Brett Kavanaugh has been confirmed, despite the boorish and possibly unethical behavior of some Democrats, and in spite of the even more boorish and decidedly illegal behavior of certain well-organized and well-funded left-wing loonies (it being slightly illegal to threaten to kill elected officials). But no one with an IQ above room temperature took the ugly Democrat muck-raking seriously, while screaming and violent protesters simply turned people off, patriotic Americans being essentially peaceable and law-abiding.
Scarier are some of the more subtle and meretricious arguments against Mr. Kavanaugh like the following one I stumbled across on Facebook:
“Let’s do some simple math.
Per the March 2017 study on reports of sexual assault in the Journal of Forensic Psychology, 5% of reports of sexual assault are unfounded – i.e., false reports.
Brett Kavanaugh has had two women accuse him of sexual assault.
The odds of each of these being a false accusation is 5%. That sounds pretty high, right? 1 in 20.
Now, what are the odds of *both* of these being false accusations? That’s two separate events, each with 5% odds. So you multiply those probabilities together: 5% x 5% – or, to write it in more easily multipliable numbers, .05 x .05.
.05 x .05 = .0025, or .25%. So, the odds are one quarter of one percent that both women accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault are making false accusations.
Or, to put it another way, the odds are 99.75% that Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted one or both of these women.
If you don’t believe women, maybe you can at least believe simple math.”
Oh, brave new world! Amid all the shrill hysteria on the streets and the preposterous posturing of politicians and pundits such quiet, dignified, and irrefutable reasoning seems a breath of fresh air. But bear with me, Gentle Reader, and let’s think about it.
If you wish to live in a world where mathematical formulae and statistical probabilities replace presumption of innocence, there it is, quiet, dignified, and irrefutable.
If you wish to live in a world where the worst, ugliest kind of tribalism (in this case it’s, “If he’s male, he must be guilty,” but it could be, “if he’s white, if he’s old, if he’s conservative… and on and on) replaces rule of law, there it is, quiet, dignified, and irrefutable.
If you wish to live in a world where anyone who disagrees with your point of view justifies the crudest, most vicious, salacious destruction of character, there it is, quiet, dignified, and irrefutable.
On the other hand, if you are, as I am, one of those smelly deplorables who revere and deeply believe in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the rule of law, the presumption of innocence, all the institutions that have made this country the envy of the world, the whole glorious—sometimes messy and sometimes wrong—history of the most generous, tolerant, and accepting nation on earth, then I suggest you get to a polling booth this November, and vote for a world where guilt and innocence are not determined by equations or statistical probabilities, let alone ugly and unsubstantiated accusations.