Michael Shear, the New York Times's "Caucus" reporter, previewed in Monday's paper the expected political reaction to several big Supreme Court's decisions coming down the pike this week, including the biggest of all, Obama-Care, expected Thursday morning. One reaction that was all too predictable: Labeling disparity and a focus on "angry" conservatives (there were no references to liberals).
Aides to Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, are prepared to use the court’s rulings to their advantage, no matter how they turn out.
If the court strikes down the health care law, they will argue that Mr. Obama lost his biggest legacy. If the court upholds it, they will argue that Mr. Romney is the last hope for conservatives seeking to undo the law.
The immigration law, which gives the police in Arizona broad power to detain anyone suspected of being in the country illegally, is trickier for Mr. Romney, who faces the task of increasing his appeal among Latinos while not pushing away Tea Party conservatives.
Even when Shear attempted to be even-handed, the loaded language always related to the right side of the political spectrum. He managed to cram three references to conservative anger into a 36-word paragraph (liberals or left-wingers apparently never get angry, not even when they're getting arrested by the score for violence or vandalism at Occupy Wall Street rallies).
Advocacy organizations have their press releases ready, their surrogates standing by and their outrage primed for both rulings.
Supporters of the health care law are preparing to assail the Supreme Court as political and out of touch if it strikes down the law. They will argue that re-electing Mr. Obama is critical to rein in what they call an out-of-control conservative majority on the court.
Opponents of the law are expecting to offer an outpouring of anger if it is upheld. Tea Party groups, which were born out of the summertime rage over health care in 2009, will stoke that anger.