. This is the heart of it…no doubt. Abortion is Demonic. That’s why we have the chaos at and around the hearings. No doubt. Mercy.

  • Barry Brunner

    Ms Hartline’s humorous rhetoric only strengthens the fact that she and those with the same uninformed outlook … are what got our Beloved Nation here in these present dire straights. They think they know so much … but, the more they speak … and even worse “write” … shows their laughable ignorance. They support a president who has done so many more vile things than Bill Clinton, who Ms Jennifer drags through the mud … again attempting to deflect as her cohorts in stupidity continue to do day in … and day out. Kavanaugh has lied about so many other things during his hearings, before these truths began presenting themselves. The problem with many of these two faced people … is they scream “anti-choice” but then want to screw the new Mother and child out of any care afterwards. It should be none of their business what another woman wants to do with their body. If truth were told … many of these “protesters” probably have had or know a friend who has had an abortion themselves.

    • What are the other lies Kavanaugh has said? If those other lies are the basis Democrats are against him, why were there protesters of women dressed like The Handmaid’s Tale? Why was a woman dragged out of the hearing with menstrual blood leaking out of her? Why when politicians speak against Kavanaugh, they tell their followers he will take their rights as women away?

      • Barry Brunner

        I will take a few moments to explain the thoughts of others … although, anyone agreeing with the poisonous rhetoric of Ms Hartline is a lost cause already. Each of these groups have their own issues with Kavanaugh, which further heightens the need to delve deeper into his past … and not rush a lifetime position through. These issues are many and although they will be minimized by those trying to push Kavanaugh through quickly, as only to do with the “right to choose” issue. Women (other than those like Ms Hartline) are finally standing up for things they had grown to accept as inequalities they were forced to live with. Throughout his entire testimony he “could not remember” details … that most already knew the answers to. He loses memory for all these things … but can be precise in his memories regarding the sexual assaults he was involved with, but knows for sure (even though drunk) exactly what “did not” happen. Folks, with the same mindset as Ms Hartline, could not possibly understand what those, who have gone through sexual assaults, have dealt with. Perhaps, If it were to happen to them or someone they loved … they might be enlightened. Karma is a very tricky wicket …

        • Jennifer Hartline

          Please tell me more about what it’s like to be a woman and live with so many inequalities. Then tell me more about how one such as myself could not possibly understand what it is like to have gone through sexual assault.

        • There are many things I don’t remember in my past but I can guarantee 100% that I didn’t rape anybody or attempt to rape anybody either in a drunken or sober state. Therefore, I can see how Kavanaugh can refute such an accusation definitively. Let me ask you this. Can you say with 100% certainty that you never got drunk and took advantage of another drunk person in order to fulfill your own sexual satisfaction? Also, I see you failed to give specifics to the parts of his testimony that he should have remembered. Why is that? Finally, Kavanaugh is not being rushed through. He went through the Senate confirmation process just like all the other Justices did in the past. The difference is that a Democratic senator purposely chose to withhold an anonymous accusation until after the phase of questioning was over. Don’t you think that was at least a tiny bit dishonest on Feinstein’s part? She had a personal meeting with Kavanaugh during the phase and still didn’t bring up the accusation. I really hope people like you start to realize the circus this all has become and at least worry about the degradation of due process in this country.

          • Elizabeth Decima

            This is not about pro-life for her. We already established that. Her interest, like so many on the far right, is to take vengeance on her “enemies”

          • Jennifer Hartline

            Elizabeth, you have established nothing at all. I get it, you don’t like me. But you have no basis on which to declare that I am not pro-life, or that I am far-right, or that my interest in taking vengeance on “enemies.” You have a lot of bitterness and anger, and I guess I’m your target of choice this week. Fine. But like Ford and the rest, you have no evidence.

          • Elizabeth Decima

            Yes, we discussed it earlier in the comments. Maybe you missed it.

          • Jennifer Hartline

            Discussed what? Missed what?

          • Elizabeth Decima

            You are the one with bitterness and anger, Miss, and attracting the same. Go back and read your article. All you do is stereotype and demean people. I have been prolife since before you were born but we never dehumanized women or anyone else. Only since lately did the hate arise.

          • Jennifer Hartline

            Well, I won’t ask your age, but I doubt it. And it’s Mrs.

          • Kelly B

            Someone needs a hug.

          • Who are you talking about?

          • Barry Brunner

            Yes, I can say that I could never have done something in a drunken state, as I never drank … my entire life. However, I had many friends that loved me being the “designated driver” and many not remembering the things they did the night before. Truth should never be deemed a circus. Have you ever been through “jury duty” … I have, and have been Foreman of the Jury … and took the process very seriously. Until both sides of an issue are heard in detail … judgments should not be made. If you were honest … you would admit that you made your judgment immediately after hearing there were “accusers” concerning Kavanaugh’s appointment.

          • Congratulations for avoiding alcohol just like President Trump. You truly deserve kudos for that. I have known people who have been blackout drunk in the past as well. However, I have never heard of a person being accused of rape when they were blackout drunk. Seems like equipment wouldn’t work properly at that point. Also, these accusations lost credibility thanks to the purposeful delay by Democrats when they knew about the first accusation months ago. That’s part of the reason I call this whole thing a circus. Additionally, the information in the accusations alone appear to be less than credible. The first accusation doesn’t have enough information regarding time and place for example. The amount of people involved changed as well. In the second accusation, the accuser admits to having to think about what happened after hearing about the first allegation. Her story involves the use of a fake penis as well. In both accusations, the people mentioned deny the allegations. In the gang-rape allegation, the accuser doesn’t even definitely say Kavanaugh was part of the rape. She didn’t even cite proof about how she knew rape was being done in a closed room. Why would she go back to those parties? She had already graduated high school at that point for a couple of years as well. Therefore, I didn’t make a judgement solely because they involve Kavanaugh. The accusations themselves appear faulty. How can you deny that?

        • Elizabeth Decima

          Barry, most of the people, all they want is other people to affirm their point of view and join them in beating up the enemy du jour. The US population has become like dogs who run around in packs looking for a fight. It probably doesn’t matter if it is the far Right or the far Left. Both act the exact same way. Our nation is coming apart at the seams. Voting is one thing we can do and not reading articles like this is another!!!!

          • Hmmm…

            You have self described. Physician, heal thyself.

          • ontheroadwitheric

            My thoughts exactly.

    • Jennifer Hartline

      Please list specifically all Kavanuagh’s other lies, with proof. Then please provide us with the proof that Ford’s accusation is true. That any of the other accusations are true. Proof, please. Evidence.

      • Barry Brunner

        There is little communication that would result in anything productive with a “person” who would vomit the verbiage … “They hate Kavanaugh because they love abortion and he does not. Hell hath no fury like “women’s rights” scorned.”” Not only does it show a lack of intellect, but an ignorance to the process of Law.

        • Jennifer Hartline

          Ah, I see. So now I am no longer a person, let alone intelligent. Thanks for your honesty. Enjoy your smug cowardice.

          • Elizabeth Decima

            Jennifer Hartline, you do not treat your opponents as persons. I am pro-life 100% to be clear, but i dont believe you are. Because all you do is preach to the choir and push people who are on the fence further away from the pro life cause. With friends like you, the unborn dont need enemies

          • Chip Crawford

            Yeah? Say, have you taken your medicine this morning?

          • Jennifer Hartline

            Believe whatever you like. I will call abortion what it is, and those who not only support abortion but *demand* it, those who viciously destroy people who do not demand abortion as they do, I will call that what it is as well: worship of abortion.

          • Elizabeth Decima

            Call people and things whatever you like, and surround yourself with people who already agree with you. When I see you win the heart of or convince someone who isn’t already in your “camp”, I will consider your writing to have some value. Everyone who has some ability to see other people who disagree with them as actual human beings and relate to them as such thinks your way of expressing is hate-filled and prurient. I hate THAT, not you. I don’t know you but I hate what articles like this are doing to the pro-life cause. I was Republican from the day I could vote until the day that party gave us the Pelvic President. How ironic

          • Jennifer Hartline

            Is there ever a time, or ever a reason, to call evil what it truly is? Even if people find it offensive?
            The fact is, Elizabeth, we live in an age where a great many people worship abortion. It is no better than the pagans of antiquity who left babies on rocks to be picked at by birds of prey. No better at all. It is barbaric.
            When can we call barbarism what it really is? When can we lose all the euphemisms and speak plainly?
            My point in this piece is that the people opposing Kavanaugh with such venom are doing so for one reason: abortion. They will destroy anyone who will not protect their precious “right” to kill babies in the womb. That is demonic.

          • ALTFREQ

            Jennifer Hartline: “The fact is, Elizabeth, we live in an age where a great many people worship abortion.”

            Do you have any proof of this?

            Jennifer Hartline: “My point in this piece is that the people opposing Kavanaugh with such venom are doing so for one reason: abortion.”

            Do you have any proof of this?

          • Chip Crawford

            Oh no, bud; nice try. Haven’t you heard? YOU have to prove it’s not true. Get after it.

          • Elizabeth Decima

            I read your article because on Facebook post from a pro lifer about how the new right has become pharisaical and full of prurient judgementalism and demeaning of opponents. But who am i to tell you? To me, people full of hate to some other group will always justify their hate and if anyone protests, they will attack. You dont see those women as worthy of human respect, you demean total strangers as screaming banshees. No one will listen to you except people who already look down on others like you do. Babies will continue to die because you make pro life look like judgemental hateful Pharisees. No one listens to pro lifers because they assume we are like you.

          • Jennifer Hartline

            What women? Who do I not see as worthy of human respect?
            The protesters at Kavanaugh’s hearing were, in fact, behaving like loons. Clothes and legs bloodied with menstruation, to make some sort of disgusting point, is certainly not respectable. Shouting for abortion-on-demand is not respectable.
            And I don’t know who or what the “new right” is.

          • Barry Brunner

            Mind your own business … or offer to support any children born. You do not care about them once they are born … what your agenda exactly is, is anyone’s guess. However, your nose should not be in everyone else’s business. When that person in your mirror is perfect, then have at it.

          • Zoran

            Do you want to stop child murder or look nice. Nice didn’t work against feminist fanatics, amoral liberals and their shadowy backers. Evil cannot be negotiated with

          • Leslie Marbach

            Who demands abortion? Those of us who are pro choice, at least the ones I know, don’t actually like abortion. But we know that we can’t possibly understand another woman’s position that might make her choose that. Also we know that in places where it is legal AND accessible, where birth control is accessible and affordable to all, and where complete sex ed is taught, abortion rates drop drastically. Isn’t that what you want?

  • gboach

    Kavanaugh sex assault allegation was so true, Mrs Fords was so scared and terrified . he wanted to kill her. am a prophetess
    she was able to take Jesus’s spirit for 2 hours and run without him finding her. thats how scared she was .
    Chat Conversation

    • Chip Crawford

      April Fools to you too and Happy Halloween, witch.

  • Trish Jordan Dukes

    This is the best article I have ever read on the travesty that is abortion! It is truly the most heinous stain on our nation. For us to think that those who love and advance the cause of those “vultures in lab coats who butcher our children” would care about Judge Kavanaugh or anyone who gets in their way would be absurd. They are bloodthirsty tools of their father Satan, going in his power to do his bidding and viciously stop naysayers. Sadly, their desire for that most innocent blood cannot be quenched and they live to destroy as many as possible. Unless there is repentance, God will one day have His vengeance for the blood of every precious child sacrificed to abortion. Thank you for writing this article exposing truth!!

    • Kelly B

      Amen – you typed the words right out of my mouth Sister!

  • Robbe Sebesta

    Hear hear!!! You took the words right out of my mouth. Could not agree more!

  • texasknight

    It amazes me that so many are willing to look past the vast amount of evil in the democrat’s platform. You cannot remain in communion with His Church and vote for the party of death.

    • ArthurMcGowan

      Bergoglio embezzled from Peter’s Pence and sent a huge check to Hillary’s campaign.

  • Ron Hussey

    I don’t even think it is Roe, I think the deep state corrupted mesons know they may really hang from nooses like Hillary said it the Supreme Court is tilted right and Justices actually rule according to our laws and the Constitution. They are all being exposed right now, and most of the left democrat protests since Trump won has been to protect their lies of Russian collusion, and oust Trump for fear he’ll really expose their corruption and prosecute the Obama era corrupted morons and Hillary too..

  • Carl Coffin

    Men are under attack

    • ALTFREQ

      Well, boo-hoo! 😉

  • crissyfield

    Totally agree! The abortion lie is the big fish here! They will stop at nothing to make sure Roe V Wade strands. This is more than a BIG money industry. It is about control.

  • The pretext here is utterly absurd! I completely disagree. I am confident that the Democrats are the only party that has a viable nominee for Supreme Court Justice, who is flawlessly perfect and who has never done bad things in his past or at least not in his recent present. Or, at least someone who’s past indiscretions are “less bad” things … Or, at least, not as bad to the average American … Or, at least, not as bad to the average Democrat … Or, at least, able to hide his past well enough that no witnesses can come forward … Or at least, able to silence the witnesses. Yeah, that’s it: I’m CONFIDENT that Democrats have a better candidate whose past cannot and will not be called into question because he or she left no witnesses. Who’s with me?

    • Hmmm…

      That utter pig, Keith Ellison, is a case in point. There is a current case with medical records and a witness concerning domestic abuse, which the Dims are slow walking an “investigation,” but it didn’t cause them to pull him from the Attorney General (top cop) primary in Minnesota. He’s the Deputy DNC Chairman as well. Karen Monohan is the claimant who states not only is the case being essentially ignored, but that she is being harassed and threatened by the party, her own party. That’s one of many ways it is handled. They are used to that form of human nature since they have so much of it in their own rank ranks, someone as clean living as Judge K has to be creatively besmirched. This cannot stand. It is too blatant.

  • ArthurMcGowan

    CORRECTION: Mary Jo Kopechne did not drown. She asphyxiated after three to five hours of keeping her face in an air bubble. Total blackness and total silence. Five hours. Running out of oxygen. There was no water in her lungs.

    She was still alive while Saint Teddy (just ask Uncle Ted McCarrick) was making phone calls to lawyers, family, and political hacks.

  • Norma Hook

    I don’t beleive that people love abortion. I’ve never met any democrat who siad that they worship abortion and that they are devoted to it. I know Democrats who love people and who love helping others. The Christian Democrrats I know are loving, kind, gentle people who can’t go along with President Trump’s policies and ways of hurting people and hurting life. What I believe is the biggest worry about Kavenaugh is that he would not hold President Trump to follow the law. Our President already beleives and acts like he is above the law. Regarding aborion, I think we need to find a way to end the desire for abortion–in other words, unwanted pregnancies. For that we need to teach our sons and daughters sexual ethics and we need adults who model a good sexual ethic. We don’t force sexual touch or acts on anyone. this is what is the basis of these allegations. Forced sexual touch. I’m not saying who is right or wrong in this case–just that we have way too much sexual perversion and lust and we neeed leaders who role model better behavior.

    • john Diamond

      you haven’t been paying attention to politics for at least forty years then if you dont think dems will do anything and destroy anyone for abortion…..IT is wedge issue they have exploited since the seventies.the “basis” of these allegations are that Feinstein and the dems knew Kavanaugh was about to be confirmed as a conservative on the court. They are destroying his character to make him un-confirmable. 35 year old allegations dont pass the sniff test and the dems have repeatedly used this same shameful gambit

      • Leslie Marbach

        Would you hire him to tutor your daughter… when you’re not home? He’s applying for a job. I wonder if you know any women. Because your remarks surely would make them not want to come forward if they were assaulted… even years ago. “Oh, sorry wife, that was 30+ years ago. I don’t know if I can believe it. Do you have proof?”

        This isn’t a criminal or civil case. Character is all that they’re looking at. His behavior alone while testifying should preclude him from holding this most high position for life. He was yelling, blaming it all on Clinton, telling us how much he likes beer. It was frightening and highly disturbing.

        • Chip Crawford

          Your brain was disturbed before watching if that’s what you saw. Typical Dim distortion of facts and reality. Crazie Mazie’s advice would work well right here: Just shut up.

          • Ute Abzoecker

            Seriously, you’d hire a guy as unhinged as that? as evasive as that? you know he’s lying about silly little things in his yearbook right? no one would ever even care and he feels compelled to lie? I would NOT hire this guy for a lifetime job, and I hope you have the intelligence to keep this guy off the job as well. You know, there are many other squeaky clean candidates out there.

          • Chip Crawford

            Aw shut up

      • Ute Abzoecker

        its a wedge issue because Republicans made it one. The race issue was losing steam. In Europe, abortions are rarer and you have to actually be counseled by a member of the church if you are registered in a faith (in germany at least), and it is NOT a wedge issue, even amongst the very conservative. Abortion is low when health care is free, but you don’t see anyone on the right fighting for free health care for the poor. If you hate abortion, do things to make it rare: support poor families, teach birth control, give women the right to say “NO!” trying to ban the right to an abortion simply turns it into a war, that we all lose in, and you’re also dooming desperate women who would rather die than deliver the fate so many had in the years before abortion horrible deaths due to infection or hemorrhage due to a back alley abortion. and so many them left their children motherless. That is sadistic.

  • Scott

    If the Dems are behind this and it is shown to be true tomorrow then I agree that this would be pure evil! However, I am not a conspiracy theorist and do not believe that Ford told her therapist, husband and others long before the appt. in a preemptive set up with Dems to undermine Kavanaugh. I am a father of a 17 year old daughter and if she came out of her pain and accused a man of covering her mouth 10,20,30 years later, I think I speak for most fathers of daughters and say just lock me up right now. Anne, I have to say that your MAGA, MAGA, MAGAAAA ah hail mighty Trump rhetoric looks more like idol worship than patriotism. Fox News does this to people. In fact, just about all cable news does this to people (especially MSNBC). I get my news from sources that do not give their emotional reaction, but only the facts within the events. I have nothing against Kavanaugh. I want Roe over turned and the abortion mill put to an end, but spewing Fox News venom and talking points will not change anything. What will change hearts is God and God only. Prayer not MAGA will change the nation for the better. I used to be addicted to Fox News and went to bed angry at liberals every night. Every since I stopped watching this toxic cable channel my blood pressure has dropped and I see people differently. Thanks be to the grace of God. Thank you Jesus!

    • Hmmm…

      Putting your head in the sand does not change the fact that there are no facts on the accusers’ side and that the Democratic Judicial Committee members are demanding that Judge Kavanaugh establish his innocence, and that this is not a court of law, so he does not enjoy presumed innocence. If reality unduly disturbs you, and you are more comfortable just drifting down river, then that’s on you when you go over the falls. The only program on Fox I see that would “do that to people” might be Hannity. He has his place, but a steady drumbeat of his intensity would disturb me too, so I just skip him for the most part. But I don’t throw the baby out with the bath water. The majority of Americans go to Fox for their news for a reason, Scott. They report things the others won’t, a lot of things. Maybe be more selective here on all counts. CBN has good news, calm, clear.

      • Scott

        How did I know you were a Fox News fanatic! Can you see Jesus watching Fox News yelling MAGA! If you can then it is not me that is fading fast into a world of hatred and darkness. Run while you can anonymous Hmmm. Run to the light! And spend some time with your family. You have commented on this thread probably 100 times. And you must watch it 24/7. Walk your dog or something.

        • Hmmm…

          I am retired and post in spurts, which I am doing right now. I spent a fruitful evening at church tonight and have a life, no dog. I am not a Fox News fanatic. That was pretty fanatic of you to presume all of this. I never yell MAGA, and your abusive characterization is neither accurate nor appreciated. So, what are you even doing here given your feelings about all of this? Isn’t it a bit hypocritical of you? You’ve failed to identify Anne. BTW, along with my other business, my chosen name and avatar and anything else of that nature is not successfully denigrated by your unsolicited opinion. Sounds like you have more issues than you can lay on Fox News … oops!

          • Scott

            oops? Just strong convictions. Relax my friend. I respect your strong convictions as well Hmmm. Enjoy your retirement. I have 5 more years. I am a baseball coach, history teacher, hunter, fisherman, Astros fan and Christian. God bless.

          • Hmmm…

            I am a Christian, called to shine light in dark places like on this board and other ways during these times, which definitely involves speaking up. We are all ordered differently. It’s hard to see into others’ motives and heading unless God shows you, which he often does. John, Peter, Paul, Priscilla & Acquilla all had varying graces and places. Thank you

          • Scott

            Amen brother! Keep shining bright 🙂

          • Hmmm…

            Sister. I will.

      • Ute Abzoecker

        If you watch Fox as your majority news source, you have no idea what the rest of the world is reporting. I watch Fox and then switch to CNN and I can tell you that they are LYING to you! the day Cohen got busted, they purposely only ran with the Mollie Tibbets story! but then last week when another college woman was raped and killed, nothing. Crickets. They are trying to only emphasize issues that obscure the actual news of the day. Open your eyes before its too late and you lose your democracy.

        • Hmmm…

          It’s the Constitutional Republic that should be of concern, but you may be too indoctrinated yourself with “our Democracy” to realize that. Nah, you’ve got it backwards. Dims, the lefter the more they accuse what they themselves do. CNN and MSNBC hype anti-Trump bias and bigotry pretty much non-stop. Who cares about Molly Tibbets, when we’ve got this juicy Cohen thing to harp 24/7. It’s always the Rebellion and the salacious with those networks, and you never hear many things. Fox News was started because of your networks not reporting many, many things. Again, the ratings back up the fact that most viewers prefer the Fox handling. Do as you like, that’s what you will do anyway, but don’t shop their lies and hyped Resistance dogma indiscriminately. Others are able to see through what wows you. Ciao

  • Rob Ludwig

    We have seen the destruction and devastation of abortion on demand and it’s aftermath. Life has been cheapened, natural gender roles blurred, and for what, so women can redefine themselves as men, leading lives as men, slaughtering life wholesale as men. 55+ million and counting. Enough is enough, the experiment is a dismal failure.

    • Ute Abzoecker

      what in the world are you talking about?? War slaughters. Poverty slaughters. Women “trying to be men” not so much. In fact, these so called figures, would logically then have very little need for abortions, no?

  • john Diamond

    dems have used this same shameful playbook on Bork, then Thomas, then Estrada, then Moore and now Kavanaugh. Shameful, but predictable, behavior from unethical dems..and the author is correct , when dems destroy others for political reasons it always comes back to abortion on demand. I hope there are still honest democrats who are witnessing the awful character assassinations the dems are engaging in.

    • Leslie Marbach

      Or you could do what unethical reps do and stall until another president is in office. Don’t you remember Merrick?

      • BravesFan

        Remember Biden? Because that was HIS rule, his guideline.

        • Chip Crawford

          There was less than a year before the upcoming election.

        • Ute Abzoecker

          nope. not his rule, never promulgated, and certainly 180 days before an election. This was silly, and was part of the self-declared obstructionists. McConnell started this and your anger should rest with him.

    • Ute Abzoecker

      Bork–too extreme for most Republicans and the willful executioner of the Saturday Night Massacre; Thomas was not railroaded in anyway–he actually made his way onto the court–inspite of Republicans KNOWING that he did have a thing for porn, and there were other unwilling witnesses (as was Anita Hill, who had to testify and did not want to) who were silenced and even blackmailed. These facts are pretty easy to find, even on right wing media. It seems obvious that there is little in the way of character assassination here; Kavanaugh is doing a great job all by himself, and he was always dodgy, and even the folks at the Federalist Society knew that.

      • Veritasamo

        So any Republican can be vilified and outed, but Dems can kill and rape and go off scot free. Thanks for pointing out the hypocrisy. And Democrat ‘proof’ is very suspect since it just rears its head at only certain times and then disappears once its goals were realized.

  • This is about abortion.

    Yes, it seems to be. But if abortion is your interest, why focus on Roe? Make abortion illegal, and abortions will be done, just illegally. If you want to reduce abortions, do what those countries that have far, far lower abortion rates than we do: reduce unwanted pregnancies.

    I think you’ll find that comprehensive sex ed plus easy access to contraception will do far more to reduce the abortion rate than attacking Roe.

    • BravesFan

      Exactly how much more comprehensive does sex ed need to be? And how much easier does it need to be to get contraception, which is dirt cheap and practically passed out like candy at every level from middle school to college? You people keep saying this. Specifically, how much easier does it need to be to get access to contraception?

      • Ute Abzoecker

        I don’t know–until our abortion rate is as low as a European country; maybe, free?

        • That’s my response as well.

          We don’t need to handwave about this. There are countries that have far lower abortion rates. When conservatives ignore this, I’m wondering if they’re serious when they say that abortion is a terrible thing. If it were, why not take steps to address the problem of unwanted pregnancy?

          • Jennifer Hartline

            Chastity solves the problem of “unwanted” pregnancy in the ONLY way that is safe for everyone. Safe and healthy and respectful for everyone.
            Contraception merely reinforces the idea that babies are a threat, an “unwanted” intruder, which only fuels the notion that a child can be got rid of whenever “necessary.” Contraception does not help us to respect human life, and it doesn’t teach respect for women, or for the marital act. It teaches us that we are entitled to consequence-free sex for the sake of pleasure whenever and wherever we like.
            Hedonism.

          • That’s what I say! I say that if you don’t want to get into a car accident, never get into a car. And if you have your strict but sensible attitude toward pregnancy, I’m sure you share my similarly sensible attitude toward car accidents.

          • Jennifer Hartline

            Bob, I didn’t say celibacy. I said chastity. There is a proper place and setting for sexual intercourse, and it is marriage. Every person is called to chastity, whether single or married or consecrated religious. Chastity is what sets us FREE. Without being slaves to our passions, feelings, urges, desires, etc. but gaining self-mastery.
            Again, you have framed sexual intercourse in the category of “risk”, when God has something quite the opposite in mind.

          • You’re ignoring my example. If you don’t like my car accident example, then don’t make an analogous argument with pregnancy.

            If “self-mastery” by remaining celibate works for someone, that’s great. It clearly doesn’t work for some people.

            Does God exist? Then he gave us a sexually mature body with urges. We must be careful to avoid hurting people, but given that precaution, nature makes clear that sex is fine. If you say that your god has a problem with sex, then do whatever you think he wants, but don’t pretend that this is an imposition that any of the rest of us care about.

            As for “sex is for marriage,” you need to read your Bible for comprehension this time. God allows polygamy, the taking of sex slaves, and so on. The concern in the Bible is paternity, and the “sin” is all to do with injuring a man’s property.

          • Jennifer Hartline

            One can survive without learning to drive or riding in a car. Bikes, buses, subways, horses, walking, etc. Go for it. I suppose each of those things carries their own potential hazards as well.

            No one has ever, ever, ever died from not having sex, and unlike driving a car, the inherent purpose of sexual intercourse is the creation of a new human being. God has no problem whatsoever with the marital act, because He designed it and made us for it. Within the specific context for which it was designed — marriage. For the purpose of new life.

            And again, Bob, please read. I said chastity, not celibacy. Not everyone is called to live a celibate life. But every human person is called to chastity. Very different things.
            You cannot present a reasonable argument against chastity. There is none. Chastity respects and protects everyone, no matter their state in life or their sex or race or age or education, etc. Chastity promotes genuine freedom.

          • Bikes, buses, subways, horses, walking, etc. Go for it. I suppose each of those things carries their own potential hazards as well.

            True. You can need medical treatment after a bus accident, and you can need medical treatment after a contraception accident.

            No one has ever, ever, ever died from not having sex, and unlike driving a car, the inherent purpose of sexual intercourse is the creation of a new human being.

            Is it? It does a lot more than create a human being. Look at sex from a biology standpoint to actually understand it. What’s wrong with admitting that sex is supposed to be fun?

            God has no problem whatsoever with the marital act, because He designed it and made us for it. Within the specific context for which it was designed — marriage. For the purpose of new life.

            Which doesn’t get around God in the OT being fine with taking captive virgins as sex slaves. Or Levirite marriage. Or polygamy. Or any of the other archaic customs of the time that God approved of.

            And again, Bob, please read. I said chastity, not celibacy.

            Yes, and I deliberately ignored you. Is there an important distinction here? Then make it.

            You cannot present a reasonable argument against chastity. There is none. Chastity respects and protects everyone, no matter their state in life or their sex or race or age or education, etc. Chastity promotes genuine freedom.

            If your point is that abstinence will avoid abortions, you’re right. Now you’ve just got to get past the fact that it’s impractical. As policy, it’s been tried in many school districts, and the unwanted pregnancy rate shows that this approach does a poor job. If you’re serious about wanting to avoid unwanted pregnancy, find something better.

          • Veritasamo

            The OT times were vastly different from today and the laws in the OT were vastly superior and merciful than the societies around them. You cannot compare the rules contained in them with today, after the NT came along. Study the cruelty of societies back and the sexual free for alls with absolutely no restraints or prohibitions of any kind, and the burning of newborns to Baal and their burying alive among other atrocities, plus the utter disregard for human life that existed back then. There is no comparison.

          • The OT times were vastly different from today and the laws in the OT were vastly superior and merciful than the societies around them.

            Citation needed.

            Why couldn’t God create a society that looks admirable from our standpoint? Instead, it looks barbaric.

            You cannot compare the rules contained in them with today after the NT came along.

            Why? Did God change his mind and decide to do things differently? Wouldn’t a godly theocracy be much better than what we have today?

            Study the cruelty of societies back and the sexual free for alls with absolutely no restraints or prohibitions of any kind, and the burning of newborns to Baal and their burying alive among other atrocities, plus the utter disregard for human life that existed back then. There is no comparison.

            The OT society that God created was poor compared to the West today. Slavery (see Lev. 25:44-46), sex slaves (Num. 31:17–18). God even demanded human sacrifice (Ezekiel 20:25–6).

          • Rudy R

            Contraception merely reinforces the idea that babies are a threat

            Or contraception merely reinforces the idea of having responsible sex between two or more consenting adults.

          • Veritasamo

            preferably married.

          • Rudy R

            Single people can’t have responsible sex?

        • Veritasamo

          how do you know its so low? And the best way to prevent abortions is to not have sex until you’re ready to care for any children who result. What a revolutionary thought…

  • haroldtu

    What a partisan ignorant view…it is also about how corporations can win more power. How health insurance can be bought or sold, Abought gun rights and controls, about how much power the president and government agencies can excert.. But of course you only have one issue one opinion!

    • Veritasamo

      It is about abortion. Look at all the screaming women, the hysterical antics, the constant references to ‘choice’ being sacred… The other stuff is important to them but NOTHING comes close to their defense of abortion. This article is spot on.

      • Chip Crawford

        Clearly, this article is so spot on, they’ve bused in all these screamin’ mimis to sound off. You barely rattle their cage on this, and they all start jumping around in it.

  • Jacqz

    They want abortions, because it gives them baby meat to feast on at their satanic rituals. Look into the Bohemian Grove. Look into the Illuminati. Look into all their evil, horrible secrets. I hate the Democrats, and if any Republicans are in on this, they too, need to GO. I think one of the only ones NOT in it, is Trump, which speaks volumes as to why they are so desperate, and I mean desperate, to get him out of office. This needs to be taken care of, and no I am not a crazy person. Look into it.

    • ALTFREQ

      Jacqz: “They want abortions, because it gives them baby meat to feast on at their satanic rituals.”

      Do you have any proof of this?

    • ALTFREQ

      Jacqz: “I hate the Democrats…”

      “Anyone who hates a brother or sister is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life residing in him.”
      1 John 3:15

    • Leslie Marbach

      Wow. Conspiracy theorist to the extreme or mad troll skills. I’m not quite sure.

    • Ute Abzoecker

      You realize it is a rare Democrat that goes to Bohemian Grove right? That is the most republican thing since the invention of the country club! and I’m pretty sure they don’t “feast” on babies…other Republicans, I’m not so sure of, but not them.

  • Yes, of course, it is about Roe. And what people apparently do not see is that, in the age of euthanasia, we are all “the fetus” now. We are all Kavanaugh’s family. Their fate will be that of everyone who opposes progressives in a way that makes a difference.

    • Ute Abzoecker

      I have no idea what you’re talking about. I’m pretty sure Gorsuch didn’t have this problem. I’m pretty sure unless you did a whole lot of assaulting and drinking and rapin’ in college, no one wants to come after you or your family. That’s just silly and hysterical.

      • Mike Beates

        Gorsuch didn’t have this opposition because he was replacing another conservative. But Kavanaugh replaces Kennedy, so the balance may tip. Just wait . . . if an opening comes up for RBG, the opposition will be even worse. It’s all about abortion

  • Leslie Marbach

    I had to go back and look. Sure enough; a woman wrote this. Smh. I’m so sorry you’ve been brainwashed for so long that you believe this mess you just wrote. There’s hope for you if you open your eyes.

    • Jennifer Hartline

      What in the world are you talking about? Eyes wide open.

      • Ute Abzoecker

        then open your eyes to the fact that Kavanaugh is just plain shady and doesn’t account for his actions. You know, the president could have nominated a woman with pro-life values and none of this would matter. He could still nominate another candidate and the left would still hate them, but I bet they’d get concerned without all the controversy! Gorsuch did.

        • Eoin Moloney

          I strongly doubt that they would have faced less controversy. The Dems were going to fight this tooth and nail no matter what. If there hadn’t been anything shady enough in the candidate’s backstory, they’d have made something up to throw at them.

  • Suzanne Elizabeth

    Conversely, Merrick Garland was NOT about abortion? For 10 months, the righteous right held up a legitimate appointment because of the desire to seat SCOTUS nominees who would overturn Roe V. Wade.

    However, nice round up of the sins of Democrats. I could list the bad deeds of Republicans, but instead will just mention the most heinous of all. One who not only maligns and insults women, but POC, those struggling with disabilities, and anyone who happens to think he is wrong: Donald Trump. An affair with a porn star while his 4 month old son was at home with his (immigrant) wife. Not to mention a number of other now proven “Indiscretions.”

  • Gamal

    The party of the left is the party of the “I don’t want to be punished for my wrong doing and I don’t want to suffer the consequences of my actions”

    • ALTFREQ

      LOL! If that’s true, why does the right want rapists in the white house and supreme court?

      • Jennifer Hartline

        Bill Clinton.

      • Lindaxox

        The biggest rapist was Bill Clinton and he was in the WH. His biggest defender and demonized of the victims was Hillary Clinton.
        What rapist? It was never rape, stick to the facts. If true it was 2 drunk young teenagers and groping. Because 1 Democrat with obvious mental health issues made an accusation from 36 years ago, who has been caught in many lies, conveniently doesn’t remember half the story and stagged with the help of a Clinton lawyer one hell of a Hollywood victim doesn’t make any of it true. I don’t believe her.

      • Steve

        They don’t. Last I heard evidence is needed to prove an event. You might be able to remember some years ago it was the leftists who wanted Clinton in the White House despite the evidence of his crime.

  • Tim Tully

    This is a profoundly clear-headed explication of a situation muddied by deliberate obfuscation and confusion. Thank you, Jennifer Hartline, for giving us this impressive bit of moral clarity.

  • Philip Kane

    This is a masterful essay, worthy of an Old Testament prophet!

  • Vickie Keen Carlton

    You hit the nail on the head with American paganism. The aborted babies are nothing more than blood sacrifices to the pleasure gods of today. That’s why hell is fighting so hard, often times using Dems, to keep anyone against abortion out of authority. Satan and his evil minions are who we are really fighting against.

    • Steve

      A good comment about “blood sacrifices” and paganism. It fits with the general decadence of the Prog Party. I try not to stereotype them but I’ve experienced plenty of situations where their call for tolerance is expected but not necessarily reciprocated e.g. transgender people who want to go into both male and female bathrooms but get angry when someone refers to them as crazy. I suspect a lot of the current push of Progs is cult driven funded by evil promoters.

  • realvegasdawn

    You’re wrong; abortion is not the issue it used to be. What is the issue is the 2nd amendment. Dems really want confiscation.

Inspiration
Don’t Let a Pit Become a Grave
James Robison
More from The Stream
Connect with Us