So what's new?
The Liberal Legal Bubble
Liberals can't even imagine the opposition's arguments to ObamaCare's individual mandate.
by Peter Suderman March 30, 2012
http://reason.com/archives/2012/03/30/the-liberal-legal-bubble
Ever since ObamaCare was shoved down our throats by a totally partisan vote in Congress and a President who cares nothing for our Constitution let alone our country, it has not gained any support from the public no matter how hard Obumbler spews it as his "signature achievement".
When last I looked 56% of the folks favored it's repeal while 39% want it to stand.
Not looking good in popularity after two years and the more we find out what is in this 2,700 page monstrosity the more people realize that it has little to do with healthcare and everything to do with changing the relationship between the government and the people.
Even Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia humorously invoked the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution, which forbids cruel and unusual punishments, when discussing the Obamacare legislation during oral argument the other day at the thought of having to read all 2.700 pages.
Excerpt:
"From the beginning, ObamaCare's backers presumed that the nation's legal institutions would be on their side - and wouldn't require much effort to convince. Going into this week's Supreme Court arguments over the fate of the 2010 health care overhaul, liberal analysts were supremely confident. Since the law's passage, they'd been predicting that the law would pass constitutional muster with ease."
Their FIRST MISTAKE. Their SECOND MISTAKE is always believing their are right and their agenda is the only path.
Excerpt:
"What can explain liberals' widespread failure to anticipate the Court's wariness of the mandate? Research conducted by University of Virginia psychologist Jonathan Haidt suggests one possible answer: Liberals just aren't as good as conservatives and libertarians at understanding how their opponents think. Haidt helped conduct research that asked respondents to fill out questionnaires about political narratives - first responding based on their own beliefs, but then responding as if trying to mimic the beliefs of their political opponents. "The results" he writes in the May issue of Reason, "were clear and consistent." Moderates and conservatives were most able to think like their liberal opponents. "Liberals," he reports, "were the least accurate, especially those who describe themselves a "very liberal.'"
So progressive's either through arrogance or their own stupidity or both are incapable of a wide view of reality instead focusing on their narrow partisan beliefs, but they still think they are smarter than everyone else.
This fact is not surprising in the least if you tried to have a discussion with a progressive lately!
Progressive's overwhelming stance as ideologs like Obumbler's - to use an old adage "cannot see the forest for the trees".
This is the same reason they lost big in the "shellacking" they took in 2010 - shocked that the American public rejected their agenda realizing the threat progressivism holds to our Republic.
Their reaction has been excuses, rationalizations, denial, and more, anything thing except the reality that occurred.
As they step up their attacks, slander, lies, distortions, and hate speech against conservative principals and republicans it is easy to predict that if the Supreme Court rules against ObamaCare they will howl that this decision is purely political, the extreme Tea Parties, the extreme right wingers, and every other rational they can think of all accept the truth that ObamaCare is government OVERREACH.
Excerpt:
"Liberals on the other hand, have a different theory. The Court is just a bunch of partisan hacks who've bought into the most extreme ideas of the Republican base. Lithwick has argued that despite the law's self-evident constitutionality, the decision has "everything to do with optics. politics, and public opinion." Harvard law professor and former Solicitor General Charles Fried, who signed an amicus brief arguing in favor of the law huffed that "the whole thing is just a canard that's been invented by the tea party and (anti-mandate legal architect) Randy Barnetts of the world, and I was astonished to hear it coming out of the mouths of the people on the bench."
"The liberal position on the Court seems to be that as long as it accepts their arguments, it's an independent legal arbiter. But whenever it doesn't, it's a partisan political enforcer. The New Republic's Jonathan Cohn makes this explicit, arguing that it isn't just the health law that's on trial but the "legitimacy of the Supreme Court."
Excerpt:
"From the beginning, ObamaCare's backers presumed that the nation's legal institutions would be on their side - and wouldn't require much effort to convince. Going into this week's Supreme Court arguments over the fate of the 2010 health care overhaul, liberal analysts were supremely confident. Since the law's passage, they'd been predicting that the law would pass constitutional muster with ease."
Their FIRST MISTAKE. Their SECOND MISTAKE is always believing their are right and their agenda is the only path.
Excerpt:
"What can explain liberals' widespread failure to anticipate the Court's wariness of the mandate? Research conducted by University of Virginia psychologist Jonathan Haidt suggests one possible answer: Liberals just aren't as good as conservatives and libertarians at understanding how their opponents think. Haidt helped conduct research that asked respondents to fill out questionnaires about political narratives - first responding based on their own beliefs, but then responding as if trying to mimic the beliefs of their political opponents. "The results" he writes in the May issue of Reason, "were clear and consistent." Moderates and conservatives were most able to think like their liberal opponents. "Liberals," he reports, "were the least accurate, especially those who describe themselves a "very liberal.'"
So progressive's either through arrogance or their own stupidity or both are incapable of a wide view of reality instead focusing on their narrow partisan beliefs, but they still think they are smarter than everyone else.
This fact is not surprising in the least if you tried to have a discussion with a progressive lately!
Progressive's overwhelming stance as ideologs like Obumbler's - to use an old adage "cannot see the forest for the trees".
This is the same reason they lost big in the "shellacking" they took in 2010 - shocked that the American public rejected their agenda realizing the threat progressivism holds to our Republic.
Their reaction has been excuses, rationalizations, denial, and more, anything thing except the reality that occurred.
As they step up their attacks, slander, lies, distortions, and hate speech against conservative principals and republicans it is easy to predict that if the Supreme Court rules against ObamaCare they will howl that this decision is purely political, the extreme Tea Parties, the extreme right wingers, and every other rational they can think of all accept the truth that ObamaCare is government OVERREACH.
Excerpt:
"Liberals on the other hand, have a different theory. The Court is just a bunch of partisan hacks who've bought into the most extreme ideas of the Republican base. Lithwick has argued that despite the law's self-evident constitutionality, the decision has "everything to do with optics. politics, and public opinion." Harvard law professor and former Solicitor General Charles Fried, who signed an amicus brief arguing in favor of the law huffed that "the whole thing is just a canard that's been invented by the tea party and (anti-mandate legal architect) Randy Barnetts of the world, and I was astonished to hear it coming out of the mouths of the people on the bench."
"The liberal position on the Court seems to be that as long as it accepts their arguments, it's an independent legal arbiter. But whenever it doesn't, it's a partisan political enforcer. The New Republic's Jonathan Cohn makes this explicit, arguing that it isn't just the health law that's on trial but the "legitimacy of the Supreme Court."
Make no mistake if the law is struck down and common sense and Constitutional values prevail there will be a HUGE backlash and this will become a political football for DemoRats in the up coming election.
We must stop the progressive machine in November.
VOTE - tell your friends and families to VOTE.
We must defeat Obumbler and his minions.
1 comment:
GREAT POST!
They cannot defend what is indefensible and that is, the lies and fallacies that is Liberalism.
Post a Comment