Kathleen Parker Colossally Wrong About SCOTUS And Abortion, Regrets Nothing, Should Retire
Pulitzer Prize-winning meathead Kathleen Parker wrote a very bad prediction back in 2018, after Anthony Kennedy retired from the Supreme Court. At the time, everyone in America who is not a dunderheaded Beltway idiot knew that Donald Trump would nominate some antiabortion fiend to replace him. Being antiabortion is a litmus test for GOP judges and has been for years, even if they blatantly lie about their position in confirmation hearings and everyone knows they are blatantly lying. And Trump, being too lazy to have any beliefs outside of believing that Donald Trump is the greatest human to ever walk the earth, was perfectly happy to let the Federalist Society, proctors of said litmus test, tell him whom to nominate.
Everyone knew this. Dogs knew it. Yr Wonkette knew it. Those weird deformed mutant fish that live at the bottom of the Marianas Trench knew it.
But Kathleen Parker didn’t know it. She wrote a column titled “Calm down. Roe vs. Wade isn’t going anywhere.” In that column, she predicted that no potential nominee would want to be “that person” who overturned a right approved of by better than half of the country. Perish the thought! She also condemned the “wild-eyed jackassery” of the Cassandras of the Left who were predicting the end of Roe.
So flash-forward nearly four years. Roe is gone, a result that Kennedy’s replacement Bret Kavanaugh — who Parker specifically predicted would replace Kennedy and specifically predicted would not want to overturn Roe — enthusiastically voted to turn America’s women into a bunch of broodmares.
Is Parker feeling any regret? Even a tingle? Her Post colleague Erik Wemple asked her if she had even the tiniest sliver of an iota of an inkling of feeling a bit chastened at having been so galactically, catastrophically wrong.
Parker, naturally, did not:
Asked whether she stands by her column, Parker responded, “One hundred percent. At the time it was written, it was accurate--it was on the nose.” Timing is critical to her point, she argues: The column appeared two years before Ginsburg’s death and Barrett’s confirmation.
This is absolutely absurd. Kavanaugh was the fifth vote to overturn Roe. He would not have been nominated to replace the swingy Kennedy otherwise. One does not get onto a Federalist Society judicial shortlist if there is any doubt. Barrett’s later confirmation just gave the conservatives a cushion.
“I have had excellent sources on the Supreme Court for many, many years,” said Parker, who sees Gorsuch, Roberts and Kavanaugh as incrementalists disinclined to undo important precedents in a single ruling.
Ha ha ha, okay. Please note that these same three justices voted for some very non-incremental rulings reversing a whole bunch of hot-button social issue cases besides abortion just in the last couple of weeks, which would seem to render this thesis a load of horse hockey.
Had the “jackals” of the abortion rights movement not protested at Kavanaugh’s house, Parker said, he might well have switched sides in the Dobbs case.
People who are not Kathleen Parker may remember that the abortion rights protests at Kavanaugh’s and other justices’ homes started after the draft of the opinion overturning Roe leaked. Brett Kavanaugh had signed on to that opinion.
In other words, Kavanaugh had already voted in favor of overturning Roe before the “jackals” showed up at his house. Now here comes Kathleen Parker to proclaim — in public! Where people can hear her! — that linear time does not exist.
This makes no sense. It’s an excuse. It’s the Supreme Court version of that old wingnut game, “Look What the Liberals Made Me Do!” It’s the sound of the rockets attached to Kathleen Parker’s career screaming out of the atmosphere towards deep space.
Once again, yr Wonkette calls for Beltway journalists to rotate out of Washington every year or two, like soldiers rotating out of a war zone.
Wonkette is ad-free and will never have a paywall and relies only on YOU, so keep us going please if you are able!