Cochise
07-02-2005, 11:35 AM
Just found this amusing :D
Tar & Feather, Inc.: A Liberal 10-Step Plan for Judicial Character Assassination
With the same liberal extremists in leadership since 1987, we can predict the 10 steps that People for the American Way, Alliance for Justice, National Organization for Women, NAACP, and the others will take to smear President Bush’s Supreme Court nominees. The 10 steps will be a carbon copy of the campaigns against Judges Bork, Souter, and Thomas.
1. Before a vacancy is announced – whip your membership into a frenzy with overblown rhetoric...
• AFJ’s Nan Aron: “igniting a firestorm of opposition around the country” and “a fight that will shape our lives for decades” (AP, 5/30/05)
• LCCR’s Zirkin: “we are in the fight of our lives” (Washington Post, 3/13/05)
2. …while preparing for battle.
• PFAW “has a war room with 50 work stations” (USA Today, 1/22/05)
• NARAL-affiliated political consulting firm has requested financial information on 30 appellate judges (Chicago Sun-Times, 5/16/05)
3. Once a nominee is named, immediately announce that the nominee’s record “raises more questions than it answers.” (Note: there will never be enough documents released, proof provided, or enough questions answered in order to satisfy the Left.)
• Souter
1. PFAW: “Souter’s record raises more questions than it answers” (UPI, 7/23/90)
2. AFJ on Souter’s SFC questionnaire: “It doesn’t answer many questions…it continues to raise more questions about who David Souter is.” (New York Times, 8/15/90)
• Thomas
1. “…Thomas says he is not an anti-Semite, but the American Jewish Congress wants more proof…” (AP, 7/13/91)
2. AFJ’s Aron: “Congress and the American people know less about the nominee than they knew before the hearings.” (St. Louis Times-Dispatch, 9/15/91)
4. Plead for a slower pace.
• Bork: “[we] believe that the [liberal] coalition…performed a series of important, and perhaps critical tasks: ‘Freezing the Senate’: making certain that there was no instant stampede of Senators rushing publicly to endorse Bork before his record could be examined in confirmation hearings (and before a national campaign could be mounted)” (“The People Rising” by Michael Perschuk and Wendy Schaetzel, 1989 – p. 96)
• Thomas
1. LCCR’s Neas: “You can’t lose the battle before the hearings begin. Neas said that more than 60 of the Senate’s 100 members are uncommitted.” (AP, 9/6/91)
2. PFAW’s Mincberg: “Why is there a need to rush to a decision on this?” (Washington Times, 9/28/91)
5. If the nominee is rated highly qualified by the ABA, dismiss this as a prerequisite for the job. If the nominee receives anything less than the highest qualifications, express outrage.
• Bork: Despite “well qualified” ABA rating, liberals seized on the fact that the vote was not unanimous. (Washington Post, 9/10/87)
• Souter: PFAW “Souter’s technical qualifications were never in question” (USA Today, 9/5/90)
• Thomas: AFJ’s Aron in response to the ABA’s “qualified” rating – “The country and the court deserve better than ‘minimally qualified’ justices.” (AP, 8/27/91)
6. Force the nominee to pledge allegiance to a liberal ideology.
• Souter: “A key women’s group…says it will oppose him unless he spells out his views.” (USA Today, 9/5/90)
• Thomas: NARAL’s Michelman: “Unless Judge Thomas explicity…recognizes that the Constitution protects the fundamental right to privacy, including the right to choose, the Senate should reject this nominee.” (AP, 7/5/91)
7. Ah-HAAAA!!! – The Left’s research will reveal a few “alarming” findings or “smoking guns.”
• Thomas
1. NARAL “cited a 1987 speech” and called the finding “a smoking gun” (AP, 7/5/91)
2. NOW: “Beneath the surface, however, anti-Thomas activists were looking into darker rumors. Stories began circulating that Thomas’ divorce records contained allegations from this first wife that he beat her. No such evidence turned-up…’If you’re a women’s activist group, how can you not [try to confirm the rumors]?’” (Washington Post, 10/12/91)
3. AFJ acted as a conduit for the Anita Hill rumor between the accuser and the Senate Judiciary Committee (Washington Post, 10/12/91)
• Souter
1. “Analyses by liberal groups suggest…less guarded toward a mingling of religion and government…narrower approach on civil rights…” (Boston Globe, 7/24/90)
2. PFAW “announced that the group’s researchers had uncovered a 1976 brief…in which abortion is referred to as the killing of unborn children.’” PFAW Release, 7/30/90
8. Previously released findings re-released as “research” and distributed by the media.
• Souter: AFJ: “This record, coupled with an absence of any vigorous defense of civil rights, points to rejection of this nominee. The alliance’s 24-page report of the Supreme Court nominee analyzes Judge Souter’s decisions, opinions and writings…” (Wash Times, 9/7/90)
• Thomas: PFAW: “We always had reporters working out of [our office] looking at our research and our files…We gave that to a reporter or the Boston Globe to see if they wanted to pursue it.” (Washington Post, 10/12/91)
9. Liberal Hollywood Celebrities make an 11th hour appearance.
• 2005: PFAW’s Neas “expects that Hollywood celebs, such as Alex Baldwin or Kathleen Turner, would also speak out.” (US News & World Report, 2/14/05)
• Bork: Actor Gregory Peck appeared in PFAW anti-Bork ads – “the happy inspiration of PFAW founder Norman Lear…” (“The People Rising” by Michael Perschuk and Wendy Schaetzel, 1989 – p. 175)
10. FINALLY, official opposition is coordinated and announced in a drip-drip fashion.
• Bork: “…40 groups met to plan their initial attack. Almost immediately after [the announcement], the organizations were ready with statements written in advance.” (AP, 7/4/87)
• Souter: NARAL & PP (Legal Times, 9/17/90), AFJ (AP, 9/21/90), LCCR (AP, 9/25/90)
• Thomas: AFJ (press conference, 7/29/91), PFAW (release, 7/29/91), Women’s Legal Defense Fund (AP, 7/30/91), NAACP & AFL-CIO (UPI, 7/31/91)
Tar & Feather, Inc.: A Liberal 10-Step Plan for Judicial Character Assassination
With the same liberal extremists in leadership since 1987, we can predict the 10 steps that People for the American Way, Alliance for Justice, National Organization for Women, NAACP, and the others will take to smear President Bush’s Supreme Court nominees. The 10 steps will be a carbon copy of the campaigns against Judges Bork, Souter, and Thomas.
1. Before a vacancy is announced – whip your membership into a frenzy with overblown rhetoric...
• AFJ’s Nan Aron: “igniting a firestorm of opposition around the country” and “a fight that will shape our lives for decades” (AP, 5/30/05)
• LCCR’s Zirkin: “we are in the fight of our lives” (Washington Post, 3/13/05)
2. …while preparing for battle.
• PFAW “has a war room with 50 work stations” (USA Today, 1/22/05)
• NARAL-affiliated political consulting firm has requested financial information on 30 appellate judges (Chicago Sun-Times, 5/16/05)
3. Once a nominee is named, immediately announce that the nominee’s record “raises more questions than it answers.” (Note: there will never be enough documents released, proof provided, or enough questions answered in order to satisfy the Left.)
• Souter
1. PFAW: “Souter’s record raises more questions than it answers” (UPI, 7/23/90)
2. AFJ on Souter’s SFC questionnaire: “It doesn’t answer many questions…it continues to raise more questions about who David Souter is.” (New York Times, 8/15/90)
• Thomas
1. “…Thomas says he is not an anti-Semite, but the American Jewish Congress wants more proof…” (AP, 7/13/91)
2. AFJ’s Aron: “Congress and the American people know less about the nominee than they knew before the hearings.” (St. Louis Times-Dispatch, 9/15/91)
4. Plead for a slower pace.
• Bork: “[we] believe that the [liberal] coalition…performed a series of important, and perhaps critical tasks: ‘Freezing the Senate’: making certain that there was no instant stampede of Senators rushing publicly to endorse Bork before his record could be examined in confirmation hearings (and before a national campaign could be mounted)” (“The People Rising” by Michael Perschuk and Wendy Schaetzel, 1989 – p. 96)
• Thomas
1. LCCR’s Neas: “You can’t lose the battle before the hearings begin. Neas said that more than 60 of the Senate’s 100 members are uncommitted.” (AP, 9/6/91)
2. PFAW’s Mincberg: “Why is there a need to rush to a decision on this?” (Washington Times, 9/28/91)
5. If the nominee is rated highly qualified by the ABA, dismiss this as a prerequisite for the job. If the nominee receives anything less than the highest qualifications, express outrage.
• Bork: Despite “well qualified” ABA rating, liberals seized on the fact that the vote was not unanimous. (Washington Post, 9/10/87)
• Souter: PFAW “Souter’s technical qualifications were never in question” (USA Today, 9/5/90)
• Thomas: AFJ’s Aron in response to the ABA’s “qualified” rating – “The country and the court deserve better than ‘minimally qualified’ justices.” (AP, 8/27/91)
6. Force the nominee to pledge allegiance to a liberal ideology.
• Souter: “A key women’s group…says it will oppose him unless he spells out his views.” (USA Today, 9/5/90)
• Thomas: NARAL’s Michelman: “Unless Judge Thomas explicity…recognizes that the Constitution protects the fundamental right to privacy, including the right to choose, the Senate should reject this nominee.” (AP, 7/5/91)
7. Ah-HAAAA!!! – The Left’s research will reveal a few “alarming” findings or “smoking guns.”
• Thomas
1. NARAL “cited a 1987 speech” and called the finding “a smoking gun” (AP, 7/5/91)
2. NOW: “Beneath the surface, however, anti-Thomas activists were looking into darker rumors. Stories began circulating that Thomas’ divorce records contained allegations from this first wife that he beat her. No such evidence turned-up…’If you’re a women’s activist group, how can you not [try to confirm the rumors]?’” (Washington Post, 10/12/91)
3. AFJ acted as a conduit for the Anita Hill rumor between the accuser and the Senate Judiciary Committee (Washington Post, 10/12/91)
• Souter
1. “Analyses by liberal groups suggest…less guarded toward a mingling of religion and government…narrower approach on civil rights…” (Boston Globe, 7/24/90)
2. PFAW “announced that the group’s researchers had uncovered a 1976 brief…in which abortion is referred to as the killing of unborn children.’” PFAW Release, 7/30/90
8. Previously released findings re-released as “research” and distributed by the media.
• Souter: AFJ: “This record, coupled with an absence of any vigorous defense of civil rights, points to rejection of this nominee. The alliance’s 24-page report of the Supreme Court nominee analyzes Judge Souter’s decisions, opinions and writings…” (Wash Times, 9/7/90)
• Thomas: PFAW: “We always had reporters working out of [our office] looking at our research and our files…We gave that to a reporter or the Boston Globe to see if they wanted to pursue it.” (Washington Post, 10/12/91)
9. Liberal Hollywood Celebrities make an 11th hour appearance.
• 2005: PFAW’s Neas “expects that Hollywood celebs, such as Alex Baldwin or Kathleen Turner, would also speak out.” (US News & World Report, 2/14/05)
• Bork: Actor Gregory Peck appeared in PFAW anti-Bork ads – “the happy inspiration of PFAW founder Norman Lear…” (“The People Rising” by Michael Perschuk and Wendy Schaetzel, 1989 – p. 175)
10. FINALLY, official opposition is coordinated and announced in a drip-drip fashion.
• Bork: “…40 groups met to plan their initial attack. Almost immediately after [the announcement], the organizations were ready with statements written in advance.” (AP, 7/4/87)
• Souter: NARAL & PP (Legal Times, 9/17/90), AFJ (AP, 9/21/90), LCCR (AP, 9/25/90)
• Thomas: AFJ (press conference, 7/29/91), PFAW (release, 7/29/91), Women’s Legal Defense Fund (AP, 7/30/91), NAACP & AFL-CIO (UPI, 7/31/91)