Can't say this, can't say that, or you're trashed by the state or its thugs — this is America?

The enemies of free speech are on the march -- Part 18; also, Cuban espionage: impose the ultimate penalty

By Wes Vernon

The Stalinists in and out of government are sending the message loud and clear:

You have questions about President Obama's nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court? Shut up or suffer the consequences.

You don't think a live partially-born baby should have his/her brains sucked out? Ve hawf vays of makink you shut up, citizen. Know your place.

Sotomayor

Many Americans are fed up with warnings by the White House and its echo chambers that no matter what facts or issues are involved, we are going to have to be soooooooooooooooooooooooo careful in criticizing Judge Sotomayor as the vetting and confirmation processes go forward.

Teddy Kennedy, whose shameful "Robert Bork's America" speech on the Senate floor in 1987 did no honor to his family name — can demonize a judge who follows the Constitution and the intent of the law. He gets away with that character assassination because the in-the-tank media won't call him on such abuse of senatorial immunity from the laws of libel.

But woe unto anyone who questions Judge Sotomayor's ability to act as a non-racist, impartial jurist, even though she speaks of "life experiences" enabling a "wise Latina" to make better decisions from the bench than a "white male." Racism is racism no matter who practices it or to whom it is applied.

President Obama brushed off concerns about the statement, saying he was certain if Judge Sotomayor were to say it again, she would choose different words. Here's the rub, Mr. President: She did "say it again," at least three times over several years. Those are not the words of an unbiased judge.

Enter Chuck Schumer

Ah! But you see, she is of a minority ethnicity and therefore, any and all criticism or opposition is beyond the pale.

As Senator Chuck Schumer, in one of his habitual lectures to opponents and critics as to how they ought to behave — darkly and with a minimum of subtlety — warned Republicans that they would "oppose her at their peril."

Coming from Schumer, you can take that as a threat. The Dems, after all, control the Justice Department, and being the subject of a Justice Department investigation can be a bit nasty (and Chuck Schumer would know something about that).

After all, the senator reminds us, Judge Sotomayor has such "a compelling life story" — i.e., raised in the Bronx in poverty, but went on to the Ivy Leagues, studied hard, became a judge. Anyone who opposes entrusting this still-resentful woman to one of only nine seats on the highest court in the land is obviously a bigot — or so the White House and its Capitol Hill megaphones of the Schumer variety would have you believe.

Other compelling life stories

The very pinnacle of hypocrisy on the "compelling life story" argument comes from the mouths of Schumer and his fellow Senate liberals. They trust their media soul-mates not to remind you of other judicial nominees with life stories equally if not more compelling.

Counting on short memories, they all but buried what should have been a major scandal a few years ago:

Remember Miguel Estrada? He endured years-long Democrat foot-dragging when President Bush nominated him to a seat on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in 2002. This Hispanic nominee who had immigrated to this country from Honduras was trashed as being "like a Stealth missile — with a nose cone — coming out of the right wing's deepest silo." Those words were uttered by none other than Chuck Schumer. The senator also alleged — based on anonymous sources — that Estrada had lied to the committee. Obviously, the New Yorker should have been soooo careful about criticizing that Hispanic nominee, lest he be deemed a bigot. Actually, he and his fellow Senate liberals were in fact revealed as bigots, you see.

Don't you remember? Senate Judiciary Democrats were careless with their in-house e-mails and those with their left-wing agitprop base. Republican Senate staffers stumbled on them — not because they hacked into the computers, but because the Democrats were stupid enough not to protect their communications against accidental discovery. They showed that in the inner sanctum of Democrat/agitprop plotting, the liberals were terrified of putting Estrada on the Court to Appeals. Why? Because that would put him in line ultimately to be the first Hispanic elevated to the Supreme Court. And the Dems couldn't let the Republicans do that. Cheap politics of the hack W.C. Fields persona wouldn't allow it. Thus the program was to trash this good and brilliant young man.

When the plotting was made public, the Democrats did not defend their own dishonest bigoted plotting. No, the bad guys, you see, were the Republicans for reading the e-mail the Democrats had ineffectively guarded. The Republicans — instead of fighting back — groveled, begged for forgiveness, and threw one of their staffers under the bus. And you wonder why they're called the stupid party?

Senate Democrats also smeared the reputation of a black GOP judicial nominee, Janice Rogers Brown — also with a "compelling story." And who can forget the "high-tech lynching" to which Justice Clarence Thomas was subjected?

But, no. Anyone questioning the judicial temperament or racial comments or weird property rights rulings of Judge Sonia Sotomayor is motivated by pure bigotry. That is the smear charge.

In fact, the first lady has come right out and said it. In a commencement address to math and science students at Howard University, Michelle Obama declared — according to a report in the Washington Examiner — "that those expressing concerns about Sotomayor's views on racial preferences are actually saying minorities aren't suitable for the Supreme Court." So the first lady puts words in your mouth, and you're supposed to accept it like a sappy good sport.

Dr. George Tiller

As the world knows by now, Dr. George Tiller, a Kansas physician who performed late — very late-term abortions — was shot and killed as he attended church services a week ago.

Given that the doctor aborted scores of partially born and near born babies by the use of barbaric methods worthy of Hitler's Germany, Stalin's Russia, and Mao's China, one has to wonder how the man would feel comfortable within the confines of a house of worship. But we'll leave that riddle to sources better qualified than this column.

The point is that Dr. Tiller's murder — apparently by a deranged extremist — came just a few days after a survey reported that for the first time since the issue was polled, a majority of Americans — 51% — consider themselves pro-life.

Political opportunism at work

That recent fact has helped galvanize a panicky pro-abortion movement to pounce on Tiller's murder as a license to smear everyone in the pro-life movement as being somehow complicit in the murder.

Here again we have a case of Stalinism rearing its ugly head to demand that if you're pro-life, you will shut up or be publicly demonized.

Every pro-life group has denounced the murder of Dr. Tiller.

Robert P. George, a leading Catholic voice against abortion, said the murder was "a gravely wicked thing," and added that "violence against abortionists is not the answer to the violence of abortion."

Operation Rescue — the high-decibel anti-abortion group that demonstrated at Tiller's office — issued a statement on the day of the killing, saying: "We denounce vigilantism and the cowardly act that took place this morning."

The Stalinist "shut-up" mantra

The New York Times — which not incidentally is losing readers in droves — led the chorus of finger-pointing at the pro-lifers for Tiller's death, citing the protesters who had organized constitutionally-protected rallies at the doctor's workplace and his home.

Dr. Warren Hern — a close friend of Dr. Tiller and a man who also performed late-term abortions — played a prominent role in the pro-abortion Taliban.

On MSNBC-Obama, he charged the murder was not the act of a single deranged, lone gunman, but the result of "35 years of terrorism, vigilantism," and "outright hate speech and rhetoric which has been exploited by the Republican Party and the radical political right."

On CNN, interviewer Anderson Cooper cautioned against assuming all pro-lifers delighted in Dr. Tiller's death.

"No, that's hypocritical nonsense," Dr. Hern responded. "These people got exactly what they wanted." And that's not hate speech, right?

Double standard

The Tiller murder in Wichita grabbed nationwide headlines, as did the fact that the alleged killer, Scott Roeder, was a professed Christian. Quite a contrast to the media attention given to another shooting two days later.

In this case, the murder victim was a military recruiter in Arkansas, Pvt. William Long. His associate, Pvt. Quinton Ezeagwula, was seriously wounded.

News accounts did not fail to mention Roeder's religious affiliation. By comparison scant mention was made of the religious affiliation (a Muslim convert) or anti-military, anti-American beliefs of Abdulhakim Muhammad, the alleged shooter at the military recruiting center.

A Washington Times survey found, for example, six AP by-lined stories on the Tiller shooting and just one piece on the Arkansas murder. Another report has cited an NPR story that flat-out failed to mention Muhammed's religion or anti-military frame of mind. The shut-up cabal triumphs.

Cuban spies again

So now we learn of a husband and wife team that spied for Fidel Castro's Communist Cuba for 30 years right under the noses of State Department policymakers, and they were not caught until after they retired.

Walter Kendall Myers and his wife Gwendolyn were arrested Friday and put behind bars pending a Wednesday hearing to determine whether they can be released on bail. The government believes them to be flight risks. (No doubt Castro would welcome the Myerses with open arms, especially since their high-level spy work reportedly earned them an hour-long private meeting with the Red dictator himself.)

Authorities say the two were driven to spy for Cuba — not for money — but because they believed in Castro's iron-fist rule and the ideology of Communism. They are alleged to have passed hundreds of sensitive documents to Cuban agents.

In an article he e-mailed to this column, Thomas Van Hare — co-author of Betrayal: Clinton, Castro, and the Cuban Five (see our reviews March 30 and April 6) writes that the Myers' dirty work "no doubt included the transmission of U.S plans and deliberations of policies, strategy and tactics in the War on Terror to Cuba, and from there, the information was no doubt sold to other countries like China, Syria, and North Korea. More devastating is that Cuba...has a long-standing practice of selling to any buyer, including Al-Qaeda itself."

Further, Van Hare believes information procured by the Myers couple "will soon be realized to have cost the lives of American soldiers and agents."

The author notes that espionage is a capital offense, and that justice should be served — not for revenge, but as a message to others.

That has not happened since the Rosenbergs were executed. Many other Communist spies have gotten away with it. At long last, that should come to a screeching halt. Let justice be served.

© Wes Vernon