Chutzpah, goes the old saying, may be defined by the example of the young man who murders his parents and then begs the court for mercy on the grounds that he’s an orphan. Today, Republicans are redefining chutzpah by referring to their defense of Brett Kavanaugh as their “Atticus Finch moment.” Senator Tom Cornyn of Texas said this on the Senate floor today:
Some commentators have called this our Atticus Finch moment, recalling the famous novel “To Kill a Mockingbird” by Harper Lee. We all remember that Atticus Finch was a lawyer who did not believe that a mere accusation was synonymous with guilt. He represented an unpopular person who many people presumed was guilty of a heinous crime because of his race and his race alone. We could learn from Atticus Finch now, during this time when there has been such a vicious and unrelenting attack on the integrity and good name of this nominee.
Sigh. Where to start?
We could start by noting the irony of this statement coming from the representative of a state that, in Atticus Finch’s time, would have been more likely to lynch him than to applaud his courage. We could point out that Finch defended his client by conducting a thorough investigation of the allegations of wrongdoing against him—not by first denying, then limiting, an investigation into such allegations, as Republicans have done. We could expound upon the fact that Atticus Finch began with an open mind and followed the facts to a logical conclusion—rather than beginning from a conclusion and disregarding evidence to the contrary, as Republicans have done. And we could note the audacity—the chutzpah—of self-congratulatory comparisons between a fighter for the powerless and despised and defenders of the powerful and privileged.
But let’s not. You either see all that, and are sickened by the chutzpah, or you don’t. And if you don’t, you’ve already stopped reading.
Instead, let’s just take a moment to ponder whether this is really Republicans’ “Atticus Finch moment”—or whether it’s more likely to be their California catastrophe.
It’s hard to remember now, but once upon a time California was a purple state. We gave the nation Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan, after all. From the 1960’s onward, the line of governors went like this: Pat Brown (D), Reagan (R), Jerry Brown (D), George Deukmejian (R), Pete Wilson (R), Gray Davis (D), Arnold Schwarzenegger (R, sort of), Jerry Brown (D). That’s a pretty mixed bag. But now California is solidly blue. Every statewide elected official is a Democrat, and that’s been true for a while. Republicans now have such trouble fielding credible statewide candidates that their best bets are self-funded nonpoliticians such as Schwarzenegger, Meg Whitman, and Carly Fiorina.
Proposition 187 happened.
(Trigger warning: lawyer humor.) The proposition was appropriately numbered. It killed the state Republican Party.
(California Penal Code section 187 describes the crime of, and punishment for, murder. Sorry, I couldn’t resist.)
Proposition 187 was a 1994 ballot initiative to establish a state-run citizenship screening system and prohibit illegal immigrants from using non-emergency health care, public education, and other state services. Voters passed it into law. It was challenged in court and found unconstitutional by a federal district court. Nevertheless, conservatives were thrilled by its passage. It meant that the conservative view of illegal immigration represented the majority of voters, right? Republicans would henceforth be able to win at the polls by being tough on immigration and by sponsoring ballot measures designed to divide Democrats on the issue, right?
They certainly thought so. Flushed with victory, Republicans sponsored two more anti-immigrant ballot measures: Proposition 209 in 1996, which ended affirmative action at governmental institutions, and Proposition 227 in 1998, which sharply curtailed bilingual education in public schools. Both measures passed. Conservatism was ascendant in California, right?
Wrong. Numerous studies have shown that the long-term effect of these racially divisive propositions has been to shift Latino support away from the Republican Party and toward the Democratic Party. As California has become more Latino, it has also become more Democratic. For the sake of short-term victory, the Republican Party sacrificed long-term viability, to the point that it has become almost irrelevant in statewide politics.
The moral of the story is pretty simple: If you act as if you don’t give a rat’s butt about people, you don’t get to complain when they believe you. Tell them enough times that they don’t matter, and they’ll vote for people who tell them they do.
Women understand what’s happening with the Kavanaugh hearings. They’re not fooled. They understand that Kavanaugh’s conduct toward women in his youth, and even more so his view of that conduct now, is an important issue. But they are even more keenly aware that Senate Republicans believe it is not important, regardless of the truth or falsity of the allegations against him. Women understand that, while Republicans may say they don’t believe Christine Blasey Ford and other women who have described misconduct by Kavanaugh, in reality they don’t care whether those claims are true. They didn’t want to investigate these claims because the outcome of an investigation didn’t matter to them. They didn’t call relevant witnesses to testify before the Judiciary Committee because they didn’t care what those witnesses might say. When Republicans were shamed into allowing an investigation, they limited its scope because the integrity of the investigation doesn’t matter to them. Women get this.
Tell women enough times that they don’t matter, and they’ll vote for . . . well, we’ll see. Women are not a monolithic voting bloc; they vote against their own interests as often as anyone else in this country. They’re no more intelligent or virtuous than men. But you can only show overt disdain for people so many times before they realize you’re not on their side. Denigrate them long enough, and they’ll find new friends. It happened with Latinos in California. It may yet happen nationwide with women.
So, friends, do not despair as Senate Republicans adopt the mantle of a fictitious civil-rights hero to justify their ill-treatment of women. While they talk about their “Atticus Finch moment,” the rest of us are California dreamin.’
5 thoughts on “California Dreamin’”
interesting take on why California has moved left. wonder what other factors contributed. more urban than rural people?
LikeLiked by 1 person
…. or maybe the GOP just got too nuts.
LikeLiked by 1 person
There is a school of thought that California women have moved away from the GOP because of other issues, including reproductive rights. But I don’t know why that would produce such a pronounced shift. I don’t know why the gender gap would be so much greater in California than elsewhere.
Agricultural employment has been steadily declining for a long time, so that could be a factor. And the rise of Silicon Valley produced a group of voters who believe in free enterprise, but can’t abide cultural conservatism.
Still, I don’t think anything explains such a dramatic shift to the left quite as well as the GOP pissing off the fastest-growing ethnic group in the state—Latinos.
As I posted on your FB page the railroading of things through Congress should be suspect in the case of Kavanaugh…..people unfortunately won’t connect the dots until it is too late…..last time this occurred was with the tax bill…..lots of red flag, lots of confusion, lot’s of evidence it was a bad deal for the country…..and unfortunately noby in the media or democratic party is pointing this out to the American Public….the tax Bill is a disaster that is growing in scope as McConnell, our version of Nero, plays his tune to confirm Kavanaugh……Washington DC is burning and taking the country with it…..
And the terribly unfortunate thing is that none of this had to happen. The Republicans could have stepped back, not fought the investigation, and not limited it when forced to accept it. They could have agreed that the issues are important, and the facts needed to be found, and still have confirmed Kavanaugh in the end. If they’d done that, there’d be a much greater chance that the confirmation process would have been accepted as legitimate. They’d be in a better position to argue to the American people that the allegations against Kavanaugh had not been sufficiently substantiated to torpedo his nomination. I suspect a significant number of people who are otherwise opposed to the nomination would have shrugged their shoulders and thought, “Maybe next time there will be better evidence of misconduct.”
But as you say, the nomination is being railroaded through. That can only erode the legitimacy of the Court’s opinions, and legitimacy is all the Court has. It has no troops and no power to spend money. If its decisions are not respected, they may be ignored. It’s happened before in our history. And it’s exceedingly dangerous.