Articles by moronic pundits insisting the Supreme Court wouldn't overturn Roe

Eric Wemple, the Washington Post's media critic, offers a splendid collection of articles in a timely genre: pundits sanctimoniously lecturing readers that the Supreme Court wouldn't overturn Roe.

The very serious thinkers on show include Lisa Blatt, a self described "Liberal Feminist" who supported Roe-deleting justice Brett Kavanaugh, and Kathleen Parker, who smugly told liberals to "Calm down. Roe v. Wade isn't going anywhere" and that "only Clarence Thomas would likely vote to overturn Roe v. Wade." This clueless moron—who now insists the only reason Kavanaugh voted against Roe is because he was offended by anti-abortion protestors—is pantsed mercilessly by Wemple in her own newspaper:

The misfiring pieces are grounded in naivete regarding Republican politics. Then-Sen. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) didn't steal a Supreme Court appointment from Obama — and, later, jam Trump's third appointee onto the bench — just to tweak the idling speed of American jurisprudence. The plan all along has been to overhaul it — fair play be damned. …

In fairness, conservatives often pose themselves as liberals and feminists and moderates and whatnot. It's a starchy form of thinktank culture jamming that journalism's editorial caste thinks is marvelously clever.

Wemple also points out a general problem with logrolling in the press—free self-promotional content from "experts" of no real distinction—and calls for an and to it.

All the same, here's a stark picture of how naive and arrogant the vaguely centrist mainstream of American punditry is—and how completely impossible it is to dislodge, no matter how blatantly, contemptuously wrong it is about everything.