This is how Republicans are defending Brett Kavanaugh
Brett Kavanaugh is innocent of crimes he didn’t actually commit, although what he didn’t do aren’t really crimes and everyone else has done them anyway, except our choir boy virgin hero Brett.
In the days since Brett Kavanaugh was accused of sexual assault, first by Professor Christine Blasey Ford and then by Deborah Ramirez and Julie Swetnick, many honest, well-meaning people have taken Brett’s side and pointed out that we all did silly things when we were teenagers. At first this took me by surprise, since usually when someone you like is accused of something illegal and immoral, you defend them by denying it, not shrugging your shoulders and blaming the folly of youth. But the more I read these smart people’s suggestions, the more I have to admit that I completely agree with them.
None of us were saints at 17 — back then, I listened to a lot of Eminem. We all do crazy things at that age! Just as I justified listening to that Satan music then, I can now justify Brett allegedly abusing young women by constantly telling myself and everyone around me that kids will be kids, except girls, who will of course be asking for it.
How can a man be responsible for what he might have done when he was 17 years old anyway? You’re just a kid at that age, one who can legally work 48 hours a week to support a family, join the army and fight overseas, buy an AR-15 or shotgun at a gun show or get a Private Pilot’s License for a helicopter. I’m 100% certain that kids aren’t responsible for any crimes they might have committed, except in Obama’s case where he should have been deported for smoking weed in high school.
However, I’m not blind to criticism, and I acknowledge that some people are saying that being 17 doesn’t defend someone from potentially committing the odd bit of sexual assault. And that’s fine of course, it’s still a free country outside of California and New York. But how about this for a rational bit of evidence: it was the 80s! That might sound like a mere factual sentence that offers no deeper explanation for Brett’s alleged felonies, but it’s actually an ironclad argument.
See, things were just different in the 80s. I should know, I’ve read The Art of the Deal six times. It was a golden age where men were men and women were fucking grateful to be hit on by future-lawyers with sketchy opinions on abortion. We weren’t so damn sensitive in the 80s, which is why it was hilarious when movie characters committed illegal sex crimes against their unsuspecting, non-consenting friends and colleagues.
So we’ve established that Brett turned 17 in the 1980s. That means, even if he did sexually assault women, which he obviously didn’t, it happened in an era where it was perfectly ok and definitely not morally sickening, like owning slaves before the 1860s, or forcing women to have sex with you for work before October 15, 2017.
The main takeaway from this whole debacle isn’t the one the Democrats want to talk about, because when they bring up things like sexual assault it makes a lot of guys feel nervous and that should be a felony in itself. No, it’s a question of fairness. Is it really fair to drag up what a successful and God-fearing man may or may not have done when he was just 17 years old?
That’s what we need to be asking of Brett. Not to his face of course, because that would be rude and he’d just fumble and dodge the question anyway. No, we need to ask that question on friendly TV shows loved by the President and on social media where we can just block or shame whoever disagrees with us.
This is the discussion we should be having, not one spearheaded by lying women and liberals. We need to get all over this debate, figuratively smother it if we have to, and really try and get into it. There’s no letting it get away from us, so we all have to do our best to shove it down and metaphorically show it who’s boss. Allegedly, or whatever.