PCG's Joel Hilliker Denounces Opposition to Brett Kavanaugh

Unsurprisingly PCG's 1% think Brett Kavanaugh's promotion to the Supreme Court is wonderful news and they seem to think that anybody who does not approve of his nomination otherwise is wrong to do so. That is the distinct impression one will get from reading Joel Hilliker's article on the subject. ('Shame on You!,' October 10, 2018.)

Currently Republicans control the Senate so it was always rather likely that President Trump's nominee would gain the post. During the nomination process Dr. Christine Blasey Ford accused and later testified that many years ago Kavanaugh had attacked her. And what does Joel Hilliker think about what she has said?

On Friday, Collins announced her decision in a 43-minute speech on the Senate floor. She reviewed Kavanaugh’s judicial record, showing that he was not a radical, then addressed the accusations that Kavanaugh committed sexual misconduct 36 years ago when he was a teenager, allegations that have proved unsubstantiated, unprovable, even outlandish. “That such an allegation can find its way into the Supreme Court confirmation process is a stark reminder about why the presumption of innocence is so ingrained in our American consciousness,” she said. Collins’s case was sound and well reasoned.

Over time other women, namely Deborah Ramirez, Julie Swetnick and another anonymous accuser, also presented accusations of unlawful conduct by Brett Kavanaugh but somehow they are not mentioned in Hilliker's article.

Hilliker insists that there is no legitimate reason to oppose Brett Kavanaugh's ascension to the Supreme Court. He makes no attempt to try and view things from the left's perspective. His view is seemingly the only perspective that matters.

Leftists had no constitutional reason, no compelling reason, no logical reason to block Kavanaugh. They pronounce shame on him and his supporters for political reasons.

Back in 2016 Republican Senators blocked President Obama from nominating Merrick Garland to be appointed to the Supreme Court even though this act left a seat of the Supreme Court vacant for over a year. And somehow Hilliker insists that this is not a compelling reason for the political left to oppose Kavanaugh's nomination.

Hilliker comments on Senator Manchin's decision to approve Kavanaugh's nomination. While on that topic Hilliker further reveals his opinion of Dr. Ford's testimony.

Shame on Senator Manchin and on Republicans for upholding the rule of law! Shame on Manchin for not politicizing his vote—shame on him for not ignoring the evidence before him and simply voting like a sheep along with his party to oppose the president, regardless of Brett Kavanaugh’s qualifications! Shame on him for not destroying a man because a woman made an unsubstantiated accusation against him. Shame on anyone who didn’t simply “believe women,” accept everything his accusers said at face value, and presume his guilt!

Hilliker has more to say about Dr. Ford's accusation.

Let’s talk about sexual conduct. Christine Blasey Ford claimed that a 17-year-old Brett Kavanaugh had gotten drunk at a party and jumped on her on a bed before she escaped. She did not claim that he raped her, or even came close. Nevertheless, Democrats insisted that this incident should disqualify Kavanaugh from ever serving on the Supreme Court. We must set the bar very high when it comes to sexual conduct and respecting women, they insisted.

It is baffling that Hilliker felt like he should write down the sentence highlighted above. It is sort of like implying that one should should not worry about attempted murder since the murder did not actually occur.

Furthermore Hilliker makes no mention of allegations that Brett Kavanaugh may have committed perjury. Questions about previous decisions made by Kavanaugh are also not addressed. Somehow those topics are not worth discussing according to Hilliker.

While discussing this topic he mentions New Orleans, the city which suffered so much in 2005 due to Hurricane Katrina, in an unflattering way. It would have been so easy for Hilliker to simply not mention the city by name.

A couple of days ago as I was flipping between news stations, my attention was arrested for a moment on a reality show where a group of friends discussed where they should go for a road trip. One said she had the perfect spot: New Orleans. Why? Because there they could get as drunk as they wanted and never get kicked out of a bar. There they could urinate or vomit in the street and never get arrested or even draw much attention. The group of 10 or so friends cheered wildly at this idea! 

Shame! That—and the whole gutter culture it represents—is something Americans should be ashamed of.

Elsewhere in the article he insists that opponents of Brett Kavanaugh's ascension to the Supreme Court are hypocrites for allowing conduct contrary to PCG dogma but that line of thought does not directly address the question of whether Brett Kavanaugh should have been appointed to the Supreme Court or not. That is just whataboutery.

Seeing that PCG's 1% seem unwilling to speak out against Kavanaugh's ascension to the Supreme Court despite allegations of criminal conduct this leads to other questions that needs to be asked. However only PCG's 1% can answer the following questions, namely:

How much does the sexual harassment of women by men matter to PCG's 1%?

And if an allegation arise about someone in authority within PCG, what are the rest of PCG's 1% going to do about that?