Ethics

What is the Point of This Story?

By Ed Brayton

I'm just baffled by this story from AP that repeats an absolute non-story that should have died long ago. When the first round of "Clarence Thomas doesn't ask questions during oral argument" stories came out a year or two ago, they were completely and utterly pointless; to update them with another one that says "oh by the way, he didn't ask questions last term either" is a complete waste of ones and zeros. They just rehashed the same quotes from the last round of stupidity on that non-issue. What editor said, "Hey, remember that completely substanceless story we ran two years ago? Let's reprint it for no apparent reason"? I don't get it. The arguments were idiotic the first time, they're still idiotic, and only someone who has no clue how the Supreme Court works could possibly think it's even worth discussing.

Full post as published by Dispatches from the Culture Wars on February 27, 2008 (boomark / email).