Chances are you haven’t forgotten what a shameless liberal hack Jennifer Rubin has transformed into over the past several years.
But you know what? It never hurts to be reminded.
So here’s her latest hot take on the abortion debate, which is front-and-center at the Supreme Court today:
Rs won't inconvenience themselves with universal background checks to save lives but they'd demand women undergo 9 mos of pregnancy. This has never been about LIFE.
— Jennifer "Pro-privacy" Rubin (@JRubinBlogger) December 1, 2021
Ouch! We need weapons-grade oven mitts for that one.
And would you believe it gets hotter?
There were many horrifying statements during the SCOTUS hearing. But the low point for me was Justice Kavanaugh’s statement that this case is hard because ‘we can’t accommodate the interests of both the woman and the fetus’: it was clear who he was prioritizing and it isn’t women
— Cecile Richards (@CecileRichards) December 1, 2021
and where the heck do the rights of a fetus come from if not from religious doctrine which not everyone shares. truly appalling.
— Jennifer "Pro-privacy" Rubin (@JRubinBlogger) December 1, 2021
The only thing more appalling is that Jennifer Rubin believes anyone should ever take her seriously as a serious person.
CZ The exact same place yours come from, moron. https://t.co/xlGs1GbjNM
— The Gormogons (@Gormogons) December 1, 2021
She actually wrote a whole, full-throated defense of her wrongness:
calling BS on the entire "pro-life" canard. https://t.co/SitDQHRl1q
— Jennifer "Pro-privacy" Rubin (@JRubinBlogger) December 1, 2021
Set aside for a moment all the questions about personhood and the fact that many religious traditions do not recognize personhood at conception. (Galling arrogance that “everyone” agrees when personhood begins is indicative of a theocratic movement)
— Jennifer "Pro-privacy" Rubin (@JRubinBlogger) December 1, 2021
focus on antiabortion activists demand that a woman’s right to bodily integrity must be sacrificed for the sake of another. This is a rule that is applicable in no other situation. In what other context is someone’s body, health and daily life commandeered to save another?
— Jennifer "Pro-privacy" Rubin (@JRubinBlogger) December 1, 2021
who'd accept a law requiring someone to be a bone marrow or organ donor to save another. same voices reject the obligation of self-sacrifice for others’ health when the inconvenience is far more trivial than pregnancy's emotional, physical and financial burden
— Jennifer "Pro-privacy" Rubin (@JRubinBlogger) December 1, 2021
A free society must grant a sphere of personal autonomy. We recognize the unacceptable price of overriding that zone of personal integrity in certain intimate matters. We dare not give govt the right to override bodily integrity even for very good reasons.
— Jennifer "Pro-privacy" Rubin (@JRubinBlogger) December 1, 2021
Oh really?
Tell us more about personal autonomy https://t.co/d7uyfjmSv9 pic.twitter.com/taUhH8R1K2
— Dr. Richard Harambe (@Richard_Harambe) December 1, 2021
Guys, she’s not just broken; she’s shattered into a million pieces.
— The MoGal (@themogal20) December 1, 2021
https://t.co/FEer0Fjhk4 pic.twitter.com/nF7nVqAVZE
— Utterly Purple (@DefiantlyFree) December 1, 2021
https://t.co/nquA9jVu5e pic.twitter.com/l3zJQcPlXs
— Robert “Francis” Loblaw (@AllenMi90365299) December 1, 2021
https://twitter.com/ThatAmish1/status/1466058101564403714
This woman just isn’t right in the head is she? https://t.co/299rdOqIxq
— Let Me Be Myself (@CeaseArtTheft) December 1, 2021
Was … was she ever?
Didn't she proclaim to be "conservative" at some point? Did she ever hold a conservative point of view on any issue? https://t.co/eQwmdbNLbG
— Independent Fact Checker SiggmaK (@Siggmak) December 1, 2021
So… Jen Rubin became pro-abortion all of a sudden?
Or was she never actually, you know, a conservative?
— RBe (@RBPundit) December 1, 2021
Seems reasonable to ask at this point.
Editor’s note: This post has been updated with additional text and tweets.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member