The administration seems intent on displaying total disregard for facts or analysis while continually touting the intellectual superiority of their positions, even when those positions are disconnected or manifestly political in nature. What's that mean?
Try this analysis of the Kagan position on allowing military recruiters access to the hallowed halls of Harvard law school:
JAG Corps Aren't Baby-Killer Warriors Either
Ludicrous isn't it? She doesn't like the "military's discriminatory hiring practices" so they can't come on campus. The clear implication is that there is something illegal, immoral and blatantly homophobic about these knuckle-draggers in uniform. But she conveniently blanked out that the policy they were applying was the one that was mandated for them by the President, the Congress and even by the Clinton Administration that she had worked for.
If they don't make the rules, how can you fault them for complying? Somehow she also manages to read "the right of the people..." in the Second Amendment to not really mean the right of the people, but actually mean the right of the states to form a militia that can then keep some arms and bear them occasionally when the feds think it would be harmless. But, that's a gripe for another day.
But, this Supreme Court candidate with no judicial record is only part of the Bamster legal team. There's also the crack Attorney General. By now you've probably heard about his appearance on the Sunday news talks shows and his lightning quick repartee in Congressional testimony. Here's a summary of quotes:
Probably Unconstitutional Based on a Feeling, I Guess
Now that is really some talent there. He can apply legal tests of Constitutional compliance even without actually reading the brief ten page document. Clearly that puts him above the common man.