This was recently posted on Free Republic Illinois site, regardin Judge Gorsuch. A Red Flag warning (oh, oh):
“New Message on Illinois
2/2/2017, 12:54:23 PM
Washington National Cathedral was established well over a century ago when Anglicanism was the major Christian denomination of a lot of prominent political leaders in the United States. Today it’s one of the fastest declining Christian denominations and a shell of what it used to be the United States. There are a handful of pro-life conservatives still in the Episcopalian Church USA, but they’re very rare. Most of their conservative members have left as the church became increasingly liberal over the years.
It’s true that most American Presidents have attended services at Washington National Cathedral, it’s also true that there’s a sculpture of Muhammad on the Supreme Court building in Washington D.C. Those facts would not justify a Supreme Court nominee being a member of a radical mosque in Dearborn, MI that preaches Sharia law, and it does not justify a “conservative” Supreme Court nominee being a member of a leftist church in Boulder, CO with a female “priest” that marches with women dressed as vaginas and has a “partnership” at the church to promote “LGBTQ rights”.
Is it possible that Judge Gorsuch is really a Scalia-type conservative and does not share the views of the liberal church he’s worshipped at for years? Yes, it’s possible. It’s also possible Barack Obama is actually proud of this country does not share the “God Damn America” views of Rev. Wright despite attending that church for years. But if I was a betting man I wouldn’t put my money on either possibility.
Simply put: Episcopalians today tend to be very liberal. Being an Episcopalian by itself is not necessarily a sign that someone holds left-wing views. But attending a liberal church for years is definitely a bad sign and makes it unlikely that Gorsuch will be the second coming of Scalia.
I’m not even claiming this guy is a stealth liberal, simply that his views appear to be far closer to Sandra Day O’Connor than Clarence Thomas.
If FReepers want to take the risk of giving this guy a lifetime job appointment to Scalia’s seat because there’s a slim possibility he MIGHT secretly share Scalia’s beliefs, that’s your business.
I will be urging the Senate to oppose this nominee.”
I'll wait to see what happens.
On the surface it seems like a lot of conjecture and the report is filtered through your state site rather than the big board because it would have been pounced upon immediately as fake news ....
And the one thing fake news can't afford is to be exposed before it has a chance to at least utter a word.
Fake news is all about words that mislead and confuse.