AP NEWS

Your Turn: Oct. 5

October 5, 2018

A different timeWe’ve done it again — a positive thing for the wrong reasons!It is positive to encourage women to unload themselves of a burden they have carried secretly for 30 years or more. It has, sadly, affected what they say and how they respond to others in many aspects of their lives. That is why they seem so sincere when they tell their stories to someone for the first time — it is as if it had just happened.Unfortunately, the reason Christine Blasey Ford was being encouraged is not to help her — although it may be a side effect — but to destroy a political opponent.I was in college in the ’60s. My friends corroborate what I thought then: Very few of us didn’t have these negative experiences — now called date rape. Sex was called “the game.” Both men and women dressed up and acted roles for the weekend. Colleges frequently ran out of hot water on the weekends (because everyone showered at once.) Men were pressured to do things they were ashamed of later. Even if they didn’t actually do them, they felt they had to brag about it to show they were men. A party wasn’t a good party without excessive drinking, and you didn’t have a good time if you and everyone else weren’t flat-faced drunk.Those times are behind us. Instead of punishing what men did then by today’s standards and destroying them and their families, and not recognizing how they have changed their lives and what they have accomplished since, we should focus on improving standards now.Virginia Castro, BlancoDelay unnecessaryRe: “More inquiry on nominee necessary,” Editorial, Tuesday:The delay in the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court would not have been necessary if Sen. Diane Feinstein had released the letter when she first got it in July. If she wanted Christine Blasey Ford to remain anonymous, Feinstein could have had her staff investigate the allegations in the letter privately and then report back to the senator.Feinstein had two other opportunities to discuss or release that letter. She could have discussed those allegations when she privately met with Kavanaugh prior to the confirmation hearings. And then Feinstein, if her staff had found any creditability to the claims, could have brought it up during the actual confirmation process. No, the letter was leaked before the confirmation vote in an attempt to delay confirmation until possibly after the November midterm elections.And where were those two other accusers when the confirmation process was going on? Any of them could have come forward once Kavanaugh was nominated. But for some reason, they chose to also wait until the vote was about to be taken. And like Ford, they also had no corroborating evidence, just an accusation.So where is the fairness in the process?Robert M. LouieJob interviewToo many people seem determined to miss the point about Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation process. It’s not a trial. It’s a job interview. “Innocent until proved guilty” has nothing to do with it. Nobody ever went into a job interview “hired unless proved guilty.”I’ve conducted and participated in a great many job interviews. It is the role of the interviewers to look for red flags and make judgment calls. If a candidate appears to have anger problems, or drinking problems, or problems with women, or problems telling the truth, or problems with people he doesn’t agree with, or problems playing by the rules, he doesn’t get the job. The interviewers aren’t required to “prove” anything against him.People who talk about “late hits” and “moving the goal posts” need to remember that this is not a game. Kavanaugh is up for a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the country. If there is any valid concern about his past or his character or his temperament or his honesty, he should not be confirmed. There are plenty of other conservative judges.John Maxstadt, LaredoOne-issue partyHe said, she said. Who do you think is lying?The Republicans have been lying to the American people for the past two decades. Brett Kavanaugh is cut from the same material as Donald Trump. Kavanaugh can’t cop to illicit activities if he’s been lying to his associates and his wife for years.So what’s this Kavanaugh thing all about? About putting another anti-abortion, white religious Republican on the Supreme Court for the next 30 years.The GOP has become a one-issue party. Heaven help women’s rights.And Trump defends his Supreme Court pick — a liar defending a liar.Ron Lowe HarlingenNo persecutionRe: “Judge persecuted,” Your Turn, Sunday:The writer described how he watched as a fine Catholic judge was crucified by zealous, liberal, leftist politicos.I, as well, watched the same interview by the Senate Judiciary Committee, perhaps through a different lens, and saw an enraged person, out of control, blaming everyone for his alleged wrongdoings.Also noticeable were his arrogance, lack of deportment, untruthfulness and partisanship, which definitely aren’t suitable traits of a Supreme Court Justice. His reluctance to answer direct questioning with a yes or no reflects uncertainty in his convictions. He prefers detailed meaningless explanations, which are time-consuming and inconclusive.About the only thing I learned from the judge’s self-defense was his fondness for beer.John KeplerMore than ’OK’Re: “Businesses OK with trade deal,” front page, Tuesday:A new trade agreement is hammered out with Mexico and Canada, lowering tariffs on U.S. goods going to them. Our stock market responds by jumping almost 200 points. And your headline is that businesses are “OK” with it?OK? Imagine the headline if President Barack Obama had accomplished this! “Sea levels lower, businesses thrilled!” But since it’s a Trump administration, businesses are just “OK.”J. David Trawick

AP RADIO
Update hourly