Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1 Roberts and Intimidation 
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE www.nationalreview.com PRINT

    By Dennis Prager

    July 3, 2012 12:00 A.M. Given how many more Americans define themselves as conservative than as liberal, let alone than as left, how does one explain the success of left-wing policies?

    One answer is the appeal of entitlements and a desire to be taken care of. It takes a strong-willed citizen to vote against receiving free benefits. But an even greater explanation is the saturation of Western society by left-wing hate directed at the Right. The Left’s demonization, personal vilification, and mockery of its opponents have been the most powerful tools in its arsenal for a century.

    Since Stalin labeled Leon Trotsky — the man who was the father of Russian Bolshevism! — a “fascist,” the Left has cast its ideological opponents as evil. And when you control nearly all of the news media and the schools, that labeling works.

    The liberal media even succeeded in blaming the right wing for the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, even though his assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, was a pro-Soviet, pro-Castro Communist. Similarly, just one day after a deranged man, Jared Loughner, attempted to kill Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and murdered six people in the process, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman wrote that it was right-wing hate that had provoked Loughner: “It’s the saturation of our political discourse — and especially our airwaves — with eliminationist rhetoric that lies behind the rising tide of violence. Where’s that toxic rhetoric coming from? Let’s not make a false pretense of balance: it’s coming, overwhelmingly, from the right.”

    Krugman made it all up. But what matters to most of those who speak for the Left is not truth. It is destroying the good name of its opponents. That is the modus operandi of the Left.

    It works.

    Two examples in the last month bear testimony to its efficacy. One was the overwhelmingly likely motivation of Chief Justice John Roberts to declare the Obamacare individual mandate constitutional despite his ruling that, as passed, the mandate was in fact unconstitutional.

    The other was an op-ed column that David Blankenhorn, the prominent conservative advocate for marriage and against same-sex marriage, wrote for the New York Times.

    First Blankenhorn.

    David Blankenhorn has committed his professional life to fighting for the institution of marriage. As recently as 2010, he testified on behalf of California Proposition 8, which, in 2008, amended the California constitution to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman — and which was immediately challenged in the courts, where liberal judges overturned it.

    Blankenhorn was vilified throughout the liberal and gay media (which, in their invective against proponents of retaining the man-woman definition of marriage, are indistinguishable). As Mark Oppenheimer, editor of the “Beliefs” column in the New York Times, wrote: “During the trial [over the constitutionality of Proposition 8] and in the immediate aftermath, Blankenhorn became a national figure; he was . . . the butt of ridicule. . . . And now, he has decided to give up that fight.

    “Blankenhorn would be ridiculed in the New York Times, and he would be . . . [ridiculed] in a play by an Oscar-winning screenwriter, starring a bevy of Hollywood stars.”

    Blankenhorn told Oppenheimer: “I had an old community organizing buddy who wrote a note to me after the trial and said how does it feel to be America’s most famous bigot? I used to think you were a good person. Now I know you’re a bad person. How does it feel to know that your tombstone will read that you’re just a bigot?”

    Two weeks ago, Blankenhorn wrote an op-ed piece for the New York Times in which he announced that he now supports same-sex marriage.

    As for Justice Roberts, he and his conservative colleagues on the Supreme Court have been the targets of media and academia vitriol and personal invective for years, and in some cases decades. But while his conservative colleagues don’t care, Justice Roberts does.

    As reported by CBS News: “Some of the conservatives, such as Justice Clarence Thomas, deliberately avoid news articles on the Court when issues are pending. . . . They’ve explained that they don’t want to be influenced by outside opinion or feel pressure from outlets that are perceived as liberal.

    “But Roberts pays attention to media coverage. As Chief Justice, he is keenly aware of his leadership role on the Court, and he also is sensitive to how the Court is perceived by the public. [“The public” means liberal media and academics.]

    “There were countless news articles in May warning of damage to the Court — and to Roberts’s reputation — if the Court were to strike down the mandate.

    “Some even suggested that if Roberts struck down the mandate, it would prove he had been deceitful during his confirmation hearings, when he explained a philosophy of judicial restraint.”

    David Blankenhorn’s change — he has admitted he is tired of fighting the culture wars, and he has gone from being the object of New York Times derision to being a New York Times hero — and Justice Roberts’s change — New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman wrote a column lauding Roberts for his “statesmanship” — reassure progressives that ridicule, demonization, and character assassination work. With the stakes so high in the forthcoming election, expect it to only increase.

    — Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and columnist. He may be contacted through his website,dennisprager.com.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/blogs/print/304646
    __________________________________________________ _____________

    It explains a lot...
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    PORCUS MAXIMUS Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    42,270
    Roberts is the most cowardly waste of skin to ever be on the court even the liberals of the court do things because of their ideals no matter how misguided they be. Roberts does things based on how people will perceive him and has no business on any court.
    The difference between pigs and people is that when they tell you you're cured it isn't a good thing.
    http://i.imgur.com/FHvkMSE.jpg
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    Quote Originally Posted by Rockntractor View Post
    Roberts is the most cowardly waste of skin to ever be on the court even the liberals of the court do things because of their ideals no matter how misguided they be. Roberts does things based on how people will perceive him and has no business on any court.
    In all fairness, the liberals do the same thing. The difference is, they get lauded for being liberals. Do you really think that Nancy Pelosi is smart enough to understand the things that she does? Or that Harry Reid believes in anything except keeping a death grip on his power? Most leftists don't have a clue about what they are supporting, they just do it out of herd mentality. They're lemmings. Want a great example? Go back to this thread:

    What is the Difference Between Socialism, Marxism, Communism, Progressivism, etc.?


    Wei's response was utter gibberish. If a self-described Marxist college professor can't define what he believes in, then how can his students? That's the problem with the Ivy League today, the campus atmosphere of intolerance yields kids who can regurgitate leftist talking points on cue, but who have no understanding of them, because understanding would require analysis, and analysis would undermine the indoctrination. Here's Wei's attempt at explaining what communism is, and the incoherence of his view of it. It would be funny if it weren't so destructive.

    http://www.conservativeunderground.c...l=1#post343063
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Senior Member Janice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern USA
    Posts
    2,809
    That judges succumb to political blackmail and payola is nothing new, as can be observed by many an infamous case during the past few years. However, that a Justice of the Supreme Court .... the CHIEF Justice of the Supreme Court .... could be counted among them is mind-boggling. I guess we know who the new swing voter is now.
    http://i1220.photobucket.com/albums/dd445/JansGraphix/ConsUndergrd-Sig2.jpg
    Liberalism is just communism sold by the drink.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •