Wednesday, October 27, 2010

I don't claim to be a journalist an an incredible terrible news show

But I'm pretty sure that Kathleen Parker is incapable of knowing what lynching actually means.


Anonymous said...

"As Supreme Court analyst Jan Greenburg wrote in "Supreme Conflict," Thomas is the quiet force on the bench who brings others to change their minds."

(Pause.....deep breath....hold it...hold it...) WHAT THE F...? Sweet buttery Jesus! On what planet?

To quote a commenter: "Thomas has not had a single original thought in his head that's made it to any of his written opinions. He simply echoes Scalia, although without any of Scalia's intellectual finesse."


MarkC said...

> to forgive poor Ginni

There is so much overt and semi-subtle pandering to authority in that piece -- my nominee for the "pretentious tool of the powers that be" award for 2010.

sukabi said...

well now I know what to send Parker for Christmas... she's definitely in need of some new knee pads... she's completely worn out the ones she's currently wearing.

pansypoo said...

i am sure the rite is pleased w/ scalia's mini me.

jackd said...

That same column appeared in the local rag this morning. I stopped reading at the first paragraph. Anything she was going to say after "[Anita Hill] may have told the truth, but so what?" was going to be either evil or stupid or both.

omen said...

it was anita hill who got lynched. and it was biden who hung her out to dry. where does parker get off painting thomas as the victim. he was rewarded for his lechery.

so what if she told the truth? women got fired if they complained back then.

kathleen, you don't get points for willing to sanction sexual predation just to avoid looking like a repressed rightwing sexual prude. what are you, auditioning for wonkette? holy crap. i hope you don't have daughters.

Anonymous said...

Parker, thy column doth make me yawn.