Indeed, there are some civil rights groups which support the nomination of John Roberts to the Supreme Court. Like the Center for Equal Opportunity (an organization dedicated to the rights of whites, Christians and men) and several organizations which define civil rights as religious rights.
Even a Bush-nominated member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights is firmly backing Roberts! What a surprise. Jennifer Braceras used to be listed as an expert for the Independent Women's Forum, a Scaife-funded right-wing gals' club. She also wrote a fascinating piece about the civil rights of The Passion of the Christ in which she made this comment:
And, as many religious people have already come to realize, public professions of faith are often scoffed at by the liberal elite.
Note the "liberal elite" term. She is really well taught in the right language to use. Here is today's example:
Braceras and others referenced recent opposition to Roberts' nomination voiced by liberal activist organizations such as People for the American Way. Those groups' attacks on Roberts, Braceras said, "are as predictable as the sunrise and as preposterous as the man in the moon."
She dismissed PFAW President Ralph Neas' comment this week that Roberts would try to turn back the clock on civil rights as a boilerplate radical agenda attack that special interest groups would make on any Bush nominee.
"The truth is that, contrary to the cartoon-like portrayals of John Roberts by special interest groups, John Roberts is a fair-minded jurist who will judge each case on its own merits," Braceras said.
Note how everything is slogans? "Man in the moon", "boilerplate radical agenda", "special interest groups". Who is being cartoon-like here?
And how is one supposed to respond to these cartoonish statements? Zap, Pow, #$%%?