The 'Oprahfication' of America
When asked at the close of the
That question might also be put to the five
Even better than the question of what the court has allowed government to do is what its ruling says about us?
Rugged individualists founded and helped preserve America through many challenges. They believed we should first take care of ourselves and help our neighbors with government intervening only as a last resort. Today we are rapidly becoming a collective in which government penalizes achievement and subsidizes failure, thus producing less of the former and more of the latter. Apparently promoting the "general welfare" has come to mean welfare. Food stamp ads run on the radio. The USDA pays for the ads, which encourage more people to apply for the program.
Among the avalanche of postmortems delivered by "experts" and pundits to the court ruling, one may have gotten closest to answering the question about what was in the mind of Chief Justice
"It's a very odd decision," said Rothstein. "The conservative guy went liberal."
Rothstein further speculated about Roberts' motives when he said that the chief justice's experience with his own health issues and working in big business might have contributed to his decision. Rothstein said Roberts had good health care when he needed it and that "He was probably thinking about the millions of people who are less fortunate than he is."
Rothstein said Roberts needed to land on "the right side of history and morality" and these, too, probably influenced his vote.
Notice in all of this there is nothing about the Constitution. And what's this about morality? Whose morality would that be? Is it a fixed morality, or one based on opinion polls and wanting to land on "the right side of history," whatever that means? Liberal justices regularly decide cases based on such non-constitutional irrelevancies. Why must a conservative?
This is the "Oprahfication" of America in which feelings trump truth and personal experience and class guilt rule, not the Constitution.
This sounds like selective morality by those academics who will write history. Such reasoning is not based on sound legal principles like the Constitution, much less a moral code created by One more "supreme" than the
Rothstein said, "Roberts wanted to show that the
Again, what does this have to do with the Constitution? At future confirmation hearings before the
If the majority on the
Read the latest political news.
- The True Meaning of Patriotism
- Year of the Gaffe
- Oh, I Believe in Yesterday
- Super Pacs -- Who Comes Up with Those Names?
- Sabotaging Montana's Campaign Finance Legacy
- Taxing Mitt Romney's Consistency
- Mitt Romney's Worst Enemy
- Conservatives May Want to Think Twice About Repealing Obama/Romneycare
- Symptoms of a Sick Culture
- Why Women Love John Roberts
- Will Young America Come Alive in 2012?
- Voter Apathy is Not a Crime
- Supreme Court Surprise
- Corporations Score Another Supreme Court Victory on Healthcare
- Chief Justice Roberts' Choice
- Supreme Court Hypocrisies
- Health Care Access Shouldn't Require Good Luck
- Health Care Deja Vu
- Justice Roberts' Ruling Took Guts
- Reading Roberts
- The 'Oprahfication' of America
- The NHS: A guide for Americans under Obamacare
- Live Free -- And Uninsured
- Florida Governor's Tenuous Relationship with the Truth
- Bait and Switch on Obamacare
- Legal Illegal Immigration
- Arizona's Immigration Bind
- Justices Uphold Individual Mandate, Set Limits On Medicaid Expansion
- Court's Dissenters Argue That 'Entire Statute Is Inoperative'
- Health Law Decision A 'Victory For People All Over This Country'
- Justice Roberts Says Law's Offer to States on Medicaid 'Is A Gun to the Head'
- Romney: Health Law Bad Policy, No Matter SCOTUS Decision
- The Tea Party Shtick
- How Wall Street is Trying to Avoid Oversight
The 'Oprahfication' of America | Politics
Copyright © 2012 Tribune Media Services, Inc.