Double-take

Hugh Hewitt writes about the immigration bill:

There are so many problems with this bill that it should not be introduced in the Senate absent a period of open hearings on it and the solicitation of expert opinion from various analysts across the ideological spectrum. Even were it somehow to improbably make its way to the president's desk, if it does so before these problems are aired and confronted, the Congress would be inviting a monumental distrust of the institution. There is simply too much here to say "Trust us," and move on. The jam down of such a far reaching measure, drafted in secret and very difficult for laymen much less lawyers to read, is fundamentally inconsistent with how we govern ourselves.

Open hearings? (But not have Rove & Co. testify on their roles in attorneygate?) Expert opinion from across the ideological spectrum? (But evolution and climate change don't exist.) Don't just "trust us" and move on? (But trust us on Guantanamo detainees, NSA wiretapping, et al) Drafted in secret and difficult to read? (Cheney's Energy Task Force?) Inconsistent with how we govern ourselves? (But the Military Commissions Act and PATRIOT Act are consistent?)

What a tree-hugging, bleeding-heart, wacky moonbat, America-hating liberal. Why can't he just support the troops and the President so that we can protect freedom?