Tell Senator Snake-in-the-Grassley that if has can't stand the heat he should get out of the kitchen. If he isn't competent to question a woman he isn't competent to serve. He should stand down and resign immediately.
13
Oh, give me a break. If Grassley were to question Ford himself, the column would be titled "Old white Republican male questions female sexual assault victim." Democrats would be avoiding these optics, too, if the situation were reversed.
4
An 85-year old white male from the Midwest has an opportunity to show that he can step into the 21st Century, with an awareness and sensitivity about how to address issues of sexual assault - instead, he opts to stay in an imaginary 20th Century.
The GOP has proven they can not govern- they are out of touch with reality, and their frame of mind is "white males rule the earth", without even understanding why we think they are entitled elitists. Squash the p888y-grabbers flat at the mid-terms, please.
7
Putting aside this vulgar circus, we should find out exactly how much of a drunk Brett Kavanaugh really is and why he ran up $250,000 in credit card bills very recently apparently gambling.
And then who miraculously paid those bills as be was considered for our Supreme Court?
This is a guy whose mission in life is to undermine and ultimately destroy organized labor in this country. Who is he paying off? Who is his boss? What has he promised Donald Trump?
He's a deeply flawed individual. He must offer something pretty big for them to go through all this trouble and risk for him.
If he gets rammed down our throats this or next week, it will not be the end of this investigation.
It will be just the very beginning. And now we know where to look.
What a mess.
13
My grandmother who was a feminist 80 years before her time and she would be appalled by these men, they are not even pretending to advocate for ethical principles, values and equality, the confirmation has been about expediency and winning, not matter what the cost.
5
These old, tired white men have run their course. Vote them ALL out. That they would even suggest this approach underscores their complete lack of awareness. They still don't "get it".
5
If the committee insists on using a female to question, why doesn't Dr. Ford insist on having Avenatti, do her questioning? Or at least by her side for advice?
3
If Mr Grassley wishes to outsource the questioning of Prof. Ford, will he also outsource the follow-up questioning of Mr Kavanaugh on Thursday? Perhaps Hillary Clinton could be tapped for that role.
7
Grassley needs to do his job, not outsource it to some carefully chosen--read Republican--lawyers. On the other hand, he is in his Eighties and is almost certainly out of touch with women who stand up to him.
3
Alas, all the players in this drama are mainly interested in "optics" - unfortunately the case in much political discourse these days. And it's mainly because much of the public is little interested in looking below the surface - beyond mere "optics" - to discern the truth and how important it is in shaping the outcome. One's opinion of this issue is mainly determined by political ideology. Hey, I'm no different - I think this is a great column.
1
Pundits ask what was learned in the Anita Hill hearings. Men, who had previously believed themselves quite brilliant, discovered they had the emotional intelligence of a teaspoon. They discovered that it just looks bad when a gang of men work over a single woman. They discovered that their names would be forgotten, that the name of the supreme Court Justice involved may no longer easily arise to ones mind. But everyone remembers the name Anita Hill and the curious debacle of our debased elected officials.
34
Suck it up, Grassley--- do your job for once. Don't shirk it off to some female lawyer. And, by the way, subpoena Judge.
6
Sounds like somebody is upset that their 'old white men grilling a female survivor' articles just went down in flames. And they were all set to go, too.
1
Keep in mind that these same men overlooked Trump's admission of serial sexual assault and the 19 women who came forward to accuse him, and voted for Trump to be US President. Same party, though, that went after Bill Clinton and impeached him over a consensual affair. It is clear that the Republicans party is toxic and corrupt, has no values other than getting and keeping power, by any means, and has no honor. How sad for all of us.
4
If the R's can use an outside lawyer on Ford, the D's must be allowed the same for Kavanaugh. I'm thinking Michael Avenatti.
7
"The Republicans’ attempt to outsource the questioning of Dr. Blasey is cynical, sexist and cowardly."
You have Grassley in a nutshell. It is a description of who he is, who he always has been (I've been watching him since the 1960s when he was a divide-and-conquer two-bit state legislator) and who he always will be. In sort, he is a Republican senator.
2
Old, powerful men trying to protect their reputations, using a woman to do their dirty work who can be discarded if her questioning of Ford backfires. It is time for Grassley and Co. to go.
6
Could we please stop using idioms biased in toxic gender stereotypes like "Man Up"? When masculinity is defined by aggressiveness or assertiveness, we perpetuate violence. In particular, we perpetuate the type of violence this article is condemning.
1
If this ploy by the Republican members of the Judiciary Committee does occur, could the female witness(es) address the female questioner with with respect then address those cowardly senators? Possibly something to the effect of "I am sorry that you were thrust into this situation, possibly under threat of your job, but I will now address those responsible for this situation directly."
This article suggests many variations on this theme so that each response could emphasize them after each question and before giving the answer. This is simply a case, at its root, of a dialogue mediated by a translator - you respond to the other party not the translator.
2
Putin has succeeded in ways even he couldn’t have imagined. Polarization has been cemented at every level. Even the cowardly from the courageous that can’t see across the aisle.
1
We are witnessing the deconstruction of the democratic process
by the Republican "politburo". They have openly stated that Kavanaugh will be confirmed regardless.
Give Hatch and Grassley some credit for realizing that they
misogynists who are incapable of conducting a fair and dignified
inquiry.
5
By using a single female to question Dr Ford the panel of old men will establish a turn around. Dr Ford will be on trial and the seemingly empathetic questioner will be the prosecuting attorney. This is as it usually happens when cases of assault are brought forward, the accuser becomes the defendant and the accused becomes the victim. Some things never change, especially for old white men.
2
I am not a fan of Kavanaugh.
That being said: Questioning an accuser to discover reality is always aggressive. Let us say Senator Grassley did the questioning correctly -- which is to say, challenging uncertain memories, asking about contradictions in Blasey's story and between it and that told be others she cites as supporting her version of events, etc.
And, as a result, her testimony was deemed not credible.
The same folks castigating Grassley for not questioning Blasey now would be furious with his not treating her allegations with respect and compassion -- indeed, for not accepting her story as factual on its face.
That’s not how it works. That's not his job. The committee's job is to discover the truth -- not to cater to sensitive feelings.
8
@Texas Liberal Neither is it seemly to ask questions that were asked of Anita Hill in the quest to taint and paint her as a woman not worthy of respect ." Are you a scorned woman Ms. Hill ?" Yes indeed his job is to discover the truth respectfully .
1
I really feel for the comments that say Senator Grassley and Hatch can't possibly understand. At 78, I have trouble understanding how the Ivy League changed so much between 1960 and the 1980s. Even as a contemptuous Harvard grad, I would have found the Yale incident wildly improbable in the 1960s -- I have no trouble at all finding it credible in the 1980s. I was mainly out of the country between '62 and '65 -- when I came back, it was a different place. The same goes for the believability of Prof. Blasey-Ford's account. The times they were a'changin.' And not for the better.
People talk about age limits for the Supreme Court; shouldn't they (or term limits) be considered for the Senate as well. I would give up Diane Feinstein with regret, because I think she still gets it. But most of her male colleagues are well past their best before date, and it is showing on this issue. All their presuppositions are flat out wrong -- and most of the country knows it.
3
Although there is little doubt that Mr. Grassley and his gang have approached this process cynically and with little respect for Ms. Ford, it would be refreshing if Ms. Ford's advocates, such as Ms. Bazelon, would be up front about reasons for wanting Republican members of the Judiciary Committee to interview the witness. Clearly, a significant motivation is to capture the optics a bunch of white conservatives bumbling and fumbling as they insensitively grill a credible accuser of sexual assault. To argue, for example, that having female staffers question Ford somehow limits the career options for these staffers is silly... and, yes, even a bit cynical. While pigeon-holing of women may be a serious problem in numerous professional arenas it hardly seems relevant to the question at hand. Perhaps when stakes are this large a little dishonesty may seem justified?
2
Our government needs to change. No one in a representative democracy should be graced with a position for life. The constitutionial intent for lifetime appointments of Supreme Court justices was to protect our highest judicial body from the shifting sands of politics. The opposite has sadly been the case. A party temporarily in control of both Congress and the Presidency can seat justices who will deeply affect our lives and culture for decades to come.
The Senate should also be subject to restrictions. It makes sense to have continuity so that a government functions well. But ours has become one of abuse of office. Mitch McConnell’s outrageous denial of a hearing for Merrick Garland was a disgrace. His refusal to allow a vote on a bipartisan bill to protect a special counsel is unforgivable.
Term limits for Supreme Court justices might make their approval process less fraught with a sense of irreversible damage. And as far as the Senate, one need only look to the current hearing. Some of the same cynical white men who approved the nomination of Clarence Thomas remain on the same committee in this week’s proceedings. We deserve better.
Yes, senators are subject to election. Once in power, though, they can become entrenched to little good end. Limiting their tenure would in no way limit the voting privilege of their constituents.
More than two centuries ago, we abolished a monarchy. It’s time to limit the tiny oligarchy that no longer serves us well.
3
OK, let's see here.
Grassley is afraid how women will feel if he personally interviews a woman who's only notoriety is that she might prevent the confirmation of a Justice whose only notoriety is that he intends to deprive women of the most critical choice in their lives?
Republican 'optics' puzzle me deeply.
4
If they played their cards right, Sen. Grassley and his fellow Republicans could carry Kavanaugh in triumph down Pennsylvania Avenue all the way to the steps of the Supreme Court.
They seem to have forgotten how much everyone loves the redeemed sinner. Were Kavanaugh to admit to his sins and ask Dr. Ford for forgiveness in front of a national television audience, who would fault him?
Of course, this won't happen, but in this reality TV time we live in, one wishes they had, among other things, a better sense of theater.
I am sure that at some point the good Professor has been an actual practicing attorney - this is not new - it is a practice that goes back decades. When the plaintiff / accused are members of the distaff class - attorneys will always have a woman at the table and preferably leading the questioning.
The fact that this occurs is precisely because of the unique double standard where females can tell dudes to 'man up' but if a male ever said anything vaguely similar to Professor Bezelon, we would probably lose our nomination.
1
Grassley will be remembered in the future only for his mishandling of the Supreme Court nominee and his disrespect for women. His grandson who will no doubt run to replace him won't be elected since everyone will remember his grandfather.
7
When the “we hate all men and white men in particular” society gets in a position like this I applaud Sen Grassley for doing this. It just points out the issue of Democratic manipulation at all cost. What’s good for the gander is good for the goose
1
So Lindsay Graham referred to Dr. Ford's accusations as a "drive by shooting." Huh? It would appear to me that the actual situation as described was a "walk by grabbing."
It is cowardice for Grassley & friends to not want to ask the questions. Perhaps they have some insight into their bullying, which we all witnessed last week. Sending in women is cowardice. However, since the Republicans generally had no questions to ask Kavanaugh and only spewed pretty prose about how wonderful he is, I wonder if they even have any idea how to ask real questions.
I do hope this will be an equal opportunity hearing where the Democrats have equal time - like 20 minutes each. In the previous hearing they did ask excellent questions of Kavanaugh although answers weren't exactly forthcoming.
Both sides need equal time. Deep reflection and some soul searching by all parties is needed before Thursday. If Judge Kavanaugh is unable to come up with something more insightful and truthful than his statements on Fox last evening, I believe he should be disqualified.
4
I hope the Democrats and the liberal media understand the impossible standards that they are now creating. Even if every word of what the accuser stated is true, should the actions of a drunken 17 year old, in the context of having zero other allegations on the person as an adult, preclude him from holding federal office? How many Democrats in Congress today (or Republicans for that matter) would withstand scrutiny all the way back to their teen years? There is a reason that most criminal offenses against juveniles are expunged when they reach adulthood. Being young is a time of recklessness and mistakes, with the onset of adulthood being a time to understand and learn from those mistakes. I am not trying to minimize the allegations against Kavanaugh. If there were credible allegations of similar behavior in his adult years than that would be a completely different story. To me, it sounds like Kavanaugh may have been a bit wild and reckless as a youth but his record as an adult professional is utterly spotless. Let's also face facts. If this was a liberal Supreme Court potential nominee, this article would not have appeared in the New York Times and every Democrat would be responding in the same way that the Republicans are. The alleged victim in the case of Kavanaugh has an extremely difficult time with many of the details of this story and those she has claimed can corroborate at least parts of her story have categorically denied being able to do so.
1
where do men get their reputation for bravery? christine blasey-ford has more courage than the whole congress.
8
Age limits are needed for congress, the Presidency, and SCOTUS. No more lifetime appointments.
5
Do you think it's possible that any attempt by the male senators to get to the bottom of Ford's story, any tough questions they may ask her, will be met with charges of sexism, whereas if it was a woman asking those questions the reaction would not be the same? Is it possible that this is the reason they thought of having a woman do the questioning, and not because they are afraid?
If you start with the premise that these people are evil, then you will see evil in every action and decision they make. If you step back and see them as people, at least you will be open to considering that there may be some other explanation. It's the same with Kavanaugh himself. Many on the left have already judged him as guilty of the things he is accused of, and see everything he does and says through that lens. But we haven't gotten there yet. How are we going to have a fair and impartial hearing if half of the public, or more than half, looks at the Republicans as reincarnations of the Waffen SS?
9
It's the female Republican Senators who should "Man Up" and vote NO when Kavanaugh comes to a vote.
9
Smart move by Grassley.
2
These same Republican “leaders” display cowardice, craven self-interest, and entitled arrogance over and over, decade after decade. Why are we letting them?
VOTE for gods sake.
4
What? I thought the optics of 11 white dudes questioning Ford was sexist and wrong. Ugh no matter what they do they are sexist and wrong. I thought they were being cognizant of her trauma by having an expert female litigator question her. Now I hear that its sexist to do this and actually the right thing to do is have 11 white dudes question her.
I have no idea what's considered sexism nowadays. Is just appointing a man to anything sexism today?
I dont like Kavanaugh and I wish he wasnt being appointed to the supreme court. I also dont like this last minute accusation from 35 years ago. It stinks of Machiavellian maneuvering, and its undermining the #Metoo movement by turning it into a political cudgel to attack opponents with. If an uncorroborated accusation from 35 years ago must be believed because of #metoo, I think my belief in #metoo as a pro-woman movement will decrease and my belief that #metoo is just political propaganda will increase.
1
It’s got to kill these guys to give up camera time. The Democrats will have a field day. Whomever they choose to represent them will have an unenviable job. Two or three more credible accusations will derail this fiasco.
1
I think it’s sexist to say Grassley can’t have a female question the accuser. Even Kavanagh has a female lawyer. I guess Kavanagh’s opponents just want the optics of an older white man questioning the alleged victim?
1
If you live in a state with a Republican Senator, please contact him or him immediately and insist that s/he vote NO on Kavanaugh's confirmation to the Supreme Court.
5
The worst move they could make would be to have a pretty but not too pretty woman do all the questioning. That would look like all those sanctimonious Republican senators are scared. I predict they will have a pretty but not too pretty woman do all the questioning
1
What dark, delicious irony, that Chairman Grassley has proven to be a coward in this matter.
He has also thrown in his lot with Mitch McConnell and the a string of Republican Speakers of the House who together have torpedoed congressional traditions, comity, the constitution and the majoritarian fundaments of democracy itself to serve their desperate, hyper-partisan patriarchal ends.
3
"Cynical, sexist and cowardly." Just about sums up the Republican congress, doesn't it?
Why are there members of the judiciary committee who were there as not young men in 1991? That's 27 years. If they had any talent or self-respect wouldn't they have moved on? What does their lengthy tenures say about the electorate? They make a good case for term limits.
2
Cowardice is one lodestar of these men on the Judiciary Committee. Misogyny is another. Power for power's sake is their Modus Operandi. Until their power is forcibly taken from them--at the ballot box--they will continue to believe misogyny is one of their paths towards power.
Vote Blue in every election.
6
Yup.
Been writing about these bad optics in these comments boxes for a couple of weeks now.
And keep pointing out that the Republicans put themselves in this completely untenable position--perhaps they could try, you know, to have a little more diversity on the committee. (The Democrats aren't exactly paragons of diversity, but at least there are a few women on their part of the committee.)
No matter what happens (unless Dr. Ford foams at the mouth and speaks in tongues, which I doubt), this is going to look like a batch of clueless old misogynists dismissing another victim, and that image has gotten really tired really fast.
And, as Ms. Bazelon points out, having female staffers do the questioning doesn't help any, and makes the committeemen look even more misogynist and clueless. If any of them REALLY wanted to seem like compassionate, reasonable individuals, they would have suspended the process, allowed an FBI investigation, etc. But we all know that getting that reactionary SCOTUS majority is the prize to keep eyes on, no matter what.
Republicans seem to be cynically counting on the idea that we all have short attention spans and other concerns and they won't be punished for this at the polls. It's our job to make sure that they are. Otherwise this idiocy will just continue.
4
All I can say is term limits please!
1
Oh, common....
The entire #metoo movement has emphasized over and over again that women should be doing the talking. Senator Grassley is too wise to fall for this trap.
Besides, Senator Grassley cannot tell Dr. Ford that her story lacks evidence in a "respectful" way, not because the words in the English language do not allow for it, but because there isn't any evidence, he is a man, and she is a women. That is the definition of optics.
2
In a court room, this hearing would be over by noon. Judge Kavanaugh needs to answer 1 question under oath: Did you assault Ms Blasey when you were 17 yrs old? Not, did you ever assault 'anyone'. Not all the other women friends and class-mates that know and respect him. Ms Blasey. 15 yrs old. Yes or no.
The judge will never perjure himself, and therefore only gives categorical denials. And the cowards in the senate will never ask the question, nor subpoena Mr Judge and make him answer the same question.
As Dowd put it, it is indeed a 'kangaroo court' whose members have closed their minds to protect to themselves and their fraternity.
3
It's ironic that the biggest sex abuse scandal of our times comes out of the Catholic Church. This is the religion of the school which Brett Kavanaugh, Mark Judge, and their friends attended.
This speaks volumes.
What is it about these males raised in Catholicism that makes it seem they do not have decent respectful and admirable understanding of sexuality and in particular, of the female gender?
Clearly, these males have no respect for females.
3
Translation of this column -- "Gee, I wanted to argue how horrible it was that all men were questioning Ford. How dare they take that argument away from me!"
2
The Republicans have placed 11 (mostly elderly) white men on the Judiciary Committee. These guys can relate to Professor Ford, Ms. Ramirez or any other victim of sexual assault about as well as a Martian could. If you need a microcosm of why our government is dysfunctional, you don't have to look any further than this circus.
2
This is the perfect example of why we need to ELECT more women to Congress. Aren't we tired of these old, white men who are living in the "Mad Men" age?
2
There are no good optics left for Grassley and the rest of the old white men. If they clumsily question Dr. Ford with accusations and innuendo, they lose. If they place a no-name female prosecuter in front of this cowardly sham show, they lose. And if Mitch McConnell ignores these proceedings and focuses only on installing the unfit Kavanaugh onto the Supreme Court to meet the GOP’s arbitrary “schedule,” we all lose.
2
The left is less interesting in the truth than being able to weaponize the spectacle.
1
@Jack
The "left" is interested in the truth. Based on what we already know, when the full story comes out, somebody is going to look pretty sleazy.
You think that the word "sleazy" will apply to the accusers.
l think it might well apply to somebody else - Mark Judge for sure, and who knows who else.
1
The situation is actually worse than them not believing these women. It's that they really don't care if it's true or not. So why would anyone be comfortable going before a committee that not only could care less if what you are claiming is true or not but is actually hostile toward you for ever opening your big mouth and putting them through this inconvenience.
2
They will never "man up". After all, Grassley and company are republicans. The party has become a symbol of greed, corruption and cowardice that puts their own agenda above the nation.
4
They're old; they're white; they're males, and they're acting like guilty fraternity or prep school boys. They're not interested in the truth; they're not interested in women, except when they can exploit them either sexually or politically; they're acting like frightened boys hiding behind mom's skirt. It takes a man to "man up," and there's not a real, decent, honest man among them. It's a travesty. Where justice demands evidence, they don't want it. Where their job is to find the truth, they'd rather engage in school boy name-calling and smear tactics. They're degrading themselves, Judge Kavanaugh (although he's been doing a good job of that on his own), and the Supreme Court charged with "Equal Justice Under Law."
36
These men are so used to working with and enabling sexual predators that nothing shakes their assumption that sexual assault against women is nothing more than a minor offense on the order of shoplifting some chewing gum.
2
The Republicans can have Lindsey Graham interview Dr. Ford. It’s really the same thing as having a woman.
5
John McCain when he was alive must have functioned as Lindsey Graham’s conscience. Now that he’s gone Graham has become despicable, even the sound of his voice has become mean.
2
It is a bad look for them. Craven and weak. I'd love it if Blasey Ford said, "I see you guys hiding back there. Yoo hoo!"
3
Senator Grassley is considering having Dr. Blasey Ford questioned by a hired female lawyer under the guise of being sensitive to her. It is just a ploy to prevent the Democrats from questioning her. Senator Grassley you are so transparent.
4
This column tells you everything you need to know about how blatantly political, dishonest, and scurrilous the campaign to smear Judge Kavanaugh is. For years, the Democrats and their liberal allies complained that male Senators had ganged up on Anita Hill. Now they are appalled that they may not get to make the same complaint. I am so sick of the bigotry (all men are evil), hypocrisy, and blatant dishonesty of the Democrats. The Republicans need to just ignore all these trump up charges and this Kafkesque morass the Democrats have created and just confirm Kavanaugh--tomorrow. The Democrats in the Senate today are worse than Joe McCarthy. They are not concerned about sexual assault. These are the same people who ignored a sworn statement by Juanita Broaddrick to the FBI that credibly accused Bill Clinton of raping her, when he was an adult, with much more detail and credibility than any of the fake accusations against Kavanaugh.
1
Deeper and deeper, the Republican party sinks into the abyss.
2
The simple fact that they are worried about "the optics," and are concerned that they will be perceived as insensitive to Dr. Blasey Ford in their questioning, says it all. And the answer is not to have someone else do the questioning for them; the answer is to for these 11 white male senators to stop being whiny babies and start thinking about someone/anyone but themselves for a change. Honestly, it's easy, the majority of women do it all the time. Literally, ALL the time. So pull up your big boy pants, you poor excuses for adult men, and do your job.
2
Republican men on the Senate Judiciary Committee are clearly all hat and no cattle. Man up indeed.
2
“We reserve the option to have female staff attorneys, who are sensitive to the particulars of Dr. Blasey’s allegations and are experienced investigators, question both witnesses.” - Senator Charles Grassley of Iowa, Senate Judiciary Chairman.
SO. You need female staffers who are “sensitive to the particulars” to question a woman . . .well, let’s just keep going with that line of thinking. How about:
“We reserve the option to have female Supreme Court Judges, who are sensitive to the particulars of giving birth and are experienced in their humanity, rule on issues related to women’s health.”
3
With few exceptions, some already dead, the GOP is sexist and coward. Like their Emperor.
The few 5 exeptions should deny their vote to Kavanaugh until an FBI investigation is conducted. Anita Hill had much more respect than this but now Trump is making America great again. He will not stop until we go back to the pre0-civil rights era.
2
Cowardice is the new norm for this former august body. Both Houses of Congress have become a home for lack of courage, lack of ethics, lack of morals, but it is The New Church of our Lady of Hypocrisy.
1
Chuck Grassley and Orrin Hatch were present at the judiciary hearings when they supported Clarence Thomas and denigrated Anita Hill in 1991. Good Lord, what a case for term limits.
Worse yet, these old fools give the rest of us old white men a really bad rap. As a octogenarian I resent being bunched with the dinosaurs mentioned above. Bernie Sanders is one of my role models, not these two geezers. Heck, i support Lady Pocahontas, not Traitor Trump.
Give me a break!
3
I wonder if the “stand in” woman prosecutor will only ask questions on behalf of the Republican members of the committee and have the Democrat members ask their own questions?
Brett Kavanaugh - one more example of Trump "hirinig the very best."
2
Grassley, Hatch, Graham and Trump founders of the Old White Entitled Rich Man’s Club. Kavanaugh, Jordan, and Rubio are up-and-coming young whippersnappers.
3
Why do I get the feeling that all of these Kavanaugh supporters who say the women are lying and who actually bought the "locker room talk" nonsense and believed Trump when he said his 19 accusers were lying and "too ugly to assault" nonethelss completely believed Juanita Broaddrick, Paula Jones, and Kathleen Willey? Clearly for Republicans, it's not the what but the who.
2
So Ford's lawyer (a Democratic operative) doesn't want her to have to talk to Kavanaugh's lawyer (a woman)?
Because you believe women?
Incredible.
Sexual abuse of women is about power over women. In the case of Judge Kavanaugh it morphed into judicial power over women and their reproductive rights. Given this, he is unfit for the Supreme Court.
42
Sooo, what does it mean to “Man up”? Like, be all super-manly and brave and such? Y’know, stereotyping. Is “Woman up” the equivalent? Like if I tell a woman to make me a sandwich only to have her refuse, I can say “Just woman up!” and that would be allowed?
Confusing times indeed...
1
The piece begins, "Outsourcing this responsibility to female aides or an outside lawyer because of bad optics is sexist and cowardly."
Well of course. For decades Grassley and his Republican crew on the committee have shown themselves as extremely sexist. For generations, you cannot get a Republican seat here if you are not. Racism has long been one of their signatures too. And Grassley is indeed a coward.
2
Totally agree , Senator Grassley do your job , the job you were elected to do , the job you swore to execute to the fullest of your ability , the job you owe to all the Americans who elected you , the job that should have given you the wisdom to know better , the job of voting against a tainted candidate , and lastly do the right thing for Ms. Ford who not only deserves to be questioned by you and your peers respectfully , as you were taught by your mama , and not by one of your standins . You owe the entire nation that much .
2
I can just hear a question posed by one of these "sensitive" females:
"Dr. Ford; we heard Judge Kavanaugh declare he was a virgin during high school; will you please tell us how old you were when you lost yours?"
You can bet this is the type of question on the minds of Grassley and Hatch- but too cowardly to pose themselves.
1
Female surrogate attorneys aside (please), Sen. Grassley disqualified himself from questioning Prof. Blasey and included at least some of his colleagues in his own statement:
"We reserve the option to have female staff attorneys, who are sensitive to the particulars of Dr. Blasey’s allegations ..."
This quote can only mean that Grassley sees himself and his pals as insensitive to the particulars. They know they are not capable, yet they blunder forward, bull elephants smashing senselessly through the halls of the Capitol.
Kavanaugh is not the only one who should resign. Term limits might be good on the Court, but they would be an even bigger improvement in the Senate and House.
3
I want to see these men discover that they too will find it as difficult as Kavanaugh apparently did when asked simple questions in his Fox TV interview (have not seen it yet).
These are men who perhaps will become as tongue tied as the president to whom they pray, supine on their prayer mats.
Let them be seen by the entire world struggling to do something that may well be as difficult for them as it would be were they to be asked to speak in the foreign language that is their president's English, trying to show some shred of decency to a woman - this woman, Christine Blasey Ford.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Citizen US SE
3
That's the point ...... the evolution of what 'Man Up' means ... from what it used to mean, to what it should mean.
Having failed to vet a sexual harasser on his own staff -- since removed -- Grassley has no business asking anyione anything, let alone chairing confirmation hearings by the Senate Judiciary Committee. He should recuse himself from all matters relating to sexual misconduct by a nominee.
2
Senator Grassley and his eleven angry, old, white, GOP, male campadrés on his Judiciary Committee bring the definition of "cowardice" to a new low. And that doesn't even begin to address the definitions of "dereliction"and "incompetence."
4
Who says racism and sexism in America has ended? Here you have 10 White males about to question a female witness for a pending appointment of a privileged White male to the Supreme Court that is 55 percent White male in a country where White males comprise less than 30% of the population.
2
When was the last time any senator abdicated his or her role of questioning a witness? Cowards.
3
Don't these men have wives? Don't they want the respect of their wives? the respect of their constituents? their peers? the country?
C'mon old white men, act like you deserve the respect you demand.
2
Um, allowing a female prosecutor to ask Ford questions isn't sexist.
2
Cynical, sexist, cowardly? Like waiting til after Kavanaugh hearings to drop Dr. Ford’s letter?
1
Perhaps Ann Coulter or Laura Ingraham?
Why not just nominate known registered sexual predator Bill Cosby, "America's Dad", such a decent fellow with such a great legacy. At least he admitted he doped the women into submission before he sexually abused them and did not lie about it which puts him a step above BK.
1
Grassley is a cowardly amoral Senator who has no interest in appointing a candidate of judicial integrity and
Independence. He only wants a hard right partisan who will support the Republican agenda and power base.
There should be a thorough investigation of the charges and the Republican Senators should question their nominee and his accuser and show some moral integrity.
I feel that Grassley is unworthy of his title and should resign from his office that he despoils. He is truly pathetic!
4
"Republican senators have no problem trying Dr. Blasey in the court of public opinion. "
The NYT has no problem convicting Kavanaugh in the same court.
3
You don't think a woman attorney can do a good a job as a man?
That's sexist. Shame on you.
1
The very phrase."Man Up", is insulting. What does "woman up" mean then. Talk about hypocrites. I used to dislike Trump intensely. You are such a hypocrite. Now I fear the liberals more. Woman up Lara. Trump has my vote next time.
1
How about "human being up?" Does that work for you? It doesn't seem to for the GOP.
2
Time to hit rocking chair, obviously Grassley lives in the past thinking he is a man and his believes are final.
Women should be in the kitchen and keep their mouth shut.
The whole world has moved on but some American men are still grasping for control
2
So hilarious. Yes , let’s let all these white men question Ms. Ford so the media can throw their smokescreen over the findings that will favor Kudge Kavanaugh by claiming misogyny. Yeah , let’s go ahead and do that.
The gutless Rs are going to hide behind a woman's skirts.
because they lack the guts to question Dr. Ford.
These hearings are a farce. the last thing Grassley and
crew want is fairness.
1
The old boys club is alive and well at Georgetown Prep, Yale, the US Senate, the Catholic Church and elsewhere. The GOP members of the US Senate simultaneously spout Christian values and shame women who have been the victims of their “sport” aka “Boy being boys” while two strong young men, shove a young woman into a room, hold her down, try to pull off her clothes, muzzle her and attempt rape. How manly, how gallant and respectful these young men are! And then when the victims finally get the courage to come forward, they are disrespected again! “Oh, she must be mixed-up!” says Orrin Hatch. Read the Georgetown Prep yearbook Mr Hatch. She’s not confused at all. It’s there in black and white and you and the rest of the GOP are enabling these young men even now. Here’s the message you send, “Go ahead, treat women badly and you too could end up on the Supreme Court or even in the Presidency! Go for it!”
Grassley is afraid of the optics he might reveal if he questions Dr. Ford. This sad pathetic old man should hang it up and go fishing.
2
Look at that poor man's face.
That Grassley there at the top of the article.
A man smug and certain of his superiority, a man years since realizing this is all the world has to offer champions such as himself.
You can see it in his pose. He's ready, man.
Ready for the Jello-wrestling he arranged for the good old boys on The Committee.
Oh My God, a hot female lawyer and a spunky female PhD, duking it our down there on the floor as the Emperor watches from on high, the winner per-determined in his calcified brain.
Now, all this complaining from the Left? You want Grassley down there with the girls, asking questions, pretending he to hear the answers?
You may be naive, you may be foolish, but you're sure to be disappointed.
You'll never see Grassley rolling around that lime Jello in his three piece suit.
Though it would be kind of cool.
1
Don't be silly Lara. The current batch of Republicans have no capacity to man up about anything. They are venal, hypocritical, deceitful and profoundly selfish people solely devoted to sustaining their power.
2
Solely devoted to sustaining their own gerrymandered, voter suppressed power. That's the game. There's nothing more.
2
Man up? Seriously? Doesn't anyone at the Times view this as a sexist headline?
1
The NYT will be the first to point out the bad optics when the circus begins.
Does no one at NYT realize how incredible sexist the phrase "man up" is?
1
I agree with everything the author writes, until the end. She's fighting sexism, then closes with the sexist "Man up," which is the male equivalent of the equally offensive "Pull up your big girl pants." Why oh why would she fall on that tired, sexist cliche to summarize her otherwise well-researched opinions? Then the NYT's copy editors seal the slogan in their headline. Sigh...
1
Chicken squat cowards - Grassley and Hatch do not have the courage to question someone who can stand up to them. They are poseurs not men.
2
How did the Republican Party degernate into this unrecognizable collection of creepy people whose insatiable greed and lust for power has transformed them into vampires sucking the breath out of our country? They have no scruples, no adherence to anything resembling American values, no moral compass. Lying? Sure. Appointing lobbyists paid to skirt legislation and rules as officials in every cabinet department? What’s the problem with that?
Us party poopers - us Democrats - maybe enough of us will show up at the polls to vote. Maybe enough Independents- people formerly Republicans - will join us. Keep your fingers crossed. But if that doesn’t happen, we are going to have to do something. I want my country back.
2
This article makes me worry, for the first time, that a woman, placed in charge of interrogating a female witness, will be forgiven for playing, "hardball" with the witness. Would an 85 year old Grassley or Hatch be able to get away with asking, "Did Mr. Kavanaugh touch your Vagina?" No. But Grassley and Hatch would be more than happy to remain smug onlookers while a woman asks Dr. Blasey Ford the question they couldn't, or wouldn't.
1
Judge K: Which of these sex acts do you think disqualifies you from being a virgin? This is distasteful, so please answer yes or no.
Vaginal Intercourse
Fellatio
Cunnilingus.
Thank you.
How old were you, using your own definition, that you no longer were a virgin. That shouldn't be too difficult as you've already spoken to this on Fox News. In the interests of moving away from this salacious topic, please just give me your age.
And what year would that be?
Thank you.
The Supreme Court requires a judge who will be honest and certainly not lie to the Senate. Don't you agree.
Thank you.
So if credible women say you lost your virginity before that date, that would disqualify you?
What exactly is it that these old, white Republican men are afraid of? They are afraid of embarrassing themselves by showing just how ignorant they are about all aspects of sexual assault. They are afraid that on national television they will have to say any or all of the following words: vagina, penis, oral sex, pelvic thrust, etc. They are afraid to think about their own possible exploitation of women when they were young. They are worried that someone might ask them whether they would support a candidate for any job, let alone a seat on the Supreme Court, if that person in any way molested their wife, their daughter, their granddaughter, their sister, and, yes, their son, etc. Because if the data means anything, there are at least several of them who know such a story in their own lives.
To hide behind the questions of a female prosecutor is to show just how fearful they are. They don't want to make a mistake. They don't want to relive the Anita Hill testimony. They don't want to show that they have not learned anything from that case.
They just don't want to sully themselves. Let a woman do it for them. That way, when this is over, they won't have to take a shower to remove the mud that they want slung.
1
We don’t see admirable men on that side of the aisle any longer, nor in the White House. We see bullies, or, equivalently, cowards. Why anyone mistakes cowardly abuse of power for strength and manliness is astounding and depressing. What are we teaching our kids about morality when they grow up to admire such as Trump and Grassley and Cruz and the rest?
605
@Dagwood You forgot about non-denying adulterers like Trump and closeted "moralists."
Nothing new here. When I first started representing plaintiffs in discrimination cases so many years ago, if my client was a woman, sure enough, the defense would bring on a woman attorney to sit at counsel table. Sometimes they were even allowed to question the complainant. I never met a juror or judge who was favorably impressed. I am not saying there aren't exceptionally qualified female defense counsel, but the male leadership of the big law firms were always in charge. Things have changed over the years as women inch toward being a majority in the legal profession. With the next few elections we will hopefully see the removal of the old boys of the Senate replaced with more exceptionally qualified women joining those already there who can truly represent the interests of all the people in our country.
8
@James Klimaski true but the FBI should investigate see what other evidence corroborates her testimony.
@James Klimaski: How about saying "exceptionally qualified people" rather than women. Or is sexism permissible as long as it is aimed at men?
I recall hearing a female California congress person say "the best man for the job is a woman" and the crowd cheered.
Maybe you're on to something here. Let's not fix sexism, let's just start picking on someone else instead.
I doubt whether anyone on the Judiciary Committee is qualified to determine the credibility of Dr. Blasey's accusation.
That's why the 85-year-old Grassley should have acceded Dr. Blasey's and her lawyers' request to have the FBI investigate. That's their job in background checks for such important nomination hearings.
Utilizing their experts in this area of investigation, the FBI could then make a report to the Judiciary Committee.
21
Senator Grassley and his Republican colleagues are so far removed from what is the right thing to do for America as opposed to what the GOP wants, they really have no clue how to interview Dr. Blasey and Ms Ramirez without revealing their true selves.
I find it quite just that Dr. Blasey and Ms. Ramirez stand up to these men by demanding exactly what would have been demanded of a Democratic candidate - and FBI investigation and a chance to interview (ne, interrogate) the candidate. Any accusers would be treated like royalty in that case.
See how they run, trying to get a vote off quickly, demanding a hearing before the accusers can properly prepare, questioning memories, timeframes, and intent.
The truth is irrelevant to them. Unless of course the truth is inconvenient for a Democratic candidate. Then morals, ethics, and every high-minded concept is a prerequisite.
Just watch Mr. Sessions talk about Bill Clinton around the Starr investigation. Or read memos from Senator McConnell regarding vetting of President Obama's candidates. Or even the words of Senator Graham. Wonderful words conveniently forgotten.
15
Usually when one grows older, they learn and become more wise, not always but sometimes. It is obvious by their pronunciations and statements, especially in the case of Grassley, McConnell, Hatch and the others who have been vocal its saddening to find out they have wasted their time on this planet. Zip, Zero learning, they have probably stayed consistently retrograde from the time they entered Congress. How can mankind evolve with people like these?
I think they need to be weeded out. How about we start politically by throwing them out of government and maybe nature can take over after that? Can we do it?
13
@Gary Valan: "How can mankind evolve with people like these?"
Mankind won't improve until we find a better way to pick leaders.
1
It’s not that the GOP is too afraid to question Dr. Ford. They are too savvy to do so. Their contempt for the confirmation process has been clear enough in their destruction of the one for Merrick Garland confirmation process and in their rushing of the one for Kavanaugh. Their singular focus is on power. They know the Democrats are powerless in the face of their ruthlessness: Remember how the Democrats went on every news network and held up Senate business to force a proper hearing for Merrick Garland? You don’t because they didn’t. They have not even been able to make effective use of the Garland debacle during the Kavanaugh hearings. They are the butter through which the ruthless Republican knife slices. Barring a new accuser who has hard evidence. Kavanaugh will be confirmed.
3
The Dems are hoping to use Republican senators’ questions against them politically. So much for openness and decency.
2
@Working Stiff an should they not? is this some type of tea and crumpets party? Its down in the gutter dirty politics as practiced by the russpublicans - its an eye for an eye. If you can't take it - don't dish it out.
There is another national interest at stake, American jurisprudence. Is this the face we want to present to American citizens and other countries in the world.
3
Brett Kavanaugh should simply allow any investigation to go on to show clearly that, as he says, he never assaulted Christine Blasey Ford.
But there is too much at stake and Trump is part of the equation, pushing Kavanaugh nomination to ensure a future safety net in case of impeachment.
In this turbulent situation the most important part is forgotten: American people which deserve a respectable member of the Supreme Court with a crystal clear past.
Unfortunately this matter has became a private affair between Trump, the Republicans and Kavanaugh's greed.
5
Actually, after further reflection; I agree with the Senators on replacing them with women. But why stop at one hearing alone? Let's replace these delicate men folk with women who can get the job done permanently.
8
Man up! I thought that the feminist did not allow us to use that machismo word! It is actually used in other languages. In Spanish is, " se un hombre". I stopped using it in Spanish, because of its sexist connotation but now I can use it, thanks to the author.
I am an older man, and there are millions of us. My generation was responsible for the freedoms and well-being of the younger generation. Millions died in WW2. WE protested aginst the war in Vietnam; marched for civil rights, etc. I demand respect from radicals like the author.
2
@perdiz41 I'd think a person of wisdom would realize that true respect can never be demanded. At best you'll receive condescending words of faint praise. At worst you'll be dismissed as irrelevant.
1
I agree completely. But I do want to point out that the phrase "Man up" is a sexist statement that demands of males a proscribed set of attributes. It's use in the headline is especially ironic given the op-ed on this same web site that discusses a survey in which young girls feel themselves empowered to be who they want to be while young boys feel compelled to be strong and athletic or face a backlash.
1
After all the headlines about how bad it will look with old white men questioning her, is it any wonder that he's hesitating?
This could cut either way. If he could question her in a manner that shows that he respects who she is, and shows some empathy, it could improve his "optics" of this whole situation greatly. If it doesn't appear that way, it would look terrible, and the specter of the Anita Hill questioning would be magnified.
@mlbex: They plan to ask biting questions. And they plan to hide behind a female attorney to do the dirty work. They're not looking for truth. They're looking to undermine and denigrate her.
The desire for Grassely and others to "man up" is not realistic.
Even Murkowski and Collins won't commit to voting against Kavanaugh, even though his lies and evasions during the initial interviews were very apparent.
Look at what the Republicans have done to our country, to our protections and rights, to the real economy, to our allies.
There is no hope of them putting Country first, let alone women.
6
There is nothing wrong with having counsel for the Senate Judiciary Committee question Dr. Christine Blasey Ford. (Remember, the Watergate committee had its counsel question significant witnesses because the questioning was so important. In fact, it was Fred Thompson, then a lawyer for the committee, who asked Alexander Butterfield the key question about the Nixon tapes.)
This column by Lara Bazelon is about optics and appearances and male and female and bravery and cowardice, but not about truth. It shows pretty clearly that Christine Blasey Ford's testimony on Thursday, should it happen, will be about politics, not truth.
It is a safe bet that Senator Diane Feinstein will ask for another postponement. Her singular goal is delay, delay. delay.
I'll make a few more predictions: First, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford will decide to not testify. Second, Ms. Deborah Ramirez will never want to testify. Third, Judge Kavanaugh will be approved by the committee and by the full Senate. Fourth, when the time comes for the next nomination, President Trump will nominate a woman to the Supreme Court. Fifth, and the safest bet of all, Senator Diane Feinstein and Senator Kamala Harris will do everything they can to defeat President Trump's predicted female nominee. They will even ask her about her sex life.
3
@Larry very well written. Thank you
1
@Larry Watergate was a months-long criminal investigation, and Senators could viably argue they had other things to do. This is a one day hearing. These old Republican glory hounds don't want camera time? You know something's amiss. Come on.
Well, we shall see.... Good you committed your predictions to writing so we have a record when they turn out to be wrong. Except Kavanaugh getting confirmed. The Senate Republicans have made it pretty clear they don’t care what the truth is and will confirm no matter what.
Of course they want to duck the questioning because for them it's still 1991. They may be given questions written by their staff, but they won't be able to stick to the script. I fully expect one of them to ask Dr. Ford what she was wearing at the time of the incident-my money's on Hatch but Grassley is a close second.
2
Grassley is 85 years old. He was born in 1933 in lily-white Iowa, and nurtured in an isolated cultural climate exponentially removed from today’s reality. He was approaching middle age when the women’s movement peaked in the 1970s. He is incapable of making an unbiased judgement in the Kavanaugh case.
Yes men should face these women, but they should be unbiased and enlightened. The women will not get a fair hearing from Grassley and the other members of the Senate Judiciary Committee whether they are forced to face them or not. They have already made up their minds, and it has nothing to do with whether the allegations are true or not. It has to do with party loyalty and the securing of power, which the Kavanaugh nomination is all about.
8
Senator Grassley,
I personally like the comment that said that after all is said and done, the men in the committee will have to call in a woman to ask the questions and save their bacon. Fitting.
4
It doesn't matter who questions Dr. Ford, it's a done deal. Brett Kavanaugh will be confirmed, and we will begin a generation of rule by the beliefs of the base - thirty years of backward evolution. As Saudi Arabia seeks to break the egg and struggle into freedom, America is choosing to go the other way. For the next 30 years, we will be governed not by reason but by religious doctrine. In the near future, we will program the human mind in the computer, and this will be based on a "survival" algorithm. Then, we will finally learn how we confuse the mind about what exactly is supposed to survive with our ridiculous beliefs. At that point we will begin the long trek back to reason and sanity. See RevolutionOfReason.com
2
Grassley always worries about his image, and is eager to please his bosses. He's not as strong as he thinks he is.
1
It is all of a piece-an unwillingness to be accountable for your behavior. Senators who behaved badly in 1991 in their interactions with Anita Hill would have to be willing to grapple with their past and come to grips with how not to be disrespectful, bullying and worse. Have we seen any men in the public arena hold themselves accountable for their behavior and acknowledge their behavior was wrong or at the very least disrespectful-still waiting.
2
Will Dr. Ford show? Probably not. Her life can only be made worse, when her assertions and motives are questioned.
Democrats and Trump haters everywhere are taking the Nike commercial to heart."Believe in something. Even if it means sacrificing everything."
Whichever General is leading this liberal charge over the cliff, had better be in front.
@Mike Written as nonsense. Want to bet which party is headed over the cliff in a few weeks?
@Mike Why don't you give us the information you have that there is some unknown "general leading this liberal charge". For example, I CAN provide for you the Arkansas Project, designed of one purpose: to find someone, anything, on Bill Clinton in order to bring him down, "and if you don't find anything, make something up", a quote by Richard Mellen Scaife, one of those "generals" on the Arkansas Project; I can also provide for you the name of John Whitehead of the Rutherford Institution, a rabid Clinton hater who prodded Paula Jones to continue her quest, even after Judge Weber Wright threw it out for having no merit, and offering to pay her. Something tell me, Mike, that you believed those women, along with Juanita Broaddrick, who had even signed an affadavit saying no attack had occurred. And yes, I'm old school. I do believe in not filling the SC with liars, misogynists and sexual harassers and assaulters. We will simply have to disagree on that .But feel good: it would look like the harassers and assaulters are winning. Congratulations. Now, run along and get more guns (before the Democrats take them away) so that you can protect your wife and daughters from rapists....IF you even would believe them.
I look forward to reading your scholarship, Professor Bazelon. Of even greater relevance to your argument here, though, is that women litigators have also been regularly conscripted (*propped up*) to defend corporations and often monstrous managers who have engaged in various gross forms of sexual harassment and/or sex discrimination, AND their race/ethinicity/sexual orientation equivalents. The thinking is that will "put a nicer face" on the unlawful conduct. I walked away from two Big Law jobs when it became clear that was what I would be tolerated and even valued for as a litigator.
4
I agree with the Senators on replacing them with women. But why stop at one hearing alone? Let's replace these delicate men folk with women who can get the job done permanently.
4
Ms Bazelon: great piece! The R men are more worried about optics than substance. Should a female lawyer or staff member pose the questions, the questions were written by the R men not an independent inquisitor. If that's so, as I believe, then "man up" and ask the questions yourselves. This is a charade plain and simple and such an obvious one to boot.
Donald wants "a win", the Senators want to please the Evangelicals and the Evangelicals would support Lucifer for SCOTUS if he promised to overturn Roe v. Wade. Someday perhaps the United States of America that I served in uniform for 26 years will regain her place as a beacon for civility, tolerance, integrity, compassion, strength and honor. Right now, not so much. 2018 and 2020-Make America Great Again!!
3
The true issue is raw power, and protecting male power over women. That's why overturning Roe v. Wade is so essential to these men, and everything else stems from that decision.
Roe v. Wade overturned centuries of women's powerlessness over their own bodies, and freed them to wield power. Biology was destiny no longer.
For decades the fight over Roe has been muddied by "life" versus "choice" and by emotional and hysterical talk about murder and the rights of the unborn. So terrified are most men, and some women, by the freedom bestowed by Roe, some even resorted to murdering doctors who performed abortions, and bombing abortion clinics, and screaming and threatening women outside abortion clinics.
Of course Grassley et al are "bullies." Nothing threatens men more than loss of their power. they will do anything to keep it. Now, after 40 long years, they have their man, and their chance. Do we really think they'll just give up?
Kavanaugh's alleged behavior is a piece of that power structure.
Women as objects,as vessels, as property, powerless when it comes to power over their bodies and reproductive rights.
We have a self-confessed sexual assaulter in the Oval Office. Those who argue that Grassley et al are out of touch ignore Kavanaugh's age.
It's not about he-said-she-said, or witnesses.
Kamal Harris said it best. Are there any laws controlling men's bodies? No.
Overturn Roe, and return men to the rawest, most naked power they prize. Legal control over women's bodies.
5
One of the two conditions that Dr. Ford set for her testimony is that it be fair. The Republican proposal to farm out their questioning to a female hired gun is fundamentally unfair. If the male Republicans insist on having a female prosecutor question Dr. Ford, she should refuse to answer. Come on guys, Man Up!
3
When I covered Iowa politics in the first half of the '70s, Charles Grassley was a rising figure in politics. He was sharp as a tack, but the product of a small town school and colleges little-known if at all outside Iowa (where he earned his masters degree in a year). He was a farmer by trade, which means he had a great combination--old fashioned horse sense and book learning. Iowa may be "flyover" country, but reading was and still is an almost universal pass-time and debate is literate and well informed. As he moved up the ladder, sadly, he got further from those Iowa roots--and deeper into the Washington-way. The horse sense and intellectual curiosity were replaced by party (political variety)-sense and intellectual freeze drying. And so we now see the shell of who once was--a corn husk to be thrown away rather than an ear for food, ethanol and other useful products. And he has come to believe that to stay even with glitzier younger snators' resumes, h must adopt their morals as well. That' the real Washington swamp at work. He nds to go back to his home of New Hartford (thn 500 people), midway btween the big city lights of wavrly (3,650) and Waterloo (47,000)--all small nough that if he'd lived the Gorgetown lifestyle for even a night or two h'd have spnt months going to school, doing chorss and--if he was lucky--sleping in the barn with the horses.
Oh, please. So, what are you saying? That we should judge people by their sex? We can decide if people are telling the truth or should do this or that based on their sex? Really, the new think is just like the old think. You know what the difference between the seekers of equality and the old boy system is? Nothing. The seekers of "equality" just want their turn on top. Whether it's gender or racial or ethnic or what have you.
Besides, Grassley can't even understand that interrupting a congressional hearing isn't exercising free speech. I would love to ask him - if they are exercising free speech, why are the police dragging them out? He's not even a lawyer, not that most of the lawyer's on the Senate seem capable of questioning anyone (not that most of the lawyers I've seen in most televised trials seem capable of questioning anyone). Of course he shouldn't do it. Who knows if who they choose will have any skill at it. And, sometimes, there is nothing you can do. It depends on a lot of things.
So if an all male committee questions her, that looks bad. If they don't, that looks bad, too. There is no winning with dems.
1
Grassley and those other "mind made up" GOP senators are what is known as "atavistic throwbacks," i.e., specimens from an earlier stage of evolution. I know it's not very Christian of me, but why is it that every time I look at pictures of Grassley or Mitch McConnel, I think of the products of those southern brother/sister marriages or at least first cousin unions.
2
Half of the Democratic narrative claims the panel has too many men who aren’t qualified to question Ford, now the other half states they should and ought to “man up.” This simply demonstrates that this is a political stunt, and that facts are not relevant to the desired Democratic outcome. And for the record, isn’t “man up” an atavistic sexist remark?
3
This entire episode is a farce and Grassley is certain the clown with the biggest and reddest nose. His disdain for women is palpable as is his rush to get this over with at any cost.
More reminiscent of medieval rulers than the senior deliberative body of a world power, if Grassley and his gang cannot bring themselves to discuss these allegations with an educated and rational woman perhaps they should step down and give way to people with more stamina---and empathy.
We deserve better politicians and more recognition of the systemic belittling of women and their rights.
3
I am sure greasy Grassley and the walrus from Kentucky knew about Kavanaugh's problems but were forced to put his nomination because Kavanagh promised to protect Trump when he gets impeached. Now they are calculating the political costs of ramming this nomination while more allegations appear. Trump once again put his party in a no win situation. If the democrats are lucky the clueless GOP buffoons will be forced by Trump to put Kavanagh to vote. Win or lose they WILL get a shellacking in november.
2
Beyond the optics, it’s significant that they are bringing in a sex crimes prosecutor as if to signal that the victim herself will be on trial. This is a senate hearing not a criminal court.
1
I have a solution for the senators so frightened about questioning women directly as to appear a bully. It's not the women they are trying to protect; make no mistake. Instead, why don't the women hire men to answer the questions since this subset of questioning men are so fragile and wobbly kneed. It seems the senate wants to create some sort of prophylactic shield keeping men away from women, circa 1800's. It's insidiously ridiculous. American women ain't no hot house violets needing special protective treatment!
There goes the theory that wisdom comes with age.
Thanks to the courage of Christine Blasey-Ford, it is now time to introduce the term "Woman Up."
3
"Outsourcing this responsibility to female aides or an outside female lawyer because of bad optics is sexist and cowardly."
Yeah, all true.
But even more important, Grassley is an 84 year old farmer. He is not a lawyer. If he does his own questioning, there is a good chance that Dr. Ford's lawyer, Michael Bromwich, is going to object to questions that are legally improper or improper as to form and make Grassley look like a complete fool who cannot even formulate his questions.
1
Any female attorney who agrees to do the Judiciary Committee's Republicans' dirty work will be committing career suicide sooner or later. Any mercenary competent enough to be asked to take this gig should be smart enough to realize what a crummy idea it is. And, no matter how high the compensation, it couldn't possibly be enough. No matter her political orientation or devotion to the ultra-right agenda, no woman should accept this thankless task.
Notwithstanding how much I'd love to see Kamala Harris have at it, shouldn't it follow that Democrats on the committee can bring in their own lawyer to question Kavanaugh?
2
She is there to answer our representatives. If they don't have any questions then she doesn't have to answer. I guess the time lost will be given to the (D) senators.
They can outsource their responsibilities, they were elected to represent the voters, not to subcontract the job an sit back and let a hitman carry out the tasks.
We want to see boys being boys, no matter how young, old, and decrepit they may be. We want to watch the face of those who are doing the work honestly. Inflections mean a lot. Get lots of Botox if you must, but do ask the questions or know that witnesses are under no obligation to talk to ANYONE other than the hosts.
Right on article. We pay these politicians a lot of money to do their jobs, which for most of them, probably comes down to a few months a year of actual work. If a Senator can't ask a woman questions regarding sexual assault ,abortion,rape etc. , then resign. It's time we gave term limits to them all anyhow. Many are just cruising along, handing off their work to assistants,showing up. How many men of 82 are in touch with what's going on with womens rights,attitudes etc? Either do the work or resign.
33
@SLD Since this is your position, when the senators do ask the hard questions you can't villainize them. When they ask questions like: How much do you remember having to drink during the night in question? If she says nothing or not much should she be believed? If she says she was drunk should we believe the veracity of her claims ? When they ask how she can be so sure, given all of the people she says were present refute her claims, Brett Kavanaugh was even there. The problem is your ilk is going to demonize these men regardless.
1
Thank you for this piece. The headline says what many Americans are thinking
15
Let's not forget there are several female senators who are on the committee and not worry about whether Hatch, Graham and Grassley can rise to the occasion.
4
@Sue Metu Those female senators are democrats and can be relied upon to treat Dr. Ford with decency and respect, unlike the 11 male Republicans on the committee.
1
@Sue Metu
The female Senators are all Democrats.
The Republicans are all white men.
See the difference?
@Sue Metu
Can you name one republican female senator on the committee?
1
I find it distastefully ironic that these men are quick to decry abortion, and sometimes even birth control, yet are equally quick to judge a women being sexually assaulted as a mere infraction that deserves no judgement on the man involved in the assault.
It is time to retire Grassley, Hatch and Graham, as they cannot possibly represent their constituency.
44
@LMR
"Grassley, Hatch and Graham, ... cannot possibly represent their constituenc[ies].
Ah, but alas they do. They truly do.
A hearing in the Senate is not a pelvic exam, and Dr. Ford is not an eight-year-old female gymnast. I have no doubt that the Republican Committee members will throw professional ethics out the window, but Dr. Ford will not be alone in the examining room with them. If the hearing takes place at all, and if it is open to the press, we will all be able to judge whether the proprieties were observed. Many, of course, will see no fault in the Republican tactics, no matter how abusive they are, and regardless of whether they are employed by a woman or a man. To them I say, "Why do you countenance the kind of political malpractice you would never tolerate if it were perpetrated by your doctor?"
12
Grassley merely doesn’t want to be the one to publicly evidence what is already evident: he’ll do anything to get his ‘pet’ conservative appointed to the Supreme Court including not believing the allegations lodged against his ‘pet’. He therefore hires a surrogate to do his ‘dirty work’.
15
Come now, Prof. Bazelon. This is all a game for lawyers. Optics are just part of it and women lawyers of all political persuasions play these games just as men do.
From Lara Bazelon, "What It Takes to Be a Trial Lawyer If You’re Not a Man":
"Some female trial lawyers have succeeded in turning the attributes associated with their gender—compassion, warmth, accessibility—to their advantage, particularly once they get in front of a jury. Shawn Holley, a prominent entertainment lawyer in Los Angeles, told me that she makes her gender work for her......."
As for trying Dr. Blasey "in the court of public opinion", well that is what politics is about. It is ugly. It is just a question of who gets dumped on.
Dr. Blasey is to be admired for her courage, whatever she remembers, but now it is a question of her backbone.
3
They may not have the courage and class to question Dr. Ford themselves, but women can ensure that they will have to answer to them come November 6.
33
The Donald does not like to fire people in person, except in his reality show.
22
Read the Facebook post by Sunny Izme about Kavanaugh. It ends with the point made in this article, but has a whole lot more.
9
Well, one thing this entire episode has shown: Republicans have been right all along in their anti-Darwin stances. It is certainly clear that that Grassley and Hatch haven't evolved at all in the 27 years since the Anita Jill/Clarence Thomas star chamber.
150
The Republicans seem to be acting like the roman catholic church, worried more about the image than the substance of the accusations.
257
@Awake
There is no "substance"--just vapor, reshaped memories of her past. One's belief an event occurred is neither fact nor evidence. For that, need a time machine.
2
@Alice's Restaurant Do you say that about the memories of victims of pedophilia by priests and rabbis?
To the contrary Alice, direct witness testimony is one of the strongest forms of evidence.
It is more important to have an experienced sex crime prosecutor question Brett Kavanaugh than Blasey Ford or any of his other accusers!
70
@lvzee Ah, so true, but the Republican Senators on the Judiciary Committee will be selecting the "experienced sex crime prosecutor," and who would doubt that their choice will be probing on Ford and seeking to unnerve her but will go very lightly on Kavanaugh. A real set-up job! That's why an impartial FBI investigation of all the charges is essential. And that's also why the Republican Senators will not accede. Very disgraceful!
@lvzee: This isn't a court, it's the Senate. It's a dog and pony show, where your Republican stalwarts want to look less like 29th misogynists.
Senator Grassley and Hatch continue to shame the American people by their naked hypocrisy and cowardice.
235
@Steven of the Rockies.
Goodness! Don’t use the word “naked” around them. They’ll think you’re trying to sully the reputation of a Federalist Society member—one of their own.
“Hypocrisy?” “Cowardice?” They’re OK. They’re used to those accusations, or at least they don’t think they matter because they think we don’t know what they mean.
You seem to be feeling patronized. I know I am.
I couldn’t agree more with the author that the idea a woman must question Dr. Blasey Ford is sexist and cynical. And calculating. It’s the same reason so many sexist men prefer female divorce attorneys. Sen. Grassley rejected an FBI investigation and additional witnesses—it’s hypocritical to flatly demand a female outside counsel and the false quasi-legal imprimatur that would conjure.
So far as unforced legal errors go, if the Blasey Ford camp consents I believe it would hamstring the hearing to an unrecoverable degree. As noted here, too many Republican senators have announced or implied their intent to confirm Kavanaugh regardless of the hearing’s content: it’s avowed bad faith.
Author Lara Bazelon lost me, though, with the sexist and cynical admonition to ‘man up,’ is cringeworthy in general, let alone in context. Now is the time to appreciate every amazing and evolved feminist man in our lives.
16
@Jck I think she was being ironic.
@Jck
"Republican senators have announced or implied their intent to confirm Kavanaugh regardless of the hearing’s content: it’s avowed bad faith."
Avowed bad faith? Nope: it"s just suggesting that whatever complaints are made about alleged stolen kisses or apples swiped from vendors' carts 36 years ago should have no impact on the confirmation process of a judge heading to the SC. That anyone would insist that Kavanaugh's indiscretions as a kid should make him ineligible to the SC as an adult just goes to show the level of insanity the feminist Left has reached; you might as well suggest that Blasey Ford be kicked out of her job for pulling another girl's hair in kindergarten or stealing her Barbie doll, or bullying a young woman to bulimia in high school. Nobody, male or female, has a perfect record of angelic behavior from birth; yet with the pound me too movement, any woman can conveniently come out of the woodwork to smear any given man with a weak story that allegedly happened decades prior, and not only should we all believe her and ignore the inconsistencies; he should also be banished from society, and we should all celebrate her awesomeness for coming forth.
The hysteric, shrieking crazies have really taken over the proverbial asylum.
Wait a minute. For well over a week now all we've heard are complaints from the left that those mean old men picked on poor Anita Hill all those years ago. The Republican senators "glowered" at her and said stupid man-things. They didn't understand, because they were men. And now the stupid, sexist men have given way to a woman, and...more complaints? It's almost as if there's no pleasing the feminists.
33
@Ed L. The point (which you seem to have missed) being that it seems these same Republican senators have still not evolved enough to be confident that they’ll be able to handle the hearing themselves without continuing to display their boorish insensitivity.
Please reread the column. She clearly states that what is wanted is that the men treat everyone, including Dr. Blasey, with respect. Why is it so hard to understand that women are people, too?
1
Pretending that these men are trying to be more fair or nice by abdicating their duties to vet Kavanaugh is laughable. They merely don’t want to be seen demeaning a woman and hope to push the task off on someone else. They have no problem with her being attacked for testifying. They just don’t want to bear the results of that attack when going for re-election. They’d have less to fear if the goal of the hearing was to ascertain truth, but we all know that the goal is to help their side “win”.
Thank you. This resounds.
6
If the good senator wants to outsource quesrioning of Blasey Ford, he should bring in the FBI.
308
@Themis
Senate committees do their own investigating. Let them do their job.
@Jesse No bias there huh?
@Themis - Why? That's not their jurisdiction. You just know they are blatantly corrupt, helped Hillary, hate Trump and you imagine it will drag on for years like the phony Russian probe.
Dear NYT:
Your columnist goes too far in attacking Sen. Grassley as a "coward," when he has bent over backwards to allow the complainant to tell her story.
"Man up?"
Why is she attacking his manhood? This kind of sexism and personal attack should and would not be tolerated from men (imagine if the complainant was attacked as a sissy?), and should not be tolerated from female law professors.
Having a skilled female attorney asking questions does make for better optics, but it also should cut down the amount of partisan speechifying, which is what we get all too much of from these grandstanding senators of both parties.
Why is The Times promoting gender hate speech?
28
@Jorge He hasn't "bent over backward" to let her tell her story. Frankly, he shouldn't have needed to but for the choir of voices like McConnell, Graham et al. to "ram this confirmation through" (shockingly - their words, not mine). Letting Dr. Ford tell her story was the right thing to do from the get-go and should have been granted without question or cynicism by those on the committee. And "Man up" as hate speech? Wow -- you've really drank the right-wing Kool-Aid that suggests that men (in particular, white men) are the ones that are the target of systematic abuse and oppression in our society. You do realize that we're not even 100 years into our society's permitting a woman to VOTE, right? I'm sure that the nearly 150 years preceding that where women were essentially second class citizens in the political process had nothing to do with the continuing battles they fight to this day to be taken seriously.
@Jorge No, Jorge, the Times is promoting having these old white guys learn how to be actual decent human beings.
@Jorge: right on! Bruni earlier had a column denigrating super rich white old men. It is OK for the Times to be biased unfair and bigoted: it is on a mission to unseat a democratically elected President the editors hate.
The important point made here is larger than the Kavanaugh circus. Women are still assumed to be better at “sensitive” and “emotional” subjects and are steered away from the tough issues of power and control. The Vagina Ghetto (a great term) exists not only among litigators. When I tell people that I love math and history, play violent video games, read sci-if and horror, and have all the empathy of Hannibal Lector, they don’t know how to square it with my gender. In my professional career I was repeatedly nudged toward “soft” subjects - the nudge that I successfully resisted. But even today, my female friends (especially American ones) bore me to tears with their stories of charity work, babies and grandchildren, when I want to discuss politics or science.
13
He is a coward.
Iowa deserves better.
Next topic!
Vote 11/6
57
Sad, innit? Hide behind a woman's skirts, at a time like this?
24
@jv you can tell that people are disingenuous when they have a ready-made preposterous argument for each situation. If the committee gives a woman the mic, they're cowards; if they don't, they're sexists. Whatever, let's move on and ignore the naysayers.
can't stand up to a woman?
these men when they were younger would have been called sissies.
now they are cowards and their percieved white male privelidge is demeaning and sickening.
this from a white 55 year old man.
33
If Sen. Grassley gets a female attorney to question Dr. Blasey Ford then I say, Dr. Blasey Ford should be able to get a male surrogate, how about Charles Blow, to deliver her testimony for her.
97
All the Congress and Senate have become vassels to the White House. They have become afraid #45. Why?
Wake up people you elected them, your the "boss" tell them to wake up listen to you. We need a younger crowd there.
VOTE 2018 & 2020
29
@lftash I still don't get why they are so afraid of him....unless because of his security clearances, he now knows where all their skeletons are buried? Don't forget...son-in-law Jared, (despite his lack of a security clearance!) signed out and viewed the most top secret files ever recorded. Not only did he hotfoot it out to Saudi to tell the new Prince who all his enemies were...thereby securing deep ties -with benefits- from the ruling Saudis, dontcha wanna bet he also read up on all the Senators etc to find out what was known about them? For sure he filled in his father-in-law....
Grassley and Orin Hatch went after Anita Hill 27 years ago, so let's see how they behave now. They can't save or forgive Kavanaugh (I can't prove this, but I know it's true) did what Dr Ford is accusing him of and he stuck his genitals in Debbie Ramirez's face. It's what entitled, elites like Trump and Kavanaugh do.
30
Time for them to retire - voluntarily or otherwise.
25
Sexist and cowardly is a fair assessment of Senator Grassley. The Republicans view this as a binary choice between winning and losing. Ethics and morals are a club to beat the other party with. Power has corrupted the Republican party and they don't even try to hide it anymore. Shame on them.
13
Spot on! They should not remain behind the curtain the cowards.
9
Asking Grassley, Hatch, et. al to do the right thing in this situation is like asking sulfur not to stink.
Ford is apparently only one of two -- no, wait, three -- wait, four stories developing right now. If there is truth to these stories, Kavanaugh is a serial rapist.
But as Lindsey Graham said, "I'm not going to ruin Judge Kavanaugh's life over this." Poor Kavanaugh, does he really have to not be a Supreme Court Justice just because he's a serial rapist and liar?
Sniff, sniff. What is that smell?
19
It appears that Republican senators know the art of abdication. they have abdicated their duty to stand up to Executive Branch and now they are abdicating their duty to question Dr. Ford. they should be thinking of abdicating their job as senators if they don't have the courage to question a woman>
14
Sen. Grassley is a weasel. You don’t ask a weasel to do a man’s job.
19
Man up, indeed!
These 11 white angry men need to DO THEIR JOBS!
8
Grassley is just pathetic. He does not have a law degree yet he's the Chairman of the Judiciary committee.
He sounds like he's drunk most of the time.
10
"...shirk their responsibilities and turn tail." Please. That is all this Congress has done as well as the one before it (anyone remember the name Merrick Garland?). If indeed Trump went out into the middle of 5th Avenue and shot someone, this Congress would be hard-pressed to begin any sort of response besides using words such as "unfortunate" and "not helpful."
Watching the dinosaurs grill Ms Ford on television would be both hilarious and nauseating. We all know how this is going to end...with Kavanaugh's approval. But, denying the American public the opportunity to see how hypocritical these idiots are would be a tragedy. So, please Chairman Grassley, lead the charge, but with a soundtrack from The Three Stooges playing in the background.
10
So, Senator Grassley and the other old, white Republicans are now worried about the reactions of women across the country during their examination of Brett Kavanaugh's victims? Do they think no woman was watching Republican behaviour during the last ten days? Does he think women were too stupid to be paying attention?
Own your own stuff, Senator Grassley. You don't get to hide behind some woman's skirts while your dirty work gets done for you. It's too late for that.
Vote
62
@SusanJ I suspect he questions feminists' ability, as a whole, to assess the situation with maturity and fairness. Given your comment, I don't blame him. BTW, racism, ageism and sexism aren't the best way to denounce alleged misogyny, but knock yourself out.
Majority of White women voted for Trump. They didn’t notice during last elections and are not noticing now.
Really? Grassley is so ignorant, trusts himself so little that he won't even speak to Dr. Blasey-Ford?
Well, you know yourself the best, Chuck. If you think you are untrustworthy, then you must be. I'll take your word for it.
Kind of like Pence, VP Lodestar, who won't trust himself dining alone with a woman. He fears being charged with rape. Really? And why would that be? Is he so twisted inside, so perverted, harboring such dark fantasies that he knows he must not be alone with any female or he would perform mayhem?
Gee, it's a good thing that none of these men ever had daughters, why they couldn't be trusted alone with them, could they? Or would they be harping like trump does on his daughter?
Well, good thing they only had sons.
Speaking of which, any parent that has "Kav The Caveman" as their daughter's coach needs to take a long hard look at all of this.
At least read Mark Judge's books.
Oh, I am very, very serious on that.
And, while your at it, someone check out Grassley's history.
He refuses to have the FBI investigate.
Now, why would that be?
There's something hinky in all of this.
Lindsey Graham, Chuck Grassley, trump, Pence, Mark Judge, and Kav the Caveman have all got something they're hiding.
Here's a quarter.
Call the FBI.
18
@rosa "Kind of like Pence, VP Lodestar, who won't trust himself dining alone with a woman. He fears being charged with rape. Really? And why would that be?"
You seem to be unaware of the pound me too movement, which contends that every woman is a potential victim, and that every woman must be believed. Put that in perspective with the similar wave of insanity that affected workplaces in the early '90s - remember when men refused to board an elevator with a woman, or to be alone in the same room with a female? That wasn't because they didn't trust themselves not to jump on women given the opportunity; it was because of the verified trend of false rape accusations typical at the time.
Sexist and cowardly? That would be the perfect description of every Republican on the panel and in Congress.
17
These men have no business representing the interests of women. They represent the Koch evangelical complex and no one else. Just looking at their faces makes me nauseous.
Evil doers
18
Grassley is obviously such a misogynist that he doesn't trust himself enough to risk questioning a traumatized victim of sexual predation.
35
@kirk Nope: he doesn't trust the Leftist public opinion to be mature enough not to make sexist inferences regarding a male interviewing a female false accuser.
Thank you for this very smart piece of writing.
22
Such a shame that these ladies have inconvenienced the 'gentlemen' ….all Republicans.....on the Judiciary Committee. Such ladies inconvenienced 'gentlemen' like Bill Cosby, Harvey Weinstein ad nauseum.
11
Man up Grassley, you need to question the women yourself, it is your job! It looks like attorney Avenetti has a third women coming forward for you to question.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/9/24/17896136/michael-avena...
3
I cant wait to see women incarcerated for using birth control. Many voted for this madness, many more didn't feel it was worth their time to vote. Professor, you think these opitcs are cowardly. I cant wait to see women thrown in jail by old white men.
6
It could very easily happen if the SCOTUS overruled Griswald v. Connecticut and Eisenstadt v. Baird. Given that Brett Kavanaugh stated during his confirmation that artificial contraceptives are abortificants, the overruling is a possibility.
5
Believe me, these old white men would just as soon perform a full body cavity search on Dr. Ford or any other woman in front of television cameras before, in their minds, doing the equivalent exercise in verbal interrogatories. They—and especially my old hypocrite of a senator, Charles Grassley—know they are no more capable of doing the latter with sensitivity and respect as they are the former.
7
Me thinks he protests to much
6
Grassley is a coward and I suspect is not convinced Kavanaugh is innocent.
27
@Karn Griffen None of them are convinced Kavanaugh is innocent. Why else would they suppress millions of documents and correspondences from his time in the White House, and refuse to allow both an FBI investigation AND any other witnesses (including, most intriguingly Mark Judge) to appear before the committee. This whole thing stinks to high heaven and all to provide cover for the corrosive president who selected him.
1
These cowards are just representing their base.
26
The title reads "Man Up, Grassley"
The NY Times should be ashamed of allowing the use such sexist language, particularly in this day and age and on this issue. What would it mean for Grassley (or anyone) to "woman up?"
13
@Rick I thought it was not a good headline either. We wouldn't say woman up. I get the intention of it, but in 2018, that term is considered sexist and we have made some progress, These men are stuck in a past that no longer exsists
1
@Rick It is called irony and it's been all the rage for at least the last 2000 or so years.
@Rick
Absolutely right.
Come on, "gentlemen," man up? Get real cowboys and girls! Even for Republicans who reverence their aged, culturally sclerotic icons, the thought of two wizened, full of themselves, geriatric male senators like Cranky Pants Grassley and Prissy Pants Hatch condescendingly tisk-tisking this errant "young lady" barely into her 50's on her conduct and motives would be a scene wayyyyy too far. The "gentlemen" behind these gentlemen will be far more apt to bring in versions of Judges Judy and Pirro, if not actually those actually distaff solons themselves.
4
By not wanting to question her themselves, it seems to me these men are admitting that they can't do it without looking like misogynist thugs who would prefer that these lying harlots stay silent and not persist. Still, I bet someone had to tel them that.
22
Touché Ms. Bazelon. These cowardly republican senators only want someone else to cook the turkey, plus the the entire meal, so they can carve it up to be servered to their donors...!
Makes me think of two pop culture references: the song in the commercial about “I can bring home the bacon and cook it in the pan, and make you never forget you’re a man;” and the Twilight Zone’s episode “To Serve Man...!”
3
I consider the command, "Man Up" to be slyly, annoyingly misogynist. "Up" from what?
6
@Samsara
"Man up " means to take responsibility for your actions and deeds. It means to accept the duty of your office or station in life and act accordingly . (Do your duty etc.)
"Man Up"?
You can't put me in a camp to support Grassley. But, really? The author is a self proclaimed expert in gender bias and uses terms like "Man Up"? Perhaps it's time to find new experts.
8
But Republicans are sexist and cowardly! Real men don’t abuse women or protect men who abuse women. Ditch this guy and ask Trump to nominate a woman for the job and breakup another one of your private boys’ clubs.
5
Man up, indeed.
4
Women doing men's work.... If women can ask better questions than the men in a committee hearing, why stop there? Why not replace all these Republican knuckle-draggers with their demonstratively more competent female counterparts and send the men off to live out their lives in quiet corners of the states they once purportedly represented?
13
Mr Grassley, like his fellow jurists seated on this kangeroo court, is both a sexist and a coward
14
I always believe that there should be a limit on the number of terms for senators. They are voted in because they are familiar names, and voters tend to be "lazy." When I asked my nephew to exercise his right to vote, he asked "Who should I vote for?" I told him to learn about the candidates, the values of the parties, etc., because if I tell him who to vote, it is like my vote get counted twice.
14
Men hide behind skirts when the going gets rough. And when it is really bad they find a minority woman to stand in for them. Also, in journalism, when the situation is really dangerous in the Middle East, it is often now a woman reporting from the front lines. There are two women spokespersons protecting Trump at the White House. Someday, women will wise up and realize that the men were not that awesome or even indispensable after all.
16
@Phyllis Mazik
Yeah, you're right. Maybe women interested in equality should walk the walk and fight wars, build our roads and buildings, police our streets (without male officers to protect them), and take on all the other dangerous, back-breaking responsibilities traditionally left to men. As for the women reporting in the ME, don't kid yourself: that's just the mainstream Leftist networks bowing to the feminist agenda. There are plenty of men left behind the scenes assuming the technical and security aspects for every woman in front of the camera. When there are entirely female teams of reporters sent in the war zones of the ME, then I'll be amazed at their awesomeness.
I seriously would love to see feminists try to entirely replace men. Never mind the heavy lifting, the logical thinking or the risk-taking; we all know that at the first blizzard, when they need to go out in the middle of the night to fix the power lines, that will be the end of the experiment. Come to think of it, that might just be the cure for feminism.
More sheer sexism. Why didn't they outsource the earlier Kavanaugh questioning? What it says is that Kavanaugh is important enough for the actual Senators to question, but Ford is so unimportant it can be left to staff. Degrading & disgusting.
26
@James A.
Ford is, supposedly, a victim of a sexual assault that she asserts caused her great emotional harm. She is not seeking a role in government, she is not experienced in being questioned in formal settings.
Kavanaugh is seeking a role in government of substantial importance, he is very experienced with questioning that goes on in legal settings such as his courtroom as well as in legal/political settings such as the Senate.
If you don't see the difference, you're not thinking very hard.
Love it! Man up, Grassley!
3
You mean a bunch old white men aren’t so cocksure when they’re questioning women about sexual harassment in front of the cameras? How could this be?
9
When I first heard that these Republicans would turn the questioning of Dr Blasey over to others - one word came to mind: Cowards. Dr Blasey is showing the courage of her convictions for no personal gain that I can perceive outside doing what she feels is for the good of our democracy and country. Dr Blasey is a profile in courage in my book. Thank you!
5
I hope that when Dr. Ford is asked a question, she turns to Grassley and says "Senator Grassley, in answer to your question...." and persist with this tactic when she is scolded.
6
So, apparently, Ms. Bazelon would be happier if men, ratherthan women, ask questions like:
- When, and with whom, did you lose your virginity.
- Prior to your marriage, how many sexual encounters have you had, with whom, and when.
- Did you have consentual sexual encounters with at any time in high school or college. With whom and when ?
Or, does Ms. Bazelon not think such questions will be asked.
Because they will, toward establishing character and patterns of behavior.
7
@Objectivist Ah, you see, the real question is will Kamala Harris ask these same questions of Bret Kavanaugh? I'll be watching for his answers, including, no doubt, his righteous indignation, and obfuscation in answering.
19
And why not have the pasty white men of the Senate ask these questions? Why is it better for Blasey to be grilled by women, to make it less traumatic? You prove the author’s point.
11
A grown up frat-boy, a MAN, would have owned up to his college daze and the possibility of things happening that he isn't able to remember and now Grassley is to timid to ask the obvious questions.
Racist, misogynistic, unbelievably greedy and now... cowardly.
10
Grassley: Dr. Ford, what were you wearing at the time?
6
It isn’t that they aren’t going to question the accuser that bothers you. It’s that republicans on the committee weren’t anywhere near as politically stupid as the left was praying they would be.
They weren’t supposed to let her testify, they weren’t supposed to give her so many options how to testify, they weren’t supposed to deny democrats the optics of 10 old white men questioning the alleged female victim.
It doesn’t matter what they do on the committee, you’ll call them sexist and misogynists any way. “Woman up” and be honest, you don’t care about the truth. If so, it wouldn’t matter who was asking the questions.
8
@David If these old guys cared about the truth, they would have had the FBI re-open the background check on Kavanaugh.
Brava!
Editor’s note: This comment has been anonymized in accordance with applicable law(s).
2
The GOP members on the Judiciary Committee epitomize the dictum that "bullies are the biggest cowards."
12
By definition, a bully is a coward - they bully others in order to hide their cowardice.
Trump is a coward. Afraid to serve his Country in Vietnam. Afraid to provide housing to low income and blacks. Afraid to meet with Special Counsel Mueller (despite all his fake protestations otherwise).
The Republicans in Congress are all cowards. Senator Jeff Blake, House Rep. Ryan, Sen. Orin Hatch: all running away with their tails between their legs from their responsibility and oath to the protect the Constitution. Other Senators, McConnell, Cruz, Cornyn falling lock step behind their cowardly leader. And now Sen. Grassley and the other Republicans on the Judiciary Committee press forward w/out a thorough investigation of a hard core right wing judicial nominee who has previously LIED to Congress (2004 and 2006) not to mention refuse to even have hearings to consider Merrick Garland.
These men are ALL COWARDS. Despicable Cowards.
I am an Independent that will be voting a straight "D" ticket on 6 Nov 2018 to Defeat Trumpism and protect our Democracy. I hope you will too.
7
The coward, Ms. Brazelton is the accuser, Dr. Blasey Ford and the pitchfork waving me-tooers. Apparently, the good doctor must be sheltered and treated with kid gloves with a litany of conditions to present her vague recollection without harsh questions from the likes of white males bearing the Republican party burden. Sheltered by a coddling media never questioning veracity let alone credibility, the farce now has the kettle calling the pot black with this Brazelton canard. What is this nonsense, but another deflection and finger pointing away from the alleged victim who is merely holding a country hostage while the Europeans chuckle at this ruse. Putin is also smiling knowing full well on which side of the isle collusion resides.
Do everything possible to get the klieg lights away from the corrupt Senator Feinstein and the operative Blasey Ford, but perjury is perjury and she will ultimately pay the price. Manning up is not your cup of tea when credibility is on the line.
5
@Grant I agree...perjury is perjury, and Kavanaugh will ultimately pay the price. No need to traumatize Dr. Ford for that to happen.
@Grant
Obviously you didn't bother reading the article, which isn't much of a surprise upon reading the entirety of your post. The op-ed piece is about Sen. Grassley suggesting that he and other male members of the SJC delegating what is supposed to be their job to women because they don't want the bad optics of a female academic professional being interrogated by a bunch of angry old white guys. Dr. Blasey Ford isn't the one asking to be "sheltered and treated with kid gloves"; it's Grassley suggesting that. And before you toss around the term "coward": Dr. Blasey Ford and her family are receiving death threats and had to relocate for their safety, but she is still willing to testify to the SJC; Sen. Grassley is suggesting that he and his fellow Republican cohorts on SJC hand their job off to women because they don't want to be seen as the decrepit boors that they are. And if your response to the harassment of Dr. Blasey Ford is "she deserves it," then you are confirming Ms. Brazelton's op-ed. Sorry Judge Kavanaugh didn't turn out to be such a Boy Scout after all.
@Grant But, of course, we already know that Kavanaugh lied to Congress in 2006.
Come on Daddy-o Grasshopper Grassley, afraid that your bias will show through? It already has. And I will never forget Hatch’s sneering at Anita Hill. Graham says that he doesn’t want to ruin Kavanaugh’s life but has no qualms that Kavanaugh ruined Dr. Blasey’s? If these “Senators” can’t trust themselves to ask the questions on the Judiciary Committee, then they ought to be disqualified from serving. Or are they like Mike Pence, afraid to be in a room with any other woman than their, “mother?”
11
Is it still politically correct to say "Man up"?
2
Do it yourself. It is your job, Senator.
6
Some things bear repeating:
Donald John Trump is an unindicted co-conspirator to a federal crime (i.e., a felony) for his illegal acts before he became the President of the United States of America so that he could become the President of the United States of America.
He is an illegitimate president, and every one of his official presidential acts (to date) is illegitimate, including his nominations and his subsequent confirmations to the American federal judiciary.
Now is the time for daily, mass acts of civil disobedience because some American public employees have gone rogue so as to impose an unconstitutional oligarchy upon the United States of America, contrary to their oaths of office to the U.S. Constitution (i.e., to their employer: the American People).
5
"Man up"? Now that is sexist shaming language.
5
@Kim No, it isn't. It is asking an adult who is male to behave like a man, not like a scared child/boy. Just as adult females should behave like women, not little girls. ISMs are when you believe your (race, gender, etc.) are superior to the other. When Dr. Ford takes, and passes, a polygraph test and demands an independent FBI investigation and the men here, all of them, refuse both, that makes them inferior to HER and not behaving like grown men. So yes, Grassley should man up.
@Kim
Grassley deserves it. He's being a duplicitous coward.
@Kim Yes, it is sexist shaming language and it's futile because one must have a conscience to be ashamed.
They have maned up. They are about to stack the SC to get rid of women's reproductive rights. They are about to show women that they will be groped, grabbed and otherwise molested and if they don't shut up, they will be shamed and threatened.
9
Voting for zero (0) Roypublicans this time. Have not seen a ballot. No need.
8
Grasley can't man up. He and his generation grew up believing, and still do, that all women belong in the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant
They do not deserve his respect, and so they don't get it.
10
Bravo! Well said.
5
Does the Republican attitude mean that a 17 year old boy should not be accused of a crime or offense because "boys will be boys"?
7
"Cowardice" is too kind. That might imply merely a lack of stomach or spine. The senators on the JC have plenty of both when it comes to subverting the hearing purpose, denying Dr. Ford due process, prejudging the case, and wringing every drop of political advantage, while not exposing themselves to political risk, along the way.
I hope Dr. Ford in her opening comments puts all that in context and on the record, and takes the offense from the opening gavel. Let's see what three women can do against a compact of old men.
5
While I appreciate the sentiment of this article, the headline contains a slur based in homophobia and sexism. Telling someone to "man up" is implying that they are un manly. Or 'womanly' or feminine, as if that's is a shortcoming. It implies that fear is only a trait that a woman has, and that its shameful or a character flaw.
2
@Blank No, I do not think these days the term means that they are womanly. I think it means they are sub-human.
The Senate Republicans have no interest in determining the truth of what happened between Dr. Blasey and Brett Kavanaugh, or they would not be so resistant to an investigation. Their only hope is to crush her emotionally and mentally. To keep their own hands from getting dirty in the process, they need henchmen, and preferably henchwomen, to do the dirty work. It's like the cops who bring in a matron to do a body cavity search of a female arrestee, simply to demean her and break her spirit. Any woman who plays Mitch McConnell's game to try to destroy Dr. Blasey should be ashamed of herself forever, no matter what rewards she has been promised for her services.
10
The senators bailing out on questioning is cowardice and political optics. The senators on the committee demand to be in control and not let anyone else set the ground rules or the agenda. Then, they weasel out of doing their jobs. They want control so that they can cede control. They are bullies in the press but chickens in the hearing room. I'm losing support for Kavanaugh because that boy has a serious drinking problem. People do terrible things when they are drunk and he evidently relished being drunk - often. That is a serious personality defect that has no place on the USSC. We didn't know that Nixon was a drunk until it was too late. Let's find someone else. No one is born to be on the USSC. No one has a right to be on that court or any other court.
6
Oh sure! Let women do the dirty work - then they can look like the bad guys/girls! Make them bring one of their own down. A lot of women are very competitive, insecure and mean. As a successful woman I can tell you I got very little help from women on the road to that success. Even today a woman who hears my story will say nothing and a man will say Good for You!
As Kipling said "the female is the more deadly of the species!"
I hope the female lawyers refuse to be put in that position - if they are I hope and imagine Dr. Ford will have their number immediately. Aside from the recent allegations my first thought on seeing this man's face was - "he is a person of little character." He is sure proving me right.
5
Someone that writes about gender bias trying to goad the Senator to "Man up". Ridiculous.
3
"Cynical, sexist and cowardly" is a pretty accurate descriptor for just about all of the old white Republican men seeking to ram through the Kavanaugh appointment. Undemocratic, craven and hypocritical are others.
7
Cowards have no place running the government.
Cowards like Ryan and McConnell who see no evil and hear no evil when it comes to Trump (attacking minorities, supporting white supremacists as “very fine people”) have no business leading Congress, an institution that our founders saw as an equal branch of government.
Cowards like Grassley, Hatch, and Lindsey Graham who lack the courage to do a full and fair investigation, into the allegations leveled by a woman against a candidate expected to dispense justice while on the Supreme Court, have no business running the confirmation hearings.
Cowards who are so scared that they might lose their seat because voters might punish them for not delivering on a partisan agenda have no business being in positions of leadership and governance. They have no reason to be in Congress representing people of America.
Who wants a coward to represent them in any setting???
America: we need to vote these cowards out. All they want from the hearing is to ask women not to vote against them, that they conducted an eyewash, a sham hearing purporting to hear the accuser... when their minds are already made up (Lindsey Graham, Hatch) and they will “plow right through” (McConnell).
Enough with the patriarchy. If you look at them closely, they are just a bunch of sniveling cowards. Take back the government!
8
Maybe he's worried that someone might pull the plug on grandpa.
1
This editorial is intellectually dishonest. Our Senate hearings are supposed to be adversarial. If you come out and accuse someone of attempted rape and murder and your victim and all named witnesses deny your claims, then you should expect to be grilled on the details of your memory. But feminists, sensing a political opening, portray any man playing that adversarial role as insensitive and cruel as measured by how old and white he is. So understandably men end up following some version of the Pence rule. On one hand we hear that men who aggressively questioning women are evil, and then when they bow out they get blasted as cowards. These men are just following Mazie Hirono’s advice to shut up, and rightfully so, because for all the demands of respect, it seems lost on Lara Bazelon and those like her that respect is a two way street.
There is no way these men could do anything that would spare them from the scorn your editorial board is teeing up for them on Friday. Sarah Jeong is probably tingling with excitement at the chance to be cruel to these old white men.
As for who is making up their minds in the absence of evidence ...I think people really need to check themselves here.
8
Republican senators are bending over backwards to accommodate Dr. Ford's testimony. Her allegations are completely unsubstantiated, pertain to events that occurred more than 35 years ago, and are completely denied by all parties that she claims were involved.
Dr. Ford and her attorneys are not in search of legitimate justice. Instead, they seek to try Brett Kavanaugh solely in the court of public opinion.
This kind of pathetic drivel is why I put an end to my subscription to the Times. I weep for the future of our nation.
4
@Tim Ambler I, too, weep for the future of our nation, when persons such as yourself are not in search of legitimate justice.
Nicely said Ms. Bazelon!
4
The University professor who told me my essay was wonderful, come by the office and talk. Shut the door and stuck his hand up my skirt. The co-workers at every job I had as a young woman who would make loud comments about my body and laugh at my discomfiture. The man who jumped out at me when I was on the way home from class and tried to drag me behind a wall. The wealthy prep school guy who stalked me for years, turning up in the yard, at the window, on the phone. Cowards all. And I was a well looked after, well behaved middle class girl. This is the gauntlet women have had to run all these years. Enough.
17
Those Republican Senators already showed in the past that they were cowards and they are still cowards. Remember! They refused not only to vote on but even to meet Merrick Garland a nominee of President Obama to the Supreme Court. And judge Garland was and still is a white male like them. Who is afraid of Dr. Blasey?
7
The disgust the GOP Senators arise in a decent human being is second to none. I look at people like Grassley and Hatch and honestly I feel like throwing up.
11
If she is at all a moving, authentic and measured teller of her story, she will prevail. Whether you believe her or not, who'll be willing to call her a liar?
6
If Grassley won't allow Ramirez to testify, then the Democrat Senators should hold their own hearing.
7
Of course it’s sexist and cowardly, Ms. Bazelon, but that’s precisely the point: a coward refuses to be held accountable for a reckoning because he knows that he’ll be exposed for the emptiness that is all he is.
They all—old, white, Republican men—will be more than anxious to gently lead the judge through his leisurely, non-threatening paces, leading him to the only places that he’s comfortable: the country club of mint juleps and talk of golf and stocks and bonds and partnerships and board appointments. These are all the metaphorical places from which, by and large, women have been historically excluded.
These Republicans on the Senate’s Committee on the Judiciary are a relic of an earlier age when society’s “inferiors”— minorities and women—begged for the few crumbs that their “betters” deigned to let fall, covering themselves in some ragged cloak of generosity. This paternalistic and quite offensive sense of white male privilege is what defines the Senate now, the two (Republican) women, Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski included.
These tired old elephants haven’t got sense enough to just go off to where it is that old elephants go to die. They have to harrumph and stomp around, brandishing their tusks in a threatening manner. It’s what they’ve done all their lives: defend one another against “outsiders.”
Neither Charles Grassley nor Lindsey Graham nor John Cornyn will question Christine Blasey Ford. Her answers will expose them for what they are: sexists and cowards.
7
'The Republicans’ attempt to outsource the questioning of Dr. Blasey is cynical, sexist and cowardly.'
Yep, that's them.
9
Maybe Grassley should consider letting a younger woman replace him in his day job.
19
Failing once again to do their jobs. Cowards, all of them. I only hope any female staffer or aid refuses and I really, really hope Anita Hill is in the hearing room.
9
Lying cowards, the whole lot of them. If they can't handle the questioning themselves after insinuating to the press that Blasey is lying, saying she's "mixed up", stating they believe Kavanaugh before they've even heard her, then they should step down from the Senate Judiciary Committee. Plain and simple.
4
I don't know why they're so darned fired up to get this guy on the court anyways. I mean, they already got a token sexual offender on the court. How's about moving on to the next one guys?
I wonder if there are any "stand your ground" shooters available.
9
Let us all never forget that total votes cast for Senators in 2016 were 51 million for Democrats vs. only 40 million for Republicans. Trump holds office despite losing the popular vote by 3 million. Mitch MConnell is furious that his minority party control may be upended from time to time.
We're now in a Catch-22, a Constitutional straight jacket that keeps Senators from small states in absolute power. And Grassley is the epitome of this old, white patriarchy, pretending nice but asserting his ill-gotten power at every level.
19
Man up? That implies believing in and trying to live by a code of conduct that respects individuals, fairness and a desire to value honour and integrity. These Republican creatures have spent the last 20 months prostrate at the feet of the naked emperor in the White House. (Forgive me for that mental image.)
The current Republican slate of lawmakers will be singled out by history as the most invertebrate collection of morally bankrupt politicians the U.S. has ever regurgitated into public life. Man up? That's hilarious.
5
Supreme Court watchers are worried that in 6 days the confirmation of Brett Kava-naughty will cause the court to veer sharply to the right. No one seems to be worried about the fact that in 6 weeks we will no longer have a constitution.
Trump simply cannot afford a "blue wave" to wash over Congress. The logic is brutally simple. If the Dems take control of the House, Trump will be impeached. It doesn't matter if the Senate convicts--Trumps treachery and treason will be exposed during eviscerating judiciary committee hearings. Trump knows he's looking at life behind bars as soon as he leaves office. He can't let that happen. He would rather see the United States of America and our democratic way of life destroyed. Yes, America, our president is a sociopath.
Pence won't destroy his own political career by pardoning Trump, and a fled-to-Moscow Benedict Donald can't count on Putin to shield him from American authorities if the evil Russian can negotiate a favorable swap.
We should absolutely oppose the Kava-naughty nomination, but it's really small potatoes in the scheme of things. Buckle up, everyone. The next 6 weeks are going to be quite a ride.
3
The patriarchy has always relied on brainwashed females to do their job. Let Grassley hide behind his paid henchwomen! Regardless who does the questioning, with the drip, drip, drip of new information on Kavanaugh's sexual and alcoholic appetites, there is nothing that even Mother Teresa could do to make this charade any less a farce than it already does.
These Republicans are under orders to confirm Kavanaugh. Whether Trump has kompromat on Grassley, Graham and the rest of them, or this is about money, this game will be played through its conclusion.
Go. Vote! If you can, go meet the people you are voting for and tell them you expect them to impeach Kavanaugh if he gets seated on the court. Tell them you expect them to save Robert Mueller. Tell them you expect them to impeach Trump. Tell them.
===
Rapists Have Tiger Moms, Too: Kavanaugh, Rape Culture and SCOTUS
https://www.rimaregas.com/2018/09/22/rapists-have-tiger-mothers-too-kava...
24
Grassley is so far past any emotion resembling empathy that, if he ever felt anything like that, he couldn't possibly understand that the 15-year-old Dr. Ford was severely traumatized by this attack and continues to suffer from it. Drunk prep school boys can inflict serious injury on others and never think about it when they 'grow up'.
182
The Republicans are willing to lose two election cycles to have a 5-4 majority in SCOTUS for possibly decades.
Unless there are true patriots in the Senate on both sides of the aisle who recognize the threat to the rule of law by having a SCOTUS far out of touch with a majority of Americans Kavanaugh is in.
72
“True patriots in the Senate” is an oxymoron.
5
More likely the Democrats can kiss their expected "blue wave" good-bye in November -- if they ever even had one to begin with. The Dems will be lucky if they pick up two additional House seats to the number they have now.
1
@Edward Blau
There is presently more at stake for Republicans than just the normal desire for a majority in the Supreme Court in order to do the deviant things they want.
They want Kavanaugh --now!---in case they lose the Senate, to protect themselves and their donors like the NRA, all of whom Mueller may track down and finally capture. It isn't hyperbolic to call it the Russo-Republican Party, at this point.
Grassley is craven. There is nothing wrong with starting questioning by stating, “I direct your attention to the date you saw Kavanaugh at ABC party, please tell us what happened in sequential order from the time you first saw him?”
“What happened next?”
And so on . . .
What he fears is that if instead he attacks her crediblity and motive, he will be seen as part of the boys club defending one of his own who just wanted twenty minutes of action.
Remember the father of the swimmer who had like comments?
32
Grassley, if you need help questioning witnesses, I’d like to volunteer to help you question Kavanaugh.
29
Maybe Susan Collins will roll out her "compassionate moderate" act again before voting with Trump yet again.
180
@Ken
A modern day version of Pontius Pilate?
@Ken
Is that a question? Of course she will.
@Ken I really like that there is $1.5 million pledged for Senator Collins opponent if she votes for Kavanaugh!
1
So the Republicans can reserve the right to do whatever they please ,whereas the Dr Ford and co and the Democrat input have/have had their hands tied at every step of the process.
Mitch McConnell gave a completely unilateral castigation speech in the Senate today ,which was to be expected ,but why was the opposition unable to respond to his comments .
Does democracy remotely exist in the US because those elsewhere in the western world are looking on and thinking "What kind of crazy system is going on in the US ?"
The present reality storyline ,since Trump became president has appeared more unreal and outrageous compared to the most outrageous fictional composition .
if it was a movie ,people would be coming out afterwards and muttering to themselves "most politically far fetched political movie I have seen for years ........last one like that was Dr Strangelove .!
America , despite Trump , we are still with you but surely it must be on the cards that the present US constitution must be readdressed, because the given powers to POTUS and co is much too dangerous when it falls into the wrong hands .
34
I guess Mike Pence is not the only one who can’t be in the same room with a woman alone. I finally get it. They just can’t be trust.
101
And Dr. Ford should remember that Kavanaugh is and will be following the Trump playbook as detailed by Bob Woodward:
"Trump told the friend that it's a mistake to show weakness in the face of such accusations, according to the book.
"You've got to deny, deny, deny and push back on these women," Trump said, according to Woodward. "If you admit to anything and any culpability, then you're dead. That was a big mistake you made."
Trump said the key was showing no hesitancy in denying accusations and instead, be on the attack and push back.
"You didn't come out guns blazing and just challenge them. You showed weakness," Trump told the friend, according to Woodward. "You've got to be strong. You've got to be aggressive. You've got to push back hard. You've got to deny anything that's said about you. Never admit."
Never admit.
14
Asking a Republican legislator to behave with integrity is like asking a rattlesnake to eat cactus instead of mice. Can we please stop this litany of hand wringing Op-Eds decrying bad faith dealing by Republicans. The only sensible suggestion I have seen in the Op-Eds is for Democrats to boycott the Kavanaugh hearings and impeach him when they have the numbers to do so. Impeach Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas for good measure too. The Republicans have forfeited all right to be treated with respect. Stop talking, start hitting back.
4
The Republicans just wanted to do their job and confirm the nominee. Until they didn't want to do their job.
They are only too happy to get the public exposure when they are involved in a hearing that makes them appear strong and looking out for the common people. But when challenged to actually be strong and defend the common people, promote justcie and defend the ideals of the Founding Fathers, they outsource their duty to others to protect themselves, ignoring the people they were elected to serve.
If they were only cowards, that would be bad enough. But their arrogance and belief in their self-righteousness is truly abhorrent.
8
An unbelievable level of entitlement.
When all is said and done and truth emerges, Kavanaugh should be lucky to end up as a country lawyer doing wills and divorces.
And all the ones I know have no sense of entitlement, don't attempt to rape people and don't crave their portrait up on a wall. In other words, they help their fellowman and not their own egos.
Their incomes are often in inverse proportion to their decency and expertise.
8
I don't think the phrase "man up" should be used. Perhaps "woman up" in this context. I mean if you intend to be politically incorrect that's fine I guess but you are discussing politics.
3
Grassley and the others want a proxy to attack Ms. Ford as viciously as possible while they keep their own hands clean.
7
Blatantly, a politically-motivated discussion, meant to inflict damage on the Senate Judiciary Committee. Is it not gender-correct to have females question females? Having males question females about sensitive topics throws flames on testimony. Senator Grassley is sensitive to flaming testimony.
@rdk Yep, his entire career may go up in flames. Should have done so a long time ago.
Chuck Grassley is my senator here in Iowa. His behavior as head of the Senate Judiciary Committee has been an embarrassment and a disgrace. Beginning with his failure to allow a hearing for Merrick Garland, and continuing to his current rush to get Kavanaugh on the court, this man has shown no integrity. Now this. Hoping to avoid a debacle on election day, he wants to bow out of questioning a woman whose story he regards as, at most, an inconvenience on the path to packing the court. Shame on Chuck. At the very least, let us all hope that come January, he will hand the gavel over to a Democrat for the rest of his term, and his life.
25
"Come on, gentlemen. It's time to man up."
Time for women to women to woman up. We've been second class citizens long enough. Roar? Our roar will shake the country and the heavens. Since Biblical times we've been out moded to being 2nd class citizens except for the teachings and actions of Christ which have been ignored.
We are sick and tired of having penis's stuck into our faces 24/7 for centuries upon centuries.
7
Senator Grassley is sexist but more contemptable than merely cowardly. Once the Koch Network ate the Iowa Republican Party, Grassley needed to sell all of his little remaining integrity to avoid being primaried. He freely admits he is not sensitive to the particulars of women's experience of assault and will do everything in his power to support the Heritage Foundation remake of the court. He is well beyond shaming at this point.
26
There are no real men among the Republicans on the Judiciary Committee.
3
Whether or not female lawyers question Ms. Ford this Thursday, Grassley and the other 10 Republican men by suggesting it have failed miserably in the “man up” department. Although if they do let a woman/women question Ms. Ford, just imagine the appearance of the committee room that day.
Cameras focused on 11 white men sitting there squirming in their seats for what could be, hours on end. Now that ought to be worth a few million Democratic votes right there. On the other hand if they decide to question Ms. Ford directly, with Grassley, Hatch, Cruz, and Cornyn heading up the inquisition, that too might well be worth a few million Democratic votes. Maybe more.
23
Man up indeed, tell that to the women who get assaulted and don't come forward right then. I'm sorry but if that happened to me I would be reporting it right away.
2
@JT You truly do not understand, do you? Have you not been reading the stories of women who DO report, and are either not believed, or are vilified, or whose cases somehow just never get to court? I would hope that all women and men who are assaulted will one day feel safe enough to report, and who will be treated with respect and compassion. Not likely to be the case if your situation is presented in front of this Senate Judiciary Committee.
Senator Grassley is in a no-win situation, if he does question Dr. Blasey - Ford in an aggressive manner, he becomes the chauvinist pig the left is already painting him as, but might salvage some of his reputation with his constituents on the right.
If he steps aside and allows a female lawyer or other aide to lead the questioning, he is a coward to the right and the left, although neither would agree on that label.
What he should do is call an end to this, put the nomination up for a vote and move on. Thank you Harry Reid.
Two words in closing, Keith Ellison.
1
I agree with Professor Bazelon, but if the Republicans on the committee bring in a female attorney to question Dr. Ford perhaps the Democrats should have Michael Avenatti question Judge Kavanaugh.
1
Cowardice is the key to the best paying and most prestigious jobs in Washington.
Perhaps that is another reason why so few women hold them.
4
"Man up?" What a ridiculous phrase. As if doing the right thing, having integrity, and being courageous are gendered behaviors. Dr. Blasey Ford has just demonstrated that they are not.
4
I was actually thinking the optics are worse if the Senators don't question Dr. Blasey. I agree they should man up. If you're going to gaslight a sexual assault victim, have the decency to do so in person. However, that's exactly the reason why hiding behind a female aide looks so bad. Grassley and company are worried about what happened in 1991. They clearly don't understand 2018. Their's is a textbook example of generals fighting the last war. This will come off worse for Republicans if Senators try indirect abuse. Men looking down on women performing their constitutional duties. Dare I use the word "patriarchal." Like I said, the optics are really bad.
9
Mr. Kavenaugh spent hours in the White House with Trump this past weekend, at which time Trump told him to, 'never give up'. That is his MOD and Kavenaugh bought it. And now we have a group of Republican senators who know their everyday, sexist vocabulary is a red hot trap; and they are afraid to handle the situation. But then what did we expect from these addled, tired, senators. They can barely keep up with Trumps actions much less control their sexist prejudice. It's basically a dysfunctional government.
6
Who is going to question Kavanaugh?
Also, is it only the Republican senators who will have a Joan of Arc lawyer don the armor to question Ms. Blasey? The Democratic senators can still question her themselves?
So then we have the spectacle of the Democratic senators doing their jobs, while the Republican senators outsource the work to a female lawyer.
Wow, am I ever tired of paying these dudes' salaries. In this instance, they are refusing to earn them.
4
I'd be interested in knowing if Dr. Ford was drinking the evening in question, as well as at various other parties the social set she hung around with attended.
I want fairness and truth, not a lynching. If he's guilty, so be it. If she's unable to be convincing, so be it.
I thought Megyn Kelly summarized it perfectly this morning on her show. Suggest everyone tap into those comments.
The Republican senators must question the witnesses, else they will look like the sexists they are, hiding behind a woman's skirts. If they don't have the courage to question Dr. Ford, they are once again not doing their job. And if a female accepts the task of questioning Dr. Ford in their place, she should be ashamed of herself.
5
In many ways it is "sweet justice" that Grassley and Hatch return to the courts to judge a woman. Only this time, it is not Anita Hill and there has been an explosion of angry women since these chauvinistic men falsely condemned her.... as their good Bible says "You reap from your sowing."
Hatch and Grassley deserve condemnation for Hill.
5
well, your headline writer is at fault here. because "Man" and "Charles Grassley" of Iowa are mutually exclusive. The subhead is more in line: "Coward." "Sexist."
a long list of other adjectives would surely also apply to Grassley: "Tyrant." "Betrayer." "Unfit." "Pathetic." "Corrupt."
we all get the picture. he's an embarrassment to Iowa and to the nation; right up there with his equally embarrassing cohorts Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan, Lindsey Graham, Orrin Hatch, Mike Pence, donald trump, the House Intelligence Committee majority party members, and the House and Senate Judiciary majority party members.
not simply because they are Republicans, but because they've shown their true, anti-American colors at this time of unprecedented crisis in all three branches of our federal government.
6
Minor observation: Sen. Grassley, mind you if you come to NYS. I would hate to see you trip, fall down and get hurt. Big cities, wide streets, tall mountains and ... grand waterfalls. So, don't. Thanks, though for your thoughtful care of our Constitution. Impressive (koff koff).
Signed,
A reflective voter outside your particular state.
The Republicans' reluctance to question Dr. Ford simply reinforces their cowardice. Every resident of every state which has a Republican Senator on the Senate Judiciary Committee should demand their Senator conduct the inquiry. If these cowards cannot do so; they are not earning the salary and benefits they are paid by those taxpayers and should be recalled.
Senators, you have a job to do. If you are unable, or unwilling to do that job, step down now. You are not successfully fulfilling the duties of your office. This is not a difficult concept to grasp.
8
I hope this smart assessment of this ridiculous situation gets plenty of traction in the media.
5
In the drooping, wan faces of these me do we see their cowardice. They spent all their time tossing underhand softballs at Kavanaugh, but now are indeed unable to step up to the mound when the hitter is a woman with a powerful swing. Here's hoping she hits a home run, no matter who questions her!
4
Another thought about the sexism of having a female prosecutor question Dr. Blasey: women--poor dears--are so weak they can't stand up to questioning by men. Dr. Blasey is obviously an incredibly strong person who should be treated with respect but not by a stand-in for powerful but cowardly men.
14
"Man up" is right. What would any one of these cowards do if this were their daughter? Would their almighty donors, deregulation and tax cuts still dictate their votes?
Led by the weak-chinned McConnell, this GOP majority has sold our earth, women's bodies and our votes to the highest bidder. And now they've sold our daughters too.
8
Too bad the current SCOTUS members can't chime in. I'd like to know if they want to work for many years with a person who has arguably lied, hidden himself behind enabling old white men, and who feigns purity when the context and norms for his prep-school peers was very a shambolic (of character), inebriated, and white, male privileged party scene.
That Grassley doesn't want to ask the questions himself leads me to wonder why he doesn't let FBI professionals look into claims and give credible background related to the claims.
Keep up the good reporting NYTimes!, and VOTE ON NOV. 6!!!!
56
@ajarnDB Huh? Don't they already have "a person who has arguably lied, hidden himself behind enabling old white men..." by the name of Thomas? Should be no big deal for them to add one more to the mix.
4
i wonder if there are women who have the exact opposite view, that it's insensitive for Grassly to directly question a rape victim, and that a "real man" would never directly question a rape victim. C'mon now, real men need to know how to act
1
@AceMonroe Compassion and courtesy are not exclusive to any gender...they are exemplars of decent human beings. Real men already know this, Ace.
To Senators Grassley, Hatch and Graham. Trying to have a woman do your job when that job is onerous and difficult is not just cowardly but sadly it is very familiar. It reeks of self serving irresponsibility and dishonest intent. You can’t have your misogynistic views and intentions while trying to look fair and just to women. I always knew Senators Hatch & Grassley as the mean misogynistic men they proved themselves to be during the Thomas hearings. I was hoping we’ve moved forward, sadly I’m wrong. No one should ever trust any of you again about justice and fairness. Millions upon millions of women feel the same. Your reckoning is about to begin in November. Your party will be going in the way of the dodo, never to return to polite society again.
2
Republican Senators using a woman as a ventriloquist's dummy to ask questions about the accusations: what could possibly go wrong?
8
Poor title. What are you implying by saying 'man up'? I caught myself saying 'man up' to my grandson. Force of habit. Human Up. We are seeing that men and women can be either equally courageous or equally cowardly. Strength of character does not have gender.
1
The image I have is of a shark lawyer of the female persuasion chopping away at Dr. Ford. Gender isn't a guarantee of civility or decency. What difference?
7
@Charles E
apparently the Democrats are going to include Michael Avenatti as a collateral counsel to interrogate Kavanaugh
wouldn't you just love to see the surprised looks on Hatch and co when he suddenly walks into the chambers .?
7
Women up, more like it. The men here show no courage or morality, just crass politics, ego, power. They fail across the board.
5
Sen Orrin Hatch said that Dr. Ford was "mixed up." Because in the Mormon culture, women are always mixed up when they accuse any male of impropriety.This man, in his 80's and retiring, represents the most anti feminist culture in the world. Mormonism makes Asian cultural disdain for womens rights seem tame in comparison. Readers: ask yourself what US President made polygamy a federal crime? No it wasnt FDR. The answer would shock you. Asking Orrin Hatch to determine the validity of Dr. Ford's statements is actually worse than if Trump was asked. Leaving these decisions up to 2 men who are in their 80's and see women like Dr. Ford as mixed up about their sexuality and their memory is a shame. A true shame.
4
They are scared little bully boys. They know they’re not, in the words of Stuart Smalley, good enough, nice enough, or likable enough to make even an EFFORT to be sensitive. Those aren’t qualities that they see as manly. And, to them, women are the enemy. Their anger and hostility is going to be obvious. They know it and we know it.
This is a sham. They are trying to ram this down our throats because they either know or have suspicions that more women and men will come forward - if not with assault accusations, then with testimony as to Kvanaugh’s heavy drinking and lewd behavior. And, speaking of which, are they going to question him about his drinking NOW? Is he in recovery? That kind early drinking, studies show, can lead to serious drinking problems in adulthood. I’d want to know if a hung-over Kavanaugh is going to be showing up to work.
Here we are again with one of Trump’s best people.
15
Grassley and Hatch are poster boys for term limits.
8
“Man up.” Is that a sexist comment? Is it an order? .... It’s very hard to know when to stop laughing. Both sides have a tendency to descend into the ridiculous.
1
What's cowardly is to make accusations in public about a supposed victim of sexual assault and then let anyone else do the questioning (or talking) for you after the fact.
Furthermore what is cowardly is putting hyper partisan politics of party over country by demanding FBI investigations 27 years ago, and hypocritically not calling for them now.
I would say that the two republicans women Senators are just as much cowardly, but that is a whole other argument.
70
What's cowardly is to make accusations in public about a supposed victim of sexual assault and then let anyone else do the questioning (or talking) for you after the fact.
Furthermore what is cowardly is putting hyper partisan politics of party over country by demanding FBI investigations 27 years ago, and hypocritically not calling for them now.
I would say that the two republicans women Senators are just as much cowardly, but that is a whole other argument.
5
Man up? Much too late. They can only 'Pub up. They long ago sold their souls to the company store. Godot and the messiah will come before these guys do the right thing.
3
Republicans that serve in the Senate and House have proved every day since trump was inaugurated how cowardly they are. (Yes trump in lower case letters.)
4
They question Silicon Valley execs about social media even though they don't understand how it works, they question generals about nuclear weapons they don't understand, they question scientists about climate change that they don't "believe in," they question judges and doctors about abortion and birth control.....but when it comes to questioning a woman......oh, gee, we can't do THAT. Then for crying out loud, resign and make way for someone who CAN talk to women, who by the way make up over half the population!
208
Of course, it is sexist. Perhaps it is more sly than cowardly. But it is profoundly offensive, unspeakably contemptuous (and contemptible), and deeply disrespectful to Dr. Blasey Ford.
How can the people feel anything but outrage and bottomless shame to be "represented" by such men as Grassley and Graham and their cronies!
8
What hypocrisy. The real cowardice is shown by a bunch of leftist Democratic Senators, who seem to be taking marching orders from Stalin and Mao. They believe Ford, without hearing her testimony and despite being contradicted by every other witness. They believe the latest accuser, despite all of the witnesses contradicting her. She even contradicts herself. The leftists want a society where anyone who disagrees with their polemic can be accused, judged and sentenced, without any possible defense.
3
@Robert
And you didn't list the reason that we believe both women: Chuck Grassley and Orrin Hatch refuse to have the FBI investigate.
They are fools and they will get him on the bench - but at a very steep cost.
What's that called? A "Pyrrhic Victory"? When you win a battle and lose everything, forevermore.
"Kav The Caveman" will wind up destroying it all for them.
Awwww.
4
It's becoming fashionable for conservatives to invoke Stalin and other dictators when attacking democrats yet ignore the fact that this President goes out of his way to lavish effusive praise and admiration at the dictators and authoritarian leaders he encounters.
6
What's cowardly is to make accusations in public about a supposed victim of sexual assault and then let anyone else do the questioning (or talking) for you after the fact.
Furthermore what is cowardly is putting hyper partisan politics of party over country by demanding FBI investigations 27 years ago, and hypocritically not calling for them now.
I would say that the two republicans women Senators are just as much cowardly, but that is a whole other argument.
4
Ms. Bazelon decries what she views as a sexist action by imploring Senator Grassley to “man up,” itself a sexist command.
I don’t see how this sort of discourse is helpful.
It is plain that several of these Senators are frightened of Dr. Blasey's obvious intellect and sterling credentials. They don't want to be revealed as the feckless, pious dinosaurs that they are.
8
Let their female aides draft a list of questions they can read aloud. It can be a decision tree: if answer A, this is the next question; if answer B, that is the next question. Or they can temporarily yield the floor and get a prompted question whispered in the ear, then take the floor back. How hard is that? Sheesh.
1
As Tory Amos sang, "God, sometimes you just don't come through ... do you need a woman to look after you?"
Yes, Grassley. Man up. Let's see how far you and your colleagues have, or have not, progressed since Anita Hill. I'm thinking not far, so I'd love for y'all to drive some more nails into the GOP coffins.
5
"Mr. Grassley and his 10 Republican colleagues on the judiciary committee are all white men. Their median age is about 60; Mr. Grassley and his colleague Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah are in their mid-80s."
There are so many things wrong with the picture the above two sentences paints. It is not Fake News. It is the current state of affairs in the US Senate. Old...White...Men -- Republicans. These are the people we have entrusted to confirm the judges who will be making constitutional law decisions in this country long after Senators Grassley and Hatch have gone the way of the Dodo.
3
It's too bad you had to use the term 'man up' to describe what you consider to be courage.
2
They truly ARE sniveling cowards, and hiding behind Women’s skirts and pantsuits. Any Women that are party to this farce are traitors. And that certainly includes the Complicit Sisters, Collins and Murkowski. I’m deathly tired of watching their little games and sound bites. WOMEN of America, stand up for your sisters, and stand up for yourselves. WE are the ones that we’ve been waiting for, our ENTIRE LIVES. VOTE in November. Vote for Democrats, and ONLY Democrats. R-E-S-P-E-C-T. We earned it, now DEMAND it. Period.
51
Interesting that they are afraid of the optics in questioning a woman in a hearing, yet they aren’t afraid to denigrate the same woman when interviewed by the press. These are the same old white men who refuse an FBI investigation and who would put a second sexual predator on the court to decide womens’ health issues. Why women aren’t ready to tar and feather these old fools and ride them out of town on a rail, I don’t know.
14
Mr. Grassley said, “We reserve the option to have female staff attorneys, who are sensitive to the particulars of Dr. Ford’s allegations" ...because we sure as heck aren't sensitive and don't really care what that woman has to say.
49
Back To The Trenches
"Me too professor," what have you professed?
A roll and a tumble you’ll claim if you’re pressed
At a teen get together with high kinks and booze –
(You wouldn’t’ve barked if the dude were Tom Cruise),
But Lady Jesus it was Bret Kavanaugh
Sober when sober but lustful when raw,
No wonder she’s het up, her moment has come
Me too, I’m a vic, I’ll soon cloud his sun –
No highest court, it’s back to the trenches
Where Brett can bar hop and go for the wenches.
The Rs could have a whole slate of female lawyers (aka interns) sitting behind the evil white men, obviously, feeding them questions. Make it real obvious.
Ask Mrs. Ford how she feels about Sen. Feinstein making her story public.
Grassley should announce any theatrics will result in a suspension of the hearing and move to vote on Kavanaugh.
And, the Republicans should heed what America's real anchorman, the Doctor of Democracy, a lovable little fuzzball and the truth detectors advice. Vote on K-man.
Stop it NY Times, seriously. You'd be all over him simply for leaning forward "in an aggressive manner", or "being disrespectful" while questioning Dr Ford. It's a no win for any while male these days.
This is why Pence won't meet or dine alone with a female . It has nothing to do with his religion, and everything to do with risk management.
4
Chuck Grassley, Orin Hatch, Mitch McConnell, Lindsay Graham.... these guys have shown their true colors and have to go. Vote them out next chance you get.
43
@Timbuk
Yes!!! And let's all support instituting term limits for Congress after the 2020 election. Eighteen years and you are out. We declared our independence from Britain because we wanted a democracy, not a monarchy. Being an incumbent is such an advantage that it erodes the democratic process.
Then when we have a new, term-limited Congress, let's get rid of the Electoral College. One person, one vote. Some states should not have greater influence over the election than others. It would entirely change the calculus of running for President.
Grassley, Hatch, and the rest of the Republicans on the judiciary committee, with the exception of Flake, may not be misogynists but their statements wreak of misogyny. They have already made up their minds that they will put no stock in any of Dr. Ford's testimony. And yet, if Kavanaugh were an Obama nominee, they would be raising the rafters to hear from Dr. Ford. Astounding hypocrisy.
75
"Man Up, Grassley."
really? this sexist title says everything about different standards when targeting men (everything allowed) or women (the tiniest impropriety decried as misogyny).
2
Don’t you think you’re asking a bit much from the Republican antiques.
Seriously, for them to ‘man up’ would imply their knowing how to use their manhood for something other that patronizing chauvinism.
I highly doubt any of these edifices know ANYTHING about what it means to be a man in 2018.
17
And if Grassly decided to question her directly without terms that she demanded, it would be considered by the peanut gallery as sexest and cowardly.
Hatch “mistaken” and “mixed up”
Graham, regarding an investigation... “delaying the process till after the midterms.”
Grassley "share her story" - a story? And Kavanaugh, a truth?
All these comments from these fossils without hearing a word from anyone. A rush to judgement and a rush to a vote.
No subpoenas in this matter, yet with Hillary's email's they issued subpoenas to the office furniture.
Cowards regarding finding the truth.
10
Women are the Ultimate "Loitering Stand-Off Weapons" used against Individual men. In ancient Hindu state-craft Poison-Maidens called Vishakanyas were used to kill Political rivals or your enemy. Girls from a very young age were administered poison in small quantities daily, so they themselves developed immunity to the Poison. When they were of youthful age, used in Political murders by the way of Sex with your enemy.
I am offended by the sexist title of this self-righteous opinion. Why are the optics so important if people are truly trying to find the truth? The author is guilty of the cynicism she criticizes.
5
Is there any other way to see it? Hiding behind a female staff attorney questioning a female victim of sexual assault instead of questioning her with respect and compassion yourself as required by your duty to office as an United States Senator is the height of misogyny and cowardice. Why are they even there? Here's an idea Grassley—retire and let the female staff attorney take your job permanently.
7
This behavior isn't at all surprising. It's exactly the same as the small-handed man in the White House, who excoriates "enemies" in strangely punctuated and weirdly capitalized tweets but also is afraid to fire underlings directly and to their faces. He's not just a coward but the leader of a party rooted in cowardice.
3
As an Iowan and a democrat, I can't think of anything better than the visual of Grassley questioning Dr. Ford. There are three close congressional races in the state and a governorship at stake. Grassley is an 'Aw shucks, golly gee,' farm boy. When the coyotes raid the chicken coop he says, 'Oh, my goodness, how did that happen? But I guess that's OK. There's more chickens where they come from. Coyotes just doin' what they do."
Can't wait for the midterms!
11
Perhaps it is naive or unnecessary to expect that writers will reveal their political biases, but I think it would be appropriate and helpful for all presenters/writers in the media (TV, newspapers, NYT, blogs etc.) to disclose their political affiliations.
For example, the squib at the end of this article might also note that writer of this article, Lara Bazelon, is a Democrat, or a contributor to Democratic candidates.
Then again, perhaps most writers for the NYT can be assumed to be Democrats.
Grassley and Hatch's ability to stand upright without a backbone, is amazing, i'n't it?
10
Bullies can run and they can hide, right in plain sight. Watch them do it and get away with it.
16
We already know Republicans to be "cynical, sexist and cowardly." That will never change.
If Grassley has women surrogates question Dr. Ford, then perhaps the Democrats can do the same and have women question Kavanaugh. Perhaps Anita Hill could be given top billing and a chance to interrogate him along with other female lawyers and aides - perhaps who have been victims too.
Isn't "proving or disproving injuries to women’s genitals and reproductive organs" by men the whole point to this SCOTUS nomination fight? It's as if these old white men want the right to coerce pregnancy on women right through birth as their right over girl's bodies, genitals and reproductive organs - and they will get that if Kavanaugh gets on a court that will impose this.
Republicans, man up? You jest!
4
What's cowardly is to make accusations in public about a supposed victim of sexual assault and then let anyone else do the questioning (or talking) for you after the fact.
Furthermore what is cowardly is putting hyper partisan politics of party over country by demanding FBI investigations 27 years ago, and hypocritically not calling for them now.
I would say that the two republicans women Senators are just as much cowardly, but that is a whole other argument.
2
The problem, of course, with Senator Grassley and his male colleagues on the Judiciary Committee "manning up" and questioning Dr. Ford themselves, is that their idea of being a man is intricately entwined with notions of male dominance. Try as they might, they cannot disentangle the two.
Their concerns with optics suggests they glimpse, however vaguely, this problem. But it does not excuse them from questioning Ford themselves.
Rather than say "man up," I'd say to them, "step up and let the nation see who you are." And if that's a group of unrepentant sexists trying to pretend otherwise, so be it. No hiding behind our skirts, gentlemen. Not any more. Time's up.
10
Alan Dershowitz's said about Dr. Ford: "if she doesn't show up ... she has violated [Kavanaugh's] core right to confront his accuser." Dr. Ford should be entitled to that same core right from Republican senators who have accused Dr. Ford of lying (such as Lindsey Graham), or inevitably will accuse Dr. Ford of lying before, during and after the hearing.
2
Your proposal is disingenuous. The comments throughout this paper decry that a bunch of old white men are in charge, and they don't respect and demean the victims. Your witness will not stand up to the tough questioning of her sisters,
this is the equivalent of a trial for Judge Kavanaugh. He could be forever branded as a sexual predator or rapist depending on what happens at the hearing. There will be no other chance, after that, to redeem his name, no other trial. In that light, should he not have the right to have the person questioning his accuser have his best interests at heart. I can imagine a scenario where a senator may forgo a tough line of questioning because he fears losing women's votes. That would be like having an attorney with a conflict. " You said he held you down, oh, you poor dear that must have been awful for you. no further questions."
2
@Rob Oh, poor Mr. Cavanaugh. My heart bleeds for him. He has the chance to make this right, but I doubt he will. He seems to be of the Trump mindset...deny, deny, deny. A decent person might say "I have no recollection of this event, because I was frequently dead-drunk at every party I attended at prep school and college. If this did occur, then I am truly sorry, and I apologize."
1
"Man up." There's not a man among them; not a decent one, anyway. I'd like to see Sens. Grassley, Graham and Hatch say on camera to Dr. Blasey Ford what they've said to reporters. I don't believe any of them would have the courage but if they did I think even they would feel ashamed of themselves. And it's not hard to imagine who would emerge triumphant.
Dr. Ford is gaining in stature. Judge Kavanaugh and the Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee are hemorrhaging it.
3
It isn't cowardice, it is spinelessness. They need to have someone else do their dirty work, and don't want it to make woman madder before the elections.
Will no one rid them of this meddlesome priest?
Christine Ford is just not convenient right now. Who did she think she is getting assaulted and then having the bad taste to mention it?
Yeah Grassley should man up. But what is becoming clearer and clearer is that they don't picture manning up the same way I do. I see Gary Cooper in "High Noon." Gregory Peck in "Gentleman's Agreement." Henry Fonda in "Mr. Roberts."
They see the guys in Porky's and American Pie, all grown up and sitting on a bench.
3
Kavanaugh shouldn't withdraw. We're going to give him a fair hearing before we metaphorically hang him aren't we? Anyway Avenatti is putting something together. Thankfully, he’s a balanced, nonpartisan guy with no personal agenda. ;) I'm beginning to wonder at this point if the Democrats or anyone else for that matter really care about the truth? Is that the issue now? If the FBI were to find any evidence implicating Kavanaugh, Democrats would oppose him. If there were a muddled mix of accusations Democrats would oppose him. If Kavanaugh were completely vindicated, Democrats would oppose him. Lets be honest. Everyone's mind...Republicans too... was made up long before these proceedings began. The coming testimony is political theater. It will be a he said she said dispute. We'll never get the answers we need. It's not possible. We all know that. Isn't this at the end of the day about keeping a conservative jurist off SCOTUS by any means necessary? These allegations should have have been investigated months ago. Not leaked for maximum political effect a few days before the confirmation vote. This is starting to feel like a mob driven witch hunt. I believe we will regret how we let this spiral out of control. One day soon the shoe is going to be on the other foot. It will be a Democrat nominee for SCOTUS or maybe even President. Count on a 40 year old sexual allegation resurfacing at the 11 hour that will be hard to prove either way. Then what? How are we going to react?
2
Yes, the boys are worried that they can’t question this woman appropriately, but they certainly think they know what’s best when they pass laws affecting women and their bodies. I need a new word for hypocrite.
10
It's politically smart .. that's why they are doing it.
And mark my word ... the Dems will pay for this the next time they are in power. The GOP knows how to play hardball .... all softball on the Dem's side. The GOP is going to push this through ......
Making the legitimate point that to outsource the questioning of the witness, these Republican Senators show themselves to be cowards and sexists will not deter them. For these cynical, craven lawmakers to be moved by such arguments, they would have to have the capacity for shame, which they lack.
6
I think that Grassley, Hatch, and the rest of this Republican group of pathetic Mad Men-era anachronisms are terrified of being intellectually and emotionally bested by a mature, bright, articulate, and thoroughly poised professional woman. And in their own arena no less! It is embarrassment on a national stage that these insecure relics fear.
6
"The Republicans’ attempt to outsource the questioning of Dr. Blasey is cynical, sexist and cowardly."
As is the preponderance of EVERYTHING they do and stand for.
5
Are you kidding. Grassley, the GOP judiciary committee and for that matter Republicans in general lost all courage years ago. There are few left in the GOP who haven't sold their souls in order to massage the maniacal ego of this buffoon in the white house
7
Grassley & Co as "cynical, sexist and cowardly."
Shocking, simply shocking!
And it's all about avoiding the "bad optics" of showing what he / they really think, do, and care about!
6
160 Republicans voted against the Violence Against Women Act in 2013.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell voted against it.
Republican members on the Senate Judiciary Committee supporting Kavanaugh who voted against the Act are: Chairman Grassley, Lindsey Graham, John Cornyn, Mike Lee, Ted Cruz, Orrin Hatch.
https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cf...
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/03/violence-against-women-act-...
6
What is worse, wrong-headed or a coward? We need not chose, as with "the chairman" we get both.
6
“Bad Optics” is about visuals...Can’t see how verbal questioning can overcome optics...
Because at least two of these women's accusations occurred over 30 years ago, and at least one (Ramirez) stemmed from an occasion of drunkenness on the accuser's part, the Republican senators can make the accusers' cases look weak and thereby justify voting for Kavanaugh's appointment. But here is the rub. Lying to the FBI is a felony for which one can get five years' imprisonment. Dr. Blasey Ford is begging for an FBI investigation (and so is Ms. Ramirez). Neither Kavanaugh nor the Trump Administration is. Not only that, but these two plus the Republican senators say this is unnecessary. What more do you need to know?
537
@JD It is easy for people who are not ethically constrained like the accusers to ask for anything under the sun, which is where we started with Dr. Ford's testimony demands. However, Judge Kavanaugh is interviewing as a member of the Judiciary for a seat on the SCOTUS. Our Constitution has three Branches - Legislative, Executive and Judiciary - it would be inappropriate for Judge Kavanaugh to step over and tell the Senate Judiciary Committee what to do - in fact he is precluded from doing it by the Separation of Powers Doctrine. It is against our Constitutional Law and as a prospective member of the SCOTUS, he would be even more sharply criticized for taking such action.
1
@JD
I've made this point here and at townhall.com
With Blasey, no one has to worry about whatever they say to anyone.
With Ramirez, they don't have to worry about what they say they saw or didn't see. They might have to worry about what they say about something concrete -I was not there at 8pm, when they've seen in the present something that contradicts that --perhaps a security camera video from then that they've seen in September 2018. Other than that, no worries.
Why? You have to willfully make a material false statement. The word willfully is a legal term of art-- it has a specific meaning in US law.
@JD Kavanaugh shouldn't withdraw. We're going to give him a fair hearing before we metaphorically hang him aren't we? Anyway Avenatti is putting something together. Thankfully, he’s a balanced, nonpartisan guy with no personal agenda. I'm beginning to wonder at this point if the Democrats or anyone else for that matter really care about the truth? Is that the issue now? If the FBI were to find any evidence implicating Kavanaugh, Democrats would oppose him. If there were a muddled mix of accusations Democrats would oppose him. If Kavanaugh were completely vindicated, Democrats would oppose him. Lets be honest. Everyone's mind...Republicans too... was made up long before these proceedings began. The coming testimony is political theater. It will be a he said she said dispute. We'll never get the answers we need. It's not possible. We all know that. Isn't this at the end of the day about keeping a conservative jurist off SCOTUS by any means necessary? These allegations should have have been investigated months ago. Not leaked for maximum political effect a few days before the confirmation vote. This is starting to feel like a mob driven witch hunt. I believe we will regret how we let this spiral out of control. One day soon the shoe is going to be on the other foot. It will be a Democrat nominee for SCOTUS or maybe even President. Count on a 40 year old sexual allegation resurfacing at the 11 hour that will be hard to prove either way. Then what? How are we going to react?
Kudos to the NYT. They could not verify any part of Ms. Ramirez's story and would not repeat the New Yorker's slanderous allegations the Judge Kavanaugh was drunk and exposed himself at a Yale Freshman party.
To be clear, all of Ms. Ramirez's witnesses disavowed any such party and their association of the same. Of course there is the possibility those witnesses did not want their names made public, with a long list of their alleged acts that may, or may not, have been committed during their freshman year.
I imagine most of these witnesses are about the same age as Dr. Ford, with high school and college age children, maybe some grandchildren.
It's too bad the "Girls Gone Wild" videos didn't start until the 90's.
2
@Mike
I can only assume you read the GOP line rather than the actual article in the New Yorker. You can read it for free.
This is really important as the source for the GOP complaints was selectively quoting from the article.
2
A correction
I know that in hearing in the House and the Senate, the questions are often asked by staff attorneys, particularly, I would imagine, when the subject is very technical and expertise is needed beyond what a politician can bring to the table.
I assumed this practice extended to nominees for US justices at the trial, appeal and Supreme Court. According to another analysis by a lawyer, this is not the case. The questions get asked by the Senators.
If that is the case, any change to this policy is wrong. And if they have to use a staff attorney it should be the one that usually asks questions. Picking a female one off the bench is wrong.
But what is horrific is that according to salon.com, the GOP wants to let Kav's lawyer, Beth Wilkinson ask questions. And even worse, it looks like Kav hired Beth Wilkinson just so she could ask questions.
Depend on who does the questioning for the GOP, I expect that lawyer to get hammered.
8
Ms. Bazelon's premise is wrong. Old white R men don’t want to question Ford not because they won’t treat her with kid gloves but because they will.
The author is right that optics plays a role, but got the reason wrong.
Ford is demanding that the old white R men question her because she can have it both ways: They will go easy on her but given the optics that will be provided—*irrespective of the kid gloves*—by the coached "victim," her legal team of D operatives/spinners & her allies in the MSM & Hollywood, she can falsely claim—with impunity—that she was re-victimized by those disgusting dirty old white R men.
Super-aggressive questioning is required, given the seriousness of Ford's charges. If it comes from a woman, the Left's tired standby that underlies this entire exercise—that R is the party of white chauvinist pigs and decrepit patriarchs—will ring false.
It seems fitting here to borrow for my advice to the Rs the following from Scalia's lone dissent in Morrison v. Olson, which was about power: This wolf must come as a fox.
3
@Marian ...and the Dems will win the House and Senate...excellent plan! What? Can’t take when the other side plays by your rules? Looking forward to seeing Trump in cuffs shortly after the 2020 election...
2
@Marian you hit the nail on its head!
1
@JT
Wrong year, wrong prez in cuffs.
Post-2018 election, Rosenstein is out. Sessions quits in protest, as promised. Trump appoints DiGenova AG, who impanels grand juries and prosecutes the entire cabal.
Trump thereby reclaims his presidency, restores equal justice for all, & saves the republic.
It's pretty obvious that these "men" simply lack the strength of character to do what is right and honorable.
1
I would think that men in their 60's, the age of grand fathers, would have the life-experiences and the empathy to question Dr. Ford in a dignified manner. The motivation for shunning their responsibilities as Senators may be to ensure that there will be no video tapes of their asking gender-sensitive questions. They are clearly more concerned with their images than their responsibilities.
4
I don't mind if they let a woman do the questioning on two conditions. The senator resigns and the woman is appointed by his governor as the new senator.
5
I expect the Senators are correct in their judgment that if something goes wrong in the questioning or in the confirmation they might be protected in the eyes of their constituents if they have someone else to blame - I have some sympathy for the hired folks who will get the blame if they were too easy in their questioning and the nomination fails or if they were too hard in their questioning and the nomination fails but at least their bosses may be spared and they will have earned their fees.
Good points. The tactic of using a proxy is so transparent that it is almost laughable.
However, there is word now that a third woman has come up with charges with Avenatti as her lawyer and that he is requesting having her testify on the smae hearings as Dr. Blasey on Thursday. Please do not confound the cases. Hear them separately. This last one is so outrageous that it may take away credibility from Dr. Blasey's case (which in any case, at this point rests more on the willingness to perjure himself of a mature and professional candidate to the highest judicial office in the nation), and less on an event that took place so long ago, etc. Don't add too many cases into the stew should focus be lost. Have all these old and new allegations be channeled first through an FBI investigation as they should have been all along.
1
The mere proposal that the senators out-source the questions at this late stage is a confession that their position is morally and politically bankrupt.
3
Advise and Consent is the responsibility of the Senate. If the senators cannot perform this job they shouldn't have it.
1
Empathy--the skill required to pose thoughtful and respectful, yet probing questions--requires a foundation of intelligence, openness to the experience and perspectives of others, and consideration. It also requires real effort. I do not think that Senators Grassley or Hatch are possessed of those characteristics nor want to invest effort in this process.
I am deeply saddened that we still inhabit a world in which women are not afforded equal dignity and that many men will make so little effort to consider the experience of women.
7
The Republican member should be careful. The TV optics of the camera panning across them, as they farm out hard questions to a 3rd party is pretty bad. In my view they would probably come across better asking factual questions and saying nice things about her courage in coming forward even as they gently challenge her credibility due the to the timeframe of the allegations. If they think they can be rougher on her by farming out the question they are probably misjudging the TV audience reaction.
4
Great essay! Te for the Republican male Senators to grow up, do their jobs and let the chips fall where they may. These Senators never fixed the process after Anita Hill and they should pay a price for that!
1
"Man up" is itself a sexist exhortation, provocative, and unhelpful, in my opinion. I agree, however, with the premise that our leaders should accept difficult circumstances that arise on their watch. This opinion is unfortunately marred by the unnecessary provocation.
Grassley is not a lawyer. Interesting in an of itself that he should lead the Senate Judiciary Committee. (A "reasonable" what does he know, etc.) That said, question away. If he oversteps he bounds "legal proprietary", whatever that is, I am sure the committee lawyer can remind him of that fact. Be a man.
2
the correct questioner for ms ford is an experienced person who is sensitive to the needs of women and victims. If the republican senators don't include anyone who can do that, then please ask someone else. ( but i hope people remember what that says about them). I don't care who the republicans ask to question ms ford, as long as the individual is in fact sensitive to victims needs, and isn't judged on how they can push the republican agenda as opposed to getting at the truth. a strong women who respects the victims needs is fine for the republicans to pick. it doesn't stereotype women, it is the appropriate response ( and admission) to the fact that the republican party does not elect such people. if the woman sells out her sense of justice and sensitivity in order to curry favor, shame on her.
1
The only thing "sexist and cowardly" about the Senate Judiciary Committee's questioning of Prof. Blasey by outside counsel (presumably a woman lawyer) is this opinion piece. Gender has always played a role in our society. That is why both sides in this partisan spectacle have attempted to structure Prof. Blasey's questioning to their advantage. Despite the writer's claim that having a female attorney question Blasey amounts to "women's work," it is actually something that will likely lower emotions and help us all find the truth.
When else do senior senators decide to cede questioning to staff? How common is that practice? I've never seen that before. Why now? Exactly what Ms. Bazelon points out is the reason.
1
I really don't see the point of questioning her at all. Have her read her statement and move on. Republican Senators shouldn't treat her as an opponent but simply as a citizen coming forward with what she feels is pertinent information. They already know how they are going to vote anyway. Why make the whole scene look more grotesque than it already does? I suppose the answer is because the equivalent of a defense lawyer not putting on a case in a criminal trial, where the state has not met its burden, will look too peculiar in this forum, particularly since Democrats will be falling all over themselves to praise the complainant's courage, fortitude, poise, and general grandeur.
So if, as is almost certain, Senators feel they must behave as inquisitors, simply have the best cross examiner among them use all of their collective time. I agree that it is weak to have aides (female or otherwise) step in. An experienced examiner can impeach the witness where necessary without seeming to bully or browbeat her. It is not that hard to be respectful and effective at the same time.
2
I understand the attempt at irony, but surely the unfortunate, hyper-masculine neologism, "Man Up," is not the most welcome contribution to an otherwise persuasive argument on the need for men to treat women with decency.
2
Senator Grassley and his lapel pin are once again showing their true colors by demurring on his responsibilities as Chair of the Committee. Very much the same as he did when he was supposedly debating the merits of serious health care reform on another committee a number of years back. If his man and his confederates in the republican party had any intention of honoring the oath they took and actually representing their constituents, he would be using his position and seniority to ask other important questions about Mr. Trump's nominee, such as:
Asking Mr. Kavanaugh to explain his lavish spending on season tickets and playoff tickets on credit cards and running up high balances while earning an income that would make paying them back in a timely manner seemingly impossible.
Asking the nominee to explain how the balances on these credit cards and another line of credit were paid off in a very brief period of time and if anyone volunteered to help pay off these high interest liabilities.
Request a more thorough accounting of why the nominee's testimony contradicted evidence on several occasions, indicating the possibility of committing perjury before the Committee.
Explain why it was necessary to withhold at least 100,000 documents related to Mr. Kavanaugh's career from the proceedings, particularly those from when he served the George W. Bush administration.
One reckons that if Mr. Grassley wasn't so afraid of the truth, he'd pursue it with a lot more vehemence.
8
What does it take to exercise a modicum of decency? Why is this all so hard? What has played out with this nomination is one no-brainer after another, and yet politics has completely replaced propriety in full. It feels like one tricky tactic after another after another, and no one is brave enough to pull back the curtain.
There have to be a number of extremely well-qualified, upstanding and ethically sound judicial candidates out there that the Republicans would support. But to simply exercise the power to get at all costs what those in power want has set in motion what feels like an unstoppable corrosion of culture and standards. And I fear the retribution of all this will be even worse that the current situations.
It is so disheartening and tragic, especially to victims and their families.
Just have an investigation and vote after the findings. There is no need to rush this process other than to have the power to rush it.
2
Kavanaugh won't be confirmed. When reasonable women make a sincere, credible account of their encounters with the judge, his categorical denials will be inadequate.
It's not that he can't mount a defense. He can ask for a full inquiry in the Senate and an FBI investigation to find witnesses to disprove the accusations. But instead, he hides in the White House learning denial from the master.
The Senate won't confirm this man. We can do better. Even Mitch McConnell knew that based on his partisan record.
3
There's one more reason why all the members of the Senate judiciary committee must question Dr. Ford and not outsource that responsibility to female staff. Asking such questions of judicial nominees and deliberating on the answers to those questions is part of the Seantors' Constitutional duty to "advise" and not just "consent" to a President's nominees. They must not shirk that duty because of their concerns about electoral "optics."
5
"Man up" is itself a sexist exhortation, provocative, and unhelpful, in my opinion. I agree, however, with the premise that our leaders should accept difficult circumstances that arise on their watch. This opinion is unfortunately marred by the unnecessary provocation.
2
It's remarkable that octogenarians can operate with such tone deafness, spite, and indignity. I guess that's what long careers in politics will do to conservatives.
If Republican senators don't face the music the way Dr. Blasey Ford has decided to, then she should respond to every question posed with an honest answer, followed by a demand that the men resurface. Her repeated demands and straightforward responses can help her take control of both narratives.
4
That these things need to be said - this even needs to be written shows that Republicans live in a parallel universe where they feel they are always right and should never be held responsible for their actions. Please, every last won of you who sat out the 2016 election — vote. Come back to the democratic process and change this government, because the men on that Senate committee and whoever takes that Supreme Court seat aren't going to change anything for the better.
9
If some senators don't think they can fairly question Dr. Blasey Ford in appearance or content, what are they doing representing any woman in their state or in the country? Would they do the same if the person were Black, Jewish, Muslim, 25-years-old, 75-years-old? We elected them to represent ALL of us regardless of race, creed, ethnicity, age, gender. If one of them thinks he cannot, then he needs to resign the Judicial Committee or the Senate or, at minimum, recuse himself from the examination of candidates for the Supreme Court.
5
As we watch with fascination Senator Grassley on the split-screen in a deja vu moment, one wonders whether he is hoping that the audio is muted. Time hasn't improved his technique.
1
Readers should note the shift in March of 2017 by Trumputin and Crew. From prior practice of soliciting nominee ratings and qualifications from the American Bar Association to vetting by The Federalist Society. This assumed to be a longtime goal of Mitch McConnell. Wikipedia writups for both have the whole story. Federalist Society members Orrin Hatch, Bork, Roberts, Scalia, Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch - long list of right leaning originalists. My take on originalists - committed to the 2nd Amendmant, but make no mention of its original writing, thought process of writers and their real intent. No standing army at the time. Single shot, muzzle loading, black powder etc. No mention of AR-15.
9
I don't think you're being fair and from what I have read to date, I think that both Blasey and Ramirez are giving an accurate account and that Kavanaugh committed these acts. My mind can change with new evidence.
In hearings, staff attorney often do the questioning. Is there a different practice in SCOTUS appointment hearings?
If there is a staff attorney, I don't have a problem if the person is male or female and was expected to do the questioning. If your practice is to have 55 year old male attorney doing the questioning, is is bad practice if you bring in off the bench a 40 year old female staff attorney.
If you don't have a competent attorney on your staff -
According to salon a couple of days ago, Grassley wants Kavanaugh's lawyer Beth Wilkinson to do all of the questioning. That's really, really, really nasty.
It gets worse, because Wilson is a trial litigator, hired last week. Why would you hire a trial litigator in these circumstances? Because you want her to ask questions at the hearing.
1
Unless he changes behaviors dramatically by Thursday, in the twilight of his career and life, Grassley will have ruined his reputation.
5
Sen. Grassley and his fearful GOP colleagues want a prosecutor to question Dr. Ford so they won't be accused of taking such a tone with her.
2
Grassley, Hatch, Graham & Co. may like to think a woman's skirt will protect them, like body armor, in a manner of speaking, from political harm from the female of the species (and not a few males as well). But, while it may be possible to make a bullet-proof dress, there is no garment that will stop votes. If anything, the fusillade will only be more deafening and intense.
1
We have always had to speak to one another - male to female, female to male, about personal and intimate matters. Health care providers, first responders, lawyers, police etc. There is nothing new here, and yet these men whose success in their careers is primarily based on their verbal skills are suddenly reluctant to speak up. How interesting.
41
@Anne
Of course men and women have always spoken. Great point.
Is there no Republican male on that committee that is a reasonable and respectful person? Someone with understanding and empathy that can question these women in a compassionate yet thorough way?
This sort of nuance and balance is absolutely beyond these yo-yos. And that's just it; they are beyond ethical hope. Wow.
We are in the "bully and the beast" era in the Republican Party. The condescension is palpable. Ms. Bazelon is certainly right about the optics. Senator Graham has always been concerned about his own 'optics', a man who cannot admit to his own preferences. Senator Grassley knows that he comes across as a fuddy-duddy, while Senator Hatch out-popes the Pope. Dr. Blasely-Ford is in a very good position, directing her attention to the Senators and refusing to talk to the aides who are the sacrificial lambs.
4
Let me get this straight: the Republican Senators argue that alleged victims are not to be believed because they do not report the incidents to authorities while they themselves lack the courage to question the alleged victim and perpetrator?
2
Real men would investigate, then question, then decide. Too pass off the questions to a woman, do they really think that will help the optics?
2
Committee members need to question both witnesses. Let us watch the proceedings and judge whether or not the Senators comport themselves in a manner - and reach a decision - deserving our trust and votes.
2
Dr. Ford is coming forward to the committee to provide information that should be welcomed by the Senate in helping them decide if Kavanaugh is fit to serve on the Supreme Court.
Grassley should _insist_ that he have an opportunity to speak directly with Dr. Ford.
His reputation is as much on the line as Kavanaugh's is.
My advice to Grassley is to look at his place in history, not at his place at Trump's seedy round table.
5
A reasonable and moral man has doubts about Kavanaugh. Republicans claim no doubts about Kavanaugh. Republicans are not reasonable and moral men (its all men on the Republican side of the senate judiciary committee).
They ain't gonna man up.
3
Agreed; man up indeed.
Moreover, at least two of these "senior" senators would have an excellent opportunity to rectify their behavior at the Clarence Thomas hearing of way back when
7
First of all, I agree with the author. Grassley should question Ford/Blasey himself.
However, I take issue with use of the phrase "man up" here. That phrase has a lot of pain behind it for many men and it shouldn't have been used.
1
These men are United States Senators after all. Do they judge themselves so lacking in competence, experience, knowledge and fortitude that they are incapable of properly questioning a witness who is crucial to their proceedings? If they do not believe they can be careful questioners, they should not believe they can be careful voters on the suitability of a candidate for the US Supreme Court. They cannot have it both ways and remain in office.
28
It's appalling that Senators cannot speak to a person in a straightforward, honest, and respectful fashion. Any person. Then to further condescend by bringing in a stunt double because they fear 'looking bad.'
Who are these people? Who are people who fear looking like bullies? Is it impossible to be a decent person?
Look, I'm a male. I'm also a human being. So are you, Dr. Ford--and a courageous one at that. You have a strong attorney. Hold fast, and require that Senators ask the questions.
1
Passing the buck to the the other gender does nothing to diminish the disrespect that Grassley et al have for the women who are speaking up.
They should conduct the interview themselves and submit to the pressure to try and use sense and sensibility, as best they can muster any.
2
Grassley and Hatch thrive on being imperious and snotty and they have been since they were last front and center during the Clarence Thomas fiasco, over which they officiated. They despise being questioned even though they are far past their prime and they lack an ability to make rational decisions. It's time for term limits for Congress and SCOTUS.
8
@Ed
Yes! 18-year term limits for Congress and SCOTUS. And appoint a new SCOTUS justice every two years, in off election years.
On the other hand, opinion pieces will be written regardless of how good they handle themselves and how respectful they are. The media will slaughter these republicans either way, because they have to ask hard questions, which need to be asked. Because this is so political the GOP members are not going to get a fair assessment. On the other hand, if a female attorney does the questioning, it will be harder for the left and media to be ultra-critical, opinionated/biased, and political. I see both sides of the argument. I see why they would want to remove themselves to make it less political, but also that it is their responsibility. Lose/lose in this extremely political state we are in.
1
If they were seeking more information to evaluate Kavanaugh, they'd run an investigation.
This "hearing" is, of course, not a hearing at all. It is a "show trial," not of Kavanaugh, but of Christine Blasey Ford.
Grassley and the rest of his troop know that. And we do, too.
This event is an obstacle to, in Mitch McConnell's revealing words, "plow through." "Plow through" -- how appropriate.
1
Frankly I’m puzzled. In recent years the Catholic Church has been brought to task for abuse that has spanned half a century. Victims, mostly boys, now men, spent years in tortured pain, their lives ravaged by anger, guilt and shame. Our hearts ache for their suffering. Yet due to their courage the truth has come to light.
Not once during these scandals have the young men who were abused—who waited decades to share their pain, who may have had faulty memories on exact details, who kept their silence, and who continued attending church with the same clergy who abused them—been the subject to tireless ridicule, accused of playing politics, or deemed to be out-right lying. Why is that?
Why are these young men, now grown, believed and the women who are sharing their stories of abuse as young women aren’t?
403
What's even worse is that some of these priest sexual abuse survivors themselves don't believe women if they accuse a conservative man. You would think they would support other survivors, but some of them take a very partisan approach. I'd like to see some reporting on that since both of these issues have such a high profile right now.
@bc59. Only they weren't believed. It took decades... And even now are doubted for lack of proof. There's still more to that story and very little accountability. They were certainly also vilified and mocked in some circles, unfortunately.
Hearing this committee imply/accuse Dr Blasey of lying or being "mixed up" without having heard her testimony is more evidence of how out of touch these men are with the world today. Let alone minimizing all she's accomplished by referring to her as "the lady". Further evidence of their cluelessness is not requesting/demanding that Mr. Judge give evidence and any of the other accusers testify. They must not be sure of the testimony. These men are betraying the people of the United States by failing us, by not demanding an FBI investigation of all parties in this debacle they are demonstrating how mired in political postulating they are and how little they care for what is best for our country. No one will forget what they do now.
7
I find it interesting that the male senators don't believe they can be sensitive to her allegations. That says something.
1
Nice thought, but not happening. These men are craven, and they have no interest in the truth or justice. There concern is optics and getting Kavanaugh pushed through this as soon as possible.
Dr. Blasey is merely a speed bump to these GOP politicians, particularly the 80 something Hatch and Grassley, and low character McConnell. They know they're untouchable, and they've been around long enough to know the game they need to play to get this done.
Dr. Blasey is a strong person to stand up to this -- I hope her courage wakes up a few folks who are just starting to question what the current GOP is all about, and vote for change in November.
2
There is irony in the way in which GOP Senators have rushed to defend Mr. Kavanaugh and to deride Dr. Blasey Ford for disturbing their confirmation party. Youngsters and young adults have often lost job opportunities when background checks showed they had used drugs. I can remember that the question of drug use was prominent when I applied for a federal job in the early 1970s. The other killer in a background checks was financial recklessness and high credit debt. And, of course, any conviction for assaults or other criminal acts. But it seems that teens in recent decades - especially those from prominent families and gated communities - were given a pass most of the time. After all, any teen misdemeanor that came before a juvenile court and judge was sealed. Not so with teens from urban ghettos. So, there is a definite discrimination towards job applicants based upon their socio-economic status and the clout their parents may command.
Sen. Grassley has been known for defending government whistle blowers. Now he seems unsure what to do about Ms. Blasey Ford. He and his GOP brethren on the committee appear to be squeamish about questioning her directly. They don't want to appear like male bullies. Perhaps they are also fearful of how she might respond - given her training in psychology and her research in depression. She might be tougher than they assume.
18
It's kind of difficult to discredit someone when you believe she is telling you the truth. Grassley and his fellow Republicans already believe Ford, that's the reason for the panic response. But they believe their political futures depend on discrediting Ford and not taking the blame for it.
2
Currently there are 23 women serving in the Senate. Only 5 of them are Republicans and none of them are on the judiciary committee. There are 84 women serving in the house. Only 23 are women.
The GOP clearly has a woman problem. The optics are terrible but they have only themselves to blame. Public perception is reality and right now the GOP is perceived as the party of white male privilege that doesn't care about women's rights.
Decades of refusing to diversify their party has brought them to this point. Young people are watching and what they are seeing right now will define how they perceive the GOP for the rest of their lives. Our current generation is the most diverse generation we've ever had and the GOP is losing them.
2
This article is merely schoolyard taunting. It is up to the committee to determine who asks questions of the accuser, and what questions are asked.
Just as Ms. Blasey Ford's answers will have been carefully scripted by her high-powered #MeToo attorneys, so will the committee members' questions have been carefully scripted.
Who asks the questions is not the issue; what is important is what the committee makes of the accuser's uncorroborated accusations, and if the accuser is suddenly able to remember the day, month, year and city in which the alleged incident took place; in whose house it occurred; whether 2 or 4 boys were present; and how she got to/from the house where the alleged attack took place.
In the U.S. anyone accused of a crime is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Ms. Blasey Ford has had 35 years in which to file a civil or criminal case against Mr. Kavanaugh, but has not done so. She had 35 years to share her story with the media but did not.
Yet suddenly her allegations have been raised just in time to try to derail the confirmation of Mr. Kavanaugh, which suggests an underlying political motivation.
Surely anyone with a modicum of intelligence understands that the timing and circumstances of this long-delayed accusation indicate that this is political theater rather than a search for justice.
We Democrats lost the 2016 Presidential election, too bad, now let's turn our energies and talents to ensuring that we win the mid-term and 2020 elections.
3
While I agree with the writer’s main point — male Senators should shoulder their own questions of the nominee, not hide behind a female colleague — I think it is high time we dispense with the shaming phrase to men of, “Man up!” It is demeaning to men, to women by extension, and to all of us as we try to raise a better generation of young people. We are humans, and we should embrace humane values, language, and norms, NOT perpetuate sexist, limiting, shaming language.
1
Sen. Grassley's opening remark that this woman must be mixed up says all we need to know. He has an agenda to push the court way, way to the right, regardless of how much that harms the lives of many Americans, and he would have been perfectly happy to diminish the value of a person whose value, he feels, is minimal anyway because that person is a woman. As a man, I am embarrassed that there are men like this in such lofty positions of American power.
60
I agree with most of what is written in this article, except the title and the last sentence. To equate courage with masculinity (Man up!) is sexist and damaging to boys and girls.
4
I agree with what you said - except for the third word in the last line.
2
Ms Bazelon is spot on with her observation that any republican senator who hides behind a woman's skirts to question Dr Ford is a coward.
Dr Ford is no longer the issue, if she ever was the issue.
Republican indifference to women's rights and stature is not the issue.
The issue now before the nation is twofold:
a. To hold accountable the people involved to testify under oath as to the truthfulness of the matter.
b. To hold accountable the senators who will hear the testimony and make a judgement about their own character by the way they vote on Mr Kavanaugh's nomination.
Let's face it. There is no evidence that will hold water in court. While each of us has our empathy with one party or the other, and while each of us believes one party or the other, this whole thing boils down to judgement.
Judgement is what leaders are elected to evince when matters are material yet not proven to within a gnat's eyelash of legal exactitude.
Never more so than in the selection of a Supreme Court Justice who may have to pass judgement on the President of the United States.
For Grassley and the republican senator boys to hide behind women's skirts in this matter is a clear indication of their judgement as well as the courage of their convictions.
Avoiding Dr Ford is not politically astute, although that certainly is their goal.
Avoiding her is demonstrating intellectual contempt for Americans, betting they will not see through the senators' intent.
2
It is time for Senators Grassley, Hatch & Graham to Recuse themselves from the Committee since they've already stated Publicly how they intend to vote. This should also apply to any Democrat on the Committee who have already stated Publicly that they believe Dr. Ford. What's the point of even having a hearing if some Republicans & Democrats have already made up their minds?
This is an extremely sensitive matter that should be taken Seriously by those people, who are in OUR employ, who will sit in judgment of Dr. Ford & Judge Kavanaugh. How can anyone on that committee or the Senate judge either of these people until they sit down & speak their piece?
I'm sure Dr. Ford who has gotten death threats & Judge Kavanaugh who may lose his chance to be on the Supreme Court are taking this seriously!
If Senators & House members ever wonder Why the American public have such a low opinion of them this hearing will be another glaring example.
26
So, the original objection was that the men shouldn't be questioning Ford; and so Grassley proposed having female attorneys do it. Now according to this article, even that concession is not good enough; the author wants the older "white" Senators to do the questioning themselves (what their ages or race has to do with this is anyone's guess). Of course, we shouldn't assume that Dems intend to take full advantage of the "optics" of that, right? I'm getting the impression that if Ford's attorneys demanded that Kavanaugh stand on his head while testifying, we would be lectured about how terrible it would be for Grassley not to grant that demand.
2
I agree 100% with this op-ed, but it may be too late to ask Chuck Grassley to "man-up." Whatever independence the senator might have shown in his younger years has faded into the obeisant toeing of the party line that we see from most of the GOP these days.
At 85, you might think that Grassley was starting to think about his legacy a bit, which right now is not very flattering. But, instead, he seems more than content to serve as Mitch McConnell's errand boy in perpetrating a massive fraud on the American public.
Why these senators in their 80s are thinking about elections is a mystery to me but, then again, so is most of what they consider to be public service. Asking them to show some courage is no different than asking them to take a public stand on any issue - they need to check the political winds to see whether being courageous will gain them more votes than being a coward.
5
It scares them, I'm sure, and makes them feel very uncomfortable. In terms of power, these powerful men are almost powerless. There's no good outcome that can come from this for them.
Also, if the Republican men did the questioning then they'd have some accountability for what to do with the information they receive in response to their own questions. If they simply observe the proceedings as bystanders then they can more easily move forward with their decision. At least in their own minds.
4
Thank you, Lara Bazelon, for identifying and labeling this for what it is. This entire process has been set up to be a fake hearing with a pre-determined outcome. And people still wonder why victims do not come forward! The midterms cannot come fast enough.
5
Dr. Blasey and her lawyers should refuse to answer any questions that do not come directly from the Senate committee members themselves. As we know, the Republicans on the committee are all men. The Trump Republican misogyny--and the Trump Republican immoral opportunism--must be forced to find the courage to stand up and speak for itself.
4
The Republican Senators are, indeed, profiles in cowardice.
They know to have to do this so they can claim they heard her out, they know they don't care what she has to say, or how many other like her are out there, their minds are made up.
But they hate the optics of tangling with an intelligent, capable woman. Let's all remember this come November.
2
Is there really no other possible Supreme Court justice qualifies to be a candidate in the entire country? Does this man even know how to question an alleged victim of sexual assault? These are critical questions, not partisan. Who is asking them?
1
After listening to McConnell speak on the subject today, I think it would be irresponsible and cowardly for the 11 white men to have a staff woman ask their questions on Thursday. McConnell said it was the Democrats that have caused the problems, so if the Republicans really believe that, then the Senators should man up and do their jobs.
12
Warning to the senators in question: The more I read about the handling of this accusation the angrier I get...No FBI investigation, Kavenaugh getting primed by the White House, the dismissive comments by the senators on the committee (to say nothing of pre-judgement), handing the questioning off because they don't want to be 'on camera' for their questions.
I'm watching and so are a lot of American women. I vote and so do American women. We will make our judgement too. Beware.
4
Don't these "Men" think they can think on their feet any more?
They have all the time in the world to formulate their questions and then ask them. Are they afraid that the answer will surprise them and they won't be able to follow up?
They should be able to do better questioning Kavanaugh because he has practiced his denials, diversions and "won't answer"s for days on end in the WH "murder boards". No surprises there.
6
Interesting to watch Grassley on youtube from the Anita Hill hearings.
Nothing has changed.
How does our system ever allow a guy like that to be in power?
How can he be in power for more than a quarter century?
These guys have to go. Vote.
142
@JB
Yes. Vote Blue, up and down the ballot.
Also, let's institute term limits for all of Congress. (I'd add, every elected office in the country.) No one should represent a state in Congress for more than 18 years. That is long enough. Incumbents have too much money and power to be readily defeated.
@JB
Perhaps Dr. Blaisley-Ford should be on the Supreme Court.
Grassley's comment about female staff attorneys being "sensitive to the particulars of Dr. Blasey's allegations..." implies, does it not, that these particular Republican male senators are not? Who then are they to sit in judgement in the first place? Time to call in the FBI.
2
The GOP wants to control women, or ignore them. They want a male-dominated Supreme Court that claims to understand "women's issues," yet they aren't "sensitive" enough to ask questions of a witness to Kavanaugh's sexual assault.
2
This is silly. I believe an FBI investigation is necessary, and then a hearing. But criticizing the GOP for wanting to have staff or outside counsel do the questioning is a waste of energy, and disingenuous. Bazelon wants the senators to do the questioning for exactly the same reason they DON'T want to do the questioning--it will result in bad optics. But it's ahistorical to suggest that somehow having staff or counsel do the questioning is somehow unusual. It's exactly what RFK and Roy Cohn did as congressional staffers, making their public reputations this way! Those are just two of the more well-known examples. There are many more.
Well you see Crowley lost his election because he didn't pander to Trump enough, not because he sent a female latina staffer to debate the female latina staffer, and in general not giving his constituents the proper time and effort needed. As bad as the optics are for the Republicans on this, I can't help but think it's still probably the right move, as they, the old sheltered white men that they are, are incapable of being sincere and empathetic to a woman in opposition to them, even if she is sacrificing her safety and well being to be there.
They don't want clips of them yelling and making accusations at Blasey, old men questioning attempt of rape accusations won't play well, so let's try other females. So weird how the right, stops yelling about identity politics, just for enough time for them to do some good old identity politics.
1
Grassley is a lump of coal. Been around for eons and is intellectually inert. Appealing to qualities not found in lumps of coal is just not going to go anywhere.
4
How funny. First editorials said that Republicans should rely on outside parties to do the questioning, now according to this comment they should do the questioning themselves. This process is so broke, given this contradictory advice, no matter what the committee does--question the accuser herself or use outside counsel to do so--it will be blamed.
The news has become a cesspool of gossip and contradictory pundits, each more self-righteous than the last.
4
Attorneys please come forward and figure a way to prosecute these senators for something. Deny, cover-up, intimidating witness, lying about what they knew when. If we can turn over the statute of limitations on childhood sexual assault, there must be a way to go after our misguided senators.
1
Someone with expertise in "gender bias" is telling a male to "man up." Note that his decision is not just sexist to the writer but cowardly - he doesn't conform to her ideals of masculinity.
1
It sounds like it's time for those Senators who are too afraid to fulfill all the responsibilities of their job to step down. Let others take over, likely as not women, who will do what is called for of a U.S. Senator. Let's have an end to the picking and choosing of which critical functions they carry out.
20
Ever wonder what secrets are in Grassley's past? I bet there are more than 1 or 2. Could those secrets keep him from acting with more courage and reason?
1
All the Republicans on the Judicial Committee are both bullies and cowards, as well as hypocrites.
Consider:
They are DEMANDING that Judge Kavanaugh be judged by the standard used in criminal cases where the accused can face fines, loss of rights, incarceration, or even execution--Innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
But in such a case, both the prosecution and the defense are allowed to compel witnesses, cross-examine, introduce both corroborating aggravating and exculpatory evidence. And that is PRECISELY and EXPLICITLY what the Chairman and his fellows are denying.
There is to be NO corroborating testimony for Dr. Ford. Deborah Ramirez won't be heard. Mark Judge, published witness to Georgetown Prep debauchery, won't be heard.
This is TRULY what a kangaroo court is, with even less legitimacy (if that's possible) than Clarence Thomas's hearing. At least back then, the abuse of Anita Hill (and it was vile abuse) was bi-partisan. This time, it's solely strictly and totally partisan.
All we can hope for is that Senators Flake, Collins, Murkowski, and all 49 Democrats vote "NO" to promoting Judge Kavanaugh to a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court.
7
Grassley is giving new meaning to "Advice and consent". He is shirking his duty as chair of the Judiciary Committee in so many ways, but especially in asking questions of an important witness. His pushing off the questioning to "staff" demonstrates that this witness is unimportant to his decision to vote for Kavanaugh. Grassley can't even bring himself to pretend to be open minded at this point.
Grassley will be remembered for his failures to honestly approach the SCOTUS nomination of Kavanaugh. He chose to rush through without waiting for important documents and failed to consider important aspects of Kavanaugh's career. In the end Grassley will have failed his party as well as his country.
The voters of the US deserve better than an unfit president nominating an unfit candidate for SCOTUS to be considered by a Judiciary Committee chair unwilling---and unfit---to do his duty.
2
Is it possible to see these men as anything more than Crypt keepers fiendishly trying to protect their themselves and their own keepers?
1
Some of our favorite Republican operatives comment that Ms. Bazelon is only looking for an opportunity to criticize the Republicans members of the committee by insisting they ask the questions directly. They are right! We already know that those members are not able to interrogate a witness in a meaningful and respectful manner because they have already revealed their prejudices in this matter. Grassley and Hatch don't want to question her directly because they would be judged and would be certainly found lacking. But they can't hide behind their aides' skirts. They have already revealed what they are made of by even proposing to bring in outsiders to do their dirty work.
2
Grassley is 85 yrs. old, has been a senator since 1980 and was a rep since 1975 that's 43 yrs. in Washington.
You read his bio and he's done some good things, but of late (G. W. Bush yrs. on) with the further shifting of the republican party to the hard right, he's moved with it.
Regarding Kavanaugh, it's worth noting that Grassley was an ardent supporter of Bork, and accused his detractors of McCarthyism.
At that time, he commented that "The big lie is standard operational procedure for some of these groups. All you have to do is repeat the same outrageous charges, and repeat them so often that people believe they are true."
When Douglas Ginsburg was nominated for SCOTUS, but withdrew when he admitted to having used marijuana, Grassley said "You like to think people who are appointed to the Supreme Court respect the law."
Grassley, Hatch, all in the current iteration of the republican party have certainly perfected the use of the big lie, while demonstrating such a lack of respect for the law that they give unwavering support to trump, a man whose corruption, deceit and ignorance of the law is the embodiment of the word "outrage".
Now they intend to use the big lie as a weapon against Dr. Ford and in defense of Kavanaugh. Cowards all - including Kavanaugh as he hides behind it, and without enough respect for the law to trust it can prove his innocence.
Or he's worried about it doing just the opposite.
13
If you object the the treatment of Dr. Ford by the Senate Committee, call your Senators offices, regardless of party.
The Republicans need to be called out for their foot dragging on Obama’s appointments and their obesance to Trump on Kavanaugh.
Once upon a time the U.S. Senate was called “the world’s greatest deliberative body.” Now it seems to be the world’s greatest deliberately subservient to special interests body.
5
Grassley seems to be ending his career by shamelessly not doing the logical steps to deal with serious accusations. Grassley should be using the FBI and conducting the confirmation with an open mind. I bet John McCain would have some strong words about his partiy’s bumbling the confirmation hearings.
30
@Javaforce
McCain sided with Mitch McConnell in denying a hearing to Judge Merrick Garland for appointment to the Supreme Court. He also stated that if Hillary Clinton would win the Presidency, he would join the rest of the Republicans in blocking her Supreme Court Nominations as well.
I just want to point out that the right has correctly been saying for a long time that words are NOT violence. Cruel/hateful words can be harmful and damaging, but violence they are not. But now look who's changed their tune?! "A drive-by shooting"? Sigh. The one idea which allowed me to respect the conservative side of things - correctly noting that sometimes one should listen to unpleasant theories, rather than run away from them - seems to have conveniently been forgotten.
1
Do you suppose that it has even occcurred to the white men on the Judiciary Committee Republican majority that in the future whether in majority or minority they should appoint women to their committee.Have they no Republican women lawyers or are they simply committed to Judiciary for men only?It is way late in this era to exclude women from certain Senate Committees.They should find a spine and pray for wisdom and do the questioning themselves this week.
5
Ford's lawyer is demanding that senators question Ford for similar reasons as Grassley's proposed outsourcing--entirely for optics. If one purpose of the hearing is to elicit relevant information, then it doesn't matter who questions Ford (or Kavanaugh, for that matter). Skilled interrogators should fill the role. But if the purpose is to have fodder for the midterm elections, then you'd demand that senators question Ford. And then you'd write columns labeling the decision to have a female lawyer question Ford as "cowardly" and "sexist." If Ford is a "formidable opponent" as the author writes, then she shouldn't care who questions her.
2
Please!
Asking Grassley to 'man up" is pointless. This has been pure Kabuki Theater all along from the Republican side. Grassley knows Kavanaugh's unfit. He knows about other accusations against him as well.
None of this matters to them. The only thing that matters is getting another Republican operative onto the Supreme Court to push their agenda. Mitch McConnell has said so.
Kavanaugh could hand the gun to Donald Trump to shoot someone on Fifth Avenue, and they still wouldn't care. In a sane world with a functioning democracy, Kavanaugh would not only withdraw his nomination, he'd resign his judgeship. He has compromised himself just by all the lies he has told to Congress, both now and in the past.
Vote them all out in November.
8
Wow. Its clear that the Senators do not want to appear like the Senators grilling Anita Hill back in the day. Its clear that that is what kind of a image that Dr. Ford wants to portray. Have the sensitive women trained for such matters do the questioning. To do otherwise would not be smart.
The essential problem here is not just optics. The role of a hearing is fundamentally different than an investigation. At a hearing, or a trial, it is good advice for prosecutors to not ask a question that he or she doesn't already know the answer to. During an investigation, it is critical for an investigator to ask questions that he or she doesn't know the answer to, that being the whole point of an investigation.
The Republicans, by skipping the investigation, will force them to ask questions for which they are unsure of the answers, and they will look like fools.
6
Grown up in Iowa (did vote for Grassley once).
30 years as a litigator.
Having heard "little lady", "just a minute dear" and "oh don't you look cute" type comments in court from Judges directed to my female counterparts. None of which comments being meant in a professionally complimentary way.
And, having two daughters, I am comfortable saying, Ms. Bazelon, you nailed it.
Sen. Grassley should man up or exit stage right.
I stand with Dr. Ford.
4
Just what America doesn't need: two 80 years old men from the unpopulated middle of the United States whose only claim to fame is that he have suckered the voters in their states for decades and should have been cast aside at the turn of the Century.
33
Superb column.
Bringing in women to grill her is, indeed, cowardice. It's also ducking their constitutional responsibility.
However, the real cowardice is not calling for the FBI to investigate the allegations of the three different women and the others that are out there.
The other major issue is not making available to the committee and the public most of Kavanaugh's documents, emails, and memos from his time at the While House. The few documents and emails that have come out, that they wanted to keep secret, have already shown that Kavanaugh lied under oath!
What else are they hiding?!
Of course, this is all par for the course.
Their protestations that what's now going on is "unfair" is laughable. They have rushed and RIGGED this confirmation process from the get-go. They had no problems with Kavanaugh's friend and protege, Bill Burck, being the one to vet the documents in the first place rather than the National Archives as is usually done.
They also pushed for an earlier hearing and vote when they got wind that there were women he had assaulted!
2
Note also -- please correct me if I am wrong -- that one additional slimy aspect of Grassley's strategy in bringing in an outside questioner is that this will also prevent the Democrats on this committee from being able to ask questions of Ford.
2
Grassley and Hatch and the other Republican prima donnas who sit on this committee need to do their jobs and ask the questions at this hearing. This is their job. They have no problem criticizing the accuser and making up their minds about her motives and accusations even before they meet Dr. Ford, but are too scared to face her across the table at the hearing and ask her questions. These two nasty old men have been around Washington too long and the fact that they were at the Anita Hill hearings and are still there shows that little has changed and their narrow bigoted opinions can still count in this country...
4
It is not only because it is cowardly. Grassley and his piggish colleagues know full well that they can find a lawyerly version of Sarah Huckabee Sanders to confront Dr. Ford in a demeaning way that they cannot. They believe it will provide impunity to any charges of attacking the victim or questioning her truth and her motives.
It will be disgusting no matter which way it goes.
2
Republicans on the Judiciary Committee understand their problem. This “jury” found Kavanaugh innocent and well qualified to be on the Supreme Court before the hearings started. But like President Trump, who was cautioned not to testify for Mueller because Trump couldn’t tell the truth, Republicans on the committee can’t help but be seen as sexist while questioning Dr. Ford. Since they already know she is lying and needs to be exposed as a Democrat agent, they will need a woman to do their dirty work, to keep their hands clean for midterms.
4
Grassley and Hatch don’t want their old age and liver spots to face a clear-conscience woman.
Which is demeaning.
Just like them.
4
Whatever these Republican men decide to do, the "optics" will be bad for them. If they hide behind a woman's skirts, I'm sure Senators Kamala Harris and Mazie Hirono will have a few choice words for them.
33
@Carson Drew, probably something along the lines of "But really, guess who's perpetuating all these kinds of actions. It's the men in this country and I just want to say to the men in this country. Just SHUT UP and step up."
LOL!
1
Well argued, Professor Bazelon. I strongly concur. In addition, to improve the prospect of achieving justice, let's implement the hard earned wisdom of Professor Hill (see her recent article in the NYT).
Professor Hill's shameful and unfair ordeal "courtesy" of the likes of Biden et al. is a grim injustice which needs to be acknowledged. What could be better vindication than for Professor Hill to preside in the matter of Ford v. Kavanaugh.
14
Nice try on ducking out of your elected responsibilities Senator.
If you are unable to do your job, why remain in the Senate? If you are afraid to do your job, why remain in the Senate? If you think someone else is better at your job that you are, why not retire and help them run for your seat?
If you want the power and the income, just do your job.
8
Lara Bazelon is right about the cowardice of Senators Grassley and Hatch in assigning a female staffer to interrogate Dr. Christine Blasey Ford.
Most of us, however, are more concerned about the dishonesty of having a pretend hearing to provide political cover for Republican misogynists and bullies in the court of public opinion.
The midterms are on everyone’s minds, and Mitch McConnell has instructed Republicans on the all-male Judiciary Committee to be very, very careful. A red wave in the House on November 6th could spill over to a change in control of the Senate.
In the meantime, Donald Trump – who wants Judge Kavanaugh’s concept of the all-powerful, Teflon presidency so badly, he can taste it – couldn’t resist taking crude shots at Dr. Ford.
4
@sdw
Excuse me. Obviously, I meant "blue wave," not "red wave."
2
If they can't trust themselves to behave respectfully and compassionately to women in public, how can we ever trust them to so in private?
152
Grassley is my senator and cowardly has described him well recently.
39
Cowardice is right. Generations of seminarians report that female graduates are most often guided into "pastoral care".
The male graduates have no hesitation when it comes to pontificating from the pulpit, but the deathbed vigils are often more than they can take. Mary, take the wheel.
1
"Man up?" What does acting with integrity, doing the right thing and displaying courage in the face of adversity have to do with being male? Dr. Blasey Ford (a female) is doing all three.
121
@Amy Luna Yes. It's fascinating that the very language Bazelon uses to criticize Grassley is inhabited by the sexism inherent in his problems with women. That's what makes the whole thing a thorny proposition. It's entangled in the bedrock of our thinking in ways we don't even realize. How do you excise what you can't even see?
I'm guessing, though, that Bazelon used the phrase sarcastically, as in, if one is going to be sexist, at least do so in a way that fits your own sexism. But then, men who exhibit this kind of sexism are not "manly" at all; they're sniveling cowards at the core, afraid of the power of women and thus abrogating their true power as men.
The Republican Senators are partisan functionaries, and so they are willing to defy Senate traditions to further rig the hearing.
2
testostrone deceases by age,it is physiologic!
If gop were to be honest, they’d agree to fbi investigations as requested by Dr Blasey but not Judge Kavanaugh. Trump can shriek all he wants that dems are playing politics but as usual what he accuses dems of doing is the tactics he uses more than anyone. Trump says only he can fix it but it appears he‘s mostly capable of destroying democracy and civility. McConnell is destroying democracy too and needs to go.
Trump says Kavanaugh is a fantastic person and he picks only the best people. So far we know Trump lacks good judgement on quality people having supported Roy Moore, Rob Porter, Tom price, Scott Pruitt, Michael Flynn, Manafort, Chris Collins, and many others.
3
Ok I'll man up. I'm a loser because I'm concerned about h1-b workers and companies out sourcing to other countries whilst stinking up the aisles of Walmart. Now I'm not a man but a pig. That's bellow what I'm used to being called like sheep or cattle. What do i have to offer? A vision of what the Supreme Court shouldn't be.
You see I caught Yale law students saying Kavanaugh is guilty before being proven so. One by one they came up with policy reasons why he shouldn't be appointed which superseded any real or implied guilt. He because they didn't agree with him didn't belong on the Supreme Court. What happens when these students become lawyers and work for the government? They don't believe in due process or the election process. Imagine Utah gets two Senators. What's going to hold these little minds back but a conservative Supreme Court.
1
Absolutely no Republican Senator should ask a single solitary question to Dr. Ford.
Thursday hearings will not be about finding the truth. The truth is nowhere to be found. 36 years ago perhaps the truth could have been found.
This is political smear campaign against a conservative man who could not be defeated with reason and logic about his constitutional views. So Democrats chose to engage in a political smear campaign against Judge Kavanaugh.
Nice try, nobody is buying whatever you're selling Lara.
1
@F1Driver Nor are we buying what you are selling, trucker. Doing an additional FBI background check with the information in Dr. Ford's allegation would be both prudent and fair. But conservatives are so desperate to get this guy on the SC before November, they are willing to ram this confirmation through. Surely there are conservative judges out there who have not had a history of excessive drinking and high credit card debts, let alone accusations of sexual assault?
1
Dear Dr. Blasey,
I sincerely hope that you will have the fortitude to withstand this onslaught and to require that the old white men on the panel question you themselves and not try to hide behind women so that the public does not see that 27 years later it is still a bunch of old white men questioning a woman who has shown immense courage in coming forth. May God be with you and with our country. What have these are done to it?
4
Not only is Senator Grassley a coward, along with most of the Republican Senators, but Brett Kavenaugh is too. He remembers quite well that during his prep school days as an under age drinker he often got drunk. Judge Kavenaugh also knows that overly intoxicated people usually remember little or nothing of what happened the next day. If he had any integrity in this case, he would say something like the following: "I regret the heavy drinking I engaged in as a teenager. It was behavior unbecoming of anyone who aspires to any kind of public service. I honestly don't remember everything I did while drunk. If I did what you said I did, Dr. Ford, please accept my sincere apology for any pain that you were caused. Even though I have no recollection of the event, I believe that you are sincere in you public statements." Although I don't agree with most of Judge Kavenaugh's probable agenda, I would after such a statement at least consider him to be worthy of being a Supreme Court Justice.
10
@Michael Janko Exactly, Mr. Janko!
If the senators on the committee are unwilling or incapable of questioning Dr. Blasey themselves, they are unfit for their office and should step down. Grassley's proposal to cede questioning to a female lawyer or aide is cowardly, insulting and irresponsible.
Rather the get to the truth, the Republican senators on the Judiciary Committee wish to destroy Dr Blasey's credibility without having to face any accountability for their aggressive, insensitive behavior which might taint the Republican party and themselves as misogynous.
17
It's time for another movement, the "too old" movement. Senator Grassley has demonstrated that he is too old and too out of touch to be chairing anything. Congress needs to be repopulated with younger Americans, more minorities and more women. And that's coming from an older, white male.
5
@KL
Yes! Congress and the Supreme Court need term limits. 18-years max and you are done.
Man up, indeed. Bazelon puts her finger right on some of the most infuriating aspects of this gender-biased process. When white male politicians want to dismiss a credible, intelligent woman's allegations of sexual misconduct, they should have the integrity and honesty to speak for themselves. Instead, they hope to avoid the political fallout by manipulating yet another woman to do their dirty work. If they believe in what they're doing, let them act for themselves and take the real-life consequences. This entire, appalling situation shows what happens when an entire political party lines up behind leaders that have lost their moral compass.
26
No one elected these staffers. The members of the judiciary committee were elected to do this work. The Democratic members are prepared to carry out the responsibilities of the job they were elected to do and question the witnesses before their committee. But the GOP members scurry away like cockroaches exposed to light--the light of public opinion. As Lindsay Graham might say, "Let the ladies do it."
Man up, GOP boys. Do your job. If it's too hard, then resign.
12
If the optics are bad (and they are), the right thing to do would be for Republicans to take stock of why NOT ONE female Republican senator is on the powerful judiciary committee.
Of course in order to do that, the GOP senators would need to have the courage (which they lack) to confront their biases. And of course pigs are likely to fly before one of the white, male entitled GOP senators ever acknowledges what's so clear to everyone else: their very obvious and ongoing bias against females. Which I guess is why they want to use a female surrogate to provide "cover" for those biases. What they don't seem to get is that many of "us females" will rightly see that as just another example of the ways that powerful men use women for their own ends.
44
Republicans have already so mishandled this situation that what's a little more mishandling going to affect? They plan to vote for Kananaugh regardless of Ms. Ford's testimony . Their planned combination of hiding themselves and voting for Kavanaugh after the testimony will reveal an even greater level of cowardice than anyone imagined but worse, this move will reveal their contempt of the testimony prior to any investigation; a fitting end to a string of incompetence and proof that their ethics are entirely situational
119
@Buoy Duncan But isn't the opposite true too? If the FBI were to find any evidence implicating Kavanaugh, Democrats would oppose him. If there were a muddled mix of accusations Democrats would oppose him. If Kavanaugh were completely vindicated, Democrats would oppose him. Lets be honest. Everyone's mind...Republicans too... was made up long before these proceedings began. The coming testimony is political theater. It will be a he said she said dispute. We'll never get the answers we need. It's not possible. We all know that. Isn't this at the end of the day about keeping a conservative jurist off SCOTUS by any means necessary? These allegations should have have been investigated months ago. Not leaked for maximum political effect a few days before the confirmation vote. This is starting to feel like a mob driven witch hunt. I believe we will regret how we let this spiral out of control. One day soon the shoe is going to be on the other foot. It will be a Democrat nominee for SCOTUS or maybe even President. Count on a 40 year old sexual allegation resurfacing at the 11 hour that will be hard to prove either way. Then what? How are we going to react?
1
Uh huh. And if Grassley and other male senators DO question Ford directly, Ms. Bazelon gets to lambaste them for it. That would be quite an opportunity to lose, wouldn't it?
36
@Richard Luettgen Perhaps you didn't fully read the piece before you rushed to launch your critique? She specifically calls for them to "pose respectful, probing questions, rather than bullies intent on shaming and demeaning the witness."
3
Is this making the assumption that Grassley is incapable of questioning her respectfully?
4
@Richard Luettgen Instead of "attacking the attack", I would like to know in your opinion why it would be OK to have a female aid do the questioning? i.e. do you support Sen Grassley's decision in the first place?
5
The author is hoping to attack those awful optics, and does not want to be deprived of the opportunity to criticize them for doing it.
31
@Mark Thomason
How else does one create accountability?
You have an unaccountable Congress that isn't willing to do its job as an equal branch of government. They fear Trump and are unwilling to displease him.
How do you get someone to do their job? These GOP men fear being held accountable by women voters for their despicable actions of attacking a woman and her credibility (and want someone else be an attack dog and destroy the accuser's reputation).
It's the classic American tradition of having someone else do the dirty work while one only reaps benefits... you know, the kind Lincoln fought against??
Enough with the Good Ol' (or is it great?) Boy America already... We are living in the now, the 21st century. Politicians need to be held accountable for their actions.
15
You are absolutely right. Dr. Ford’s supporters are rubbing their hands together waiting for Republicans on the Judiciary Committee to be perceived as insensitive, patriarchal inquisitors.
3
@Alan Barton Waiting for them to be perceived as insensitive because they ARE insensitive! So many Republicans have already announced that they are going to vote for BK, without waiting to hear from any accuser, without an FBI investigation, and without hearing from any other witnesses. They are being totally dismissive. This is an insult to the accusers, and also an insult to the nation they are sworn to serve, and to the concept of justice. Can't you see that????
“We reserve the option to have female staff attorneys, who are sensitive to the particulars of Dr. Blasey’s allegations ....question both witnesses”....... and we want every American woman to know that no male sperm shall be left behind.
Gonads Over Pudendums 2018
November 6
Vote.
228
Every day Republican Congress men and women prove they're too cowardly to stand up to Trump even though they loathe him in private. Why should we expect them to be strong now when they left their spines to air out in the lobby's umbrella stands long ago?
421
I am no longer convinced this is about standing up, or not, to Trump. Rather, I believe this is about who they are as people. Unethical, possibly amoral, and not worthy of any more votes.
9
@Linda: We would expect them to rise to the occasion of an admirable woman on the left if there was one who wasn't too cowardly to have waited 36 years to report and another one who waited until the last minute to reveal.
2
@Linda Trump may not be cuddly but most Americans have never had it so good. I guess you want to go back to higher taxes, lower wages, higher unemployment, an open border and food stamps. You could volunteer to pay the old tax rates or give the difference to a good cause.
A hot, hot potato, indeed,
Grassley, desiccated weed,
Kavanaugh he can sense
Tells a lie that's immense,
One the public at large will not heed.
239
@Larry Eisenberg The public at large does not read the Times. Roughly 8-10 times as many people watch Fox News every week. People believe what they want to believe and you don't want to believe Kavanaugh. I don't know what the truth is but there are very big holes in the accusation which the Times is unlikely to share with you. You remind me of the old New Yorker cartoon where one socialite remarks to the other, I don't know how Nixon got elected. No one I know voted for him. I suspect no one you know voted for Trump, but I doubt you would give a blue collar worker the time of day.
2
@John Kerr
You make some harsh misassumptions about Larry Eisenberg. I know for a fact that he knows some Trump voters. And he would give the time of day to anyone who asked courteously. He's no snob.