Well, sort of. Over the weekend, Trent Lott (R-Miss.) responded to the far right’s new favorite argument — Dems are blocking a handful of Bush judicial nominees because Dems hate religious people. As Think Progress noted, Lott appeared ABC News’ This Week and parroted the nonsensical line.
Lott: [W]hat has made people uncomfortable is that people that have strong feelings about their faith, regardless of the denomination or background of that particular religious group, if they feel strongly and live and support the positions that reflect their faith, then you’re disqualified.
Stephanopoulos: But that’s the difference…
(Crosstalk)
Stephanopoulos: …. people are motivated by opposing this faith. You’d agree with that.
Lott: I do.
The substance behind such inanity is too offensive to even warrant a response, but let’s follow through on Lott’s logic here.
To date, 205 Bush judicial nominees have been confirmed by the Senate. If the Dems’ “obstructionism” has led to 10 people of faith being “disqualified,” what, exactly, is Trent Lott saying about the other 205? Are we to believe that an evangelical president has filled over 200 federal court vacancies with secular humanists?
Lott’s argument seems to be that Dems are blocking the nominees who take faith the most seriously. In addition to being painfully ridiculous, Lott is implicitly arguing that the other 205 who are on the federal bench don’t take their faith seriously. That, or the anti-Christian bigots in the Senate Dem caucus (most of whom are Christians) are just remarkably inefficient in executing their animus.
So, Trent, which is it?