You forgot the part where Claire doesn’t believe her “white male” statement and has to be told twice the judge actually said something so outrageous.

That would be:

A.) Willful Omission
B.) Selective Editing
C.) I still want my good seat at The Royale

===

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/26/hey-claire-mccaskill-meet-clarence-thomas/

“that dog wont hunt”, Gracie? Been spending too much time with the Bushes?
good old “from-southern-Missoura-by-Texas” girl Claire, that’s what we always called her. But I’d be careful with those dog metaphors, girlfriend; you never know when it might come back to bite you in the, uh, you know. Might want to stick to tweetering. Just saying.

If Claire has to tell us that she’s not a liberal activist, then I have to believe she is a liberal activist.

Claire first heard of Sotomayor 3 days ago. She has about as much info on her as we do.

Amazedbythelunacy
That’s a very definite proclamation.
I assume you have positive testimony and can verify it?