Susan Collins/ Profile in Courage
At 3:PM EST Susan Collins delivered what has to be the finest speech delivered before the US Senate in my lifetime. While Senator Lindsey Graham blasted democrats for their detestable tactics during the confirmation hearings and the Judge's own fiery comments came after being accused of a heinous crime, Susan Collins today spoke in a more reasoned and deliberate tone, addressing all the elements of the process.
She first addressed the legitimate Judicial arguments lodged against Kavanaugh by liberal activist groups. She used logic and reason to dismiss every argument from abortion to executive privileges. I also believe that Roe v Wade is now established law, though I can see where Kavanaugh and others may begin to extend rights to the unborn. (Don't tell Ms Collins). Then she addressed the claims of Christine Ford and others. After admitting what most of us felt, saying that Ford's testimony was compelling, yet unsupported and somewhat contradicted by witnesses Ms Ford named. Senator Collins then reminded us all of the cornerstone of American law, the accused having the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.
Finally Senator Collins addressed the individual who leaked the identity of Christine Ford. Saying that we may never know who it was, that person had committed a serious injustice for political gain. She also said there may be a bright side if it serves to change the procedure for the Judicial confirmation process. Then she said it: " I will vote to confirm Judge Kavanaugh,"
Shortly after that Senator Joe Manchin (not a profile in courage) announced that he also would be voting in favor of Kavanaugh. Thus it took a 66 year old woman to bring the most contentious judicial confirmation hearings in modern history to an end and she ended it on the ridge of decency.
I have referred to this gentle woman on a few occasions as "the fickle woman from Maine" ......I now regret that.
A woman who can think and reason for herself has brought the circus to an end.
https://youtu.be/FRpSJed5xsA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRpSJed5xsA
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Who is online
82 visitors
The speech lasted about 40 minutes. When it was over Justice had been restored to the US Senate
That's how a Senator should act. Telling truth in the face of a howling mob.
The contrast to the Schumers of the world could not be more striking.
Such a rarity these days
Excellent news!
Murkowski has said (not officially yet) that she will vote against so that is balanced by Manchin officially (and publicly) stating he will vote for.
Flake doesn't matter now. If he votes against it's a tie and Pence casts the deciding ballot.
All over but the extensive wailing and crying.....
So, what we are looking at is a confirmation down party lines, which will play into the elections in November, over 50% of the population in the U.S. is women and, I would say over 60% of them are angry women, not at the Democrats but, at the Republicans and, I would say every one of them plan on voting this time around, it should make the results in Congress interesting.
There is one more thing that can be done, wailing and, crying isn't it. A member of the SCOTUS, like any member of the government, can be impeached and, the scuttle butt is that is what will happen if the Democrats take Congress, Kavanaugh will be impeached.
The tactics of Senate democrats have also energized Republicans. We will see you at the polls.
I would say over 60% of them are angry women,
Really? All women think alike? Women don't believe in innocent until proven guilty? I doubt it.
Vic, you added my quote, where in that quote did I say all women?
"Mr. President, I listened carefully to Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony before the Judiciary Committee. I found her testimony to be sincere, painful, and compelling. I believe that she is a survivor of a sexual assault and that this trauma has upended her life.
Nevertheless, the four witnesses she named could not corroborate any of the events of that evening gathering where she says the assault occurred. None of the individuals Prof. Ford says were at the party has any recollection at all of that night. Judge Kavanaugh forcefully denied the allegations under penalty of perjury. Mark Judge denied under penalty of felony that he had witnessed an assault. P.J. Smith, another person allegedly at the party, denied that he was there under penalty of felony. Professor Ford’s lifelong friend, Leland Kaiser, indicated that under penalty of felony she does not remember that party. And Ms. Kaiser went further. She indicated that not only does she not remember a night like that, but also that she does not even know Brett Kavanaugh.
In addition to the lack of corroborating evidence we also learn facts that have raised more questions. For instance, since these allegations have become public, Prof. Ford testified that not a single person has contacted her to say I was at the party that night.
Furthermore the professor testified that although she does not remember how she got home that evening, she knew that because of the distance she would have needed a ride. Yet, not a single person has come forward to say that they were the ones who drove her home or were in the car with her that night.
And Prof. Ford also indicated that even though she left that small gathering of six or so people abruptly, and without saying goodbye, and distraught, none of them called her the next day or ever to ask why she left. “Is she okay?” Not even her closest friend, Ms. Kaiser.
Mr. President, the Constitution does not provide guidance on how we are supposed to evaluate these competing claims. It leaves that decision up to each senator. This is not a criminal trial, and I do not believe that claims such as these need to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, nevertheless fairness of this terrible problem."........Susan Collins
You said 60%.....Right?
She wanted to retire and Schumer & the democrats talked her out of it!
Ya, Linda Sasour called her a "traitor" on twitter. That must mean that all women are supposed to think alike. That must mean that the accused is automatically guilty.
Upon what legal grounds, facts, and evidence do you base this comment?
Yes, I know what Collins said, I also thought she would vote to confirm, no matter what was produced by the FBI report, as I said earlier, the vote will be down party lines, not a good sign for our country.
Is 60% all women? Why no, it isn't.
And? What did the report say?
It is a majority. Why are you so convinced that so many women will see it as you do - that an allegation is all that's necessary?
Traitorous to who Tessy? She is voting with her party, I expected nothing less of her, expecting more of her is apparently too much to ask, consider where she has stood for the past ten years and, on top of that she doesn't have an election challenge until 2020 so, she stands to lose nothing this year.
Traitorous to her gender?
So women are supposed to think alike?
I do but, the Democrats in Congress, if they manage to take both houses, will make a show of it anyway.
You get the same question. All women are supposed to think alike?
Sad but, she does fall within that 40% that I didn't mention earlier.
She voted her conscience, and used a much much lower standard than Beyond a Reasonable Doubt. I think it was a "More likely than Not" standard.
And still found it unbelievable.....
And I guess according to you means a traitor to her gender. Sorry to see that you feel that women are not so intelligent that they can make their own determinations of such an important issue.
Not me, the Democrats in Congress, I'm simply reporting what I heard but, if I was to hazard a guess, I would say his testimony in front of the committee, I'm sure some Democrats could make a case for perjury.
No, not me, however, I do expect Kavanaugh to be a thorn in the GOP's side for a few election cycles.
They should stand up for women's rights, including reproductive rights.
It doesn't matter, it never did, the Republicans were going to confirm Kavanaugh even if there was proof that he had murdered someone, after all their "Fearless Leader" demanded it.
There are women who are pro life. They can't think for themselves?
Really? I thought for sure this thing had been derailed. I thought Republicans would back down again. I didn't realize how strong Susan Collins was.
Btw I don't count it as a done deal until it actually happens tomorrow evening
Then you are saying that. Women should stand up for women? Even if a woman is wrong or falsely accuses somebody?
A majority is not "all" and, that is what you said, "All women".
Women in general are angry, angry at Republicans, angry that their calls for justice have gone unheard by a political party and, that party in their minds is putting an accused rapist on the Supreme Court while there is a misogynist in the White House, which they are still angry about. Women will fight each other over a man or, other things but, when it comes to a cause like this, they will unite and, fight for that cause and, they will make themselves known as a force to be dealt with. Does the election after the Anita Hill hearing ring a bell?
She is a party lady so, she will vote with her party every time in cases like this.
No? Susan Collins said it better than I could. Take a look at post # 4.1.3
and what does that mean? 60%? All?
angry that their calls for justice have gone unheard by a political party
Really? And what about their sister, Karen Monahan? :
"The woman who accused Minnesota Democratic Rep. Keith Ellison of domestic abuse said on Monday that Democrats don’t believe her story and threatened to isolate her over the allegations."
And, in 2020 she will be campaigned against by the #metoo movement and, other women's groups so, she may have lost that election.
She is a moderate who has bucked her party many times, so much so that Chuck Schumer talked her out of retiring
The movement hijacked by the left? How strong is it?
Feminism might be on the rise, but many women aren’t on board. Though slightly more women consider themselves feminists now (38%) than they did in 2016 (32%), close to half (48%) of women still say they are not feminists, according to new data from YouGov Omnibus. Among men, only about one in five (22%) say they consider themselves to be a feminist, which is a very slight increase from 2016, when 19% of men said they were feminists.
I think it will be 50/50 with the deciding vote coming from Pence so, it will be a party line vote.
Then obviously, you believe that women must all think alike.
No more last minute stunts?
Then you can't call a woman a traitor if she has a different opinion from a "feminist democrat"
I have made no comment on this for a reason, I know less of this than I do of Kavanaugh, I have my own reasons for opposing Kavanaugh and, they have less to do with Ford than his record on the courts so, don't try to derail with Ellison.
She is a moderate when it suits her political agenda, this time it didn't suit her agenda.
Yes, I'm sure your opposition is based mainly on his Conservative views on the Constitution. That I am sure of
Why aren't the women who disagree with Collins the traitors?
And, who is speaking of feminists as the only group to consider? You are, not me, I'm speaking of the differing groups of women who have different agenda's but, have one common enemy to fight for the rights that are being taken from them, the conservatives in Congress.
This time was her finest moment.
I can't speak for the Democrats in Congress but, I think they will use this for a rallying cry for these elections.
I know you don't mean it that way, but if I saw somebody else say that, I would think that logic to be a form of misandry
Could you re-phrase that?
Why is that?
It is already working for Republicans. I can't wait for election night
And, you are correct Vic, it is not a form of misandry, it is just what I have picked up on over the years from women. Different fights but, when they have a common goal in mind and, someone gets in their way they join up to fight that common enemy. It makes for more interesting elections IMO.
Yeah, it should be interesting but, I think once Kavanaugh is confirmed the Republican electorate will relax and, the Democratic electorate will unite more. I could be wrong so, like you said we will have to wait until the election to really know for sure.
"One plausible narrative is that the Kavanaugh hearings are helping to excite Republican voters and reduce the “enthusiasm gap” with Democrats. As The Upshot’s Nate Cohn points out , you can cobble together a credible case that polls since last Thursday’s Senate hearings have been comparatively good for Republicans. You could cite, for example, cite two new North Dakota polls showing Democratic incumbent Sen. Heidi Heitkamp down by double digits, or the several polls showing a close-ish Senate race in New Jersey , or a Quinnipiac University poll showing Democrats’ generic ballot lead down to 7 points from 14 points previously , or Upshot/Siena College polls showing GOP incumbents holding up well in districts in southwestern Ohio and coastal Virginia ."
All of this is true, it could be helping the Republicans but, will it continue, there is a whole month before the elections and, Trump can still kill the golden goose between now and, then.
Sarsour is a dangerous woman. She also said that Senator Collins promoted "white supremacy".
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/oct/5/womens-march-leader-sarsour-launches-racial-attack/
Sarsour's Women's March group said that Collins is a "rape apologist".
Yup, a lot can still happen
Yep, that's my problem with the radical left. It is their endless name calling, smearing and tendency towards mob rule.
Sorry, the profile in courage award goes to Heidi Heitkamp, definitely. She came out early, totally voted her conscience and did what she knew was the right thing, and it could very well cost her, her seat.
She is already down by about 15 points. She did it because she knows it's already over.
"Mr. President, the politically charged atmosphere surrounding this nomination has reached a fever pitch even before these allegations were known, and it has been challenging even then to separate fact from fiction. We live in a time of such great disunity as the bitter fight over this nomination both in the Senate and among the public clearly demonstrates. It is not merely a case of differing groups having different opinions. It is a case of people bearing extreme ill will toward those who disagree with them. In our intense focus on our differences, we have forgotten the common values that bind us together as Americans".......Susan Collins
Not being an American, and not being blinded by party loyalty, my view from afar is exactly what Susan Collins said. The beautiful country I so often travelled, and even as a foreigner was a property owner for a while there, has become a battleground - and even worse, one with so many people bearing arms. It's scary to think of it.
And it can't be avoided
Her seat is already gone, and she knows it, so her vote is just another in a long line of irrelevant democrat votes.....
Meaning attempting to apply leverage to her was pointless...
It's why I discounted her as a vote to flip anything....
Manchin on the other hand, wants to keep his seat and has an outside fighting chance to do just such. So he's voting his district against the powers that be.
That is the REAL profile in courage.....
I think Manchin does what he can to help the Democrats while still keeping his seat. I hate lots of things he does, but if he didn't do them there would be a Republican in his place, so...
Sounds like you're admitting she did the ethical thing.
Irrelevant in the knowledge that hers is just another in the long line of partisan votes that were going to be cast against the nominee.
The whole ideal of her voting her conscience was moot when it was being proposed.
She voted the party line cause there is no reason not to....
No ethics to it..... (and I made no claim that there was)
It seems they all know if they don’t tow the party line their toast no matter what they actually think is best for the country. How are we ever suppose to have a better country when this is our system ?
Unfortunately combined with having a president who was elected to singlehandedly hired to tear down the existing government and rebuild this country to his desire it seems to me WE the People are losing our hold over our own country, to the people we hire.
I really wonder how that is making this country great.
Fortunately, he was hired to "Tear Down" the usual way of doing business in our government. Trump isn't the one that got us to a point were the citizens of this country wanted "Real Change". It was the Government we've had all these years that did that. Obama's "Change" was just the same "business as usual" x 10. The Fed up Silent Majority spoke in 2016.
he was hired to "Tear Down" the usual way of doing business in our government. Trump isn't the one that got us to a point where the citizens of this country wanted "Real Change".
Thank you, Yes I understand that I also understand who hired president trump and why.
The entire problem I have with this is ONE man deciding what is right, wrong the direction taken why, where, how and when to do the tearing down and rebuilding, seems more like a dictatorship than a constitutional federal republic.
Far easier to make the changes some want but as we see with much destination, obstruction and division by and from the masses to accomplish what is done.
To me I hate (and I hate very little) pretty much anything that is used to or does divide the American people Because I think that is how the politicians and media gain more power over us … everyday little by little.
Trump is no exception. He definitely wants as much power over all off us and this country as he can get.
They all do I'm not stupid, but most also have seemed to have more personal restraint of their accomplishing the gaining of more power.
Good Luck controlling this, the republicans own it. And Good luck to America !
. The President, the Susan Collins/ Profile In Courage.
WTF?
Courage?
The Republican President of the United States, the Republican Senate Majority leader, Republican Trump TV (AKA "Fox News") and every single Republican in the entire Senate (except for Murkowski) voted for Kavanaugh. And you believe it took "courage" for Republican Senator Collins to vote with the others in her own party?
I can respect people having different opinions on Kavanaugh-- but to claim that yet another Republican who went along with the other Republicans is a "Profile in Courage" is just plain . . . what???
(What's next-- is some Democrat here going to claim that Democratic Sen. Feinstein is a "Profile in Courage"- because she voted the Democratic position (to oppose Kavanaugh)?
I know.
Not what Jack Kennedy had in mind when he wrote "Profiles in Courage" is it?
Manchin is the one demonstrating courage here. Collins? it shouldn't be considered courageous to stand on principle, particularly if those principles are what you are supposed to be standing on.
What I will say is this, she (Collins) is going to have to withstand a manure train load of criticism from the leftist women's movement. You know, those that think that having a vagina means you HAVE to think a certain way, and it had better agree with your thinking.
Isn't that kinda an indictment of similarity to what they abhor?
Manchin and Collins? Apples and Oranges where courage is concerned. Why?
Because one voted against their party-- one voted along with party@
Only two Senators took the opposite position from that of their party-- one in each party: Murkowski (R) and Manchin (D). So if you wanted to attempt to make a case that some senators were "profiles in courage" you'd have a better chance of making the case with the two senators who had the courage to oppose their parties.
A case for Collins being "courageous" is nonsense-- she was no more courageous than Ted Cruz, or Tom Cotton or Mike Lee or Mitch McConnell, etc (all of whom voted with their party)
Or, for that matter, no more "courageous" than Chuck Schumer, Kamala Harris, Diane Feinstein, Elizabeth Warren, Amy Klobuchar, ...who did the same thing-- they voted with their party's position.
It doesn't take "courage" to vote with your party (especially when they are so united)-- it takes courage to vote against your party!
So the only ones you could make a legit case for is those showing the courage to vote against their party-- in this case only Manchin and Murkowski.
But even then-- I don't think either of them voted out of courage at all.
In any event-- here's s NT "Surprise Pop Quiz"-- which state that Trump carried in the election gave him the biggest margin of victory? No-- its not Hawaii
Anyone? (No googling allowed!!!)
Are you saying that I think standing on principle should be considered courageous? Re-read it, I specifically did not say that.
But I did say it was a difficult way to go.....
That's easy West Virginia. (almost tied with Wyoming)
Yup.
And that's why I think that even defying one's own part as one Democrat and one Republican did is not necessarily an act of courage. I don't mean to be critical of Manchin. However, given the fact that he's a Democrat in a red state-- in fact the most pro-Trump state in the country-- he had no chance of being re-elected there if he voted with his party.
So I don't consider Manchin's vote to be an act of "courage"-- rather IMO it was merely common sense!
I think we have experienced an Al Dixon moment in the Senate with Susan Collins. Most of you will say who is Al Dixon and, why is he important or, even being mentioned on this seed? Well, Al Dixon was a Democratic Senator from Illinois in 1991 during the Clarence Thomas hearings, up to that point Dixon had never lost an election in Illinois and, he had held almost every elected job there was to hold in Illinois, he was the golden boy of Illinois, everyone loved him, he was known as "Al the Pal" because he worked with everyone, he never caused any waves. When he entered Congress he worked across the isle with Republicans and, he got a lot for his state of Illinois in doing so, so, again he was very popular back home, then came the nomination of Clarence Thomas, Al promised President Bush he would vote to confirm Thomas before any information on Thomas came out, then Anita Hill came forward and, Al the Pal found himself in a situation were he had to either go against his promise to the president or, against the voters who wanted him to not confirm Thomas.
Al went with the president and, within four days after the confirmation found himself in the outs in his state of Illinois. Up to this point in his political history Dixon had never, ever lost an election in the state, he was the most popular politician in the state, he had millions of dollars for any campaign he wanted but, now, he was being primaried a first for him, he lost the primary by double digits and, his opponent went on to be the first African-American woman in the Senate.
This is the woman who replaced him on the Senate and, proved even someone who was believed unbeatable could be beaten.
So at least one lesson to be learned from that is 'Don't make promises that you might not be able to keep.'
As I said, Dixon voted for Thomas because of his promise and, because of that he lost his next election, the moral of that story seems to be lost on you Buzz, I could be wrong and, if I am forgive me but, Susan Collins has voted for Kavanaugh and, I think like Dixon she will pay for it in the next election she faces in 2020.
Collins is not in the same position as Dixon. The people who are tearing their hair out over Collins' vote were never going to vote for her anyway. Plus, given new cycles these days, it's unlikely to be an issue that motivates anyone by the time she runs again. She certainly doesn't have to worry about a primary like Dixon did.
The Illinois Democratic Senate Primary was incredibly rare. There were actually two well financed candidates challenging an incumbent Senator. Moreover, one of them made a play for the same moderates voters that Dixon relied on. It was a perfect storm that rarely ever arises to take down a Senator in a primary. The crucial difference is that Dixon was challenged by his own party, Collins will have no such worries.
Had Dixon survived his own party primary, he probably gets reelected.
Murkowksi and Manchin are in the "Dixon" position. But they aren't facing a primary for years. Manchin probably ensured his reelection with his vote for Kavanaugh, and it so far in the future that it's doubtful Murkowski's vote will matter much to Republicans when she's up for reelection.
But in Liberal political circles Sean, none of those realities matter...
Yes Manchin probably punched his ticket, it's only a probably cause you never really know what is going to happen. It may be that the voters are tired of such twisting in the wind and vote him out anyway....
All politics is local is a truth they fail to accept...
Good for her. Finally a Senator who knows her job when it comes to SC nominations. Advise and consent. Not extort and smear like many on left are trying to do.
I’m so proud of her. Such a courageous Woman. I wish she was my Senator.
I think Collins ought to put together a group of moderates, three from each party should be enough, who promise in advance of the 2020 election to support a President's nominee absent lack of qualifications or extraordinary circumstance. If confirmation is assumed, maybe the craziness, showboating and character assassination of nominees that has become SOP will stop.
I do not know if Collins is courageous or not - but I think after all the bullying that has taken place from women more or less threatening Collins if she did not group think with them, her political career was going to be put down like a dog …………………… Senator Collins did not cave, she did her job and right or wrong will vote her conscience
…………. calling her [Collins] a traitor to her gender (?) is a bridge too far.. Feinstein may be a more likely traitor to her gender .. had she done the right thing, Christine Blasey Ford's accusations could have been heard and investigated without a public display - Feinstein counted on the emotional uproar .. counted on the revictimization of many women who had never come forward before about their own assaults to foster support and blackmail the senate over votes in the upcoming election … it backfired - but Collins is the traitor? Feinstein used women to try and be some kind of hero, as the senator that brought Kavanaugh down (?)
I keep hearing about speaking truth to power .. Pffft it is more like truth be damn'd ……... seems as though it comes down to what one wants and what they are willing to do to get it! blackmail and threats apparently are part of getting their way at all costs!
Kavanaugh is not my choice for Supreme Court .. but alas ……………….!
Women will vote their conscience come November and again in 2020, just as they always have....
Thank you all. A special thanks to the courage and decency of the Senator from Maine.
A reminder for all those who call women "traitors".. The "Me Too" movement needs to understand, once and for all, that lying is not restricted to one gender.