AddieStan

Bill Donohue , perhaps your blogstress's favorite bigot, has a piece at Human Events Online in which he rehashes his charge of anti-Catholicism against your écrivaine for having dared to note, in 2005, that George W. Bush 's nomination of the very Catholic John Roberts to the top spot on the high court was a smooth move. Her point was that Roberts' religion would give the right cover when the liberals on the Judiciary Committee, before which he would appear for his confirmation hearing, pushed him for his views on abortion. "Anti-Catholic!" they would cry, of anyone who dared to challenge Roberts views on Roe v. Wade . Grouping your cyberscribe among the likes of the besotted Christopher Hitchens, the probing Nina Totenberg and the saintly E.J. Dionne, he then said that none of them could surpass your blogstress in one critical area: When John Roberts was nominated to the U.S. Supreme Court, his Catholicism became an issue with pundits like NPR’s Nina Totenb...

Having cast her customary spell of glamour over all her endeavors, your blogstress now finds herself in much excellent company--including that of writers much better-paid than she--in the conduct of alleged anti-Catholic bigotry. Christopher Hitchens has kicked up quite a bit of dust on Slate with a harangue about the John Roberts nomination and the Church of Rome, a piece that encompasses an amusing aside about the Vatican's rescue of Cardinal Bernard Law, the discraced former archbishop of Boston. (A similar rescue was made for Father Paul Marcinkus of Chicago, who was wanted for financial shenanigans in that toddlin' town, so, at the pope's invitation, he secreted himself away in some catacomb off St. Peter's Square.) A very sane young man, James Joyner of Outside the Beltway , has taken up Hitchens' larger argument, engaging in a go-round with Ramesh Ponnuru of the National Review. Click here to read Joyner