Lindsey Graham’s Guide to Goading a Supreme Court Nominee

1)  Be Tactful

The most important thing when it comes to properly goading a Supreme Court Nominee (SCN) is that she can never be able to prove that she is being goaded. This is key. So be subtle. Remember, there are cameras everywhere, so you’ve got to choose your words carefully. You must be condescending without seeming so. I enjoy using phrases like “Did you know what he was talking about?” “Are you familiar with that term?” “We’ll give you a chance to look at some of the things I’m talking about, because I want you be aware of what I’m talking about” and “Does that make sense to you?” as much as possible. With the right tone of voice, and the correct amount of time spent with your cheek resting sympathetically on your fist, these phrases will appear solicitous to the outside observer while convincing your SCN that you think she’s a moron.

If these phrases fail to goad your SCN into betraying her temperamental side, you can crank things up a bit: “Can you tell us a little more about why you decided to wear those pants with that blouse?” “Are you serious?” “Sorry, I zoned out there for a minute; can you repeat that?” or “Comprendes Ingles tu?” (Note: Always use the familiar “tu” form in Judiciary Committee hearings.)

2) Play the Victim

When trying to goad a SCN, especially when that nominee is a woman or displays one of the more minority-like skin tones, do your best to make her understand that her underprivileged status actually puts her in a privileged position that white men could never hope to experience. Ever.

For example, if your SCN is silly enough to have said something like this – “I would hope that a wise Latino woman, with the richness of her experience, would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male.” – you have hit the jackpot. All you have to do is denounce those words as proof that this fiery, temperamental woman is completely ungrateful. Reply with this: “I just hope you’ll appreciate the world in which we live in, that you can say those things … and still have a chance to get on the Supreme Court.” Bingo! Now you’ve got her, this excitable, aggressive, fiery woman who thinks she’s better than you and who doesn’t realize how lucky she is.

3) Forgive your Supreme Court Nominee even when she hasn’t asked for forgiveness

Do this and you will come off looking munificent even while she comes off looking flawed. Plus your religious constituents will respect your Christ-like sense of mercy. For example, if she says something that strikes you as racially insensitive, and you have already made her feel bad for her privileged position as a poor minority woman in America (see step 2), if her response isn’t complete contrition but is rather a cynical left-wing appeal to subjective liberal “contextualization” – “I hope that we’ve come in America to the place where we can look at a statement that could be misunderstood and consider it in the context of the person’s life” – just assume that she means she’s terribly sorry, feels awful about the whole thing, and is desperate for your forgiveness … and then let her off the hook, just like Jesus would. Take a deep breath, look her in the eye, and in your most charitable voice say, “You know what? If that comes of this hearing, that some people deserve a second chance when they misspeak … then we’ve probably done the country some good.”

See that? Not only are you being generous and charitable by forgiving an aggressive, temperamental, hot-blooded woman; your solemn misreading will be regarded forever as an act of high patriotism.

Lindsey Graham, at the pulpit | Charlie Neibergall / AP

4)  Sermonize, sermonize, sermonize

One should never miss a chance to espouse one’s political views in the form of a rhetorical, polarizing, leading question no reasonable person would ever go near, much less try to answer. Not only will this give you the chance to show your constituents just how committed you are to your beliefs; it will also prove the lack of conviction of your SCN and drive her into an irrational, temperamental, aggressive, fiery, Puerto Rican fit of premenstrual womanly rage. For example, try this one: “If a lawyer on the other side filed a brief in support of the idea that abortion is the unnecessary and unlawful taking of an innocent life and public money should never be used for such a heinous purpose, would that disqualify them, in your opinion, from being a judge?” Or this: “Should a judge be approved by the Committee if he or she fails to see that so-called ‘global warming’ is a myth conjured up by Godless anti-creationists bent on secularizing the American political arena and destroying the free-market system?” Or even:  “Do you not agree that a federal judge has no business making any decision that might infringe on my right to own any size gun I want and to shoot that gun in any direction I choose and to wear it in any church or children’s hospital I see fit?” Trust me, she will get nowhere near those questions.

Which will only make you look principled, while making her seem indecisive.

Not to mention temperamental, fiery, aggressive, Latin, loopy, ungrateful, injudicious, cranky, brown, and really really female.