Actually I have some quite specific evidence having asked Patrick to ping the "list" to a thread on judicial activism. I actually was interested in finding out the "lists" views on the holding. Patrick was none too pleased, a bit arrogant and firing ad hominem from the gitgo.
Having said that, I consider it an honor to be considered arrogant by the the Prince of Arrogance.
The May 21 Lincoln Journal Star piece on the Rosenbergs' son's address to the American Civil Liberties Union annual dinner glosses over the most important fact of the case.
Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were unquestionably spies; the Venona intercepts, Khrushchev's statement that the pair provided "very significant help in accelerating the production of our atomic bomb," and released KGB documents show that Julius was in fact a leading Soviet spy in America who led an espionage ring that transferred nuclear weapons technology to the Soviets.
In this way the Rosenbergs put in jeopardy the lives of every man, woman and child in this country and sustained an evil empire that kept hundreds of millions of people in bondage.
Nonetheless, the ACLU persists in trying to maintain the long-discredited lie that these treasonous agents of a tyrannical foreign power were somehow innocent victims of anti-Communist hysteria.
Why this 50-year love affair with virulent enemies of the United States? Has the ACLU run out of innocent people to defend?
Of course, it's easy to post snide insinuations on FR about atheists, with a cohort of fundy brethren around to provide cover. It's not so easy to confront liberals on their own turf. The Rosenbergs were real Marxists, and real enemies of the United States. Dawkins is a Lib Dem who happens not to like the President. To some of us, that's a meaningful distinction.