Objecting to your own principles. Is that a problem in an election year? Maybe not if you are a Leftist. Have you noticed the Leftists seem intent on criticizing Judge Barrett over issues they normally support? Seems a little incongruous, don’t you think?
But, in doing so they are undermining a few of Joe Biden’s positions during the campaign. You have to love this. You cannot make it up. First they go low. Democrat operatives began trumpeting the narrative. The smear is the motive behind Coney Barrett adopting two children from Haiti.
They assert she’s a racist for doing it at all. What they thought had been a sharp observation did not pass the smell test. It is facing exposure as rather vile. The initial senders are locking down accounts. The Leftists did not see the disgust from the general public coming. There is something unacceptable behind the innuendo.
Soon they were back with a different spin. The suggestion is becoming ACB is using her transracial adoptions as a career move. The adoptions are a shield against charges of racism. The truth is the left is full of outrage. Their favorite knee jerk narrative, the accusation of racism, is not available to them.
Attacking for the children
That has now become the focus of their accusations. The assertion is ACB has gone through the efforts of adopting two children as a political insurance policy… How offensive is that? She did this just in case… someday… she might… become a SCOTUS nominee. Well, it exposes the vacuous thinking the Leftists the Democrats have become these days.
Isn’t the concept of whites being open and accepting of minorities is the goal? Now, when presented with an active example of their demands, it becomes problematic? Really? The only shock is they did not go to the next step. Why didn’t they accuse Barrett of stealing content from another race? Is objecting to your own principles confusing?
Then there’s the disgusting act of targeting her children. This reflects badly on a Biden campaign running ads using his own kids. In one spot highlighting the need to preserve Obamacare they invoke his late son, who died from cancer. Why isn’t Biden facing accusations of using the death of Beau Biden as ‘’a shield?’’
Another attack of Barrett is her Catholic faith. This is an issue brought against her three years ago. During her confirmation hearings to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals Senator Feinstein did raise it. This presents another challenge for Biden.
A Catholic is a Catholic, is a Catholic
If ACB’s faith comes up then it reflects back directly onto Biden. He too is a Catholic. It is something he is massaging during the campaign. Biden’s faith is something the campaign wants to leverage. At the same time he needs to resort to pretzel faith. You see the Democrat positions on abortion, and forcing nuns to pay for birth control fly in the face of the tenets of his nominal faith. At what point does objecting to your own principles indicate you don’t really have any?
If ACB receives targeting over her Catholicism then Biden will need to answer for it as well. It’s the sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander rule. So, if he says the political agenda is more important than adhering to the principles of the church then he loses that issue with devout voters.
Another criticism thrown at the judge makes no sense coming from the left. A number of individuals are attacking the presentation of Barrett as a working judge AND being able to be a mother to seven children. This is a remarkable turn from years of leftist feminism. Isn’t that the claim we can have it and do it all? Clearly, either the Left does not have principles or it does not believe in what they say about them or objecting to your own principles has left them unable to grasp the inconsistency.
Now these voices of the Left are declaring it impossible for her to manage both. Really? Her having a supportive husband is completely left out the equation. And Jill Biden has become something of a centerpiece of the Biden campaign. She is even serving as Joe’s replacement at times. You understand; he has been frequently under a ‘’lid.’’ Whatever that term means.
The feminist perspective
This new stance by the left fails the smile test. It is made more humorous with the desperate attempt to conflate the nomination of ACB with ‘’The Handmaid’s Tale.’’ The amusement is the people leveling the charge were the ones resorting to the repressive tactics. You just cannot make this stuff up.
This is a woman with a nomination to the highest court in the nation. The people who are claiming to be aghast at this concept are suggesting it is unseemly. Somehow it is less than motherly for her to be both a professional and a mother. Oh please, don’t embarrass yourself defending this. Just drop it and walk away.
Here they are diminishing her import as a female. They are hectoring her over her decisions as a parent. Adding insult to injury they are implying she should be home with the kids. We’ll assume they will concede she can still wear shoes. And, all while claiming they claim a new standard is being ushered in that would rob women of their agency. Okay. Everyone save their watch ‘cause it’s getting deep.
It is not at all shocking that the emotional reactions from the left are devoid of pragmatic thought. It is rather smile inducing to watch, all the same. Bring on the clowns and dancing bears… I mean the confirmation hearings. The best part is none of it has anything to do with her qualifications for the job. Shouldn’t that be at least part of the conversation?
