Re-Writing to Lie: Kagan and Salazar

Seems that re-writing the work of others to create a lie is perfectly fine and dandy in Washington.

But is it acceptable for someone who will sit on SCOTUS?

We all know about Slimeball Salazar's 'extra graf'. Several scientists and drilling experts wrote a report on the spill, and Slimeball simply appended a conclusion recommending total shutdown of all drilling in the Gulf.

The experts and scientists did NOT write that, but Slimeball pretended they did.

Now comes Ms. Kagan.

...There is no better example of this distortion of science than the language the United States Supreme Court cited in striking down Nebraska’s ban on partial-birth abortion in 2000. This language purported to come from a “select panel” of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), a supposedly nonpartisan physicians’ group. ACOG declared that the partial-birth-abortion procedure “may be the best or most appropriate procedure in a particular circumstance to save the life or preserve the health of a woman.” The Court relied on the ACOG statement as a key example of medical opinion supporting the abortion method.

...The problem is that the critical language of the ACOG statement was not drafted by scientists and doctors. Rather, it was inserted into ACOG’s policy statement at the suggestion of then–Clinton White House policy adviser Elena Kagan.

The task force’s initial draft statement did not include the statement that the controversial abortion procedure “might be” the best method “in a particular circumstance.” Instead, it said that the select ACOG panel “could identify no circumstances under which this procedure . . . would be the only option to save the life or preserve the health of the woman.”

That deception is not as blatant as Slimeball's. But it's the same procedure.

It's lying, plain and simple.

SCOTUS material?

I think not.