Let’s see: She went to a third-tier law school, worked as a lobbyist for the Chamber of Commerce, got a job at the Department of Labor where she argued that women should not be paid the same for comparable work and against the Family Medical Leave Act, then married a Supreme Court justice. She was the person who handled all incoming resumes for the new administration (coincidentally, BushCo hires were famous for placing political theology over competence) – while her husband was deciding the case that selected Bush as president. (She saw no conflict there.)
She’s an anti-cult activist who works for the Heritage Foundation.
Now she’s running a new wingnut group devoted to opposing the “tyranny” of President Obama, which took over a half-million bucks from undisclosed donors.
What possible appearance of bias or conflict could there be?
I’ve said this before: They’re going to have to figure something out to prevent questionable activities by spouses that an elected or appointed official couldn’t do themselves, maybe pay them a salary during their spouse’s term of service. It’s certainly not fair to the spouses who’ve developed their own careers, but sometimes public service calls for real sacrifice.
