Peter Heck is calling out the Left for their they’re redefining words and terms when it suits their political agenda.
The left has long-mastered the Orwellian art of hijacking terms and pretending they mean something entirely different than what they really mean.
- Feticide and infanticide become “choice”
- Moral and ethical discernment become “bigotry”
- Runaway deficit spending becomes “investment”
- Profit becomes “greed”
So precisely no one should have been surprised to see the left continuing that proud tradition in recent days. First came the comical reimagining of the otherwise serious issue of voter suppression.
I’ve been unsympathetic to a lot of past complaints about voter suppression, but this is CLEAR voter suppression and it’s not even close. https://t.co/jyNHGfjRVS
— Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) October 12, 2020
To be clear, voter suppression is the effort to prevent specific groups of people from participating in an election. What you see in this video is a line of people – of all races, ages, sexes, and conditions – standing in line in order to vote.
Particularly given that this video is shot in the South, where voter suppression was at one point a heinously routine practice, the redefining of this practice to mean “having to stand in line” is particularly loathsome.
But if that wren’t bad enough, the imminent ascendance of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court is causing an emotional meltdown of epic proportions on the left. So much so that Democrat leaders have openly threatened to “pack the court” once they attain power. That phrase goes back to the 1930s when a previous Democrat president, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, sought absolute power.
Fear of the economic insecurity of the Great Depression era had caused Congress to become little more than a rubber stamp for FDR’s sweeping New Deal policy proposals. But the Supreme Court doggedly defended the Constitution from the president’s authoritarian designs. They struck him down so frequently, so thoroughly, that FDR initiated a plan to add six new members to the bench, turning his persistent 3-6 defeats into 9-6 victories. It was a naked power play…then, as it is now.
But this time, the statists are shrewdly disguising their attempted abuse of power. To do so, they’ve returned to the tried and true tradition of language manipulation – recasting the entire concept of court-packing to equate it with the constitutional, legal, traditional practice of filling court vacancies as they emerge.
Just try to pretend this isn’t a coordinated narrative:
Can we at least recognize that “Court Packing” at all levels of the judiciary has been the Republican playbook for decades? Asking for Merrick Garland.
— Dan Rather (@DanRather) October 11, 2020
Conservative court packing in one chart. pic.twitter.com/MvnM9S2xgP
— Sam Berger (@SamBerger_DC) October 10, 2020
Tweet one: Packing SCOTUS by adding seats is “not what anyone is proposing.”
Tweet three: If elected Republicans act in alignment with the constitution & overwhelming precedent, we must punish them by adding seats to SCOTUS. pic.twitter.com/FeERRAWcH5
— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) October 11, 2020
Just say you don’t have the guts to vote against Trump, because staying home is a vote for him. If you’re ✌🏾line✌🏾is packing the courts, then you weren’t serious. Because Trump/@senatemajldr have packed the courts with 200 judges and I bet you weren’t this bothered. https://t.co/uElCU8IS2E
— Jemele Hill (@jemelehill) October 11, 2020
For any American paying attention, the message the left sends should be as clear as it is galling: filling vacant Supreme Court seats, if done by Republicans, is always illegitimate under any circumstance. Meanwhile, Democrat violation of constitutional direction, congressional rules, and traditional norms, if punishing Republicans, is utterly legitimate.
In other words, only the left is allowed to win, and they are more than willing to rewrite the dictionary to do so.
You can read Heck’s piece in its entirety here.