Flame throwing—and often bomb throwing—Cleveland Indians closer, Chris Perez, had a mind-dump session with the New York Times today, lambasting Cleveland fans for not supporting the Indians to his satisfaction, for "blindly" supporting the Browns, and for hating on poor LeBron James:
“I don’t get the psyche,” said Perez, who grew up in Florida. “Why cheer against a guy that’s not even in your city anymore? Just to see him fail? Does that make you feel good? I could see if the Cavs were in the championship, but that’s their mentality."
Perez, the Indians' $4.5 million Bubble Boy, can't imagine why the energy of every citizen of Northeast Ohio is not focused on him and the Indians' 3-game skid and the drubbing the Yankees heaped upon them last night. He can't imagine that we can simultaneously hate LeBron and love the Browns. That we can be furious at Art Model for absconding with our team and at the same time laugh because we know he only took a bunch of players who are now retired. The Browns are still in Cleveland. Cleveland radio loudmouth Mike Trivisano made a point that Perez needs to understand: we're all just Cleveland sports fans. Period. Trying to pit us against each other isn't going to win him many fans around here because we are all on the same team - Team Cleveland.
And, for what it's worth, most of us still love the Indians, but because of the crappy economy, we can't afford to fill a 43K stadium for 70+ homes games a year.
Just like Chris Perez, the Left is constantly—CONSTANTLY—accusing conservatives of the same breaches of team spirit. We're told we blindly follow the Republican party and we hate President Obama so much that we're willing to take the country down in order to defeat him.
The constitutionalist members of the Supreme Court have faced the same accusations of partisanship. Bill Clinton told MSNBC that the oral arguments on Obamacare in the Supreme Court were "unusually politicized" and "it was an unusually politicized discussion."
And of course, President Obama famously warned the Supreme Court that defying him on the issue of Obamacare would be akin to a Constitutional crisis:
“I’d just remind conservative commentators that for years what we’ve heard is the biggest problem on the bench is judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint — that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law. Well, here’s a good example. And I’m pretty confident that this court will recognize that, and not take that step.”
E.J. Dionne, Jr., writing about "Judicial Activists in the Supreme Court" says that if Obamacare is struck down:
"[A] court that gave us Bush v. Gore and Citizens United will prove conclusively that it sees no limits on its power, no need to defer to those elected to make our laws. A Supreme Court that is supposed to give us justice will instead deliver ideology."
WaPo's Greg Sargent went a step further, saying nothing less than the Obama presidency is at stake because of the partisan justices:
"...the law's proponents were badly caught off guard by the depth of the conservative bloc’s apparent hostility towards the law and its willingness to embrace the hard right’s arguments against its constitutionality. They didn’t anticipate that this could shape up as an ideological death struggle over the heart and soul of the Obama presidency..."
Do you see how this works? We can't love the Browns AND hate LeBron. We can't love the rule of law AND hate Obamacare. In the liberal playbook, it's one or the other. To the Left, if the SCOTUS rules that Obamacare is unconstitutional, it's not because the law is unconstitutional; it's because the court is stacked with racist partisans who want to see Obama fail because they're blindly loyal to the Republican party. They're not being team players.
Assuming that the Supreme Court will strike down all or part of Obamacare on Thursday, the play the Left planned to run, continuously until election day, was the Partisan SCOTUS-3...P-SCOTUS-3...(#1 Bush v. Gore, #2 Citizens United, #3 PPACA). But suddenly, our best player, Chief Justice Roberts, defected to the opponents' team. And now, the SCOTUS has (inadvertently) run a trick play for the Red team.
Though Monday's decision was a giant turd sandwich for the country and especially the citizens of Arizona, there is one bright spot: the Left can no longer legitimately claim that the Supreme Court is partisan and politicized and in the tank for the Republican party. Oh, they certainly will continue to say that, but Monday's decision gives us a recent example of how constitutionalist justices are willing to be led by more than blind loyalty to their team.
David Frum, writing in the Daily Beast, admits as much:
"One footnote: can we end the silly practice of categorizing every event in public life as either a "win" or "loss" for the president of the moment?
This media practice reminds me of the sad case of Major Major Major in Catch-22, who described every event in his environment as either a "feather in my cap" or a "black eye for me." A sensible outcome in the Arizona case is a win for everybody—and that's what we seem to have here."
Let's hope Mitt Romney noticed and clearly explains the relevance of the Arizona decision when the judicial partisanship accusations begin to fly on Thursday, as they surely will if /when Obamacare is overturned. His message should be that we're all on the same team - Team USA. David Frum said so.