EJ Dionne, a liberal writer from WaPo seems to be taking credit for Roberts flipping on Obamacare. Sounds to me like a bit of a touchdown dance. But here’s what he said on NPR, according to John Podhoretz:
“I think Justice Roberts in this case saw . . . the attacks that [the high court] was facing from lots of people — including me, I should say — were just going to escalate,” Dionne said. This was a problem for Roberts, the pundit surmised, because Dionne & Co. were raising doubts about “the legitimacy of the court, which has already been called into question by decisions from Bush v. Gore through Citizens United.”
This rhetorical assault against the court “was going to escalate further,” Dionne said. “And I think he was trying to avoid that.”
So Dionne threatened to attack and Roberts cowered. If this were prison, what would that make Roberts?
This is like in 3′ O Clock High when Buddy Revell tells Jerry Mitchell:
You and me, we’re gonna have a fight. Today. After school. Three o’clock. In the parking lot. You try and run, I’m gonna track you down. You go to a teacher, it’s only gonna get worse. You sneak home, I’m gonna be under your bed.
Then poor Jerry Mitchell just about soils himself and tries to pay him off and Buddy looks at him in disgust, saying (among other things), “You didn’t even try. How does that feel?”
That’s how Dionne and his liberal cohorts are going to look at Roberts when he’s invited to all the cool cocktail parties. Like Buddy looked at Jerry.
At least in the movie, Jerry Mitchell mans up in the end. But I guess happy endings are for Hollywood.
July 3, 2012 at 11:01 pm
I said it before elsewhere, after thinking about it, that the joint dissent essentially ignoring Roberts, treating him like a non-entity, reminded me of Michael's reaction to Fredo —
First, "I know it was you . . . you broke my heart." I think one reason that the joint dissent doesn't engage Roberts at all is because of how profoundly disappointed and heartbroken they are.
But then, there is also a little of this in their ignoring him, "you're nothing to me now. You're not a brother, you're not a friend. I don't want to know you or what you do. I don't want to see you at the hotels, I don't want you near my house. When you see our mother, I want to know a day in advance, so I won't be there. You understand?"
July 4, 2012 at 1:36 am
Bender, you are on to something here. I like the Michael/Fredo analogy. Trouble is, we can't have Roberts exiled to Vegas, snorting coke and handling whores with the rest of the Libs.
While the dissent refuses to address Roberts or his opinion by name (while explicitly addressing Ginsburg's argument) it nonetheless heaps scorn on Roberts's gyrations and findings throughout page after page after page.
The Chief will rue his findings if he does not already do so. It is purported that he ruled his way to protect the Court from scorn. Fool's errand, that.
The scorn from the right is not only deafening, it is right and just. The thing you hit on, Bender is that thought the scorn from the right is deafening,it is but silence as compared to the scorn from his colleagues on the Court.
Roberts has fashion his own isolation. Let us pray he can return to both righteousness and justice.
July 4, 2012 at 1:39 am
I guess this makes EJ Dionne a bully and a donkey at the same time.
July 4, 2012 at 4:29 am
Because of this ruling, Roberts should resign. This disastrous ruling by him has destroyed his judgeship. He cannot rectify what he did here.