If Judge Amy Coney Barrett had been as Forthright as Judge Judy during Rubber-Stamped Hearing Q & A:

At the Senate hearing rubber stamping the Supreme Court nomination of Amy Coney Barrett, wouldn’t it have been wonderful if Judge Barrett, like Judge Judy, answered questions with no filters?

So, here the unfiltered exchange we would have loved to have heard:

Senator: Did YOU demonstrate good judgment being presented at your nomination announcement ceremony where Covid-19 protocols were ignored and many people infected?

Barrett: Not my call. Liberal judges make policy; real judges deal with what comes to them. Precedent and the President ruled.

Senator: Do YOU always defer to authority, even when the call is short-sighted?

Barrett: We’re fast tracking my appointment to keep the Supreme Court at full strength in perilous times.

Senator: If keeping the Court at full strength is an important consideration, why wasn’t that the case in 2016 when Judge Merrick was refused a timelier hearing by the same Republican-controlled Senate? Is THIS process to push YOUR nomination before the people have a say in who should be the nominator hypocritical?

Barrett: And the fake news media says Conservatives live in the past! The 2016 circumstances dealt with a lame duck President. This might be a dumb fuck President, but that hasn’t stopped him getting elected before. Among some, it might even have helped.

Senator: What do YOU say to pro-choice women who worshipped Judge Ginsburg and worry your beliefs will impede freedom to choose?

Barrett: Most had their choice when in a . . . can I say . . . position to choose the possibility of conception. Tell the sluts they made their choice. Everything after’s a consequence, not a choice.

Senator: Speaking of so-called pro-life, the Catholic Catechism states that the death penalty is “an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person.” The Church now advocates capital punishment be abolished worldwide. Do YOU agree?

Barrett: Pope Francis does get out there at times. Holy Mother Church historically has used different methods to fix its lapses. Orthodox Catholics will carry the next papal election. Soon.

Senator: Yet, YOU co-authored a publication (“Catholic Judges in Capital Cases”) that discussed when recusal might be appropriate for Catholic judges in capital punishment rulings. Still go with that?

Barrett: I was in my twenties. It did distinguish types of rulings. Besides, as Emerson said, “a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of mediocre minds.” Mine is not mediocre. I’ll find more ways to get around this.

Senator: Pope Francis also castigates those who cast immigrants as “less worthy, less important, less human.” How can YOU watch this President cage immigrant children and act as a world-wide tweeting bully without having second thoughts about his appointments, people like YOU?

Barrett: Maybe Dan Brown created Pope Francis. And, as for “Mr. Hire ‘em; Fire ‘em,” he couldn’t fire me like all his staff and cabinet. Even a blind squirrel sometimes finds a nut. I’m good for this lifetime position, and no nut like him.

Senator: But in his Constitutional ignorance, he speaks of a Presidency for life or firing what he calls “Obama judges,” a characterization that even raised the ire of Justice Roberts. Won’t YOU forever be a Trump judge, associated with his foibles?

Barrett: With a life-time appointment in my forties, I’ll be in office when Barron Trump in line for President.

Senator: Speaking of the President, Regeneron, the experimental cocktail he took and now advocates for all unless they have Obamacare, was made from stem cells – what his and YOUR supporters would call aborted fetuses. More hypocrisy while vilifying abortions?

Barret: Ask him. It wasn’t part of my treatment.

Senator: In a 2019 dissent you said you would have limited a federal law forbidding felons from owning guns, adhering to originalism, the theory championed by your mentor, Justice Scalia, which seeks to interpret the Constitution as originally understood. How can YOU do that since, pointedly, no women were part of that original understanding?

Barrett: At Notre Dame football games and amidst court buddies, I’m one of the boys. Besides, the 2nd Amendment – there’s only one above it — protects the right to bear arms but voting’s way down in the amendment order – 15th, 19th and 26th. Rehabilitated white collar felons still need to protect themselves from real criminals.

Senator: White collar or white? So, this decision, and others YOU’VE made, suggests that at least some released felons can bear arms but not vote?

Barrett: Read our constitution. Then vote for my confirmation.

Senator: Would YOUR originalism also suggest women shouldn’t vote, that Black people count as 3/5 of a person when voting, and that to vote you have to own property? Should we adhere to originalism in medicine too, as we have with climate change? Should the President have been leeched to draw out bad blood rather than taking Regeneron?

Barrett: Hmm. No fetuses in leeches. Yes, women should vote. After a good discussion with our husbands, of course. And, no, the President’s bad blood’s here to stay.

Senator: You say you base legal decisions on what would be fair for your seven children if they were a party. Judging by his debate conduct, would you use President Trump’s behavior as a model for YOUR children?

Barrett: America grants freedom to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. If boorish behavior, lying, hypocrisy, divisive rants and immoral sexual dalliances make the President happy, as the Pope says in a more unfortunate context, who am I to judge?

Senator: Exactly!

Author: Ken Hogarty

Wadayasay? Here's your chance to sound off!