The Morning Rant: Minimalist Edition

One of the many conceits of our political ruling class is the expectation that the typical voter will consider them intellectually superior. Most of them do this by carefully memorizing glib, intelligent-sounding phrases and buzz-words that sound impressive but are ultimately meaningless when examined with any degree of intellectual rigor.

Barack Obama was and still is an expert at this sort of verbal obfuscation. He is a stuttering fool when speaking extemporaneously, but with some preparation he sounds like a simulacrum of the statesman he pretends to be.

Our current and ersatz president is cut from the same cloth, only he may be even dumber than Obama. Biden's infamous questioning of Clarence Thomas during his confirmation hearing is cringe-worthy for its exposure of exactly how stupid Biden really is.

And that was before his rapidly worsening dementia! The man has always been an intellectual lightweight, whose almost unblemished record of policy failure has been carefully massaged by a compliant (fluffing?) media in its bid to prop up an aging fool without the intellect to think past the aroma of a little girl's hair and how to grope her while pretending to be a dignified politician.

J.J. Sefton appropriately excoriated Biden for his vile and divisive remarks about half of America in the wake of the leaked SCOTUS draft. But lost in the discussion of Biden's vitriol and blind, jingoistic anger is the equally obvious point that he is dumber than a bag of rocks, and his interpretation of the draft opinion is shallow, and almost certainly based on a cursory reading of it by someone on his staff.

From The Federalist:

"What happens if you have states change the law saying that children who are LGBTQ can't be in classrooms with other children?" Biden said. "What are the next things that are going to be attacked? Because this MAGA crowd is really the most extreme political organization that's existed in American history, in recent American history."

Unable to show concrete reliance on Roe and Casey them- selves, the Solicitor General suggests that overruling those decisions would “threaten the Court's precedents holding. that the Due Process Clause protects other rights.” Briof for United Statesas Amicus Curiae 26 (citing Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U. 8. 644 (2015); Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U. S. 558 (2008 ); Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U. S. 479 (1965)). That is not correct for reasons we have already discussed. As even the Casey plurality recognized, “[aJbortion is a unique act” because it terminates “life or potential life.” 505 U.S, at 852; see also Roe, 410 U. 8., at 159 (abortion is “in- herently different from marital intimacy,” “marriage,” or “procreation". even the Casey plurality recognized, “[aJbortion is a unique act” because it terminates “life or potential life.” 505 U.S, at 852; see also Roe, 410 U. 8., at 159 (abortion is “in- herently different from marital intimacy,” “marriage,” or “procreation". And to ensure that our decision is not mis- understood or mischaracterized, we emphasize that our de- cision concerns the constitutional right to abortion and no other right. Nothing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion.

But Joe Biden has never been about the truth. He has always latched onto the easiest rhetorical devices available to him because he simply does not have the intellectual heft to make a complex argument about anything.

And we have more than two and a half years to go!

posted by CBD at 11:00 AM

| Access Comments