01 July 2012

If This Is at All True...

...then Roberts is worse than I thought. But go ahead and commiserate with the Bush apologists who continue to insist that the unknown Roberts was the perfect choice to sail through confirmation, though unknown, because he was unknown. Trust Bush to nominate a true conservative. A true conservative nominated by a true conservative. Ha!


Fr. Andrew said...

Is it his conservatism or his character at fault? The article all but imputes this thought to Roberts: "I don't want to face the pressure of the media or have the court appear unfavorable in main stream opinion!"

CS Lewis says something about educating "men without chests" doesn't he?

Anonymous said...

Can you be clear and define exactly what you mean by a "true conservative?" There are so many brands out there!

Are you kind that believes that raw capitalism is the perfect economic system? That each man is in it for himself, that we must all be rugged individualists who are in charge of our own plight in life?

Are you one who believes that "market forces" have a way of balancing the system?

One only has to go back to pre-revolutionary Cuba (or Haiti) to see what raw capitalism produces - 17 families of "winners" who owned 93% of Cuba's wealth, while the rest lived in raw poverty. (You know, the 17 family lines that you'd be trying your best to continue giving huge tax breaks to.)

Some of us love America so much we don't want to see it end up like a "have and have not" society that is the breading ground for revolution. Some of us think BOTH the lower and middle class have value and are made up of people with full human dignity.

And then there are "true conservatives." *sigh*


thetimman said...

Boy, you sure nailed me on this one. I don't think the poor and middle class have value or dignity. I tried so hard to hide it, but alas!

X said...

These kinds of decisions are preordained and decided in a manner not open to the public. Kennedy pulled a very similar maneuver back in the early 90s when a spring vote revealed that a majority of the justices were voting to overturn Roe. By the fall somehow Kennedys vote had magically flipped to upholding Roe via some baloney about precedent, earning him the nickname of Flipper. The Supreme Court is nothing more than a trump card for the real leaders.
You need to stop kidding yourself that we live in some kind of constitutional republic and accept that this is a "nation" of blackmail and bribery, lies and brutality. The power elites would not let their fortunes rest with the whim of the masses. Nothing new here, Father Coughlin said it all 80 years ago.

Anonymous said...


I'm too lazy and busy to research it right now, but this would not be the first time that a Chief Justice has caved to political pressure. The New Deal / court-packing plan is the most obvious example, but I also seem to remember some actual case law (Marbury vs. Madison? perhaps the ripeness cases?) where the Court recognized that it's limited power was a real handicap, particularly in the face of a strong executive and public opinion, and for the court to retain it's power, it would sometimes have to bow to political pressure.

Roberts, who is a known as a court historian, is acutely aware of this, perhaps too acutely aware. Time will tell, I suppose, but it is entirely reasonable to conclude that a 'win' on Obamacare would not have helped anything if it spurred legislative efforts to gut the judiciary. While Congress can't realistically change the Constitution (thankfully), it can wreak a lot of very important havoc on the federal judiciary, and this President is clearly not above such mischief. Roberts pretty clearly was fine with losing this battle to protect the Court's power and political capital (the latter, perhaps, to strike down the contraceptive mandate on broad grounds, with should be a no-brainer). I don't know that I agree with his analysis, but I suspect very strongly that this is why Roberts did what he did.

I know you disagree, timman, but I'm not ready to abandon ship just yet, glass half full and all that.


Proud SLPS Parent

Latinmassgirl said...

TIYS, (Totally Ignorant Yellow Socialist)

In 1848, when Karl Marx and and Frederick Engles wrote, "Communist Manifesto," they thought it would be a process that would take centuries to come into full power. Igor Shafarevich reduced the 10 planks of the "Manifesto" to three specific targets:

1. Private Property & Capitalism (Gov. should confiscate and own everything)
2. Christian Religion (Elimination of)
3. The family (destroyed through immorality (sexual revolution) and children brought up by the state)

Americans do not realize how Marx & Engels' "Communist Manifesto" has been seeping into our lives. Of course, Obama-uncare. We have public schools which indoctrinate our children to believe capitalism is evil and they promote class warfare. Religion is not allowed in schools as that is evil as well, and now the family is obsolete, especially fathers.

Do our country a favor and read about Communism. Learn about what you are promoting before you spew out such stupidity against the very cap
italism and freedoms that you take for granted.

Happy Independence Day

Anonymous said...

I am still amazed that the conservative voice didn't rise up in huge protest when the court ruled that a corporation is "a human" and has the first amendment rights afforded to humans. And therefore, billions of unregulated money can pour in to buy elections, proving that America has the best "democracy" that money can buy.
This is the same court, however, that will not rule that a fetus is a human.
So, where was the conservative Catholic backlash?
What? There wasn't one? You mean that the conservatives were so happy that money from billionaires coud help buy them election that they refused to stand on principle here?
Oh. Right. Money trumps it all, doesn't it.

This election year, BY FAR the most sacred thing to leading Republicans is not the right to life - it is simply less taxes for the uber wealthy.

Even Timman is decrying taxes now instead of railing against abortion.


Rick Larsen said...

Proud SLPS parent:
The court-packing plan of Franklin Roosevelt in 1937 was not successful in any way. There was such an outcry from all quarters about it, that the President quietly dropped the plan.
The way that you stated it appeared to imply that it was successful.

Latinmassgirl said...


There you go again. You sound just like a Marx groupie. Our Lady of Fatima told us that Communism would spread its ways if the Holy Father did not consecrate Russia, and he didn't. Obamacare is the biggest first step towards communism. Rich people aren't the problem. They do not make people poor, but create wealth by jobs and spending their money on our products. Your class envy is certainly not Christian.