Kavanaugh's WSJ op-ed: a lack of apology

     Brett Kavanaugh's bluntly-titled I Am an Independent, Impartial Judge: Yes, I was emotional last Thursday. I hope everyone can understand I was there as a son, husband and dad. in yesterday's Wall Street Journal may be various things, but the one key thing it maybe had to be, it wasn't. It never says the word "sorry" at any point.

     The judge does say, "I might have been too emotional at times. I know that my tone was sharp, and I said a few things I should not have said." However, this is quite vague, and the "might" shows a lack of genuine sorrow and of serious self-analysis. Even if the word "sorry" had been used, that would not be enough for many observers to conclude Kavanaugh had turned a new leaf; but the lack of the word "sorry", and of the true sentiment of sorrow, is damning.

     As one reason, he gives, "My statement and answers ... reflected my deep distress at the unfairness of how this allegation has been handled." Then why did not Christine Blasey Ford, who has indicated she questioned the fairness of the proceedings, not blow up like he did? In fact, his op-ed doesn't mention her at all. Or Debbie Ramirez. Or sexual assault. Or rape. Or drunkenness. It's not for nothing that the word "I" appears four times in his essay title.

     His September 27 hearing, by the way, was revealing not only of his temperament, but also of his logic, or lack of same. C-SPAN's video "Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh Sexual Assault Hearing, Judge Kavanaugh Testimony" shows Kavanaugh, saying at 2 hours nine minutes to Senator Blumenthal, about Renate Dolphin, “she and I never had any sexual interaction”, and claiming he is defending Renate’s reputation.
     But this is all a red herring, because the issue is not whether they actually had sex, but rather, whether a yearbook statement of his was a boast of sexual conquest. And at 2:10, Kavanaugh again poses as a defender of Renate’s reputation, when he is the one who offended her in the first place by his yearbook statement about her. He repeats about Renate, “we never had any sexual interaction”, which again, is not the point at all. ...In his WSJ essay, Kavanaugh doesn't apologize or explain these anomalies about Renate (and maybe other anomalies as well) ; how can we see him as genuinely understanding or repentant, then?

     Finally, retired Justice John Paul Stevens came out against Kavanaugh yesterday, on the basis of the temperament shown at Kavanaugh's recent hearing. So when senators like Susan Collins ponder a vote, they might want to consider Stevens' condemnation, along with the political likelihood that Republicans may forgive her if she votes to confirm another right-leaning nominee (say, Amy Coney Barrett), but Democrats, independents, and even moderate Republicans (or conservative ones with a conscience) may never forgive her if she votes for Kavanaugh. Put another way, swing-vote senators may not have to be sorry, for refusing to vote for someone who never even bothered to say he's sorry. Or: "What goes around, comes around."--Kavanaugh at the September 27 hearing.