Courtesy of Tim Lynch.
The questions, of course, are all based on Holder’s record in public service. Given that record and given the bizarre stances that he has taken–seriously, look at Question No. 6 and ask yourself how it is possible that a nominee for Attorney-General of the United States could try to foster content-based speech restrictions on political opponents of Bill Clinton–the question arises again; why isn’t Eric Holder’s nomination simply dismissed out of hand?
Just imagine what the outcry would have been if a Republican President-elect nominated an Attorney-General who tried to burden political opponents of George W. Bush with the same kind of content-based speech restrictions. The outcry would have been massive and overwhelmingly negative and the press would have reported on the issue until the cows came home.
Why shouldn’t the same standards apply here?