WALL STREET JOURNAL
NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE
THE WEEKLY STANDARD
DRUDGE REPORT
THE WASHINGTON POST
SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE
NEW YORK TIMES


*=recently updated





Matthew Hoy currently works as a metro page designer at the San Diego Union-Tribune.

The opinions presented here do not represent those of the Union-Tribune and are solely those of the author.

If you have any opinions or comments, please e-mail the author at: hoystory -at- cox -dot- net.

Dec. 7, 2001
Christian Coalition Challenged
Hoystory interviews al Qaeda
Fisking Fritz
Politicizing Prescription Drugs

RSS FEED
<< current


Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay Learn More













A note on the Amazon ads: I've chosen to display current events titles in the Amazon box. Unfortunately, Amazon appears to promote a disproportionate number of angry-left books. I have no power over it at this time. Rest assured, I'm still a conservative.



Friday, July 08, 2005
Pull the other one: Time magazine once again proves that when the majority of the media describe themselves as "moderate," that's what the general public calls "liberal."

Try this test for yourself before you check out how Time magazine chose to categorize our remaining Supreme Court justices.

Classify each justice as a "Staunch conservative," "Moderate Conservative," "Moderate Liberal" or "Staunch Liberal."

Williiam Rehnquist
Clarence Thomas
Antonin Scalia
Anthony Kennedy
Stephen Breyer
David Souter
Ruth Bader Ginsberg
John Paul Stevens

For those of you who don't want to guess each one, just guess how many current judges are "Staunch Liberals," according to Time.

You can check your answers here.

10:47 PM

Comments:
Where one places others on the political spectrum from left to right depends on where the "placer" is in relationship to the "placee." Therefore, I suspect that anyone to the left of Matt Hoy would be considered a liberal.

It is interesting to note that often we evaluate judges on a few cases and not on the totality of their opinions.
 
I think anonymous above is probably fairly "liberal", although I don't find the term very useful in a general context.

We "conservatives" tend to evaluate justices on how their rulings conform to the meaning and intent of the Constitution. Otherwise, we live under a dictatorship of 9 unelected opinions.
 
Anonymous #2 apparently feels that conservatives have discerned the "meaning and intent" of the Constitution. If its meaning and intent were perfectly clear, and the framers beleived that, then why have a Supreme Court at all? Actually I am a moderate--liberal about some things and conservative about others--I suspect most American's live their lives in a similar way, that is why I can't get too excited about the labels. Wasn't Earl Warren perceived as "Conservative" until the Brown vs. Bd. of Ed. Topeka, Kansas case. Anonymous1
 
I don't really care where you are in the political spectrum, if you look at SCOTUS and see no staunch liberals you are lying to yourself. Of course, we're talking about "Time", so no surprise there...
 
Post a Comment

Powered by Blogger Pro™