The Senate hearing of Amy Coney Barrett is going along predictable lines, with Barrett claiming that she never discriminated against anyone on the basis of “sexual preference” and the use of the term itself is discriminatory — not to mention inaccurate and outmoded.

It’s surprising that someone in her position is using a term of art that went the way of the dinosaur some years back. The words sexual preference imply that homosexuality is a choice. It’s a holdover from the conversion therapy years and it’s more than a little shocking that somebody being vetted by the Senate for a lifelong appointment to the Supreme Court would use it. But on the other hand, with the goal of stacking the court with the most ultra-conservative legal talent available, it unfortunately makes a lot of sense. Blow back was swift.

The sham hearing goes on and I’m a little surprised that what is the seminal question has not yet been put to Barrett. If I was on the judiciary committee, all that I would want to know is Barrett’s explanation — legal, moral, whatever — of how vetting a Supreme Court candidate in March of an election year is verboten, but doing the same thing in October of that year is simply swell. I just want to hear what she has to say about that. Because if the Republicans were sticking to their own rule, we wouldn’t be talking about any of the rest of it. That’s why this is a sham hearing.

Help keep the site running, consider supporting.


  1. She wants to play by 1790 rules, and the majority of us live in 2020. Someone needs to ask her why she thinks “original intent” should apply in things that didn’t exist then, and that the framers would probably enthusiasticly support.

    • Well, if she does want to “play by 1790 rules,” then she needs to step aside and let a MAN be put on the Supreme Court. (That IS sarcasm, folks.)

  2. Just heard a GOP Senilator say they’ve filled court positions as they arose. Wrong- hundreds of seats remained empty thanks to McConnell. They’re trying to say Dems would pack the courts – as if they didn’t! Sham indeed.

  3. Maybe someone should’ve taken that on a follow-up and asked her, “Ms Barrett, when did YOU choose your ‘preference’ to have sex with men? What was the EXACT moment that you realized that you ‘preferred’ men rather than women for your sexual partner? If you cannot provide an adequate answer to the members of this committee, then you need to step aside and refuse this nomination as your language will prove that you are NOT open-minded enough to rule on LGBTQ issues that might come before you as a Supreme Court justice.”

    If nothing else, watching her flounder and sputter for several minutes to determine why HER “preference” was NOT really a “preference” would have made for some genuine “must-see TV.”

  4. The fascist believe the Constitution really means nothing, and thus anything they want. What it ultimately means is protection of the individual from abuses by the mob or the state. Fascist only protect the individual if they fall in line and hate the correct people.

  5. All she’s doing is making the case for SCOTUS to get some long overdue updates when the Biden administration rolls up. And don’t worry if the Dems have yet to ask a particular question you want them to. They’re pacing themselves so that they consistently hammer EVERY day of these goddamn sham hearings.

  6. The republicans use the law/rules/Truth like a prostitute. They can’t deal with the sacrifices/character it takes to have integrity, so they buy power, abuse truth & discard integrity to have their dark needs met. No commitment to anything that promotes the common good. They are as much a deadly virus as covid. That, ladies & gentlemen, can be proven with facts.

    • A bit of verse from the original comic version of V For Vendetta by Alan Moore: “I love you but why must you love the law?/Tis plain for all to see that she’s a whore/Whom virtuous persons have no need to woo/Whom villains screw and then studiously ignore.” THAT’S the GOP.

  7. Nicely put, Mayor Pete.

    My *preference* is that the winner of this presidential election should choose the next justice.
    — Pete Buttigieg (@PeteButtigieg) October 13, 2020

  8. It doesn’t matter what she says during the hearing. When she held up the blank piece of paper with no notes on it, I thought that was a real slap in the face to the American people. She can sit there all smug knowing that she will be voted in no matter what because the Republicans know she will vote how they want her to.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

The maximum upload file size: 128 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop files here