The Four Color Media Monitor

So just what you'd expect them to be saying.

"what kind of anti-Kavanaugh blasphemy's turned up on social media lately"

Blasphemy? When did Brett get made God?

The Democrats would be on a witch hunt against Oliver Wendell Holmes if Trump had nominated him.

Ulysses S. Grant was a drunkard and a slob. In peacetime, he probably would have been discharged for conduct unbecoming an officer.

If Lincoln had followed peacetime SOP and fired Grant, the CSA might have won the war, and Democrats would still own slaves today.

But, when the Gary Conways and Samuel L. Jacksons and Mark Waids of that time petitioned Lincoln to sack Grant, the president wisely observed, "I can't spare this man. He fights."

If a woman claims to have been raped, groped, or harassed, she is to be automatically believed. No need for an impartial investigation. No need for evidence. Just go to Ox Bow Canyon, find some men, and string them up without a trial.

Women never lie, and they never make mistakes.

Unless it's Kathleen Willey, Juanita Broddrick, or Paula Jones. Then it's all a right-wing conspiracy.

Mary Jo Kopechne never had a chance to accuse anyone of anything.

And Suzanne Coleman never testified before Congress. After Bill Clinton got her pregnant, she committed suicide by shooting herself twice in the back of the head.

This witch hunt is an example of why VP Pence refuses to be alone with a woman other than his wife.

And it is also an example of the reason for MGTOW.

Kavanaugh did not deny that he drank while in high school and college. He did not lie about it while under oath.

The unsubstantiated accusation of sexual assault did not produce results, so now the SJWs are resorting to unsubstantiated allegations of a drinking problem. That he may or may not have had 35 years ago.

What's next? He got a ticket for parking overtime?

The FBI should do what the Democrats claim to want. Conduct a thorough investigation. That means following every lead. AND following the money.

The women who confronted Flake are professional activists from a Soros-funded organization.

A competent investigation would conclude with a lot of Democrat politicians and journalists completely discredited, and some witnesses being prosecuted for perjury.

MGTOW is no solution. Even if Mr Pence is kept away from any contact with women other than his wife, he is still vulnerable to accusations from boys and young men, which could be equally devastating to his career. The only solution is no contact with anyone, ever.

Even Donald Trump, though, has acknowledged that ford's testimony was credible; she is a professional academic with a well established career, not a paid employee of the nefarious global dominating all powerful Mr Soros.

It is kind of sad, when the standard of behavior demanded of a Supreme Court judge is so much lower than that expected of, say, a director of a Guardians of the Galaxy movie.

Kavanaugh should withdraw.

Then Trump should nominate, in turn: Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham, Jeanine Pirro, and Judith Sheindlin.

Honestly, the fact that they're bothering with this witchhunt DESPITE Christine Ford already at best having dubious credibility, and at worst a complete liar is just disgusting and should not have happened. Not just Kavanaugh, either: All four of the people she accused of assaulting her have had airtight alibies, most of the women he knew ended up defending him on his behalf (and there's zero evidence he even pressured them to defend him) and even her ex-boyfriend has indicated she's not trustworthy. Kavanaugh committing sexual assault on her? Yeah, and Princess Peach is always kidnapped by Mario. (had to add in the sarcasm tags in case someone doesn't get that the Mario and Peach reference was meant to be sarcastic).

Probably the only thing even worse about this bit is how they went after his wife and kids to such an extent that the wife had to move twice in a short period of time just to avoid the death threats issued against her. That's just sick.

Ford has not accused four people of sexual assault. There has been talk of four witnesses who might have knowledge of the party at which the incident happened.

Death threats have been directed against both Ford and kavanagh's wife.

Anonymous actually said:
"....following every lead. AND following the money.
The women who confronted Flake are professional activists from a Soros-funded organization. "

Can't believe anyone still comes out with things like this in this day and age, or that it goes by with so little comment. As others have pointed out in other contexts, this is an ugly dog whistle: "blaming a rich Jew for controlling the levers behind protests organized by your political opponents is the stuff anti-Semitic cartoons have been made of for centuries."

How many of these sexual alligations are actually the real thing or are just fakes attempting to get a couple minutes of glory?

"How many of these sexual alligations are actually the real thing or are just fakes attempting to get a couple minutes of glory?"

Strange glory indeed. But the answer to the question is easy. If they are made against republicans, they are fake. If they are made against democrats or Hollywood types or leftists, they are the real thing, no questions asked. Anyone reading this blog has learned that.

"Professional academics" are often left-wing radicals. And a lot of mental health professionals (psychiatrists, clinical psychologists, social workers) are crazier than their patients.

And Soros was a Nazi collaborator. So it is disingenuous to say that he is a "Jew," and to imply that criticism of him must be anti-semitism.

George Soros was born on August 12, 1930. That would make him a very young collaborator. Some of the usual suspects have tried to make the argument that he collaborated when he was 14 years old, but there is not much substance to it.

There are a lot of right wing radicals who have been "professional academics". Think Arthur Butz, or, less crazy but still right wing radicals, Jordan Peterson or Robert Bork.

"George Soros was born on August 12, 1930. That would make him a very young collaborator. Some of the usual suspects have tried to make the argument that he collaborated when he was 14 years old, but there is not much substance to it."

You, ah, DO realize that Soros HIMSELF admitted he collaborated for the Nazis, right? It's even on video: https://youtu.be/HXqty2rkUDY So unless you want to claim Soros just lied about himself on the news, I'd suggest you reconsider your stance about it lacking "substance." And BTW, that's not even counting the fact that he also mentioned this in his own autobiography, titled Soros on Soros.

"There are a lot of right wing radicals who have been "professional academics". Think Arthur Butz, or, less crazy but still right wing radicals, Jordan Peterson or Robert Bork."

Yeah, I'm not sure Arthur Butz is a right-wing radical, or even right-wing. Let's not forget that Noam Chomsky has engaged in similar instances of Holocaust denial, and he's so far to the left he makes even Vladimir Lenin look like a member of the John Birch Society. As far as Jordan Peterson and Robert Bork, they don't strike me as being all that radical. Conservative, sure, but not really all that radical. If anything, Bork was closer to an Originalist, basically Anthony Scalia before Scalia was made a Justice. If anyone came across as radical, it was the guys who rejected him, NOT out of his qualifications, but simply due to his politics. Same goes for Jordan Peterson (you want radical? Try Michel Foucault or Jean-Paul Sartre).

It is important to listen to what Soros actually said in that interview from 60 Minutes. He said that when he was 14 years old he saw others seizing Jewish property, and that he was a spectator, seeing it but not doing it himself. That is not collaboration. Nor is working for the Nazis under threat or compulsion for that matter; slaves are not collaborators. It was the people who went beyond that, the ones who were violent and cruel to other victims to get something for themselves, for example, who were labelled collaborators.

See for example from the National Review:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/02/parkland-shooting-hoax-latest-right-dishonesty-epidemic/

Chomsky has spoken up for the right of holocaust deniers to assert their views, and has allowed his writings to be associated with theirs. Problematic, but he has never said or suggested that the holocaust did not happen.

Who is radical depends on what you think of as the standard. Sartre seems mainstream, and Foucault argued against any absolute truths, radical or otherwise. But Bork was and Peterson is definitely outside the norm. Originalism is a recent radical notion, one inconsistent with how the founders themselves saw the Constitution.

"...If they are made against republicans, they are fake. If they are made against democrats or Hollywood types or leftists, they are the real thing, no questions asked. Anyone reading this blog has learned that."

Yeah, but by that logic, if an actual rape had been performed by a republican, would that mean that it automatically gets dismissed?