CNN’s Chris Cillizza thinks he’s figured out President Trump’s pick to fill Justice Anthony Kennedy’s seat, and just so you know, it has nothing to do with her qualifications, but the image Trump wants to project. She checks all the boxes, see?
If you believe Trump makes decisions based on image and appearance (and he does), then here's the next Supreme Court Justicehttps://t.co/GRVrVkrmJF
— Chris Cillizza (@CillizzaCNN) July 2, 2018
Cillizza insists that for Trump, image is everything — which is not a take we remember him floating when Trump chose Neil Gorsuch. But now that a woman, Amy Coney Barrett, is in line for the seat, it’s all about “central casting” — again, not a take we remember when Gorsuch was nominated.
Cillizza writes:
For Donald Trump, image is everything.
How you look is a major marker for how you will do in Trump’s world. You need to look the part for him to imagine you in the job. Your personal story has to stand out in the crowd.
…
That “central casting” view of the world goes for reality TV contestants, Cabinet picks and, yes, likely even Supreme Court justices.
By that logic, Trump’s pick to replace retiring Justice Anthony Kennedy — which he is set to announce July 9 — is simple. It’s Amy Coney Barrett.Coney Barrett is, among other things:
- A woman
- A mother of seven
- Young (in her mid-40s)
- A person of faith
- Reliably conservative, particularly on social issues
Or, just maybe, she’s the best person for the job.
Coney Barrett graduated from a prestigious law school, was executive editor of law review, clerked on the DC Circuit and the Supreme Court. You reduced her to her looks. Disgraceful. https://t.co/u1uevAztqJ
— Mo Mo (@molratty) July 2, 2018
Man, @CillizzaCNN has some major projection going on. Does the smart lady scare you, Chris?
— Mo Mo (@molratty) July 2, 2018
https://twitter.com/bkraky1/status/1013889073310720002
I'll bet he never made the same point about Obama, who clearly used criteria other than judicial qualifications to choose Sotomayor and Kagan. Not even most committed Demo-apologists thought either of those two were the most qualified available.
— Vizzini (@phorton01) July 2, 2018
https://twitter.com/INGFirebrand/status/1013889948712357888
– She was an appellate court clerk
– She clerked for Antonin Scalia
– She has great law firm experience
– She was a top law professor at Notre Dame
– She has a deep portfolio of legal writing/scholarshipBut Cillizza thinks he has it figured out because she has blue eyes. Wow… https://t.co/LkE8AFfvOK
— Daniel Savickas (@DanielSavickas) July 2, 2018
Throughout my career it's always been liberal men who assume I got my position because of my looks or because I slept with someone at the organization. They seem to have a weird hang-up about the idea that women can be attractive AND accomplished. https://t.co/9vGFFsRvWl
— Amber Athey (@amber_athey) July 2, 2018
WOW. Incredibly offensive. Instead of focusing on her image, let's discuss her accomplishments, such as:
-Notre Dame Law Graduate
-Editor of Law Review
-Clerk for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia https://t.co/VRfz1zZDoF— Ali Swee (@ahswee12) July 2, 2018
This is rather gross and sexist of you, no? https://t.co/V4YnvSGDcj
— Alexandra DeSanctis (@xan_desanctis) July 2, 2018
https://twitter.com/CharlesFLehman/status/1013883903986360320
Right, it would be because of her looks. Not because she had an appellate-court clerkship, Supreme Court clerkship (with Justice Scalia), elite law-firm experience, law professor at an elite law school, and now experience as a federal judge on the Seventh Circuit Court. https://t.co/CxCPrKXVn7
— Garrett Ventry (@GarrettVentry) July 2, 2018
Wow, that's super sexist of you to judge a woman based on her physical appearance and not her legal acumen, @CillizzaCNN. https://t.co/OmrbragnNk
— Nick Solheim (@NickSSolheim) July 2, 2018
How is this not blatant sexism? https://t.co/eWIjgFjSL5
— Courtney Kirchoff (@Courtneyscoffs) July 2, 2018
https://twitter.com/kebejay/status/1013889342702477312
So to Trump she's an excellent choice but to you she's just a woman?
I thought the Left supported promoting women in these situations.
You guys really need to pick which kind of sexism you're running with here. https://t.co/GO8nTfAvJp
— Chad Felix Greene (@chadfelixg) July 2, 2018
"I'M not being sexist. HE is!" https://t.co/RiezwyL2qZ
— Currently between fraudulent suspensions (@jtLOL) July 2, 2018
Just imagine if a conservative had argued the ONLY reason Kagan, or Sotomayor, were picked was their image. https://t.co/q4gTMBPf8b
— Pradheep J. Shanker, M.D., M.S. (@Neoavatara) July 2, 2018
Shorter @CillizzaCNN: "I want to call this judge hot, but I also hate her because she disagrees with me so I want be belittle her and reduce her career accomplishments down to her looks. How can I do both? I've got it!" This is @CNN. #Sexist https://t.co/rUyKDiZXur
— Derek Hunter (@derekahunter) July 2, 2018
Progressive journalists are ALWAYS the embodiment of what they constantly virtue signaling against. Never fails. This is laughable. https://t.co/JqlD3qsWCk
— ??????? ??????? (@brad_gohornsbkw) July 2, 2018
Now she's definitely not gonna go out with you. https://t.co/YiSMvLMG67
— Anthony Bialy (@AnthonyBialy) July 2, 2018
Take a lap, Chris. https://t.co/wveFMNnKsN
— James Hasson (@JamesHasson20) July 2, 2018
When Thirsty Chris Met Lady Ratio https://t.co/3jH74flpkW
— Seth Mandel (@SethAMandel) July 2, 2018
.@CNN really? you can do better. https://t.co/mE0KzWBCHH
— Annafi Wahed (@AnnafiWahed) July 2, 2018
But can they?
If you're tired of media that cries all the time about racism and sexism, only to become extremely racist and sexist against political enemies, #WalkAway.
Like most of the people who used to watch @CNN have. https://t.co/wrN4w7S5aO
— Ghost of Alexis Rose (@icanhasbailout) July 2, 2018
Related:
Facts first? CNN's Chris Cillizza explains why TIME's (debunked) cover is so powerful https://t.co/JaDNGvauwz
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) June 24, 2018
Join the conversation as a VIP Member