Probably too late, but my answer to the cabbage would be Kalua Pork and Cabbage (ideally made in an instant pot, but that's just 'cause it's easy).

I agree with the "(metaphorically) fuck that guy" responses on Kavanaugh. He also seems to be eminently blackmail-able, which is also exactly what you want in a justice t /irony font

BUT, assuming that's where we end up, they should feel free to burn another week or two before they give up on him.

I agree with Emily Bazelon's take (which she articulated on the Gabfest, not sure if there's a written version) - more or less that we should take into account that he was a minor at the time and unless more women come forward to demonstrate a pattern of behavior extending into adulthood (which has not happened, yet), one criminal act as a minor should not be an automatic disqualification. What SHOULD be an automatic disqualification is that he is now, at age 53, lying about it to Congress and to the American public, which is unacceptable behavior both in general and especially for a federal judge and REALLY REALLY ESPECIALLY for a Supreme Court Justice.

I didn't hear Bazelon's take, but what Jessica said seems right to me.

I thought this piece by Caitlin Flanagan in The Atlantic was thoughtful.

Trigger warning: the writer was sexually assaulted, but the piece is not graphic and the boy stopped and later apologized to her.

Maybe it's a function of being male, but I say no without even getting to that issue. To me, withholding so many documents from the Committee, and dumping so many others on the Committee with no time to review before the confirmation hearings start equals, at minimum, a need to wait until the complete record is available and it's possible to know what they're hiding.

That said, I believe that Ford is telling the truth (with the caveat that she may have imperfect recall of the details, by which I mean that she may remember that his shirt was blue when in fact it might have brown). And that dismissing the incident as misreading signals/overenthusiasm or the like is outrageous.

Yeah, he was a hard no before this stuff, Now he's a "and the horse you rode in on" no.

one criminal act as a minor should not be an automatic disqualification.

I agree with this in general, but it frustrates me to no end that we're spending so much time trying to figure out these fine points of character and redemption and guilt and absolution while the larger problem is still so...large. You know? I'm not saying it's not an important conversation. It's incredibly important. But I would like to see having non-sexual-assaulty-men in positions of power be a higher priority. (And more women in positions of power, more diversity, etc.)

And technically I realize that there's no reason we can't have these things concurrently, but it seems like the national conversation gets so absorbed in the first part that it gets 80% of the discussion when it's 20% of the problem.

I agree Dana. That frustrates me in the same way the worry pieces about comebacks for people like Louis CK do.

I also agree with you, Debet. For me, Kavanaugh was a hard no because of his stances, and then a harder no, when it was clear how shifty he is, and gave dishonest answers in the Judiciary Committee hearings. With him in particular, the attempted rape is the poop sauce on the shit sundae. My other comments were to the more general topic.

Happy birthday, Board!

Yeah, after reading Heidi Bomd's take on the Kozinski stuff, in Slate (also, kick ass Heidi Bond!) I don't even have o get to potential juvenile crimes or not before I smell rotten lying that should disqualify. Again, if he were like "yeah, I got the emails and I should have spoken up but I didn't and I'm sorry"I'd have a harder time, but he didn't.

Definitely no too late, Debet. I found a recipe for that for a slow cooker that I will keep in mind. I'm not making the cabbage today.

Cabbage tends to keep for a bit.