How can Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada claim Clarence Thomas' opinions are "poorly written" and "at an eighth-grade" level, call the Justice "an embarrassment to the Supreme Court," with either no explanation or a rationale factually wrong and premised on short dissents -- one of which a single paragraph -- that Reid plainly never read?
How can the left attack the strict scrutiny of Bush's judicial nominees, yet insist on unquestioned adherence as soon as a 5-4 Supreme Court augments the Constitution with yet another plank from the liberal platform de
If Constitutional text is flexible, why can't it later revert? And what's in-tolerable about raising the question, at a garden party or a Senate hearing? When did tolerance encompass only those with whom one agrees?3
1 Cf. Melana Zyla Vickers in Tech Central:
It's one thing to play one trick, if you're a one-trick fan dancer. Falling for the same extortionate trick is something else entirely. Yet the U.S. appears headed in just such a direction.2 Cf. Nurse Andrea Nead "has filed a lawsuit against Eastern Illinois University saying the college refused to promote her to a higher job at the student health center because of her pro-life views and refusal to dispense the morning after pill." (via Jack Lewis)
3Cf. Congressman Charlie Rangel (D-NY) on talk radio:
The Iraq war "is the biggest fraud ever committed on the people of this country. ... This is just as bad as the 6 million Jews being killed," the 74-year-old Harlem Democrat insisted during a Monday radio appearance on the WWRL-AM morning show with Steve Malzberg and Karen Hunter. "The whole world knew and they were quiet about it because it wasn't their ox being gored."