What they’re saying (or Shooting fish in a barrel)
Alright. There have been some pretty awful writings about the Alito hearings, I’m sure. But honestly I don’t think I can stomach them all. So I’ll just read this one. Let’s take it one part at a time so that the rising gorge doesn’t become overwhelming.
Brandi Swindell - Engage the Culture: “I was just in the Alito senate confirmation hearings on Capitol Hill this afternoon.”
(Article originally via Jesus’ General.)
This may or may not be true. I certainly wasn’t there. I can’t imagine why a no-account failed candidate for Boise city council would be in Washington, D.C. at the Alito confirmation hearings, though. Rich husband? Trust fund? I suppose I don’t really care.
“We really need to be praying that Alito gets a fair and balanced hearing process.”
Uhm, Brandi must not realize this, but the committee is chaired by and dominated by the friendly party. I’m all for a fair hearing, but I think it’s more likely that the concerns of balance are opposite of what she thinks. Certainly if I were a Supreme Court nominee, I’d be heartened to have my very own cheerleading section, a la Lindsey Graham.
“The democrats are determined to distort his record. There were many false accusations made. Below are some facts to help clarify the statements made against Alito.”
Oooh, tut tut. It’s nice to see in your very next post that you have dutifully copied and pasted ready made talking points consisting of selective quote mining, conveniently without attribution to your source so that your reader can make a determination on whether or not to buy into your implicit appeal to authority. Happily, I’ll tell my readers right now that the links I provide to them are all fine examples of certifiable left-wing truthiness. Read at your own risk or for your own edification, depending on your point of view, I suppose.
“I heard Sen.Diane Feinstein imply that she too would consider a filibuster. Her remarks on Roe were very disturbing.”
Were they? Why? Can you provide me with three disturbing things about her remarks, and justify their characterization as disturbing? What a nice, breathless accusation without any depth or analysis.
“The bottom line is that Judge Alito deserves an up or down vote.”
Does he? Why? Can you provide three reasons that Judge Alito deserves an up or down vote, and provide justification for those reasons? What a nice, stunning conclusion without any apparent thought or consideration. “Well, clearly all the right people are pushing for confirmation, so it must mean confirmation is justified (?)” That’s high school group-think. Grow up.
“As I mentioned earlier, a group of angry pro-choice men disrupted a pro-life news conference in front of the Supreme Court. These men do not support Judge Alito’s confirmation. Here is an interesting tidbit from this AM. The ‘counter-protestors’ were from the Revolutionary Communist Party. Here was the website they touted: http://rwor.org/ …so it’s communists that hate President Bush and Judge Alito.”
“As I mentioned earlier, a group of people who obviously would be against Alito were against Alito.” Huh? “The small insignificant group were from a small insignificant social party. I guess everyone who hates Alito is from that social party.” Huh?
What’s most surprising to me is not that you lost your race for city council, but that you garnered almost 30% of the vote. In fact, that’s downright disturbing.
Technorati Tags:
republicans, politics, SCOTUS, Samuel Alito
