Opinion from Hertzberg: Liddick’s loaded language
July 9, 2013
One does not have to go far into Liddick’s article to find the “confusion of words” he rails against. On the Zimmerman trial, Liddick states: “The physical evidence is not in question: Mr. Zimmerman had wounds consistent with his account, as did Mr. Martin”. But since Mr. Martin is dead, we do not have his account!
Liddick’s hero, Justice Scalia, recently referred disparagingly to a minority’s right to vote as an “entitlement.” Entitlement indeed, paid for with their blood, sweat and tears. The Right always uses that term disparagingly as though such entitlements are inevitably unearned.
But then we have an earlier example. What could be a greater “confusion of words” than for Liddick’s heroes on the Right of the Supreme Court equating “money” with “speech”, and “corporations” with “people” ?
Do we really have to be treated to Liddick’s routine bigotry every Tuesday? The Conservatives are working very hard to transform our liberal society to a dystopic one.
Trending In: Letters to the Editor
- Summit Daily letters: Former DA Mark Hulbert endorses Bruce Carey
- Summit Daily letters: A Democrat rallies for Republican Woodman
- Summit Daily letters: What do federal income taxes pay for?
- Summit Daily letters: Problem-solving courts, a modern approach to justice
- Summit Daily letters: Doctors against Amendment 69