So, just to be clear -
Got it.
Why tpm covering this? This is not worthy, on top of your site crashing all the time on my iPad.
I disagree. This is an official administration response that clearly shows they are more interested in derailing an investigation than finding out if their nominee has the kind of past that would undermine Supreme Court rulings.
Curious why you don’t think it’s worth reporting. Is it because it isn’t a surprise? If so, I’d say there are no surprises anymore, which is all the more reason we need to be kept informed.
I don’t suppose your ipad is waiting for an ios update?
Because it’s a window into the tactics that Kavanaugh, PP, and their women allies plan to use going forward. I like to stay up on these things.
Why are you reading it?
And then why are you bothering to comment on it?
Let’s not give him too much grief over it. I’ve occasionally the same sentiment over some stories (although I think this one is definitely newsworthy), and we don’t know whether a story has value or not if we haven’t read it.
Slightly OT - I love TPM, but my biggest gripe isn’t usually about whether a story is newsworthy; it’s that there are often several single paragraph stories on one topic that really should be consolidated into one post.
So we have “locker room talk,” and now we have “rough horseplay.” If drunk bastards rush into the women’s locker room, throw them to the floor, clamp hands over their mouths and grope them we have “locker room rough horseplay.”
Hey Brett, some guys are are waiting outside in a van, send your daughters out for some rough horseplay. Hopefully he’s asked next week to confirm that he’d find nothing wrong with that.
Sorry but I don’t recognize the person and I don’t understand why people just show up to bitch.
His TPM bio is available. He has 219 comments to date, and a spot check shows substantive comments.
Christians of a conservative bent, especially evangelicals and fundamentalists (the groups overlap greatly, but there are distinctions), take very seriously the biblical passages that teach submission of women to men. Women who are raised from birth to believe this stuff have a hard time getting over it, especially if they are home schooled, or educated in Christian schools, etc. It’s very easy for evangelicals and fundamentalists to construct social bubbles and live most of their lives within those spheres. Bear in mind, also, that even American public schools, within the lifetimes of many of use on TPM, taught, sometimes subtly, sometimes more openly (a) male superiority - this was more open, and (b) white superiority - this was more subtle, but hard to miss over a lifetime.
I’m not trying to excuse conservative Christian women, but I know that many of them often tamp down cognitive dissonance in order to keep their lives together. They sometimes have a lot to lose if they break out of their prescribed role. How do I know this? Consider me one of the breakaways.
I still disagree with the whole notion that it does one bit of good.
Is this really the day you want to use a toad-adjacent descriptor?
So it looks like “why didn’t she come forward sooner?” is the new “what was she wearing?”
The GOP always knows just how to kick women where it hurts.
I’m having painful flashbacks of the Anita Hill hearings, as I’m sure many of you are. Though I was only a teenager at the time, it was awful. I’m afraid we’re going to get screwed again on this one, ladies. I desperately hope I’m wrong.
It was bad enough that this a-hole is being nominated to the SC, and is going to destroy women’s rights to decide what to do with our own bodies… but the only thing that could make it worse is to drag us through a woman-shaming “hearing” first, just to approve him anyway.
ETA: I truly feel for what Professor Ford is about to put herself through. No matter what the outcome, she is a hero.
Surely you don’t mean that Josh isn’t scouring the comment sections for kindly (or not so kindly) kvetching about how to run their stories? 
Catholic and non-Catholic Right to Life activists would be standing in line to sign up. The background of these 65 women would be telling.
Schlapp also said she spent a “lot of time” with Kavanaugh during their “younger years” and claimed the judge was “incredibly professional.”
This is about one thing and one thing, only. Abortion. Kavanaugh will end it. Republicans will then have a steady, low paid work force unless women are lucky enough to find their way to a filthy, vermin ridden back alley.
You can’t throw a soiled copy of the Constitution at any Federalist Society gathering without hitting a future Roe overturning hopeful, so I don’t think it’s entirely that. I think it’s about making DT king, and not wanting to have the stench of loser going into midterms.
White House Director of Strategic Communications Mercedes Schlapp called Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s (D-CA) decision to sit on allegations made against Brett Kavanaugh in order to protect the identity of the victim “incredibly disturbing,”
Why disturbing… OH YEA, disturbing because you can no longer ramrod Kav onto the SC. If you were honest in your assessment of a person’s suitability for the SC all the records would have been made available and the time needed to review would have been given. This whole rush, rush is a sign of desperation. Desperation that you are about to lose the Congress and this along with another obscene taxcut are now your only priorities.
Republican indifference about the manner in which they are steam-rolling through this nominee–in a marked partisan manner—with total indifference to his many flaws: his previous false testimony, his shady financial history, and now, the uninvestigated accusation of sexual assault— is what is incredibly disturbing.