We Need Answers About Coleman's Ascent

Nick Coleman grunts out some questions the Judiciary Committee should ask about Minnesota's U.S. attorney, Rachel Paulose:

Did Sen. Norm Coleman sponsor Paulose's appointment?

Did Paulose's religious faith make her a prime candidate for appointment?

Do U.S. attorneys need to believe in intelligent design?

What importance was played by Paulose's membership in the Federalist Society, a group of archconservative lawyers?

Was her appointment intended to ensure that a Bush loyalist would hold the highest law office in an important state? Was it part of a strategy to suppress voter turnout?

I think paranoid McCarthyite just about sums up Coleman these days. What does Paulose's religion or membership in the Federalist Society have to do with anything? I understood this to be a free country.

In keeping with the theme, Scott Johnson has some questions of his own:

Does anyone at the Star Tribune with supervisory authority over him read Coleman's columns before publication? Or does he have some kind of sweetheart deal with the paper?

Do Coleman's DFL bloodlines have any bearing on his thuggishness and ignorance?

Does recitation of the words "Federalist Society" and "voter suppression" suspend the need for rational thought in a column ostensibly devoted to weighty public issues?

Is the regular publication of a column featuring the fulminations and ravings of a Democratic shill part of a strategy to pump up DFL turnout?

Coleman is an observer of the age old tradition of turning self-promotional press releases into columns. I wonder who dumped this latest idea in his inbox.