MURKOWSKI:"We are now in a place where it's not about whether or not Judge Kavanaugh is qualified...

[kpete]

“We are now in a place where it’s not about whether or not Judge Kavanaugh is qualified. It is about whether or not a woman who has been a victim at some point in her life is to be believed.”

Link to tweet

[Eliot Rosewater]

1. If the woman claimed that Al Franken put his arm around her waist in front of

2000 people for a picture not only is it to be believed but it must be thought that he did something more than what 2000 people saw with their own eyes.

If the woman is claiming a republican did something, she must be lying.

And so it goes in America.

[Iliyah]

2. Ditto!

And no mention of the 2nd women huh.

[Hortensis]

3. Spoken like a woman who intends to betray

her constituents again. Still.

I don't know her. Is she a constitutional originalist? A closet pro-lifer? Appalled by gay marriage or white people "only" being 76% of the population now?

Is she being blackmailed?

Did her large reelection win last time make her feel sure she can get away with voting to repeal the ACA, vandalizing the nation with the tax heist, and now putting a true extremist who represents almost none of them on SCOTUS?

[pnwmom]

11. That's not how the article reads to me.

She's saying we need to listen to women like Blasey and take their claims seriously.

[Hortensis]

14. I confess I only read the header and took it as

just more of the usual. Is there anything that suggests she won't once again shine people on with talk of thoughtful concern about healthcare, economic wellbeing, and now abortion and sex abuse and then vote to confirm?

[pnwmom]

15. No, it just sounds like she's wavering more than before. n/t

[Hortensis]

16. Okay, thanks. Turns out she doesn't have to worry about reelection

until 2022, four years from now. Not a good sign. She could be caught up in her own sex scandal and have to resign this year, and probably be able to get elected again in 2022 because "oh, that was back then." At least male senators could.

She also says Kavanaugh is "qualified," when we have every reason to believe morally, ethically and ideologically he emphatically is not. A very bad sign. What happened to questions about abortion and birth control? All resolved? Or just swept under a "listening to these women" rug courtesy of this enormous distraction?

I trust her like a snake. And I'd still love to know why she does what she does. Is she one of the amoral, conscienceless sociopathic types who only care about themselves? A dutiful authoritarian soldier loyal to her leader?

[TeamPooka]

4. He was never qualified for the job.

[Solly Mack]

5. I don't think simply because someone shares my gender with me means they are my friend.

Murkowski went along with McConnell about Merrick Garland.

She can make all the claims she wants and pay lip service to the plight of women in a sexist society - she's not my friend.

[ProfessorPlum]

7. somehow we have to get people like her who are not our friends

to do what we want, and what also happens to the be the right thing to do.

And we can celebrate small steps in the right direction, I hope.

You are right not to recognize her as an ally, as she is surely not.

[eleny]

6. No, senator, it's about whether Kavanaugh is a liar and a degenerate or not

[triron]

12. Exactly.

[Jarqui]

8. Somehow, according to Murkowski, we passed all the places he lied ...

which should have disqualified him

[Garrett78]

9. Decent people everywhere have known he was unqualified to hold his current position.

Never mind being unqualified for a promotion. My word, he's lied every time he's appeared before the Senate. Nobody with a working brain believes, for instance, that he didn't know he was in possession of stolen emails when the subject line read, "spying."

[Squinch]

10. No. Now we're talking about whether YOU, Senator, will pull

your usual bullshit and hem and haw, and generally do your attention mongering thing, before you put thus asshole on the supreme court.

Which we all know you fully intend to do.

[Yavin4]

13. Part of being qualified to sit on the SCOTUS is not perjuring yourself and lying about crimes you've

committed in the past. Or do I have that wrong?

[Denzil_DC]

17. Maybe, MAYBE, Murkowski's being uncharacteristically principled.

Or maybe it's to do with another case that's causing a rightful stir in Alaska:

Lisa Murkowski's Vote on Brett Kavanaugh Is Looking Tougher Than Ever
A startling incident in her home state brings things into focus—and ramps up the stakes.

...
There is a boatload of red-hot outrage in the state of Alaska at the moment at the decision by a judge to go easy on a man who was convicted of throttling a woman, and, in the exact wording of the charges, "committing harassment by contact with bodily fluids." From Alaska Public Radio:

Police said the victim in the August 2017 assault reported that the man — later identified as Justin Schneider, now 34 — offered her a ride across town. Instead, Schneider choked her unconscious and — at least according to the original charges — committed harassment by offensive contact with bodily fluids. Anchorage TV station KTVA reported that Schneider was a “free man” Wednesday after Superior Court Judge Corey accepted a plea deal and sentenced Schneider. The state agreed to drop the kidnapping and harassment charges and Schneider was sentenced to time served.

Williams says the night she saw the KTVA report, she discovered online that Corey’s six-year term on the Superior Court was up for a retention vote this November. “And, ultimately, it is the judge who’s responsible because he’s responsible for who walks out of court. And in this case we really think he messed up,” Williams said. Williams says she understands that the judge was sentencing Schneider under the guidelines for the remaining charge in the deal prosecutors struck. And she thinks the laws should be tougher and prosecutors should feel pressure, too. But, Williams says, the judges are the ones voters can directly affect.

So the judge is probably roadkill. But, as my very smart friend said, think about this. In this moment, with her home state embroiled in a huge #MeToo moment, does Senator Lisa Murkowski really want to be the vote that helps Brett Kavanaugh to a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court? I'm not sure she does.

https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a23411549/lisa-murkowski-brett-kavanaugh-vote-alaska-assault-metoo