Alabama Senator - Stupid, or the Stupidest?

Jeff Sessions writes in today's Washington Post that Americans want Supreme Court justices that will adhere to a strict interpretation of the Constitution rather than, you know, considering actual circumstances and issues that may be completely outside of any worldview even conceivable by the original framers. But notwithstanding any baseless statements in the argument (who are these Americans? Why do we forget the fifty percent that don't agree with you at all? Oh yeah, that's just part of the narrative. Anyhoozle.), let's see what evidence he has:

"Look at President Obama's response to the 5-to-4 ruling in Citizens United. The court found that Congress had violated Americans' constitutional rights by prohibiting all manner of companies, including small businesses and advocacy groups, from engaging in political speech near an election. Far from activism, the decision was grounded firmly in the plain words of the First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech."

Nonetheless, President Obama assailed the court for ruling against this government overreach and said that "powerful interests must not be allowed to drown out the voices of ordinary citizens." But what interest is more powerful than the federal government? And what protection is more vital for ordinary citizens than the protections guaranteed by the Constitution?"

Citizens United. He uses the Citizens United case to prove that Americans want strict constructionist judges. The same Citizens United case that 80% of the country opposes, with 65% "strongly" opposed. How do you go from the most unpopular Supreme Court decision in anyone's memory to "Americans want this type of judge on the Court"? No, really, how do you link those two positions? There are essentially only two options, one being that Sessions really has no evidence for any position taken in the article, and thus decided to throw together various things and hope that no one ever really paid any attention. This is the "let's create our own world without any concept of an outside reality" possibility. But I think the answer lies elsewhere.

I think the answer actually is that Jeff Sessions is possibly mentally challenged. There is no requisite IQ test for senators, nor is there any medical test that demonstrates brain activity. Perhaps he really is just plain stupid. This would explain why for him, "Americans" means "me" and why "80% opposed" means "chocolate pudding". Chocolate pudding is Jeff Sessions. Sessions is pudding. Go forth, Senator Sessions, and spread the news of the pudding revolution. It would certainly make more sense than what you're trying to spread now.