Google+
Close

The Corner

The one and only.

More on: Obama’s 99% Lie



Text  



So does Matthew Yglesias acknowledge that I’m right that Obama was talking about Supreme Court cases when he absurdly stated that differing judicial philosophies don’t matter in “ninety-nine percent of cases [because] the Constitution is actually going to be clear?  Or does he explain why he thinks I’m wrong?  No.  Here’s the entirety of his “update”:  “Ed Whelan has a response here that I do agree makes his point of view on this look a bit less ridiculous, but I would still stand by the contention that he’s completely misrepresenting Obama’s fairly clear and basic point here.”  No explanation why he would stand by a contention that I have shown is wrong. 



Text  


Sign up for free NRO e-mails today:

Subscribe to National Review