Top Supreme Court myths, courtesy of Media Matters

[Initech]

The article is too long, so I'll post the link and the key points.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200507190003

Since Justice Sandra Day O'Connor announced her retirement from the Supreme Court on July 1, conservatives have formulated or resurrected numerous false and misleading claims about the high court, which some in the media have all too willingly repeated without challenge. With President Bush's anticipated nomination announcement later today, some of these claims are sure to resurface, and Media Matters for America will be on the lookout for new "Supreme distortions" that will undoubtedly emerge.

1) Robert Bork was "smeared" when he was nominated for the Supreme Court

2) Democrats will oppose any nominee President Bush picks

3) In questioning nominees, Democrats will treat them with disrespect and hostility

4) Roe v. Wade is not threatened by O'Connor's retirement

5) Democrats should follow "Ginsburg precedent" by accepting a Bush nominee despite significant ideological differences

6) Democrats are divided on whether ideology constitutes an "extraordinary circumstance" under Senate agreement on filibusters

7) Bush favors conservatives who will strictly interpret the law over judicial activists who legislate from the bench

[iamjoy]

1. Very Good

We must make note of some of these points and incorporate them into letters to the editor when Dubya announces his right wing judicial activist nominee.

[Kraklen]

2. I hardly know anything about the failed Bork nomination.

Wasn't there something about anti-semitism too?

[Initech]

3. *bump*