I’m sorry if I seem a bit rattled by the attacks on Sonia Sotomayor. I think it’s a fascinating collision of blogging, the continuing nefarious influence of TNR, and the white male punditosaurus. Via commenter JDM, I see that wingnut welfare enters into it as well: Rosen’s wife works at the far-right Ethics and Public Policy Center (which also employs Rick Santorum) and Rosen gave a speech about SCOTUS nominations there a few weeks ago in 2006.
Now, I don’t know how much Rosen’s wife is paid nor how much Rosen was paid for speaking before them. And his wife’s writing doesn’t seem quite as wingnutty as much of what comes from the EPPC (though her articles do appear in The National Review sometimes).
But at a certain point, isn’t this kind of conflict of interest deeply troubling? A journalist writes an inaccurate smear job of a *potential* SCOTUS nomination while receiving having received money from a place that will oppose the nomination and which employs his wife? Not so good, no?
Fencedude
IOKIYAR
redbeardjim
Sounds like it’s time for another blogger ethics panel (tm Atrios).
The Grand Panjandrum
Bingo!
It does seem at a minimum distasteful now that this information has come to light. And as Glenn Greenwald pointed out Rosen’s criticism of her “lazy intellectualism” was at best ironic when he then later goes on to use quotes from anonymous sources and admits he has NOT read her opinions. Good grief.
schrodinger's cat
Independent press not so independent after all.
Joel
Jeff Rosen is getting smacked by.. wait for it…
About.com
The article isn’t much to read, but it’s interesting to see how far news of Rosen’s shameless, bald-faced idiocy is spreading.
lemma
Glenn Greenwald has been all over this. He reports Rosen’s brother in law is Neal Katyal who works for the Solicitor General. Katyal could move up if Elana Kagan is chosen. Wrong on many levels.
debrazza
Don’t forget the brother-in-law connection either. This thing stinks to high heaven.
TenguPhule
It’s like a horrible parody of the 12 steps to Kevin Bacon game.
BruceFromOhio
You and me both. The speed at which this tale unfolded indicates something more than just Rosen & Co with an axe to grind or a handy ideological soapbox. It’s too ‘neat,’ and Occams Razor tells me that there is one mind or small group of minds behind this, pulling the strings and pushing the buttons. Paranoid? Perhaps. But it rolls together too many things I know about wingnut behavior into a neat litle package that just wreaks of collusion.
What’s fun (and different) is when it runs headlong into Glenn Greenwald, and eventually, President Obama. If Senate Republicans aren’t cautious, it can blow up on them, guys like Sessions in particular. It’s one thing to hold to your principles and toe the party line. It’s another thing entirely to come off as a whiny, rich racist white guy representing other whiny racist white guys.
And gosh darn it, how nice it is to play offense for a change.
LaurenceB
It’s only a conflict of interest if the journalist is actually interested in journalism. Just saying. :)
thomas
never saw an interest he couldn’t conflict
Oh, and I almost forgot WATB
Michael
That’s how they work it.
Back when I was a wingnutter, I still had an honest streak. As the Schiavo fervor spread, I’d scolded a purveyor of a particularly vicious lie about Michael Schiavo that was known to be untrue. I mentioned that activism required honesty.
I was rebuffed, and told on more than one occasion that it didn’t matter, as the First Amendment gave them the right to spread any lie they wanted in order to make their point.
Craig
How do you know you’ve hit the bottom of the journalistic barrel? When motherhumping Powerline thinks that your hit piece doesn’t reach minimum factual standards.
JR
Man, that rag has really gone downhill since Stephen Glass left.
Betsy
Please don’t be sorry. Be proud of it. As I said in the other thread, I was quite unnerved by the sudden, nearly coordinated attacks on her, especially given the overtly sexist and racist nature of them. The only thing that is giving me comfort is how many people are appalled by them, too. And the fact that it’s not just the usual feminist/anti-racist voices shouting into the hurricane like it often feels like. Obviously it’s about more than sexism and racism, but those two things are so bound up in it as to be inseparable.
JK
A few days prior to Rosen writing his hit job, he appeared on Rachel Maddow’s show and she was fawning all over him and complimenting him for his keen insight. Maddow ended her interview by telling Rosen that she looked forward to him making many more appearances on her show to discuss the SCOTUS nomination. I wonder how Rachel is feeling now.
JC
Seems like it’s a part of the coordinated oppo dump. Rosen might be willing, or just an unknowing accomplice. But it’s part of a piece, with that affirmative action case that the right is riled about, that can be traced to Sotomayor.
John Cole
Have the glibertarians weighed in on this next? Usually after TNR barfs something up, someone at Reason chimes in so we can get an amen chorus of “even the libertarians” to wash down the “even the respectable center” nonsense from TNR.
I’d check myself, but I read two pieces this morning at Reason and had to stop when a Nick Gillespie piece on Obama’s choice of mustard almost gave me a heart attack. Apparently Reason has now gone full-fledged wingnut.
Also, has Mickey Kaus weighed in yet?
Joel
@John Cole: Waiting for Kaus?
So that people can say, “Even the George Wallace Democrats are opposed to Sotomayor!”
TR
As others have said, don’t apologize. This asshole needs to be smacked down repeatedly.
TNR has apparently closed the comments for the article, with the 200 comments they have allowed being overwhelmingly negative. They must be getting a shitstorm now.
Col. Klink
Is Punditosaurus on the same branch of the evolutionary tree as Gopasaurus? They sure look related from a distance.
John Cole
It is actually even better than that, btw. She isn’t even a SCOTUS nominee. This was a pre-emptive smearing.
Changeroo
What’s even more disturbing is the fact that the Rosen’s new pet, a male collie, is a half brother to a collie that was engaged in a recent fight with a cat belonging to the next door neighbor of Glen Greenwald’s former physical trainer. All of this is very disturbing.
asiangrrlMN
@JK: That was him????? Man, I hope Rachel brings him back and reams him a new one–in her oh-so-controlled anger way, of course. Fucker.
@Betsy: I read your post in the other thread. I agree with the points you made about how the white male is the standard and anything else is the deviation. It is one reason I am so dispirited. I have read widely on this topic, and there are quite a few liberals espousing the ‘best person for the job. If that happens to be a white male, so be it’. I will always elect to diversify because there are people who are not white males who will do the job just as well, but who are not considered as good (whatever that means). I wrote about it here (sorry for the shameless self-plug). I need to expand on part of it, but it’s discouraging to me that it’s still so virulent.
DougJ, don’t apologize. It heartens me to see people rattled by this kind of behavior because that means that the conscience of society has deepened. Twenty years ago, Sotomayor wouldn’t have even been mentioned except as a punchline to a joke. The fact that she is a serious consideration by the conservatives, at least, means that we have progressed.
P.S. Thank you all for your song suggestions. I really appreciate it.
cleek
and it tells all other potential nominees: see what we just did there? are you sure you want this job?
it will have the (perhaps unintended) effect of weeding-out people who might make excellent judges but who don’t have pristine records.
all so the GOP can get a little airtime.
humans are a truly stupid breed of ape.
Nellcote
To attempt to be fair to Ambinder, he does link to a whole-hearted endorsement by one of her former clerks, who’s worked with her and known her for a decade:
http://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/prawfsblawg/2009/05/on-the-brilliance-of-people-like-judge-sonia-sotomayor-and-barack-obama.html#more
gex
@John Cole: I call future reverse racism. No backsies!
Scott
I would love to see what TNR’s response to all of this is going to be.
“To all of you who think it’s wrong for a writer with a severe conflict of interest to dishonestly smear a jurist for the crimes of being non-white and non-male… Fuck you, I do what I want!”
Joey Maloney
Sorry, Mickey’s lost his voice temporarily. Who knew that goat semen was a throat irritant?
Scruffy McSnufflepuss
The irony is, if Rosen were a judge who engaged in conduct resembling his conduct in any way, he’d probably be subject to some pretty hefty sanctions. Judges have to avoid the appearance of impropriety; “journalists” (for lack of a better word; apologies to all the genuine journalists out there) can whore all they want for their immediate families.
Napoleon
@cleek:
Quit smearing apes by saying we are a breed of them. They may fling poo, but they have none of the really serious issues we have.
JK
Glenn Greenwald’s email to TNR Editor Franklin Foer and Foer’s reply
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/05/05/tnr/index1.html
blogenfreude
@Craig: That’s amazing – usually they just pile on.
More on Mustardgate here. The wingnuts have nothing left.
kay
I hope Obama casts a wider net and looks outside the federal judiciary, if only because none of these horrible people know anything beyond their narrow career/social circle, and then they can’t weigh in.
Look to a state high court. A state legislature. Anywhere pundits don’t have friends and relatives ensconced. I just want to be spared months of this. Make them travel to find something out. If they actually have to get off their ass, they won’t bother.
Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle
You forgot to mention the other intriguing bit of information. Jeffrey Rosen’s brother-in-law is Neal Katyal. You can read about why that is a problem at Glennzilla’s place.
Denyordave
So Obama will nominate Sotomayor and the right can have a cow. Let them put the final nail in the coffin and make sure they get no Hispanic votes from now on. The right will officially go for the low-education white vote. That worked out well for them last election didn’t it? They must be counting on all the whites moving in droves to Alabama, Mississippi, and the rest of the deep south.
Thankovsky
@Denyordave:
Are we sure it will only be Republicans voting against Sotomayor, though?
cervantes
Oh, I don’t know that it’s all that bad. Why don’t you ask Mrs. Alan Greenspan what she thinks?
Xenos
Is it time to define a new verb, to “Rosen” somebone, or to “pull a Rosen”? Since I have not kept up with the details on this case somebody other than me ought to come up with the proper definition.
An important role the blogosphere can play is to come up with creative ways of shaming this sort of dishonest, bad-faith behaviour. Let’s blacken Rosen’s name by associating it with his actions.
Xenos
@kay:
How about Margaret Marshall, author of the Massachusetts gay marriage case that led to the End of Western Civilization? Would make for some lovely fireworks…
thomas
the ‘best person for the job’ is someone who will bring a ‘not-a-white-male’ perspective to the court. there will already be 7 ‘white-male-perspectives’ on the court.
Yes, I’m including you, Clarence.
James F. Elliott
After Rosen’s article, I’m loath to give him any benefit of the doubt or support, but I think this is stretching “conflict of interest” a bit far. I don’t think this particular tidbit is a problem at all.
eemom
why does any of this MATTER? There is no “SCOTUS nomination” yet — and who in their right mind thinks that an irresponsible smear job of Sotomayor by a wingnut bobblebot is going to have fuck-all to do with whether Obama picks her?? To THAT extent at least, he’s proven himself.
And this kind of shit is going to ensue a millionfold after he does nominate someone, no matter who it is. At least wait till that happens before going full frontal freak out.
bartkid
>I hope Obama casts a wider net and looks outside the federal judiciary,
Just for fun, he should nominate the spouse of the current Secretary of State. Heh.
geg6
I knew they’d attempt to smear anyone Obama put up, but the use of these cowardly anonymous sources, the obvious racist and sexist treatment she’s getting from the pundiocracy (anyone see Tweety and Buchanan ganging up on Joan Walsh over this last night and Joan Walsh smacking Tweety down?), and the framing being that somehow white males are becoming an endangered species among our governmental elite just has me infuriated. The Mark Halperin headline was just the first infuriating thing. Then the Rosen hachet job. And then Tweety last night, claiming that being a fire fighter is the “family business” for Irish, so it’s terrible to make the hiring and promotion requirements open and fair to all other applicants. As a woman of a certain age and geographic/socioeconomic region, I’ve heard this shit all my life and I’ve about had it with it. I hate to tell all these white men, but they aren’t so much. In fact, 99% are nothing at all to brag about. But nevertheless, if they aren’t given every prestigious job or every bit of praise or credit or simply put on a pedestal for the most minor of ordinary achievements, they do nothing but whine, cry, and scream at the unfairness of it all. STFU, you WATB white men. Before I go all Lorena Bobbit on you.
Notorious P.A.T.
At least we’re talking about an outfit with high standards.
Notorious P.A.T.
More like “even the goat-f**kers are opposed to Sotormeyer”.
EDIT: Hehe I knew someone would beat me to it.
Anne Laurie
Of course that’s the point, Geg6 –to a Pale Male of a certain age, power (and its surrogate, money) is the real dick-measure. Ergo, when us women, not-pales, and other DFHs attempt to steal the Big Serious Jobs that “rightfully” belong to Our Betters, it’s objectively just the same as Bobbit-izing their precious penii. (There is an argument that the Pale Males are losing the SCOTUS for the same reason John Wayne B lost his shaft, namely egregious misuse of same while under the influence of misguided ideology… )
asiangrrlMN
Annnnd more preemptive strikes from the conservatives, via Washington Monthly.
Read “A Different Kind of Breakthrough…” and “Transparent Bigotry”. Being teh gayz is even worse than being teh femalez or teh coloredz, apparently.
Roq
All these conflicts would be pretty minor if he hadn’t used anonymous sources. Then people could assess, on their own, whether he was letting his personal interest interfere with his judgment. Instead he gets to marinate in the suggestion of impropriety. I call that poetic justice of the sweetest kind.
Hoisted on his own ironic petard. :)
Lawyer
With all due respect, Doug, what’s your basis for saying that what Rosen wrote about Sotomayor was inaccurate? I understand the objection to his use of anonymous sources. I kind of understand the purported conflict of interest, though it frankly seems pretty thin to me. But I’m at a loss to understand your basis for saying what he wrote was inaccurate. I’m guessing it’s not based on personal experience or first-hand conversations with her colleagues.
Actually, I’m not guessing. I practice frequently before the Second Circuit and, sad to say, the views expressed in Rosen’s piece (1) jibe with what I’ve personally seen of Sotomayor and her work, and (2) really are pretty widely shared. And before you write off her detractors as a bunch of racists and misogynists, I should mention that most of the same people who view Sotomayor as mediocre have nothing but stellar things to say about Amalya Kearse, an African-American female judge on the same court. (And, btw, this isn’t about SS attracting racism because she’s now a potential nominee; she’s been held in middling esteem for quite a long time.)
My point, I guess, is that just as paranoids can have real enemies, anonymous criticism is sometimes accurate. The rush to pronounce it inaccurate and impugn Rosen’s motives and presumed political sympathies based on — well, based on pretty much nothing — strikes me as little better than the wingnuts’ rush to oppose Obama’s appointee without even knowing who it will be.
My other point — at the risk of further offending what seems like an echo chamber in this thread — is that this sort of knee-jerk defense of Sotomayor by progressives is incredibly self-defeating. If it’s true that Sotomayor is a mediocre judge and not liked or respected by her colleagues, she’ll be a tragic waste of a Supreme Court pick, because someone like that will have no prospect of coaxing other Supreme Court Justices in a more progressive direction. So if it’s true, progressives should damn well want that known now rather than later.
In other words, before you all decide that Sotomayor is your judicial hero — which seems like the trend here — it’s worth stopping to consider whether you have any real basis for thinking she’d be a good Justice, or for dismissing out of hand the possibility that what Rosen reported might have some basis in reality. Embracing her simply because she’s been the subject of criticism in the “elite media” is the kind of thing supporters of Sarah Palin do.
Jesse
I happen to work in the policy area of Christine Rosen, Jeff’s wife. Although she’s a fellow at the right wing EPPC, her writings are very intelligent, well researched, and reasonable – albeit moderately conservative, which I am not. She writes in most issues of the quarterly New Atlantis.
http://www.thenewatlantis.com/
Apprentice to Darth Holden
Before I go all Lorena Bobbit on you.
You’re going to need an electron microscope to find the thing on these twits.
Emma Anne
@Betsy:
What Betsy said. I am so tired of the knee jerk white-male privilege from these villagers. The assumption that there is *one* most qualified person for the SC, and it *obviously* is a white male (and probably an ivy league Catholic). Grrr. These are public sector jobs, not your family business. (h/t Joan Walsh)
eemom
@Lawyer:
thank you. I don’t personally know anything about Sotomayor, but I very much appreciate reasoned resistance to the mindless group think echo chamber that so many progressive blogs fall into — and you’re exactly right that at its worst, the phenomenon ends up being the left-wing equivalent of a Sarah Palin rally.
I will defend BJ in general against that charge, though. That it is usually NOT like that here, is why I am here.
SFAW
And, as an African-American, she’s a two-fer.
MasonMcD
@Lawyer:
Perhaps, as a lawyer, you might appreciate a criticism of a judge based on the thoughtfulness or otherwise of their written opinion, rather than clerk gossip.
Anne Laurie
Not exactly. She was born in South Africa, to a family very much on the “White Privilege” end of the colo(u)r spectrum. In fact, I remember her saying that growing up in a society where (traditional, Biblically-based) prejudices had destroyed so many millions of lives had a certain influence on her legal understanding behind the gay-marriage ruling.
asiangrrlMN
@Lawyer: I am not saying she should be chosen–I was commenting on how incredibly quick people have been to destroy her before she is even nominated. You say it’s a commonly-held belief what Rosen has written about her, but I have read from other lawyers (other than Glenn Greenwald) that the opposite is true. To say that people can’t be racist/sexist against her because they don’t feel the same way about an African American woman is ludicrous. There are different prejudices against different people.
@eemom: I don’t think people here WERE saying she should be chosen if she’s like Palin–which I highly doubt she is. It’s more about the motive behind the whole ‘white guys are being excluded’ meme than anything else, and the fact that Rosen says he doesn’t have enough knowledge about Sotomayor’s opinions to come to a conclusion as to whether or not she’s qualified, but he’s going to say she is, anyway.
MB
FWIW (perhaps not much), I do want to point out that Rosen is *not* an idiot. My interaction with him at GW Law (he as a prof, me as a student) left me with the impression that he has a pretty hefty reserve of intellectual firepower, tho’ perhaps limited by (lack of) diversity of experience. I mention this only to make the point that he’s not really a hack DC press corp journalist, and that the absurd line he puts in the article is more representative of his background as a perpetually-qualifying legal writer more than anything else.
TR
You know, Jeff Rosen is the author of four books.
By the standards of his article on Sotomayor, no one would need to actually read them in order to pass judgment on them. On say, Amazon, or Barnes and Noble, or Powell’s, or anywhere else online with a customer review aspect.
Anyway, I heard from someone that Rosen is a dim bulb, and that’s good enough for me.
eemom
“I don’t think people here WERE saying she should be chosen if she’s like Palin—which I highly doubt she is.”
That is SO completely unrelated to what I actually said that I can only beg you to re-read.
SFAW
And, as an African-American, she’s a two-fer.
Not exactly.
Just my little joke.
Lawyer
Sure, but then you’d just have Jeff Rosen’s opinion of her written opinions, which I’m guessing you’d be just as quick to dismiss. For that matter, I can tell you (truthfully) that I’ve read lots of her opinions, and have found them generally competent, pedestrian, too-frequently sloppy, and not particularly persuasive. But what’s that worth to anyone who doesn’t know me? The fact that there’s a widespread view that she’s not that great (assuming you don’t indulge in wishful conspiracy theories about Rosen’s inventing that widespread view) conveys information that his own opinion of her writing would not. Particularly since — if it’s really true that she’s not particularly liked or respected within her current court — that bodes poorly for her prospects of having much influence at the Supreme Court. Rosen reviewing her opinions certainly won’t give you that info.
Lawyer
That may well be. I wouldn’t want the President (or anyone else) to pass final judgment on her based on Rosen’s anonymous informants, or yours. But I sure as hell want him to know that the issue is out there — that there’s a significant group of people with progressive sympathies who have extensive familiarity with her and her work and don’t think she’s all that great. I have full confidence in his ability to figure out for himself who’s right.
What I object to is the attempt to demonize Rosen for reporting on an issue that (I know personally) is really out there. And I object even more strongly to the attempt to rule this sort of reporting out of bounds — as if we’re going to benefit by sticking our heads in the sand and waiting till after her appointment to discover whether we’ve enabled the lifetime appointment of someone likely to have no (positive) influence on her colleagues and little influence on the law.
Lawyer
I guess. But if I’m trying to decide whether someone’s opinion that SS is mediocre is based on (a) racism/misogyny or (b) a reasoned conclusion that she’s actually mediocre, the fact that the same person thinks extremely highly of Judge Kearse tends to shrink the possibility that it’s option (a) pretty severely. Unless, that is, you start with the presumption that any negative opinion of SS is based on racism and/or misogyny until proven otherwise. If that’s the way you choose to see the world, well, good luck with that.
JDM
I call bullshit, Troll. You’re still gossiping – nothing is “out there” just because some fucking “lawyer” with “actual experience” says it is. You’re part of the hit.
Lawyer
@JDM: Excellent substantive response. I have a different view, hence I’m part of Elena Kagan’s “hit” team. Or is it Diane Wood’s? Please advise.
JDM
Start it off with a discussion of some “objectionable” part of one of her actual opinions rather than the comical, bitchy assertions that you and some of your imaginary, anonymous friends don’t like the way she allegedly behaves on the bench or in chambers. That you don’t and won’t do this is why I think you’re an asshole smear artist and a troll.
gwangung
Nah, a just a typical blogging moron.
Could show folks differently by doing an actual analysis of her legal opinions, but since you haven’t so far, can’t blame us for relying on behavior no different than 90% of the blogging public.
BruceFromOhio
@Lawyer:
Really? Then why all the “anonymous” sources in Rosen’s hit piece? I call BULLSHIT.
BruceFromOhio
@Lawyer:
That you’ve missed the point, ney, POINTS, is self-evident. That there continues to be evidence of collusion in a smear job has actually made it easier to spot the horse puckey, and the producers of said puckey.
Thanks for playing!
Lawyer
@JDM: Please don’t leave out Jeff Rosen’s imaginary friends, or the (presumably imaginary) friend Matt Yglesias mentioned in his takedown of Rosen. They might be insulted.
In fact, I suspect they’re already offended that you think this is primarily about “the way she allegedly behaves.” It’s much more about her pedestrian work as a judge. As soon as I figure out how to demonstrate the difference between high-quality judicial work and merely competent judicial work (to an audience of non-lawyers, in the space of a blog comment), I’ll be sure to get right back to you. I’m sure it will be worth the effort; you seem quite open-minded.
Until then, I guess I’ll have to cede the floor to all of the exhaustive analyses of her opinions that demonstrate her brilliance. You know, the ones that convinced you that the criticism must be baseless.
Lawyer
Dunno. Can’t imagine why people are reluctant to go on the record criticizing the abilities of a judge before whom they practice. A real head-scratcher, that.
BTW, re “evidence of collusion in a smear job”: I’d be curious to know your criteria for distinguishing between (a) evidence of collusion in a smear, and (b) evidence that there are plenty of people familiar with her work who think she’s not a very good judge and hope the President won’t waste a Supreme Court seat on her. Sounds like a more accurate characterization might be “faith-based belief it’s a smear.”
JDM
You can’t do it because you’re probably not a lawyer. And your notion seems to be that because you’re a “lawyer” who “has talked with other lawyers,” we ought to believe your bullshit because it can’t be verified due to their fear of retribution from the bench. Of course, in their apparently frequent work before the Second Circuit, they never in written briefs or oral argument find themselves needing to distinguish the occasional opinion of Judge Sotomayor. Must be some goddam great lawyers you talked to, only cite opinions they know won’t piss off a particular judge. Must be very hard indeed, given that appellate briefs have to be written months in advance and you don’t know then which judges will be on your argument panel or if it’s going to wind up before the whole court.
Christ, that’s some lame bullshit. What an asshole. Fantasist and liar to boot.
Lawyer
@JDM: Yeah, definitely no difference between distinguishing a judge’s opinion and going on record denigrating his or her abilities. The judge will hate you either way. Can’t believe I didn’t see that.
Anyway, I apologize for intruding into the echo chamber, or anger-venting exercise, or whatever this is. I won’t bother you any more. But thanks for the thoughtful and temperate responses.
JDM
Buh bye. Don’t let the Troll Door hit you on the ass, Clarence Darrow.
SFAW
JDM –
I have no idea whether Lawyer is 100% full of shit, or 100% spot-on, or where he/she is on the truth/bullshit scale.
Nor do I know anything about the relative merits of Sotomayor vs. Kagan vs. Margaret Marshall vs. Judge Dredd.
And I think Rosen was stupid to put out a piece like that. If I want journamalism like that, I can read Pantload or Jeff Jacoby or take-your-pick.
But after reading your responses to Lawyer, I’d almost want to support Scalito, if it would piss you off enough. I mean, really, your shrieks were worthy of Glenn Beck or Rush or Savage or Malkin. So give it a rest, will you?
No doubt, I will now be your next target. So it goes.
JDM
Don’t you have a funny dog whistle joke right about now?
SFAW
If I did, I’m pretty sure you wouldn’t understand it.
But it would be funny, nonetheless.
JDM
I mean, really, your shrieks are worthy of Glenn Beck or Rush or Savage or Malkin. So give it a rest, will you?
Also KMA.
SFAW
Also KMA.
OK, troll.
Just visiting from RedState? How are things in the “Heartland”?
And don’t forget to “Go Galt!” like your heroes keep telling you to.
DougJ
Fair enough.
BruceFromOhio
@Lawyer:
Call it whatever the hell you like – whether someone is a good judge or not is irrelevant to the author, hence “smear job.” Here’s a better autopsy than I can do.