Shorter Differently phrased Ann Althouse: “I don’t understand how the Times can say that the entirely baseless controversy about the place of birth of the candidate in the 2008 election who was born in the United States had anything to do with race. It’s all an amazing coincidence!” (Another variant from Tom Maguire, the Orly Taitz of the birther curious.)
In related news, connoisseurs of inept Althouse fanboys will enjoy this attempt to argue that her disastrously wrong op-ed which invoked Harry Blackmun, Thurgood Marshall, and William Brennan in the course of an argument about why liberals should support Alito was not actually trying to claim that Alito was more moderate than Scalia. Right. Is “chances are that a [justice] will please conservatives more often than liberals” something you’d say about Sandra Day O’Connor or someone who’s to the right of Scalia? (Hint: Alito, for all intents and purposes, never disappoints conservatives. For that matter, he doesn’t “disappoint” liberals who, unlike Althouse, took some time to examine his record; there’s nothing unexpected about his performance.) This feeble revisionism must also come as a surprise to Althouse herself, who was still claiming that Alito was closer to the Court’s center than Scalia and Thomas (based, of course, on a case in which he took a position to the right of Scalia and Thomas) after he was appointed and for all I know still believes it.