Christine Flowers: Journalist used disgraceful in tactics against Alito and his wife

I am not a journalist. I have never pretended to be a journalist.

The mere thought that anyone takes me for a journalist makes me wonder if that sound I hear beneath my feet is Walter Cronkite drilling his way to China, with Philadelphia legend John Facenda following close behind, choking on his dust.

I do not even play a journalist on TV. When I make one of my regular appearances on a local political roundtable, they sometimes use the title “Attorney-Journalist” but that’s because they are nice people.

It is not because I have earned it. I do have an old “press” card from the organization that syndicates my column, but I lost it and they won’t send
me a new one.

I suppose it’s a good thing that my bank hasn’t taken the same posture, because I’ve lost my debit card twelve times and they always replace it.

But I digress.

The reason I am not a journalist is because I do not pretend to be unbiased. I do not usually do my own original investigation unless the story has something to do with immigration, an area in which I can confirm my expertise.

Other than that, what you get in these columns is opinion supported by more opinion, and sprinkled with a bit of necessary fact.

Most of the readers who disagree with me have already figured that out, by calling me a hack.

That’s Ms. Hack, Esquire, by the way. My primary job is lawyering. My hobby is opinionating.

This is why I find the so-called “journalism” of Lauren Windsor, the woman who lied her way into an interview with Justice Samuel Alito and his wife and private citizen Martha Ann Alito to be as yellow as my grandmother’s wedding dress before we had it restored.

Windsor, a/k/a Lois Lame, went to an event at the Supreme Court historical society, something which she had every right to do as a dues-paying member. However, she was not there for the crudites and rose.

She ingratiated herself with Justice Alito by pretending to be a Christian conservative who agreed with the Dobbs decision and pretty much everything else that Alito has supported or authored in order to get him to admit that he believed in the importance of faith.

He issued this terroristic threat: “We need to return our country to a place of godliness.”

News flash, Brenda Starr: Most of us believe in the same thing, and none of us want Justice Alito or his colleagues on the bench to turn us into a Christian caliphate.

Of course, if you talk to women who support abortion rights, they think that any restrictions on abortion and the overturning of Roe v. Wade is akin to public stoning and honor killings, but those women and the men who want to date them do not represent the vast majority of Americans.

Then we have the conversation with Martha Ann, which devolved into a very mean girl, catty kind of discussion about one woman’s annoyance
with her neighbors.

Martha Ann reminds me of the women I grew up with: opinionated, funny, snarky and with a take-no-prisoners sense of moral authority. It is no wonder that I have turned into the opinionated, snarky and take-no-prisoners moral absolutist that I seem to be.

But these women were also decent, hardworking, patriotic and extremely loyal human beings who had a great deal of respect for our country and
its traditions, and didn’t like to see those traditions mocked by social activists with progressive agendas.

Martha Ann is being attacked because of her comments regarding the Pride Flag, and her wish to have a Sacred Heart of Jesus flag flying on the front porch.

While I grew up seeing the Sacred Heart of Jesus staring down at me, all bloody and thorns, from my grandmother’s living room wall, and while I do not particularly like that form of interior decorating, I find no problem with Alito’s annoyance at the ubiquitous rainbow, which seems to have supplanted the American flag for so many home dwellers.

But as I wrote in an earlier column, who cares?

She’s the wife of a Supreme Court justice, not the human equivalent of his rib, the Old Testament notwithstanding. I cannot believe the number of ill-intentioned people arguing that she reflects poorly upon him, as if they are literally one and the same person.

Martha Ann Alito had a life before she met her husband, and every feminist out there suggesting that she is simply his proxy with a vagina is a hypocritical disgrace.

And speaking of disgraces, let’s circle back to Lauren.

Even journalists who have clear progressive biases have criticized her actions.

Al Tompkins, a teacher of broadcast journalism at the Poynter Institute had this to say: “The danger comes when she is portrayed as a journalist. She styles herself as a documentarian, but she’s really an activist. And in this case, she is misrepresenting who she is. She is tricking her way into the trust of people she’s talking to.”

The people who don’t like what the Alitos stand for were delighted that they were the victims of a “gotcha,” which is fine.

What is not fine is that they are trying to present what this fraudster has done as actual, legitimate journalism.

Take it from someone who hasn’t lied in any of her columns, about anything: You can be forgiven for your opinions, but you can never be forgiven for tricking other people into giving you their own.

Christine Flowers is an attorney and lifelong Philadelphian. @flowerlady61

This piece was originally published in the Delco Times.

25 thoughts on “Christine Flowers: Journalist used disgraceful in tactics against Alito and his wife”

  1. “but you can never be forgiven for tricking other people into giving you their own.” – Do you feel the same way about James O’Keefe and Project Veritas? Who engaged in identical tactics, selectively edited videos, and attempted to wiretap a Congressional office.

  2. Well, another wife of a corrupt Supreme Court Justice, Ginni Thomas, is a crazed MAGA activist who contacted lawmakers in 2020 to overturn the results of our 2020 election. The fact that corrupt Clarence Thomas is sitting on that court covering for a convicted felon speaks volumes. We do not have a functional, fair, Supreme Court. We have corrupt activists who take over 4 million in bribes (Clarence Thomas). No one should have any respect for this corrupt Supreme Court. Worst in my lifetime.

    1. “I’d vote for the corpse of Joe Biden over Trump BECAUSE of the dangerous, biased, and corrupt far right activists on the Supreme Court.”
      I believe you would… and appreciate your candor. My question is: how many times? Win at all costs, correct? The ends justify the means? What would need to be true for you to agree that your cognitive bias has unbalanced you?

  3. The far right wing political activists on the Supreme Court just handed a win to school and crowd shooters with their bizarre ruling on bump stocks. They want to make it as easy as possible for the mentally ill or evil to use machine guns against innocent people in America. How much is the NRA paying these corrupt political activists? The anger directed at a predominately far right activist court is warranted. Their rulings have been barbarbic and horrific and certainly don’t represent the will of the American people in 2024. I’d vote for the corpse of Joe Biden over Trump BECAUSE of the dangerous, biased, and corrupt far right activists on the Supreme Court.

  4. I don’t care if Donald Trump and Mitch McConnell ever do another thing in life.
    Thank you both for packing the SC with conservatives.
    Far Right for upholding the US Constitution from the lunatic left.

      1. Any one they can. 2A comes to mind immediately.
        I just answered your question.
        Google “biden laws unconstitutional”. Get back to me, and bring out your straw man.

        1. You answered nothing as usual, “google it” is nothing more than a snipe hunt. Democrats are not coming for your guns or anything else. Trump has made it clear he will violate the Constitution; “I will be a dictator on day one” and he will stop any protests against him if he wins. Which is violation of the right to free speech and freedom of assembly.

          1. Upper-case Judah: Hahahahahaha.
            Fed Up actually wrote: 1. “Any one they can. 2A (second amendment) comes to mind immediately. I just answered your question.” and then added 2. “Google ‘biden laws unconstitutional’. Get back to me, and bring out your straw man.”
            Then you responded exactly as FedUp requested with a strawman response and completely misquoted Fed Up. Classic Upper-case Judah!
            The results that popped up for me after googling “biden laws unconstitutional” was an article by the ACLU regarding the Fourth Amendment: every American has the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. They wrote “then-Sen. Biden recognized the unconstitutionality of Section 702 and declared it “unnecessary” to achieving the government’s alleged national security and foreign intelligence goals. These words remain true today, even if his administration now pretends they are not. Whether a tool is convenient for the government does not answer the question as to whether that tool is constitutional. It would of course be easier for the FBI if they never had to secure a warrant for any search. But the purpose of the Fourth Amendment is not to make the government’s job easier or more convenient.”
            Strawman Judah never disappoints! Classic!

  5. As responsible licensed gun owner, You have to be brain dead to think the government is trying to take away our gun rights Feduo. They’re only focus is to keep guns out of the hands of mindless nutwads like you. Now because of irresponsible gun owners such as yourself, I know have to arm myself with even more guns to protect myself and family from paranoid wannabe public shooters like you.

    1. StompUout: Classic ad hominem attack (an attempt to discredit someone’s argument by personally attacking them. Instead of discussing the argument itself, criticism is directed toward the opponent’s character, which is irrelevant to the discussion.) Love your moniker – very scary stuff! And you misspelled “FedUp” and wrote Feduo.
      Remember when President Biden President once again mocked American gun owners, saying they’ll need F-16s to fight back against government tyranny? The president also ridiculed and misquoted a pro-liberty quote by Thomas Jefferson. I guess President Biden missed the debacle in Afghanistan where the mighty U.S. military was chased away with people falling off their airplanes? How does the most heavily armed population in the world conduct an “insurrection” without any of the unlawful and shameful combatants firing a weapon (one of them instead was shot and killed?) Those misguided crumbums attacked police officers and should be punished severely according to the law. If it was an “insurrection” they forgot the part about bringing guns with them. The far-Left narratives do not hold up to reasonable scrutiny.
      If the far-Left wants to change the Second Amendment so badly they can always pass a new amendment. But that would be too hard, so they engage in Lawfare. You are not the only one with guns and I’m glad you have them! The Second Amendment is not for hunting it is for defending yourself against all types of tyrants. Violence in never the answer. Vote.

      1. “2A (second amendment) comes to mind immediately.” What rollbacks have the Democrats against the Second Amendment?

        ““Google ‘biden laws unconstitutional’” I did and still can’t find anything specific Biden has done as President. Perhaps you can provide example.

    2. You have no idea who I am or what I represent. You couldn’t be any more off-base.
      If you don’t think that the left is not all-in on erasing the second amendment, then you are not paying attention, or got kicked in the head by a donkey at an early age.
      Either that, or you’re a fraud liberal posing as a ‘responsible gun owner’ as to minimalize what you know is truth.

      1. What laws have been passed that prevent you from buying guns? In light of SCOTUS overturning Trump’s bump stock ban.

      2. FedUp, I appreciate your clarification but was not bothered about it – but thank you for your concern. You are quite correct about not knowing who people are or what they represent. The reason I point out the different “Judah’s” (upper-case, lower-case, etc.) is because they could all be separate commentators. Or perhaps Connie, StompUOut (such violence – wait, they are just words), and various Judah(s) are all the same commentator using different e-mails. Who knows?

        1. You will say anything to justify that everyone agrees with you. As I have explained before the use of upper and lower case J’s is a typo on my part. As for Connie and StompUOut, I have no idea who they are. But you believe what you want to believe because you always have are conspiracy theory to justify why you are right.

          1. Lower-case ju, Upper-case Dah: You intentionally lie. I would like to meet you.

    3. BTW – that’s Mr. Nutwad to you.
      How was 5th grade this year? Will you be moving on to 6th grade, or will it be a third year in 5th for you next year?

      1. So Chreistine, a Full Disclosure
        You are NOT a REPORTER like the Reporter in the Courtroom who takes an ACCURATE transcription)
        AND To be a Real Journalist you would need to make clear what people said, (you know, (REPORT) AND then make clear Your Opinion of what the impact of the situation is or will be.

        HMMM Seems Confucius addressed this situation a long time ago when he said
        “First Step in Wisdom is Call Things with Same Name”

        So what do we call these people? ADVOCATES?
        PS Christine, You Go Girl !!!!!!

        We need to use the right title so there will be less misunderstanding

Leave a (Respectful) Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *