Dean ignores the fact that the president hasn't appointed a single member of the current Court.
And more importantly, the "right-wing" members of the court were the dissenters in the decision in question!
No surprise there, but here's the point of this post: a commenter on the lefty blog Daily Kos, who says, "I'm 100% behind it. Why? Because it resonates, and I'm perfectly willing to go for a false statement that illustrates a truth."
There you have it in a nutshell. The spirit of the statement. Even if it's false, if it "resonates," it's OK to use if it "illustrates" your version of the "truth." Isn't that the claim we heard from Dan Rather and the MSM over the Bush National Guard story? Hey folks, the documents might have been forged, but don't worry about it, we're just "illustrating" the truth. Maybe I should try that next time I'm in confession. I was guilty three times of poorly illustrating the truth. Or maybe that's "mis-illustrating." Makes me sound like a bad artist, doesn't it?
That's what happens when drawing replaces logic as a source for the truth.