York Times ran a lengthy and sarcastic front-page article attacking the
use of broccoli to illustrate why the ObamaCare individual mandate is
unconstitutional. My critique
of that article was just posted at American Thinker. In part, I state:
"Because, in a sense, the broccoli
example is a reductio ad absurdum ridiculing ObamaCare's overreach, the Times
disingenuously attempts to ridicule this legitimate ridicule."
Using typical media bias techniques, the Times attempts to marginalize ObamaCare
opposition as confined to extremists, seeks out a professor to proclaim ex cathedra that broccoli is a “simplistic
metaphor” and “such a bad argument,” implies that justices would be naïve to
strike down the law on the basis of this inapt “defining symbol,” and disputes “that
limiting the commerce clause protects personal freedom,” which it derides as a
mere “notion” in the sense of a foolish idea.
elaborated upon in my article, I conclude:
"[I]f ObamaCare is upheld, there will
be no end to interference in people's lives -- far more than already exists.
There is never any end to the schemes concocted in the fertile minds of petty
martinets who derive their greatest satisfaction in life from bossing other
people around, in the guise of legitimate exercise of government power.
"Despite the Times' attempt to
belittle the broccoli example as a far-fetched 'notion' of right-wing
extremists, broccoli will be just the beginning."
Labels: mediabias, Supreme Court