we should not be analyzing this in terms of guilt or innocence. This is not a criminal proceeding. If charges had been filed immediately after this incident took place (if indeed it did) since Judge kavanaugh was a minor at the time, it would likely have been dealt with in our juvenile court, where the issue is not termed "guilt or innocence".
The questions are (supposed to be) these:
1) Does this guy have the professional experience, intelligence, and exposure to the Supreme Court and its tasks and functions to serve on that court? (for sure he does)
2) Are his views of the law so wacky and out of the mainstream that he should be rejected, or are they more normative? (They are normative)
3) The last....Does he possess the requisite moral character to serve in this position? Personally, even if as a high school student or college kid he did some awful things, it seems that in the last 33 or so years he's been ok. I think back to some of the things I did when I was young and stupid (as opposed to now, when I am old and stupid). On balance, I'd be likely, if I were in the Senate, to give him a pass and vote for him.
But, now, based on the strident positions of both sides, there is a fourth question. An inappropriate one, in my view, and that is: How would voting for or against the confirmation affect my political future? The US Senators, who in general have backbones not unlike your average jellyfish, will vote solely on the basis of this 4th question.
In the movie about Justice ginsburg, Orrin Hatch said that he disagreed with her opinions on things, but that she was qualified, and hence he voted for her. But this type of civility is gone. Where are the Jeffersons and the Washingtons? They are not in politics, they are in the NFL.
Irwin, this is a very good post and well said...and sadly I think I would agree with point four.
it should be exactly as Hatch stated.