Ensign: Tenthers Who ‘Hold The Constitution Pretty High In Their Lives’ Should Be Able To Ignore Health Mandate
Ensign: Tenthers Who ‘Hold The Constitution Pretty High In Their Lives’ Should Be Able To Ignore Health Mandate
UPDATE: The video is now working.
A popular right-wing objection to federal health care legislation is that it’s unconstitutional. These “tenthers” argue that since the U.S. Constitution never explicitly gives the federal government the right to regulate health care, the 10th amendment leaves that power to the states. Texas tenthers have held pro-secession rallies, and officials in various states have raised the possibility of legislation to exempt their residents from federal health care.
Yesterday in the Senate Finance Committee markup, Sen. John Ensign (R-NV) took these concerns to the next level by saying that people who “hold the Constitution pretty high in their lives” should be able to opt-out of being required to purchase health care insurance, making it similar to a religious objection:
ENSIGN: We’ve allowed exceptions for religious and various other reasons. But some people hold the Constitution pretty high in their lives, and if they believe that this thing is unconstitutional, and they then say, “I choose not to have health insurance, I’m not going to buy it,” we could be subjecting those very people who conscientiously — because they believe in the U.S. Constitution — we could be subjecting them to fines or the interpretation of a judge, potentially, all the way up to imprisonment. That seems to me to be a problem.
Ensign also predicted that some people would actually drop their health insurance “just out of conscience” in order to make a point and show solidarity with the tenthers. Watch it:
Basically, Ensign believes that anyone who claims any law is unconstitutional should be allowed to ignore that law. While Congress has allowed “exceptions for religious and various other reasons,” in the 1990 case Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, Justice Antonin Scalia actually warned that allowing a person “to become a law unto himself” defies “common sense”:
The government’s ability to enforce generally applicable prohibitions of socially harmful conduct, like its ability to carry out other aspects of public policy, “cannot depend on measuring the effects of a governmental action on a religious objector’s spiritual development.” To make an individual’s obligation to obey such a law contingent upon the law’s coincidence with his religious beliefs, except where the State’s interest is “compelling” — permitting him, by virtue of his beliefs, “to become a law unto himself,” contradicts both constitutional tradition and common sense.
Transcript:
ENSIGN: Let me ask, if someone — The reason I’m going down this line of questioning is we have heard from a lot of people — and I bet your office has, most of our offices have as well. Sen. Hatch mentioned this, that a lot of people do not believe that this is constitutional. That this is not in the enumerated powers of the U.S. government to mandate the purchase of health insurance or penalize somebody.
We’ve allowed exceptions for religious and various other reasons. But some people hold the Constitution pretty high in their lives, and if they believe that this thing is unconstitutional, and they then say, “I choose not to have health insurance, I’m not going to buy it,” we could be subjecting those very people who conscientiously — because they believe in the U.S. Constitution — we could be subjecting them to fines or the interpretation of a judge, potentially, all the way up to imprisonment. That seems to me to be a problem.
I understand the idea of this shared responsibility and the insurance companies want — they want everybody to have this mandate. That’s how they can get rid of pre-existing conditions. I understand all of that. But there are a lot of Americans who hold that Constitution of the United States very dearly, and if you look at the enumerated powers, I have trouble understanding how we’re mandating the purchase of health insurance, other than the broad interpretation of the general welfare clause, which, by the way, Madison — who wrote the Constitution — certainly, according to the Federalist Papers No. 10, certainly did not envision that. As a matter of fact, he was a huge critic of the general expansion of the general welfare clause.
So I would think that we should take this thing very very seriously and consider what we are doing to the American people who are going to be protesting. Some people may even do this just out of conscience, drop their health insurance, and then want to take this thing on. Because there is an outrage amongst the American people over this.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
***
“they should also be able
to their marriage vows.”
..
September 25th, 2009 at 10:03 am***
s/b
“they should also be able
to ignore their marriage vows.”
**
September 25th, 2009 at 10:04 amHosed his friend’s wife. Had his parents pay them off.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:05 am“common sense”
Right there is the first problem.
Ensign is appealing to that lack of common sense, at best, and, at worst, has none himself.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:06 amthen by the same logic (maybe, i think, seems to me…)
i should be able to prevent MY tax and premium dollars from
being used to treat those idjits EVER.
i am so sick of stoopid hypocrites… hate ‘em all…
yes, HATE.
i am completely out of straws…
September 25th, 2009 at 10:09 amAnd people are not holding the Constitution “high in their lives”! They are holding their selfish, self-centered, ignorant interpretation “high in their lives”. Just like Ensign held his marriage vows, apparently.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:10 amI thought Ensign was Nevada’s senator not Arizona’s.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:10 amThe republicans rant that Obama is *shredding the Constitution*. What the hell do they think THEY are doing to it? It’s the jerks like Ensign who keep the nutters pushing for what they think is valid.
We can only hope and pray that the Obama’s agenda is successful and that the next elections give us even more Democrats in Congress.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:11 amWhat a fu(king idiot.
First of all, anyone who claims that they “hold the Constitution pretty high in their lives” is a lying teabagger simply looking for a flimsy excuse to hate on the President or else they’re a frickin’ weirdo.
No one with any kind of life holds a political document sacred like they might hold the Bible.
Second, individual citizens don’t get to conform their behavior to their personal beliefs about the US Constitution.
We have an elaborate and expensive federal court system, one branch of which is set up specifically to decide questions of interpretation of the Constitution.
What about that does Senator Ensign not understand?
September 25th, 2009 at 10:12 amWell, since the Constitution does not specifically prohibit transporting women across state lines for immoral purposes, I guess I can just ignore the Mann Act!
Woo Hoo!
September 25th, 2009 at 10:12 amI’d say, “Fine but understand, that if you need health care and can’t afford it, you don’t get it. The state will pay for your children’s needs if it becomes medically necessary, then charge you with negligence.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:13 amYou know, by Ensign’s logic…Tenthers should be able to ignore the 13th amendment and keep a couple dozen slaves. Suppose someone believes that the amendment prohibiting slavery is an unjust action against one’s freedom to own slaves. They should, then, feel free to enslave someone.
It sickens me that the people who so ardently support the 10th amendment to rail against any government intervention claim to be acting in the spirit of the Founding Fathers. Then again, these are the same people who believe in Biblical inerrancy and claim to be acting in the spirit of Jesus.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:13 amDammit, PLC! That’s what I was trying to say.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:13 amforgot the closing quotation mark
September 25th, 2009 at 10:14 amAhh 1st hes from NV not AZ
2nd he is a doomass who really has no right to speak for any one about the Constitution.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:15 am7.
Besides the flagrant adultery, this schmuck is virtually interchangable with Jon Kyl. It’s a common mistake, I guess. Still…c’mon TP. Stay on the ball.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:15 amarbereshe says:
I thought Ensign was Nevada’s senator not Arizona’s.
– - Actually, it’s Sen. John Ensign (R-eprobate)
September 25th, 2009 at 10:15 amPrivate Video
September 25th, 2009 at 10:15 amanyway to unblock this for viewing?
more indications that they know they are losing. That’s all this is.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:16 amAnd who refuses to buy health insurance as a matter of principle?
I can see not purchasing it because you can’t afford it, or because it doesn’t cover anything except unlikely worst-case scenarios, but because it conflicts with your interpretation of the Constitution?
Can’t these Republicans come up with any decent arguments?
September 25th, 2009 at 10:16 amThink it’s unconstitutional??? Test it in the Supreme Court! That’s what the court is for.
Tenthers who skip right to revolution or secession and ignore the Court’s role show off their profound ignorance of the Constitution. That a SENATOR would display the same ignorance is truly appalling.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:16 amThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
gag order
bill clinton, that’s all you got? You really going back to Bill Clinton again?
Bill Clinton? Really? That’s really funny.
Bill Clinton.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:19 amI believe I can clear this up.
There’s the Constitution, known to historians and legal scholars.
Then there’s the Winger Constitution, known to Southern White Males. This Constitution allows white guys to do whatever they want. More at Winger Bible.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:20 amIf some hypothetical young muckraking film-makers had marched into an ACORN office and entrapped some lowly staffer into giving the very same answer that NumbNuts Ensign gave, there would be hell to pay!
September 25th, 2009 at 10:20 amOh lordy.
Got flaming, blatant, unrepentent STUPIDITY???
And that same goes for any benighted moron who fights for his right to NOT have health insurance because it’s unconstitutional….
September 25th, 2009 at 10:22 amgag order says:
Bill Clinton? Blow jobs in the oval office? Marriage vows?
September 25th, 2009 at 10:17 am
____________
Hey, while you’re digging up ancient history, why not mention JFK and Marilyn Monroe?
Or how about Ben Franklin getting syphilis from a French hooker?
It’s TOTALLY RELEVANT to a discussion about health care, right?
September 25th, 2009 at 10:23 amgag order says:
Marriage vows mean nothing to you? The other poster seemed to think they did. Not you? Democrats get a pass?
September 25th, 2009 at 10:22 am
______________
Bill Clinton’s marriage vows mean nothing to me. I’m not him. And he’s completely irrelevant to this thread. Do try to pay attention.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:24 am***
#23,
the rules are different for ensign.
he’s a “tenther”.
**
and mommy and daddy
paid the girl off.
;\
wanna try again?
:)
September 25th, 2009 at 10:26 amBut some people hold the Constitution pretty high in their lives…
Doesn’t matter if they haven’t read it and don’t understand it.
I agree with Ensign that we should establish a single-payer health care system in order to avoid any such mandate.
.
Peter C says:
Think it’s unconstitutional??? Test it in the Supreme Court! That’s what the court is for.
Although the Supreme Court is established by the Constitution to settle questions regarding the interpretation of the Constitution, Tenthers believe that their rulings should be overthrown by public pressure… which of course, would be unconstitutional.
.
gag order says:
Bill Clinton? Blow jobs in the oval office? Marriage vows?
Warren G. Harding? Teapot Dome scandal? Giving national parks to oil companies?
September 25th, 2009 at 10:26 amPerry logan says:
Then there’s the Winger Constitution, known to Southern White Males. This Constitution allows white guys to do whatever they want. More at Winger Bible.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:20 am
___________
Sorry, I had to.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:26 am***
#32,
stop drinking and
put on your glasses.
:0
September 25th, 2009 at 10:27 amShow me someone who likes to bash Bill Clinton and I’ll show you a degenerate.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:27 amThen we, as citizens who pay for their non-coverage should be able to:
1. Allow treatment in the ER, if they are injured, or get sick, but as a condition to claiming their states rights–they must sign away their “right” to file bankruptcy due to medical bills.
2.Demand and mandate that they sign away their rights to the socialized programs of Medicaid and Medicare, SSD, and SSDI, welfare, foodstamps, or any calm to social services. This will apply even if they are disabled for life.
They are so sure it will never happen to them, or they have the money fine. As Eric Cantor says–find a charity because no “govenment” program will be available to them. Congress can simply add this to the plan–no problem.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:27 amEnsign is a sleazy adulterer who lied to his wife, to his constituents, to his fellow Senators and to the nation.
He continues to lie right now.
Screw the repiggies, screw the tenthers and screw the teabagger trash.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:28 am***
#34,
if he doesn’t practice “abstinence” he’ll get the clap.
that’s a health care issue.
:)
September 25th, 2009 at 10:30 amgag order says:
Hosed his friend’s wife. Had his parents pay them off.
What does this have to do w/healthcare, chiroptera toasterhead?
September 25th, 2009 at 10:26 am
__________
Nothing. But it is relevant to a thread about Sen. John Ensign (R-NV), as it describes the actions of Sen. John Ensign (R-NV), who is the person who this thread is about.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:30 amgag order you lost when you played the Bill Clinton card.
it reeks of desperation.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:30 amEvery day I read about something that just boggles the sane mind. This morning I got to thinking, what’s in it for these guys like Ensign, Cantor and Bachmann? Radio and TV hosts like Limbaugh and Beck I can understand, it is a paycheck, but politicians? What motivates them to encourage the crazies?
Do they honestly believe in what they are saying OR is there other reasons for this nonsense? would be interesting to look deeply into the lives of these people. Maybe there is a common thread for insanity.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:31 amElections have consquences Mr. Ensign. Now STFU until which time your Party regains power. In other words, the balance of your political career should be comprised of sitting down and shutting the fu(k up.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:31 am***
#41,
yes you could if you didn’t
always have a headache.
:)
September 25th, 2009 at 10:32 amgag order says:
Couldn’t agree more.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:29 am
__________
When did Bill Clinton serve in the Senate?
September 25th, 2009 at 10:33 am***
twajie,
“gag order”?
*
is that the best you could do?
“:)
September 25th, 2009 at 10:34 amGee… who would could have predicted that a wingnut troll would look at an article describing a nuanced diplomatic strategy and reduce it to a simple-minded war-mongering song parody?
September 25th, 2009 at 10:34 amHey, does this Tenther stuff about ignoring laws apply to marijuana prohibition too? It might get a bit more popular if it did.
.
gag order says:
Clinton is a sleazy adulterer who lied to his wife, to his constituents, to his fellow Senators and to the nation.
Couldn’t agree more.
Tell you what, let’s have both of them retire from political office…
September 25th, 2009 at 10:34 amIt’s kind of nostalgic to see a lame troll throw out the “But CLINTON!” lure.
It’s like watching a not-particularly talented contestant on American Idol belt out “Billy Don’t Be a Hero“.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:37 am***
#52,
twajie,
dude you’re going to have to work harder
if you want to keep your job.
**
try again.
:|
September 25th, 2009 at 10:37 amgag order says:
Arent you embarassed to be such an ignorant punkass troll? Why dont you just STFU until you grow some semblance of a brainpan.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:38 amYOU try coming up with 5000 troll names and have every one be a winner.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:39 am***
and this time get really angry.
:(
September 25th, 2009 at 10:39 amJohn ‘look at my hair & face, they’re perfect’ Ensign should join Mark Sanford & take a long, long walk up an Appalachian trail.
Both are C Street products, & believe their behavior is inconsequential because they’re of ‘The Chosen Ones’.
What a crock of crap!
You’re ‘chosen’ by voters. You can also be defeated by voters.
Ensign, dipping your pen in office ink may have been fun, but it will eventually kill your political career…that can’t happen soon enough!
September 25th, 2009 at 10:40 amThe tenthers can ignore the mandate but that does not make the constitutional argument any less disingenuous.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:40 amI could ask the same of you in your defense of the right who as history has made plain have gotten absolutely nothing right.
So how long will you be an apologist for losers?
September 25th, 2009 at 10:40 amgag order says: “Bill Clinton” “blow job”
must…not…laugh…*gasp*…at…ignorant…irony
September 25th, 2009 at 10:43 amI think Rick Martinez was thinking gag reflex,
September 25th, 2009 at 10:43 amlike when he performing deep-throat on Eric Odom.
ralph the wonder llama says
September 25th, 2009 at 10:16 am
Can’t these Republicans come up with any decent arguments?
____________________________________________________________
No. There aren’t any.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:46 amThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
The only blow job gag order ever got was from his cousin Frank.
Frank, did you take your dentures out?
September 25th, 2009 at 10:46 amTenth amendment: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” (emphasis added)
The ‘tenther’ crap is complete baloney. The Constitution does NOT authorize everything the federal government can do — the founders realized, obviously, that things might change, that society might evolve during decades and centuries following the moment the Constitution became the nation’s official guiding document. They understood that everything that would ever be known about anything was NOT simply that which was known at the moment they signed the document. But what they did do was mandate that which could not be undone on the spur of any given moment. The Constitution did not, after all, authorize either Medicare or Medicaid, nor Social Security – but Congress did, because it’s the (constitutional) purview of Congress to do such things, to make laws, to institute policy. The only thing Congress canNOT do is usurp rights and authorities granted by the Constitution. That takes an amendment, and the procedure for amending is spelled out clearly.
The Constitution doesn’t mandate the prohibition of public stupidity either, nor is public stupidity “prohibited by it to the States.” Therefore, public stupidity “is reserved to the states, respectively, [and] or to the people.”
I think they call them “Red States” — the ones that accept public stupidity as their governing mantra, or, when referring “to the people,” mostly Republicans.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:46 amTruly amazing: Their argument is that they love the supreme law of the land so much that they are willing to violate it. They’re probably better sticking with MLK Jr.’s formulation that an unjust law is a nullity. If they want to argue that health care is somehow instrinsically unjust, that’s one thing. But to argue that your respect for the law requires you to ignore it is just incomprehensible.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:47 amThe word Hypocrite appears in my iMac Thesaurus, as:
hypocrite
noun
I’ve been made to feel inadequate my whole life by someone who turns out to be a total hypocrite: pretender, dissembler, deceiver, liar, pietist, sanctimonious person, plaster saint; informal phony, fraud, sham, fake.
I’ve decided to add the word: republican to update the modern usage.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:49 amIf Ensign is correct, then I think we owe a lot of people an apology for refusing the draft during Vietnam.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:49 am@58 Zimzone, Dipping your pen in office ink. Ive never heard that one before.Thanks for a good laugh.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:49 amAnd yet Tenther Ensign no doubt supports federal usurpation of state common law regarding medical negligence claims in the name of “tort reform”. I understand consistency cannot be expected amongst wingnuts, especially amonst god fearing family values wingnuts who got caught schtupping their friend’s wife then paying hush money but this guy almost makes Vitter sound coherent.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:49 amShe didn’t coin tenter but you are a phony.
What makes you think you have the right to interpret the constitution?
What makes you think you are above the law?
People like you interpret your bible and the constitution the same way, you read into it what you want it to say.
Guess what, you lose this, big time. Best to just let it go.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:50 amThe motherfu_ker is sick if he thinks that people should be able to ignor any law they don’t like. Apparently he forgot that his job is a “law maker”, but I know why when you think about him ignoring his marriage vows. This is exactly what is wrong with the Republicans who are racist. They believe that laws passed under a black President don’t count. Only the ones passed under the dumbest azshole who has ever been President should be followed to the letter. I guess I will start making up laws of my own. My new law is: I can go to the bank and withdraw any amount of money as long as the bank has money in it, lets say a million dollars every hour or unitl the bank runs out of money. Rule 2: When the bank runs out of money I can just go to the next bank and start all over again. Man I’m so glad I get to make my own laws. This law making is fun, and profitable beyound my wildest dreams. New Law: I get to slap the shlt out of any dumbasz who suggest that he can make laws himself, excluding myself of course. The voters in his district must all smoke crack or meth or something illegal, otherwise why havent’ they demanded his resignation?
September 25th, 2009 at 10:51 amJust because you consider something to be unConstitutional doesn’t mean you get to ignore the law. I consider the criminalization of recreational drugs, torture, roving wiretaps, and banning of gay marriage to be unConstitutional, but we don’t get to ignore those laws, nor do we get to stop paying taxes to protest the funding of programs that perpetuate these policies.
If you have a problem with the law, you take it to court and try to fight it. You don’t get to practice your own personal brand of anarchy.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:52 amConservativeChristian, the states rights battle and threats of rebellion are so 1850’s.
Do you have a calendar?
September 25th, 2009 at 10:54 amgag order says:
Have you always been a hardcore moron and punkass troll or is it that being so stupid thats all you have?
September 25th, 2009 at 10:55 amYou mean, kinda like conservative Christians did with “liberal”?
Yeah, that would be bad.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:56 amThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
***
“ConservativeChristian”
that’s being redundant,
isn’t it?
:|
September 25th, 2009 at 10:57 amI love how folks call themselves “Constitutionalists” as if their inordinate love and devotion to a political document renders their interpretation of that document somehow correct and supreme.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:57 amjoe cantwell says:
No it isnt. Some of us Christians are EXTREMELY liberal
September 25th, 2009 at 10:59 amWhoo hooo! We’re all Supreme Courts of One now! I can ignore everything I believe is unconstitutional!
There is no possible way this could be a bad thing.
/sarc
September 25th, 2009 at 11:00 amWait a sec — isn’t one of the Right’s proposed solutions for the health care mess the demolition of the state-charter system under which insurance companies operate?
They say that allowing insurers to compete across the nation would bring savings that only competition can deliver.
How does that square with your “States’ programs” idea?
September 25th, 2009 at 11:00 amThe problem is that you say you hold the document dear but as above you want to pick certain parts out of context to make it read the way you want it to.
The constitution includes all ammendments and the bill of rights is just the first 10 ammendments.
You lost this once, why would you wish to suffer such a defeat again?
September 25th, 2009 at 11:01 amThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
THAT is what your banking on to make this idea work?
“IF the Federal government is free from corruptibility”?
No wonder right-wing ideas never work.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:02 amralph the wonder llama says:
I love how folks call themselves “Constitutionalists” as if their inordinate love and devotion to a political document renders their interpretation of that document somehow correct and supreme.
Hmmm, I thought it was considered just a ‘godamned piece of paper’ by Republics…when did this change?
/snarkilicious
September 25th, 2009 at 11:02 am“It would be more ideal for the States to set up socialized medicine.”
No, it wouldn’t. It would be too inconsistent for one. Take for example a program like Medicaid. In some states, one has to be make 10% of poverty-level income in order to qualify, which comes out to about $2,400 a year for a family of four. In other states, one has to be make 200% of poverty-level income in order to qualify, which comes out to around $50,000 a year for a family of four. In some states, one has to be both poor AND something else, like poor AND a minority, poor AND a parent, poor AND a veteran. In other states, one only has to be poor.
What happens in a situation with wildly inconsistent regulations from state to state is that you get all companies moving to one state where they like the regulations best, and all of them leaving another state, even though the state they are leaving is the one that best helps the people. Leaving it in the hands of the states with no guidelines to function as basic rules does not help the people in the slightest. It only helps the companies, which are far more mobile and able to pack up and leave the state than individuals are.
Secondly, only if individuals could ignore the “crossing states’ lines” rule would it build up any form of competition whatsoever. At this time, I can’t get insurance across state lines. Unless that regulation changes, and if it’s left up to the states then all 50 states would have change that rule, then it doesn’t matter which state has the best insurance, I can’t get it unless it’s the one I live in. If my state screws the people over in favor of the industry, what am I to do?
No, a program as vital to human existence as health care should NOT be left up to the states.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:03 amConservativeChristian says:
It’s like she’s trying to call someone who holds the US Constitution close to the heart a dirty name.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:46 am
____________
Nope. Only the hypocrites like yourself who only recently began respecting the Constitution after you discovered that you could use a deliberate misinterpretation of the Tenth Amendment to push your own policy agenda.
I somehow doubt you cared so much for the Constitution when Congress was passing the Patriot Act and the Bush Administration was abandoning Habeas Corpus, illegally wiretapping, and detaining individuals without due process.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:03 am***
#81,
the last liberal christian i heard
of got nailed to a cross.
*
i hope you folks fair better.
*
September 25th, 2009 at 11:04 amVery well said, smidget.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:04 amjoe cantwell says:
the last liberal christian i heard
of got nailed to a cross.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:04 am
___________
I’m pretty sure he was Jewish, actually.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:06 amI’m a little teabagger,
Short and stout
I got my handle,
So I can spout
When I get all steamed up,
Hear me shout
Just fill me with lies and I’ll pour them out!
I’m a clever tenther,
September 25th, 2009 at 11:07 amYes it’s true
Here let me show you
What I can do
I can change my handle
For my blog spout
Just fill me with lies and I’ll pour them out!
Liberals did not do that. The right owns it.
They tried to make liberal a dirty word and they have now made conservative a dirty word.
What happened to the party of personal responsibility?
Wouldn’t you be better off trying to save your party than be here chastising us for pointing out your flaws?
September 25th, 2009 at 11:07 amAnother day another poser begging for attention. Oh wait that is the same poser. Let’s try that again… Another day the same poser new name seeking attention…
September 25th, 2009 at 11:09 amThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
Thanks, ralph.
Health care reform is a really passionate topic for me, and I’ve done a lot of thinking about the best way to go about it, the upsides and downsides of all the options. I’m open to anything that will work.
It seems, however, that there are only two options that would actually meet our needs – a robust public option in which EVERYONE could participate in conjunction with a Health Insurance Exchange program that employers could participate in as well as individuals, or a single payer plan, which is, in my reasoned opinion, the best options hands-down.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:10 amGet over it. We need more Americans who don’t seek to divide us to keep us from moving forward.
That would be you.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:12 am***
#92
that was his tribe, not his faith.
**
#85,
you should read the “consitution“.
:)
September 25th, 2009 at 11:13 amBut some people hold the Constitution pretty high in their lives,
Er, Navy Lieutenant guy, that wouldn’t be applicable to secessionists and republikants in general.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:13 amCC blathers “Where were the Republicans and Democrats in Congress?”
Umm, the Republikkers were busy bowing in adoration, and the Dems had to use basements rooms to hold hearing, so bugger off.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:15 amThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
interesting morning session.
i see some exponents of The Turnip Truck Rebellion are in the house.
charming.
have we determined whether a CC is anything like a PP.
has the gagging person gone already?
sometimes i hate my time zone handicap…
September 25th, 2009 at 11:15 ammy plurals is mixed up, please forgive me, oh grammar gods…
September 25th, 2009 at 11:16 am“Basically, Ensign believes that anyone who claims any law is unconstitutional should be allowed to ignore that law.”
Sorta sounds like George Bush, Dick Cheney, Condaleza Rice, John Yoo, David Addington, Alberto Gonzalez, Donald Rumsfeld, et al.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:17 am“Also we need to repeal the ammendment concerning the Federal Reserve”
There is no amendment to the Constitution concerning the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve was created in 1913 by the Federal Reserve Act.
In fact, one of the major criticisms of the Federal Reserve is the question of whether Congress has the Constitutional authority to hand off the creation of coin, paper, and electronic money to an outside agency that is not, at least, quasi-private.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:17 amThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
Correction:
“to an outside agency that is not, at least, quasi-private.”
September 25th, 2009 at 11:19 amshould read:
“to an outside agency that is, at least, quasi-private.”
Why would anyone vote for Bob Barr?
September 25th, 2009 at 11:20 am#96 – ConservativeChristian says:
———————————————————-
“I honestly believe that the Federal Government has overstepped its bounds. The warhawking of George Bush and Dick Cheney and all they did to undermine the Constitution has become a chronic symptom of the central government. Obama is continuing this legacy. ”
September 25th, 2009 at 11:09 am
While I don’t agree with everything that pres. Obama has done, I fully support his using the egregious “power grab” leftover from the Bush Administration. This is the best, and probably only, time to shove the bad decisions made by the then-majority complacent and compliant Republican Party. It’s a chance to say to them: “You made the rules that Pres. Bush used to further destroy the US and our reputation here and abroad. Now Pres. Obama gets to follow on with your wrong-headed choices. Suck it up and live with your decisions!”
It’s very much like how the Republicans supported the TARP bailout legislation while Pres. Bush was in office, and now they claim it’s too much. They’ve got to be forced to admit their own bad decisions before they can change their bad behavior. I’m not holding my breath waiting for politicians to do the right thing, though. ;-)
September 25th, 2009 at 11:20 amSmidget is correct in pointing out that state run public insurance would end up with wide disparities from state to state. Welfare was taken over by the feds because of the widespread disparities. Some states would not offer any or inadequate insurance which would create migrations to states with better plans. However, the larger argument is that these state plans would be unable to compete with the private insurance which has more economic leverage to negotiate rates.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:20 amThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
#103,
tom,
it’s a rich assortment.
cc is “concerned”.
and twajie will return.
where else can he go?
“LOL”
“shocker”
“much”
and, of course, his obsession, “olbyloon”.
:)
:)
September 25th, 2009 at 11:21 amEnsign approaches the constitution much like he approaches the Bible and his marriage vows. First it is what please him.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:22 amThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
***
#112,
BECK: I believe that Americans should ask themselves tough questions. Americans should turn over all the rocks and make their own decisions.
***
ask yourself.
:)
September 25th, 2009 at 11:24 am“As a Democrat I would rather make peace with my Republican friends than add fuel to the fire.”
I understand what you’re saying here…but get real. Democrats have bent over backwards to include Republican ideas in legislation. There have been hundreds of Republican amendments to health care legislation alone, only to get no votes whatsoever. In addition to no votes, they get out there on the television and accuse Democrats of being socialists/fascists/Nazis/whatever who want to take over the health insurance industry, pull the plug on grandma, and force abortions on people. I’m not going to sit here and insult all Republicans by accusing them all of being complete whack-a-doodles, but you need to wake up if you think that it’s the Democrats that are being divisive. Their recent willingness to stand up for themselves is not only long overdue, it’s also not nearly enough.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:24 amCC need not worry,
it’s all in God’s hands.
“regard ye not the tumultuous events of this world,
steadfastly focus ye, upon the glorious hereafter.”
September 25th, 2009 at 11:25 amThat wasn’t my point ChristianConservative.
I was merely pointing out your error. I think my overall point was that you should perhaps consider learning what is actually in the Constitution before you claim to be able to interpret it.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:25 amThe constitution is just a gaddamn piece of paper when they’re in power.
Otherwise it’s sacred.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:26 am
Rather, ConservativeChristian. My bad.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:26 amI’m willing to give ConservativeChristian a little slack.
Sure, calling yourself “Conservative” when you’re a registered Democrat and you’re posting on a progressive blog is a strange choice to make, but our new friend is discussing reasonably and respectfully and expressing views that seem sincere.
So I say we welcome this new voice. If it proves to be a troll, we’ll know soon enough. Until that happens, let’s extend every civility as we would wish extended to us.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:26 amWhy, because I accept the constitution as it is and allow the laws of the land to previal and legal judges to judge what is constituitonal or not?
As opposed to your street lawyers and rush limballs trying to tell us what it says?
You are the ones who alienate everyone who does not agree with you.
You are the ones who are becoming a smaller group of right wingers every day and despite your strong desire to blame others, it is your own fault.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:26 am***
ot,
can she count on your support?
:0
September 25th, 2009 at 11:26 amI called Bush and Cheney borderline treasonous and get voted down. Am I offending any Bush and Cheney fans in this blog?
September 25th, 2009 at 11:27 amAmericans should turn over all the rocks and make their own decisions.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:28 am–
I am still willing to help fear nada with the ones that are too heavy for his puny little arms….
#107 – ConservativeChristian says:
———————————————————
“I would much rather seek common ground and weed out the corruption in government, than focus on the differences. As a Democrat I would rather make peace with my Republican friends than add fuel to the fire.”
September 25th, 2009 at 11:18 am
That makes you a very unique person. Personally, I’m of the frame of mind that when someone else starts a fire, and continues to throw fuel on their own fire against any form of reconciliation or common ground, then trying to find said “common ground” only encourages them to discount your side while trying to shove their self-blinded solution in everyone’s face.
It would be like trying to talk english to someone who only knows a foreign language, and trying to get them to understand you by giving them everything they are asking for while steeping back from everything for which you stand.
Again, that’s my opinion of the current political argument. The majority probably don’t feel that way, but the mouth-pieces of the argument are taking a “We’re right, and you’re wrong” attitude from the start. It’s impossible to engage rationally with people that start from that stance, and refuse to find any common ground with you.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:28 am***
#122,
captain mantastic, backup, conservative christian.
(*
it’s all sticky concern troll mind cum.
**
September 25th, 2009 at 11:29 amAm I offending any Bush and Cheney fans in this blog?
September 25th, 2009 at 11:29 am—
I don’t think so. I think it is more likely that you are being read like a needy attention seeker…
Republicans pick and choose how they want to interpret the Constitution the same way they pick and choose how they interpret their bible. The 10th amendment is sacrosanct, but the 4th amendment, not so much.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:30 amTom Baker,
You are right, but I still feel a need to be vocal about the injustices that are being done in this nation.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:30 am***
#125,
ralph likes you,
that’s not enough?
**
want a bj too?
:)
September 25th, 2009 at 11:31 amBilbo
Lost of examples of that. The second amendment is sacred to the point that it covers weapons that were clearly designed, not for consumer purchase, but as tools of war, but the first amendment is only valid as it concerns the conservative free speech…it is completely invalid with regards to freedom of the press, freedom of petition, or freedom of peaceful assembly, all of which are liberal and traitorous.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:32 am***
#129,
i voted up on that one.
:\
September 25th, 2009 at 11:32 amSo why would anyone vote for Bob Barr?
September 25th, 2009 at 11:33 amBilbo Hussein Baggins says:
Republicans pick and choose how they want to interpret the Constitution the same way they pick and choose how they interpret their bible.
And when they disagree with court decisions they claim the judges are activists.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:33 amsmidget,
I recently re-read the Constitution which I hadn’t done since my college days. I also read the Federalist Papers written by our founding fathers and the Creature of Jekyll Island about the Federal Reserve. I do know the underlying principles of the Constitution and I do know the first ten ammendments fairly well. I would like to study and know more about the Constitution, but I have limited free time, I have a family to care for and a business to manage.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:33 amConservativeChristian says:
Tom Baker,
You are right, but I still feel a need to be vocal about the injustices that are being done in this nation.
Honey, he was making fun of you, not backing up your belief system.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:34 amword, brother ralph,
may peace be upon ye.
i’m going to devote some time to skimming history books for superficial information on political conflicts of the 18th and 19th centuries, then make the assumption that no one intelligent has considered those ideas since, and try to resurrect a movement based on their general outlines.
shouldn’t take long.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:34 am***
#137,
you find the time to be here.
why is that?
>>>
September 25th, 2009 at 11:35 amI recently re-read the Constitution which I hadn’t done since my college days.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:36 am—
That seems odd what with you deep love of it. Maybe your college days were last week. What else could explain why you had turned your bag for so long? Is this one of those “tough love” deals?
or your “back”
September 25th, 2009 at 11:36 amfairly well.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:37 am—
Damn you fall in love easily…
***
#139,
outliers, tom.
outliers.
:)
September 25th, 2009 at 11:37 am“I would like to study and know more about the Constitution, but I have limited free time, I have a family to care for and a business to manage.”
I understand this and am not criticizing your lack of Constitutional knowledge, as I’m sure you probably know more about it than most people, as evidenced by the fact that you can name more than one right afforded by the Bill of Rights (everyone knows free speech).
I am simply advocating that, at least in some instances, we need to defer to those that ARE Constitutional experts. Some things we can tell are wrong just on the face of it. For example, although I despise weapons and violence, I would never support the banning of all handguns, as I see it as blatantly unconstitutional. I leave it up to those who have made it their life’s work to understand the law of the land, however, to determine if a ban on assault rifles washes Constitutionally. My personal opinion is that it does. That does not mean I am correct.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:39 amdbadass says:
fairly well.
—
Damn you fall in love easily…
Nah, he just wants to screw it.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:39 amThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
This comment has been voted down. Click to read.
just 9 more. Can ya do it?
September 25th, 2009 at 11:43 amConservativeChristian, your love of guns seems to contradict your username.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:44 amWhat does that have to do with anything?
First of all, it was an example.
Second of all, I HAVE read the Federalist Papers.
Third of all, why are people so obsessed with the Founding Fathers? They weren’t a cohesive unit that moved in lockstep. They had lots of different opinions, and lots of different reasons for their opinions. They were intelligent, but they were not omnipotent. In addition to setting the groundwork for a potentially great country, they recognized their own faults well enough to have the foresight to allow the Constitution to be changed as times required. So why, if they understood their own limitations, can’t anyone today seem to do the same?
September 25th, 2009 at 11:45 amThe Federalist Papers and the Constitution are different documents.
CC, maybe you need to spend more time with your family.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:45 ami think we should call a halt to all government activity,
until all the great debates of the nation’s history
have been re-argued.
should only take 90 or so years – lest we succumb to the seduction of impatience.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:47 amdbadass,
How many of us read over again the textbooks from our high school days and college, except perhaps from their major field of study in college?
I think it took the turmoil of this nation and the acts of the Federal government over the past few decades to wake me up and get me interested again in our nation.
I was a science major in college and really never studied American History. You’re right. I should never have taken how good we have had it as Americans for granted. Sometimes it isn’t until you see things slipping away before you take action.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:49 amI am well aware of that Zooey, and within the Federalist papers are the ideas, motivations and reasons why our founding fathers fashioned the Constitution the way they did.
It is worthwhile reading, a bit awkward because to the older English, I heard they printed modern English versions of these papers, but I read the older English version.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:51 amConservativeChristian says:
It’s amazing, the writer of this article is the female version of Rush Limbaugh.
…
It’s like she’s trying to call someone who holds the US Constitution close to the heart a dirty name. It is the Constitution and the original framework of this government which once differentiated us from the rest of the world.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:46 am
Have you ever read anything else Amanda has written? I highly doubt it.
It’s “tenther” drivel like this that guarantees most of us will never take anything you say seriously.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:52 amgag order says:
No sane people do not watch Hannity. Only stupid moronic piles of garbage like YOU take Seannie the sissy seriously. Just STFU you worthless punkass troll.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:52 amAnd now for our morning dose of laughter:
Do you think the Federal Government over the past several decades has overstepped its bounds Constitutional or otherwise?
Decades? It’s like he sleep-walked through 2000-2008.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:52 amExcellent point, smidget.
Lest we forget, these same Founding Fathers also enshrined human slavery in the Constitution and gave slaves representation (as 3/5 of a person) but, of course, no vote, as a drastic compromise necessary to win the support of the southern states.
So let’s not go canonizing these gentlemen.
And call me petty, but I might expect someone with a life-long love of the Constitution to at least know how to spell “amendment” correctly.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:52 ammaybe we could take you seriously if you didn’t just discover these excesses as Obama is reigning in all the offenses of the bush admin.
Credibility is important and you lack it.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:53 am@148
In some areas, it has overstepped it’s bounds, and in others, it has not.
I am of the opinion that the federal government is vital for some functions of the country. In order to actually BE a more perfect union, we have to actually BE a union. This immediately contradicts the fall-back “state’s rights” position. Not everything is to be left up to the states. Some things need to be dealt with on a federal level for the sake of promoting the general welfare of the country and the people.
One example I can think of of the government being well within their rights is the current health care issue. The health of the nation is vital to the security and economic strength of the country, as well as being a clearly moral issue.
One example I can think of where the federal government overstepped their bounds is in the regulation of marriage. Marriage is and has always been a matter of state law, not federal law. The federal government has no right, in my opinion, to overrule a state’s law in this fashion. However, this is a mixed bag for me. Although the states should be allowed to regulate the marriage institution as they see fit, I also think that the states have overstepped THEIR bounds by allowing legislation that directly violates the civil rights of citizens to be on their books.
DEA raids of legitimate and licensed medical marijuana dispensaries are another, and better, example of a state being run roughshod by an overzealous federal government, in my opinion. I am of the opinion that the federal government has no right to criminalize recreational drugs in the first place, and to then ignore state law, and basically step in between doctors and patients, is abhorrent for me personally.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:53 amOh yeah, never miss it!
(Twajie’s heart really isn’t into trolling these days, is it? Maybe he’s got hisself a new GF?)
September 25th, 2009 at 11:54 amFred,
I don’t own a gun and I never fired one, except for my nephew’s BB gun, but that doesn’t really count. I honestly don’t understand the appeal of guns or hunting for sport.
I understand it only if you are going to use what you shoot for food to feed your family.
I don’t love guns at all.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:54 amWell they never expressly outlawed marijuana, so in my high regard for the document, I’ll be ignoring all drug laws.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:54 amConservativeChristian says:
September 25th, 2009 at 11:51 am
Yes, but if the Federalist Papers were meant as some sort of literal interpretation of the Constitution, then it would have been made plain. Otherwise the Constitution would read, “We the People…see the Federalist Papers, yada yada.”
Here’s a cookie.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:55 amConservativeChristian says:
I’m just curious about your opinion. I think the Federal government has gotten too powerful and has an insatiable appetite which they feed with excessive taxation and legislation limiting our Freedom.
And were you of this opinion when former President Bush was expanding the federal government and pushing the concept of the Unitary Executive? Where were you then?
You also seem to have a problem with “limiting our Freedom”. Where were you when the Bush Administration was actively taking away our rights to privacy?
Like all Republics, you pick and choose how you want to interpret the Constitution they way you pick and choose how you want to interpret the Bible.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:57 amand yet you are here adovcating for the right to bear arms for the expicit purpose of killing human beings who you disagree with?
You were upset because someone used the term tenthers when they actually call themselves that?
I’m not sure you are serious. I think you just want to try to confuse the issues.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:57 amGotta go guys…be back later.
This is actually a really good conversation. I can only hope it doesn’t degenerate into “I know you are but what am I?” before I get back.
Later, taters.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:57 amConservativeChristian says:
I should never have taken how good we have had it as Americans for granted. Sometimes it isn’t until you see things slipping away before you take action.
That argument has been made since the Civil War. It is raised in the context of laws that people strongly disagree. Usually, that means the SCOTUS has upheld a fed power that people don’t like such as the income tax and Social Security. The argument is not sincere because it is selectively used by the right and left.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:57 am#147 – ConservativeChristian says:
————————————————————
“The fact is that 2nd ammendment is there for the people to protect themselves from a government gone corrupt and exceeding the authority given it by the Constitution.
This is a fact. I suggest you read the writings of our Founding Fathers. They elaborate on all the ammendments and the reason why each was written.”
September 25th, 2009 at 11:40 am
You’re making the assumption that an average citizen will be able to have enough weapons to counter any government agency. Do you honestly assume that you, or anyone else, can accumulate anough weapons to counter any action by the US Government? Even the wacko’s at Waco couldn’t stop the US Government from going after them when they shot and killed an ATF agent before he could announce himself. They had to start their own compound on fire to keep their own people from surrendering.
The 2nd amendment was originally though of as a check on government power, way back in the day when firing a weapon took a minute or two to reload. Now-a-days, when the best assault weapon can fire more rounds in 1 miunte than the average gun owner buys in a week, using the “protect against federal government intrusion” argument is incredibly weak.
Then again, if you want to hold onto that argument, go right ahead.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:58 amConservativeChristian –
If you’re of a mind to, drop me a line via my twitter account that’s listed w/ my profile.
I agree with a lot of the things you’re saying and I’d like to ask you a few questions to help me with a piece I’m working on. Thanks!
September 25th, 2009 at 11:59 amsmidget at 162 you make some very valid points. Concerning recreational drugs, I am against them but I certainly don’t see the need to waste taxpayer money chasing people smoking grass, unless of course they drive vehicles under the influence and hurt others. I really can’t think of a recreational drug other than marijuana. The others are too dangerous to classify as recreational.
The issue of states rights versus central government is delicate. I am of the opinion that the scale is out of balance and tilted too far towards the Federal government.
September 25th, 2009 at 11:59 amSen. Ensign is using the same argument as Dick Cheney in the 1960’s to dodge the draft. So many exceptions, like Cheney’s, were granted that they had to go to a lottery and finally end the draft. Health care will not be political like the draft so the outcome should be just the opposite. Using the same argument against evil and good just makes no sense.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:00 pmYou cannot hold the Constitution high and support the use of torture or warrentless wiretapping or pre-emtive war or rendition or suspending the writ of habeas corpus or any of the other disrepect showed in the last administration, such as outing a CIA agent and the name of the cover company for political retribution.
The Iraq war was, is, and will be unconstitutional, and should not be funded. I want my money back. I shouldn’t have to pay for any foriegn occupation because it is not explicit in the Constitution.
These asswholes citing the Constitution should be the ones yelling for heads of the previous administration for numerous violations. The fact that they haven’t is proof of how baseless the tenth amendment argument is.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:00 pmshe’s going to fire right back telling us she is no republic.
She’s a libertarian or indy or constitutionalist. Like all who supported bush, they now distance themselves from who they really are.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:00 pmRonniNY,
I never used Twitter, is there a way you can send me a private message here giving me your email address?
September 25th, 2009 at 12:01 pmGAGGINGWEASEL
STFU. You are nothing but a brainwashed moron. Stop embarassing yourself and boring us
September 25th, 2009 at 12:02 pmSo you supported using mercenaries in Iraq and no bid contracts for halliburton. That’s taking things out of the hands of the government.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:03 pmConservativeChristian, if you’re as interested in Constitutional history as you suggest, then surely you’re aware of the genesis of the Constitutional Convention in 1787?
It was called because the Articles of Confederation, which acted as a sort of de facto national charter by establishing a loose confederation of the states, were an utter failure. They created a loose collective of states, many of which had competing interests, and a weak federal government which had no power to raise revenue or to pass and enforce meaningful legislation.
It was, in short, the kind of “States’ Rights” paradise that so many on the Right seem to long for.
And it was a disaster. Part of the struggle and the triumph of that summer in Philadelphia was the creation of a viable federal government, with the power to tax, to regulate commerce, to negotiate treaties and to provide for the common defense and welfare. It wasn’t easy, but enough of the delegates saw that it was necessary that it was established and ratified.
That is the story of the Constitution.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:04 pmSo you supported taking government regulations away so the banks could do as they please and bankrupt us?
See, the government has a role and you no longer have credibility to decide what that role is. You gave that up when you allowed bush to crush your presious constitution.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:05 pmThe arrogance and shamelessness of the C Street crowd is astounding.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:06 pmDemocratic Soldier
I have no illusions of the citizenry defending ourselves against the government. Let’s say they declare martial law. We have no chance unless everyone is united peacefully. I want to believe that peaceful opposition would prevail and our troops would not incarcerate us or fire upon unarmed fellow Americans. With the sophisticated weaponry of today, the winner will be he who controls the Army, Navy and Air Force. Which usually means he who has the hearts and minds of the Generals and Admirals.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:06 pmot……tracy5 got banned? That’s fantastic and on a franken thread to boot. That’s icing on the cake.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:10 pmFred,
I voted against Bush every time, both Bush 1 and Bush 2. I feel that the government is being controlled by the Federal Reserve. I feel that the private group of bankers, known as the Federal Reserve give marching orders to our government.
I would love to see our government take back control our the issuance of our currency. I would love to see us go back to a gold standard and to stop all the unneccessary war mongering.
I believe the government should fulfill its role and take back the control and printing of our coin and currency.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:10 pmoh, that is good news, Fred. Thanks for sharing.
I thought that Tracist was working up to the that point lately.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:11 pmConservativeChristian is all over the place — except the topic.
This is one of the “distract and dumb down” trolls.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:12 pmHmm… we seem to have an influx of people lately who are convinced that our problems can all be traced to the Federal Reserve…
and they all claim to be variants of some liberal philosophy…
it’s just curious, that’s all. I’m a student of human nature and I find these kinds of trends fascinating.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:13 pmRalph,
That’s a brief and superficial story of the Constitution. What do you think is the most scholarly and accurate book written on the Constitutional Convention of 1787?
September 25th, 2009 at 12:14 pmDegenerate Ensign’s interpretation of the constitution has no credibility.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:14 pmConservativeChristian
address 180 & 182
September 25th, 2009 at 12:16 pmAbsolutely. Were you expecting something more detailed and scholarly? perhaps with footnotes?
Is there anything in that “brief and superficial” account with which you disagree?
September 25th, 2009 at 12:19 pmRalph,
I think people are becoming aware of the Federal Reserve’s evil from people like Dennis Kucinich, Ron Paul and the late Aaron Russo. There is also the Internet and guys like Lew Rockwell. Most people in this nation still think that the Federal Reserve is part of the US government, which of course it is not.
The Federal Reserve gets wealthy off our wars. It’s not just the Military Weapons manufacturers. We borrow money to go to war, it is printed out of thin air, we pay interest on the money. The we is you and I. The large majority of our personal Federal income tax money goes back to the Fed to pay interest. The problem is that this is not our national coffer.
We are literally giving money to private bankers, and they did not back this money with gold, silver or real estate. It is unbacked. It seems like a giant Ponzi scheme perpertrated on the citizens of the US.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:19 pmI wonder if someone got tired of reading all the flag messages I sent last night, Twacie made 102 comments on that thread and I flagged each and every one of them.
Should I be banned for spamming the flags
September 25th, 2009 at 12:20 pm/
I was asking for you to tell me the best book of the subject that you know of. That comment did come across as condescending and I apologize sincerely. I did not mean to offend you or insult you. I’m really sorry.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:20 pmThanks for you concern, ConservativeChristian.
Your opinions will be duly noted.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:21 pmConservative Christian: “Shouldn’t love of the Constitution be a common ground between Democrats and Republicans? It seems like you are the divider.”
You need to understand that the “Tenthers” gave themselves that name. The writer didn’t. And, you need to understand that the reason it has caught on is because of their misinterpretation of the 10th Amendment. The 10th does not grant citizens the right to disregard federal laws if they think their state should be handling that particular issue. Nobody calls gun nuts “Seconders” or privacy advocates “Fourthers” because those groups have not misinterpreted the meaning of the amendments.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:21 pmConservativeChristian –
Just click on my name and it’ll take you to the twitter page. There’s an email in the upper right corner. Hope that works for you.
Heading off this board for now. Have a good one folks.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:21 pmSure thing Fred I will oblige.
Concerining 180
I am and was against any actions we took in Iraq. Including wasting our money to place Saddam Hussein in power back when Bush 1 was the head of our CIA. Halliburton is a corrupt company and Dick Cheney is an evil man who needs to repent.
I think I already answered 182 with my comment at 186
September 25th, 2009 at 12:24 pmConservativeChristian, I understand that the comment was not meant to come off as condescending, and I did not take it as such, though I noted that potential.
I recognize that my post was brief and superficial, as three short paragraphs are hardly sufficient to express such a rich and complex history, and this is hardly the forum for such a treatment anyway.
Still, I think it’s an accurate description of the conditions that led to the Convention. Do you disagree?
BTW, the most recent book I read on this subject was The Summer of 1787, by David O. Stewart. It’s more of a mainstream than a scholarly treatment, but very well done.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:26 pmAny discussion of the Constitution requires a deep and thorough understanding of case law as decided by thousands of court actions. The document is not locked up and pure.
The “tenthers” need to address the Commerce Clause with intelligence in order to make their point. That clause and subsequent court decisions have pretty much destroyed “states rights” as these “tenthers” would have us believe are still in place in a pure form.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:27 pmNiners fan.
Did a movement start where people began calling themselves “tenthers”? I never heard that term used before reading this article today.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:27 pmthis all sounds a bit like discovering your car has a leaky radiator,
then insisting that the best course of action is to remove the wheels, doors, and trunk lid, in order to “solve the problem”
September 25th, 2009 at 12:28 pmIt is looking like our latest concern troll is another bircher and supporter of Ron Paul.
from Wicki:
Why am I not surprised?
September 25th, 2009 at 12:28 pmThanks Ralph,
I am definitely going to Amazon or Borders and order that book.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:28 pmThanks for reminding me about Ensign’s dirty little “secret”, Dirty Hippie. I had forgotten about that. In case anybody reading that about Nevada’s infamous rep to the U.S. Congress doesn’t believe it, it’s true. I read it in the local paper when I stayed in Vegas from Nov. ‘08 to Feb. ‘09. (Ugh). I am in AZ now. Our reps to Congress are a tad higher-minded here but Kyl lies. I saved his email to me so I can prove that. Good day, all.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:29 pmConservativeChristian, you sound just like any conservative who has abandoned their failures to now embrace and take credit for what progressives have been fighting for.
And in another breath you imply that states rights are the end all of the constitution.
You are all over the place and you will soon fall off a cliff because of your inconsistancies.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:30 pmReggie
What is a bircher and what is a Concern troll?
That’s interesting I’ve been reading Lew Rockwells site, there are many other authors there and it mostly economists.
I like Ron Paul very much. I would have voted for him had he been running this last election cycle. He was not on the New York State ballot. Ron Paul has been a Republican for quite some time now.
I’m not surprised that they worked together. They have common economic philosophies.
He’s one of the few Republicans I like.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:31 pmConservativeChristian says:
Did a movement start where people began calling themselves “tenthers”? I never heard that term used before reading this article today.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:27 pm
Oh please. Where do you get your news?
September 25th, 2009 at 12:33 pmAll my failures have been personal, not political. I disagree with you and I think I am very consistent. I know that the argument of state’s rights vs. Federal government is a complex issue. I think that a balance between the two is ideal for the Freedom of the American people.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:34 pmbusted!
September 25th, 2009 at 12:34 pmZooey,
This is my first day reading news here. I used to read the NY Times but abandoned it because it has become unreliable concerning global and domestic politics in reporting unbiased and accurate news. I mostly read independent news sources which are not controlled and or owned by large corporations which control what is printed in their papers.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:36 pmResults 1 – 100 of about 14,600 for “lew rockwell” , “John Birch Society”.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:36 pmZooey,
I tried to “vote up” your comment, No. 188, but instead it was voted down when I actually hit VOTE UP. Just to let you know.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:37 pmFred busted on what?
I heard pro-Democratic party media calling people who wanted to verify Obama’s citizenry “birthers”. I sincerely never heard “tenthers” before today.
Constituionalists yes, tenthers no.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:38 pmLike what? Grit? If you can’t be specific, you must be dodging.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:39 pmConservative Christian,
Re your comment No. 184: Our government, under Nixon, not only fired on unarmed college students in Ohio, but killed some of them. Google “Kent State” and see what comes up. I kid you not.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:40 pmConservativeChristian says:
If the Republicans truly respected the 10th Amendment they would have never proposed the DOMA.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:40 pmThanks for the link Reggie, they have their own web site http://www.jbs.org I will check it out later
September 25th, 2009 at 12:42 pmYou’re a liar or you think we are fools. Take your pick.
by the way tenthers believe:
September 25th, 2009 at 12:43 pm
ConservativeChristian says:
This is my first day reading news here.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
This is not a news site, it’s a political blog. I’m concerned that you seem not to know the difference.
As for the rest of your comment — you failed to answer the question.
Typical.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:46 pmLet’s not lose focus of the fact that “Senator” Ensign made his way in life by being born on a pile of his parents cash and his diaper stuffed with hundred dollar bills.
He’s not bright.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:46 pmI don’t think the Republicans support the 10th ammendment pags2. I think the Republican party is guilty of jeopardizing our freedom and safety.
I am actually a registered Democrat in NY.
Cherokeerose, I didn’t like Nixon at all. It is shocking that this happened on American soil. We also had the incident in Waco. This nation is guilty of many sins.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:47 pmReligion out of politics now!
September 25th, 2009 at 12:47 pmcherokeerose says:
September 25th, 2009 at 12:37 pm
No worries, but thanks for the attempt. :)
September 25th, 2009 at 12:48 pmThis is all perfectly understandable. It’s a really big picture CYA move on the part of John Ensign; it’s brilliant.
Much as I hate to admit it, Justice Scalia’s remark that is quoted in the TPpost heading this thread is directly to the point. I quote, “To make an individual’s obligation to obey such a law contingent upon the law’s coincidence with his religious beliefs, except where the State’s interest is “compelling” — permitting him, by virtue of his beliefs, “to become a law unto himself,” contradicts both constitutional tradition and common sense.”
Ensign is looking for a way to justify all his screwing about with someone else’s wife, putting her kid on his party’s payroll, and trying to pay off everyone in sight. He’s been indoctrinated by the C-Streeters to believe that as a superior individual, one of the “Elect”. He believes that he should not be accountable to anyone in his personal activity; that he is, in effect, a law unto himself. So the ploy is to get standing with one issue, making the Tenth a wide-open door to absolute individual self determination, and then to walk through that door with his personal baggage saying, “See, told ya I din’t do nuthin wrong.”
Nah. It won’t wash. Ensign’s not smart enought to be able to stretch the Tenth Amendment to cover his personal stupidity. Back to the old drawing board.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:48 pmZooey, I didn’t even get past the first article which is this, so many people have been typing to me. Political blogs can be interesting too, I understand that there will be a fair amount of bias at places like this.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:49 pmConservativeChristian:
Are you going for a Trollcadamy Award for best acting in the concern troll category?
Give it up, register another sock and try again, you’re not fooling anyone here with your silly little act.
Why are you birchers so inept?
September 25th, 2009 at 12:49 pmConservativeChristian, you present yourself as reasonable and even open-minded but certain slips of the tongue (or keyboard) give you away.
For instance, there is no “pro-Democratic party media” in this country. At least, not among the mainstream media. MSNBC comes closest, with three successful progressive hosts, but it also gives a forum to Joe Scarborough and frequently features Pat Buchanan on its shows.
The others bend over backwards to avoid offending the Right, even as they try to report the truth about issues like Obama’s birth certificate and “death panels”.
Likewise the NY Times is hardly the biased source that right-wingers like to imagine. If the Times were even a tenth as left-leaning as the Right claims, they would not have withheld the story on warrantless wiretapping of Americans until after the ‘04 election, when it could no longer affect the outcome of who America wanted as President.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:51 pm@ 227. correction, in third para, should read “indoctrinated by the C-Streeters to believe that he is a superior individual, one of the “Elect”.”
also, add (giga snark) at end of comment.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:51 pmConservativeChristian says:
Did a movement start where people began calling themselves “tenthers”?
Yes, but it’s fairly recent; about a couple months old..
.
ConservativeChristian says:
What is a bircher and what is a Concern troll?
A “bircher” refers to the John Birch society, a longstanding right-wing group which is given over to elaborate conspiracy theories.
A “concern troll” refers to someone who tries to derail the discussion by playing “devil’s advocate” about everything, forcing everyone else to restate and support facts so basic that they shouldn’t have to waste time doing it. Often a “concern troll” will start out pretending to be a moderate and worrying that “we’re becoming just like them,” then using that characterization to try to water down the discussion so much that any supported position comes off as “extremist.”
.
ConservativeChristian says:
I used to read the NY Times but abandoned it because it has become unreliable concerning global and domestic politics in reporting unbiased and accurate news. I mostly read independent news sources which are not controlled and or owned by large corporations which control what is printed in their papers.
Do you have any examples of this unreliability? I find that news sources that have explicit, detailed and publicly known journalistic policies and standards of practice, are more reliable than those without any. Of those that do, the NYT’s is the strongest perhaps in the world. For example, it’s “style guide” is the standard textbook for how to write news pieces everywhere.
“Journalism” actually refers to the thorough and detailed discipline of writing informative and unbiased pieces about current events. There are entire college programs of it. It involves techniques to explicitly analyze a piece, identify biased terms, and check for balance in inclusion and ommission. Doing it right is not something someone with a blog can just toss off without any education in that.
And everybody who posts “news” online has a bias, otherwise they wouldn’t be doing it. I’d be more inclined to believe a claimed neutral perspective from someone who reported news because it was their job than someone who did it on their own personal time. The second guy almost certainly has a strong opinion on everything he reports.
Once you’ve been convinced that the vast majority of professional news outlets worldwide are all lying to you, you can be convinced of anything at all. You’re within millimeters of being able to be recruited by a cult.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:52 pmConservativeChristian says:
I don’t think the Republicans support the 10th ammendment pags2. I think the Republican party is guilty of jeopardizing our freedom and safety.
My point was to show the hypocrisy of the Republican party. But that does not mean the Dems are not guilty of the same type of dishonest intellectual arguments. Both parties use the Constitution on a selective basis to fit their political ideology.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:55 pmalso @ 227. I sincerely apologize for interrupting the troll tutelage session elsewhere in the thread. My bad. I’ll try to get on topic with that.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:55 pmFred,
I am not a liar and if I thought anyone here was a fool I would not make such a comment. I didn’t know people who don’t like socialized health care were called “tenthers”. I support the minimum wage law, I am not in any way a racist. I play jazz guitar and have many black friends I met during my musical career. I became very close to these people over the years , they like me and know I am not a racist. I am married to an Asian woman. So I am very unlike what you define as a “tenther”. It is a nonsense term if you ask me.
I am insulted that anyone who doesn’t know me and has met me for the first time calls me a liar for simply asking a sincere question. Why couldn’t you just tell me what a tenther was without insulting me?
So I am not a “tenther” and would never like to be defined by a single phrase other than Christian.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:58 pmpags2
I agree with you that the Republican party is full of hypocrisy. I have also found hypocrisy to exist in the Democratic party as well.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:00 pmwhy couldn’t you just educate yourself before deciding you are qualified to speak about something that you admittedly know nothing about?
September 25th, 2009 at 1:03 pmThanks El Bruce,
I just noticed you took the time to answer my questions. I’m sorry for not knowing some of the terminology that everyone else here seems to be familiar with. I’ve spent too much time here today. I will gladly answer your questions about the NY Times privately via email. I used to trust it as a relaiable source but not anymore. It would be easier to send you a private email about this over the weekend and would be happy to do so because you took the time to answer my questions.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:04 pmConservativeChristian says:
I agree with you that the Republican party is full of hypocrisy. I have also found hypocrisy to exist in the Democratic party as well.
I don’t see any teabagger parties with signs about the Republicans.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:04 pmThanks for your CONCERN, CC.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:05 pmSee, this is the kind of comment that raises a red flag.
It’s not simply “people who don’t like socialized medicine” who are called “tenthers”.
It’s people who base their objections to any Federal movement in that area on their misunderstanding of the Constitution.
See the difference?
September 25th, 2009 at 1:06 pmConservativeChristian says:
I agree with you that the Republican party is full of hypocrisy. I have also found hypocrisy to exist in the Democratic party as well.
The difference is that’s the only thing that exists in the Republican party. You’re all hypocrites. We just have the blue dogs to contend with. ;)
September 25th, 2009 at 1:08 pmIndeed, it’s just the Democratic Party hasn’t made hypocrisy part and parcel of official party policy as the Republican Party has done for the last fifty years.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:08 pmKnowing what a “tenther” is, considering it is a new phrase as ElBruce pointed out to me, isn’t exactly higher education.
When in this blog did I comment once on my knowledge of what a tenther is? Know that I know what it is about, it’s not a complicated topic. Is it improper behavior to ask other people questions on this blog? If this is not protocol, then I will not ask other people questions. At most political blogs I have been to, or blogs in general, people usually are happy to share information and ideas.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:09 pmI agree Praha,
I never liked the Republican Party. I usually vote Democratic Party, until recently. I actually went third party and did not support Obama or McCain. I am as inlcined now to consider third party candidates as I am candidates from the big two.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:13 pmConservativeChristian says:
Fred,
I am not a liar and if I thought anyone here was a fool I would not make such a comment. I didn’t know people who don’t like socialized health care were called “tenthers”.
Because most are? If we had socialized medicine, there would be no private insurance, no private hospitals, no private doctors and no private drug companies. Is that’s being proposed?
If you opposed socialized health care, I’m guessing we should rip out the roads, close the fire departments, shut down the airports and shipping ports, close the schools, and shelve the armed forces? Along with Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP, the FDA, FCC and every other program that is “socialized”?
We can be just somalia then, a place full of religious idiots with guns. A Conservative’s paradise and you don’t need to run airplanes into building – hurry, go there now!
ConservativeChristian says:
I support the minimum wage law, I am not in any way a racist. I play jazz guitar and have many black friends I met during my musical career. I became very close to these people over the years , they like me and know I am not a racist. I am married to an Asian woman. So I am very unlike what you define as a “tenther”. It is a nonsense term if you ask me.
So you’re a radical socialist according to the GOP! ;)
ConservativeChristian says:
I am insulted that anyone who doesn’t know me and has met me for the first time calls me a liar for simply asking a sincere question. Why couldn’t you just tell me what a tenther was without insulting me?
That’s what you trolls do here daily. Stop your whining and playing victim. When you come in and use terms like “Socialized Medicine” you are the one insulting everyone. You don’t like getting slapped back, don’t be a jerk.
ConservativeChristian says:
So I am not a “tenther” and would never like to be defined by a single phrase other than Christian.
They go hand in hand in the GOP, NO?
September 25th, 2009 at 1:14 pmgag order,
Nuff said, if you speak the truth than this blog is pointless since it is not here for the purpose of sharing ideas, debating topics and sharing information,
Does anyone else agree with gag order?
Who disagrees with gag order?
September 25th, 2009 at 1:14 pmConservativeChristian says:
I agree Praha,
I never liked the Republican Party. I usually vote Democratic Party, until recently. I actually went third party and did not support Obama or McCain. I am as inlcined now to consider third party candidates as I am candidates from the big two.
What’s wrong, upset Ron Paul wasn’t nominated and you decided to take your ball off the court like a nice little baby?
September 25th, 2009 at 1:15 pmConservativeChristian says:
gag order,
Nuff said, if you speak the truth than this blog is pointless since it is not here for the purpose of sharing ideas, debating topics and sharing information,
Does anyone else agree with gag order?
Who disagrees with gag order?
I’ve seen debate here, it doesn’t begin when someone comes as unprepared and as insulting as you have.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:16 pmJust the bleepn facts,
I am in support of socialized medicine and I really don’t care what people from the GOP call me. They can call me a radical socialist but this is not true.
I believe in a Constitutional Republic.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:16 pmSorry Ralph – obviously I’m late to this thread!
Good work all, as usual.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:18 pmConservativeChristian says:
Knowing what a “tenther” is, considering it is a new phrase as ElBruce pointed out to me, isn’t exactly higher education.
Considering it’s current events, and this topic is current events they are one and the same.
ConservativeChristian says:
When in this blog did I comment once on my knowledge of what a tenther is?
When did you hear the health care bill was claimed to be unconstitutional? Those are related you know.
ConservativeChristian says:
Know that I know what it is about, it’s not a complicated topic.
It’s not? Then you should just go solve it for everyone! ;)
ConservativeChristian says:
Is it improper behavior to ask other people questions on this blog? If this is not protocol, then I will not ask other people questions. At most political blogs I have been to, or blogs in general, people usually are happy to share information and ideas.
Are those blogs Christian or Conservative? Because talking amongst yourselves isn’t sharing ideas, it’s repeated the ideas of others you were told. And those sites ban people like us. This site permits people like you to make a complete fool of yourself though – isn’t that generous and compassionate of them? ;)
September 25th, 2009 at 1:19 pmConservativeChristian says:
Thanks El Bruce,
I just noticed you took the time to answer my questions. I’m sorry for not knowing some of the terminology that everyone else here seems to be familiar with.
No need to apologize. However, if you’re unsure about a term, I recommend Googling it before submitting your opinion on it.
You may have received such a chilly reception because most right-wingers are here to post highly extremist viewpoints, and tend to go for slander, outright lying, ignoring intelligent responses and misinformation. However, like Diogenes looking for an honest man, I try to hold out hope that there are moderate conservatives out there today.
.
ConservativeChristian says:
I’ve spent too much time here today. I will gladly answer your questions about the NY Times privately via email. I used to trust it as a relaiable source but not anymore. It would be easier to send you a private email about this over the weekend and would be happy to do so because you took the time to answer my questions.
Participating in a public forum is the entire point here. If you believe that your opinions are correct, then it follows that you should share them with anyone else who is interested in the same subject, which is most of the people here.
You claimed publicly that the NYT is unreliable. I asked for evidence to support your claim. If you’re unwilling to support the claim in public, then you should retract the claim that you made in public.
.
ConservativeChristian says:
When in this blog did I comment once on my knowledge of what a tenther is?
Comment #64
You claimed to be one, then claimed it was a “dirty name.” If you make such a claim or characterization, the default assumption is that you have some knowledge of what you’re talking about.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:19 pmThis was your first post:
And now you want to be all reasonable and nice and let’s all get along?
we appreciate your concern, take it to red state.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:19 pmDo you always swallow for johns, or is that something special you save for Eric Odom and Mark Koldys?
September 25th, 2009 at 1:19 pmWhen did Twajie start posting as a CONservative Christian?
September 25th, 2009 at 1:20 pmJust the bleepn facts,
No I didn’t like the politics of McCain or Obama. I prefered Cynthia McKinney, Democrat who ran third party and Bob Barr who ran on the Libertarian party ticket
Well I just read something else you posted. Are you proud of what you are writing? Is this how civilized people should communicate to each other?
September 25th, 2009 at 1:20 pmRon Paul and all third party candidates have a skewed vision of the Consideration and therefor, they do not merit serious consideration. These third party candidates are even further away from an intellectual basis for discussing the Constitution than the Dems and Reps.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:20 pmConservativeChristian says:
Just the bleepn facts,
I am in support of socialized medicine and I really don’t care what people from the GOP call me. They can call me a radical socialist but this is not true.
I believe in a Constitutional Republic.
Actually we are a lot more complicated than just being a Constitutional Republic, we are also a representative democracy at the same time. And the majority of Americans want universal health care and there’s nothing in the Constitution that prohibits this.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:21 pmCorrection: skewed vision of the Constitution. My fingers are not working right today.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:22 pmConservativeChristian, if you even pretend to take gag order seriously, then you obviously haven’t read his comments on this thread.
or else you’re not who you present yourself to be.
“gag order” is the latest sockpuppet name chosen by a familiar slimy little troll who for some reason delights in negative attention from strangers.
He has no interest in actually responding to questions like you do, he has no interest in even making sense if it’s inconvenient. His sole purpose it seems is to disrupt and annoy. Okay, maybe that’s two purposes.
If you can’t tell that just from his questionable “contributions” to this discussion already, I have to express suspicion of your social acumen.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:22 pmConservativeChristian says:
I agree with you that the Republican party is full of hypocrisy. I have also found hypocrisy to exist in the Democratic party as well.
Certainly. But the GOP seems to have a lock on frothing-at-the-mouth crazy at the moment.
.
gag order says:
Not here!
You are, of course, speaking for yourself.
.
ConservativeChristian says:
I am in support of socialized medicine and I really don’t care what people from the GOP call me. They can call me a radical socialist but this is not true.
I believe in a Constitutional Republic.
Well, it seems we have little to disagree about then.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:23 pmConservativeChristian says:
Just the bleepn facts,
No I didn’t like the politics of McCain or Obama. I prefered Cynthia McKinney, Democrat who ran third party and Bob Barr who ran on the Libertarian party ticket
You’re a libertarian, like most of the loons that come post here.
ConservativeChristian says:
Well I just read something else you posted. Are you proud of what you are writing? Is this how civilized people should communicate to each other?
I don’t know, is calling people a “Socialist” something to be proud of? Is whining when people make fun of your ignorance something to be proud of?
What a victim. Your passive aggressive concern trolling is just annoying.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:23 pmFred
Calling people tenthers, which I perceived as a slur, reminds me of the name calling I read Rush Limbaugh say. I never heard a Limbaugh radio show, but I read in articles some of the name calling he has done.
This article reminded me of his behavior. I’m sorry I call it like I see it. Are you all personal friends of the author of this article? Did I personally attack you at any time?
September 25th, 2009 at 1:24 pmIs this how civilized people should communicate to each other?
Do you now acknowledge that you knew what a ‘tenther’ was and feigned ignorance? See El Bruce’s excellent post @ 255 pointing out that you claimed to be a ‘firster-tenther’ long before you feigned ignorance of the term…
Is that how HONEST people should communicate to each other?
September 25th, 2009 at 1:24 pmif you really believe “the truth” belongs to you, why would you seek debate?
it’s very curious, CC, that you’ve only just now become politically vocal.
many of us have been for years, and to us it seems odd that this year people are popping up everywhere to object to things that actually happened years ago, that are in the process of being rolled back now.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:25 pmAs opposed to, say…
Right?
September 25th, 2009 at 1:25 pmConservativeChristian seems to have a lot of unknown unknowns, wouldn’t you say?
September 25th, 2009 at 1:25 pmElBruce,
I like you, you are reasonable and a pleasure to talk to.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:25 pmi think CC is really PP,
making a sad stab at a new tack.
it’s easy to spot fictional personas.
but hard to understand why they’d bother.
juvenile at best.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:27 pmConservativeChristian says:
Fred
Calling people tenthers, which I perceived as a slur, reminds me of the name calling I read Rush Limbaugh say. I never heard a Limbaugh radio show, but I read in articles some of the name calling he has done.
Except Rush lies and fabricates charges.
Why aren’t you over on those Conservative blogs you say are so civilized complaining about Rush? Kicked off or are you just lying as Conservatives tend to?
ConservativeChristian says:
This article reminded me of his behavior. I’m sorry I call it like I see it. Are you all personal friends of the author of this article? Did I personally attack you at any time?
That’s because you’re thin skinned and incapable of telling the difference between a fact and a smear. You stated we are proposing socialized health care, that’s a lie, that’s a smear, that’s name calling. Or didn’t you know that?
September 25th, 2009 at 1:27 pmStill no explaination of why anyone would vote for Bob Barr? Besides in their right mind could confuse Barr with liberty? Just check out his history on recreational drug use, gay marriage, death with dignity and any number of other big government interventions in private liberties….
September 25th, 2009 at 1:28 pmSecond that.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:28 pmIt’s not Twajie, it’s one of his butt buddies from their vile stalker/hate blog.
Twajie (Rick Martinez) is illiterate and isn’t capable of forming a complete sentence.
Hey Twajie, speaking of cowards, it’s been a month and you still haven’t had the balls to take me up on my offer to debate one on one at a neutral site.
Everybody is starting to think you’re a pussy.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:28 pmtombaker says:
i think CC is really PP,
making a sad stab at a new tack.
it’s easy to spot fictional personas.
Old troll with a new sockpuppet alright, but hard to tell which one. Could be jay, jeffy bovine(MizzPee) or even backup.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:28 pmOhhhhh I see! CC has been to many political blogs, but never heard the term Tenther until today, here?
Uh huh.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:28 pmCrazy Cat Lady says:
Ohhhhh I see! CC has been to many political blogs, but never heard the term Tenther until today, here?
Uh huh.
A libertarian that shocking believes in big government against all libertarian principles who just stumbled here! ROTFL! Funny isn’t it?
September 25th, 2009 at 1:29 pmConservativeChristian says:
Calling people tenthers, which I perceived as a slur, reminds me of the name calling I read Rush Limbaugh say.
It may be slightly perjorative, but not necessarily so. It’s only a brief way of explaining their political view, which nearly always comes back to the same Constitutional amendment to justify opposition to any government measure.
A better “slur” to complain about would be “teabagger” to characterize recent anti-tax protesters. In modern slang, to “teabag” refers to placing one’s scrotum in the mouth of another person. However, the anti-tax protesters started calling themselves “teabaggers” before their critics did. We just picked up on their apparent ignorance of the term’s connotations, and continue to use the term they adopted for themselves.
.
gag order says:
The majority of Americans are against obamas plan…
I’d be interested to hear your definition of “the majority.”
September 25th, 2009 at 1:30 pmAnd this was not a slur?
I’ll remind you again that the above was the very first thing you posted on this blog.
I call em the way I see em. Isn’t that the right wing meme these days as they warp facts?
September 25th, 2009 at 1:31 pmI doubt if it’s jay, as ConservativeChristian seems relatively willing to address direct questions.
That was always like kryptonite to jay. A direct question would get him spinning like a turbine at the base of the Hoover Dam.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:31 pmralph the wonder llama says:
ConservativeChristian says:
ElBruce,
I like you, you are reasonable and a pleasure to talk to.
Second that.
Dude’s from Portland, so of course he’s reasonable and pleasurable. We all are.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:32 pmgag order says:
ralph the wonder llama says:
Did bj not get blow jobs in the oval office? Is that a lie or a smear?
Publishing what people do in their private lives when it doesn’t involve their jobs is a smear.
Did the republicans lie to congress, the American people, and criminally violate the constitution under the last administration? Is that a lie or a smear?
September 25th, 2009 at 1:32 pmHow can one be for socialized medicine and say the government has no Constituitional authorization to enact health care reform?
September 25th, 2009 at 1:32 pmIs that how the Right “debates”?
September 25th, 2009 at 1:32 pmConservative Christian, the right wing pulls out it’s fringe interpretation of the 10th over and over whenever the federal government tries to accomplish something with which it doesn’t agree.
Right after the Brown v. Board of Education decision, 19 senators and 77 representatives endorsed a “Southern Manifesto,” proclaiming — in words echoed by modern-day tenthers — that Brown “encroach[es] on the rights reserved to the States” because the “Constitution does not mention education.”
They used the argument in the ’30s against New Deal programs. “Tenther” is not necessarily something they call themselves. It’s more like “truther” or “birther,” a pejorative term given to them.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:33 pmPatrioticLiberalChristian says:
How can one be for socialized medicine and say the government has no Constituitional authorization to enact health care reform?
The sockpuppet voted for a libertarian while saying they are for socialized medicine! ROTFL! That’s the funny part!
September 25th, 2009 at 1:33 pmTom Baker,
It appears your first question is directed at the person who said this place is not for sharing ideas and information,
Your second question about why I have become politically vocal, I’ve always been politically vocal primarily with family members, especially my brother-in-law. I would always vote Democrat and he would vote Republican all the time.
Since having a renewed interest in our Constitution, the birth of our nation and having easy access to the laws being passed and those resolutions which have been blocked, I have a renewed interest in politics.
The catalyst for this has definitely been the dreadful wrong doings of the Bush-Cheney regime and anyone in Congress who rubber stamped it, regardless of being Republican or Democrat.
Right now, I see more things wrong with this country than right. What’s been going on has been a wake up call. I spent much of my time reading about science and art, I’ve spent very little of my time on politics.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:34 pmralph the wonder llama says:
gag order says:
ralph the wonder llama says:
Did bj not get blow jobs in the oval office? Is that a lie or a smear?
Is that how the Right “debates”?
Yes. Facts have a liberal bias, so they feel they have no choice. Ironically a Republican Senator told Clinton just that – in so many words! ;)
September 25th, 2009 at 1:34 pmThe public option for health care is less of a danger to the Constitution than the Patriot Act which is wholesale violations of the Bill of Rights. There were no demonstrations when Bush was in office. However, teabaggers, birthers and tenthers can only see Obama’s plans as a danger. This makes their dissent highly suspect and can only be explained by racism.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:36 pmEither CC is a true rookie or a smooth concern troll.
Judging by the comments, I’d say the latter.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:36 pmgag order says:
Did bj not get blow jobs in the oval office? Is that a lie or a smear?
Neither; it’s irrelevant to any discussion of current events whatsoever.
It’s also true that the anglerfish is a members of the order Lophiiformes, but I’m not going to respond to people’s political opinions by pointing that out over and over again either. Why? Because that would make me look retarded. So go ahead and take one guess how your similar behavior makes you look?
.
tombaker says:
i think CC is really PP,
PP isn’t capable of putting more than five words together in a single comment.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:36 pmConservativeChristian says:
Your second question about why I have become politically vocal, I’ve always been politically vocal primarily with family members, especially my brother-in-law. I would always vote Democrat and he would vote Republican all the time.
That’s not being vocal, that’s being silent if all you talk to is family.
ConservativeChristian says:
Since having a renewed interest in our Constitution, the birth of our nation and having easy access to the laws being passed and those resolutions which have been blocked, I have a renewed interest in politics.
Actually the Constitution is what makes all of those things possible. Do you mean you have a desire to radically change the Constitution? Otherwise this whole paragraph is nonsense.
ConservativeChristian says:
The catalyst for this has definitely been the dreadful wrong doings of the Bush-Cheney regime and anyone in Congress who rubber stamped it, regardless of being Republican or Democrat.
That’s what republicans do, yet you won’t vote for the only party that can stop them. Curious isn’t it?
ConservativeChristian says:
Right now, I see more things wrong with this country than right. What’s been going on has been a wake up call. I spent much of my time reading about science and art, I’ve spent very little of my time on politics.
YAWN… If that’s what you see then you’re a fool.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:37 pmgag order says:
Is that how the Right “debates”?
What clinton did isn’t “debatable.”
Neither is its relevance, but here you are doing so. But that just proves you’re incompetent and blind. ;)
September 25th, 2009 at 1:38 pmHe’s obviously a Glenn Beck fan. He’s been whining about the Federal Reserve lately. It’s the latest talking point.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:39 pmBut what did it have to do with the discussion?
THAT is how the Right “debates” — change the subject, even if the subject is so out-of-date that it’s fodder for “oldies” nights at Republican fundraisers.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:39 pmConservativeChristian, all you have to do is follow the last few comments by “gag reflex” to rightfully dismiss him.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:40 pmgag order says:
Is Craig or Vitter any different? Done in private? Monica did it for free as far as we know. That’s the only difference yet there seems to be a double standard, right?
Considering one was have public sex (illegal) and the other was hiring Prostitutes (illegal) and they were both caught as part of criminal investigations into both things – not the same, not a double standard.
I also don’t recall Clinton parading around trying to legislate the private morality of others (Vitter/Craig) while behaving hypocritically in private.
But I’m sure you miss the irony of all of this. Facts don’t interest Conservatives, and neither does Republicans that break the laws over and over again. ;)
September 25th, 2009 at 1:40 pmObviously you don’t stay that well informed ConservativeChristian if you think Amanda Terkel coined the term “tenther”. Maybe you should be quiet and try to learn something instead of assuming you can teach anybody here anything. I believe you’re a little less informed than most of us.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:41 pmgag order says:
Publishing what people do in their private lives when it doesn’t involve their jobs is a smear.
Is Craig or Vitter any different? Done in private? Monica did it for free as far as we know.
I’ll be glad to shut up about them as soon as they retire. But while they continue to legislate morality from their elected positions, I’m going to continue to point out that it is hypocritical for them to do so.
Clinton has retired. He is a private citizen, and his indiscretions are irrelevant to discussions about current politics.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:41 pmAnd why isn’t Ensign in a court room attending his trial??? There the Neo-Nuts go again…trying to be their own country…Wonder where these clowns were when chimpy and darth were ripping the constitution up in front of their faces and they just stood there like frozen tree stumps..
These people are a disgrace to public office…
September 25th, 2009 at 1:41 pmAgain, this thread isn’t about Clinton. It’s about Sen. Ensign. Why he hasn’t been indicted for sexual harassment and abuse of power is beyond me. Hopefully the family he destroyed are initiating a civil suit against him.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:43 pmShayne says:
Again, this thread isn’t about Clinton. It’s about Sen. Ensign. Why he hasn’t been indicted for sexual harassment and abuse of power is beyond me. Hopefully the family he destroyed are initiating a civil suit against him.
In gag’s world where facts don’t matter, only Democrats are guilty and Republicans are all just being witch hunted! ;)
September 25th, 2009 at 1:44 pmNiner Fan,
I liked FDR for the most part, I didn’t like what I read about his NRA and AAA and some of the other New Deal legislation which was cut down by the court as being unconstitutional. I think the modern day Republicans have not defended the 10th, nor have the Democrats. I agree they (Republicans) have used it inappropriately and not defended it when they should have.
Brown vs. Board of Ed is a great example. I think the Department of Education is wasteful and superfluous. In the case of Brown Vs. Board of Ed the government needed to interfere, because the Constitution does mention preserving the rights of the individual and stepping in when a state tries to pass a local law which violates the freedom and/or rights of the people.
I never liked the Republican Party, I think when you say “right wing” you are talking about the Republicans and not Anarchy.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:45 pmHow did they pay any price? Who oppressed them? No one.
It’s the old gop double standard.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:46 pmShayne,
Wrong assumption.
I don’t like Glenn Beck at all. I dislike Fox News very much, it is not news, it is propaganda in my opinion. I really really don’t like O’Reilly’s show.
The only guy I ever watched at Fox that I liked is Judge Napolitano. I dont waste my time with Fox. I avoid Fox news like the plague.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:48 pmgag order says:
Is that how the Right “debates”?
The Right doesn’t debate. They fling poo.
They equate a single bj with a Governor flying to Buenos Aires on state funds to cheat on his wife, with a Senator who porks married women in his office while mummy and daddy pay hush money, with a clown who has to wear diapers to have sex with a hooker, with a Senator who solicits gay sex in a national airport, with an idiot who has visions of man-on-dog sex, with a Speaker who divorces his wife while she is fighting cancer to go play with a new honey and so many more righteous perverts who publicly proclaim high moral while doing things a donkey in Tiajuana would be ashamed of.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:48 pmActually, these days, when I say “right wing,” I have to include not only Repubs but Libertarians. To believe that corporations should have no regulation ends up being a profoundly un-democratic position in reality.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:49 pmShayne,
In my attempt to stay informed I asked people here about the term tenther. ElBruce informed me about it in an intelligent way, without belittling me. He has been acting like a true gentleman.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:50 pmShayne,
Also just because she didn’t invent that term, it doesn’t mean it is automatically OK to use derogatory names when talking about other people.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:51 pmgag reflex, just what planet do you live on and how many voices are there in your head?
September 25th, 2009 at 1:52 pmtenthers are mostly republicans and they are calling for anarchy.
Since you don’t know much, read about how they are calling for a bloody rebellion and spilling blood.
They are glorifying mcveigh and anti-government groups.
Please don’t take my word for it. Find out for yourself if you are honest and obective.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:52 pmNiner Fan, I think of Libertarians as a blend of good values of the Democrats, good values of Republicans, some bad values of the Republicans and a healthy does of skepticism of the Federal government. Opponents of this party call them paranoid, but are they really?
Although I dont agree with the Libertarians on every issue, I would like to see this party replace the big government neoconservative element in the Republican party. I would like to see the Republican Party become a third party.
Of course if one party rose to unchecked power even if it is the Dems, we would have major problems. I hope that a third party emerges. I think the freedom of this nation may hinge on this.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:56 pmConservativeChristian says:
Niner Fan,
I liked FDR for the most part, I didn’t like what I read about his NRA and AAA and some of the other New Deal legislation which was cut down by the court as being unconstitutional.
The NRA was a little broad, but key parts of it are still alive and well in the Wagner Act. Are you anti-union as well? Of course you are, all fascist libertarians are.
As for the AAA, that’s the foundation of the modern food system and a key part of how the country’s food supply and price management works. Before it prices of food swung wildly and farmers frequently lost their farms.
ConservativeChristian says:
I think the modern day Republicans have not defended the 10th, nor have the Democrats. I agree they (Republicans) have used it inappropriately and not defended it when they should have.
Then you’re a fool.
ConservativeChristian says:
Brown vs. Board of Ed is a great example. I think the Department of Education is wasteful and superfluous. In the case of Brown Vs. Board of Ed the government needed to interfere, because the Constitution does mention preserving the rights of the individual and stepping in when a state tries to pass a local law which violates the freedom and/or rights of the people.
Dealing with racism and segregation is frivolous? ROTFL! What an extremist!
ConservativeChristian says:
I never liked the Republican Party, I think when you say “right wing” you are talking about the Republicans and not Anarchy.
There’s little difference between all of you. You’re radical and you lead to anarchy. Just look at wallstreet a few months ago. Whenever repulicans and “righties” are involved, anarchy, violence and collapse follows.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:57 pmProgressives have had concerns about the Federal Reserve for a very long time. Funny you show up when it’s all the rage to bash it among right wing hate pundits as well and spew their “tenther” drivel as well. If we believe all you say you’re a walking contradiction.
And if the law was as cut and dried as you tenthers seem to believe we wouldn’t need a Supreme Court or any judges at all would we?
September 25th, 2009 at 1:57 pmThen explain why you called Amanda the female version of rush limpballs without knowing what tenther even means?
I mean, you acted like you knew it was derogatory but you now admit you knew nothing and are here to be enlightened?
Your first post, again:
September 25th, 2009 at 1:58 pm
ConservativeChristian says:
Niner Fan, I think of Libertarians as a blend of good values of the Democrats, good values of Republicans, some bad values of the Republicans and a healthy does of skepticism of the Federal government. Opponents of this party call them paranoid, but are they really?
If that’s what you believe, then you’re an idiot and paranoid is just the tip of the iceberg for how to describe you.
ConservativeChristian says:
Although I dont agree with the Libertarians on every issue, I would like to see this party replace the big government neoconservative element in the Republican party. I would like to see the Republican Party become a third party.
Big Government? So we should do away with public schools, police, army, airports, roads, etc.,? Because we the people use that big government, and it’s what pulled us out of being a rural backwater 3rd world country.
ConservativeChristian says:
Of course if one party rose to unchecked power even if it is the Dems, we would have major problems. I hope that a third party emerges. I think the freedom of this nation may hinge on this.
That’s crap. The Democrats self check, or haven’t you been paying attention? Republicans act in lock step and few if any of you “righties” ever leave the ranch. Democrats have a large range of values and self regulate nicely.
That being said, if you want to replace the Republicans with Libertarians – help yourselves! Good luck with that!
September 25th, 2009 at 2:00 pmgag order says:
They are glorifying mcveigh and anti-government groups.
Who’s “they?”
You tell us, they’re “your” people.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:00 pmFred I will take you advice,
My current thought is that the Neoconservatives in the GOP are very totalitarian and the complete opposite of the Anarchists. I don’t consider tax protesters anrachists, they seem Patriotic to me. The tenthers however seem to be a totally different animal, something which I do not understand.
From the description of people here, they are against health care reform, somewhat racist, and against the minimum wage (which sounds like they are in the employ of KMart, Walmart, Home Depot)
I know this is probably not an accurate description of them, but this is what others here have written about them so far.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:01 pmWhile potentially true, it is a misleading statement. The democrats had pretty much unchecked power from 1929 until 1994 and we had major problems but they were all caused by republicans who gained short term power, did their damage and were replaced with democrats, inevitably.
Republicans insist that government will not work and then set out to prove it.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:01 pmConservativeChristian, the name of this site is “Think Progress” not “Think Libertarian”. Maybe you would be appreciated more somewhere people believed the same things you do. Of course you’re welcome to stay here just don’t expect to get much respect for your beliefs.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:02 pmJust the bleepn facts,
It seems you are very opinionated. You also make wild assumptions about other people’s beliefs without asking them or getting to know them.
I prefer talking to other people here like Fred and ElBruce. I would appreciate it if you did not write me anymore. I honestly have no interest in having conversations with you.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:03 pmgag order says:
Who oppressed them? No one.
Nooooo! Nobody did! They were just smeared from the west coast to the east coast. To this day you folks can’t go a day w/out bringing them up! No, they weren’t “opressed.” Not at all! I could probably find 50 posts authored right here on each of those people on tp, alone!
You think two men caught in illegal sex acts were smeared? Clinton wasn’t caught for an illegal sex act – there was nothing illegal about what he did. He had consensual sex, and didn’t pay for it.
Smearing implies what you Conservatives do, which is to somehow imply that a “bj” is illegal or “wrong”? Vitter and Craig both did “illegal” acts, Clinton just didn’t want to kiss and tell. To compare the two is dishonest and “bearing false witness”, so you’re going to hell while you’re at it! ;)
September 25th, 2009 at 2:04 pmThey are the same people. The gop is lashing them into a lather using tenther and taxes as the kindling.
If you don’t know what’s going on, it would be best if you didn’t comment.
If you continue, I can only assume that your wish is to confuse the issue, which I suspect was your goal all along in light of your first post.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:06 pmConservativeChristian says:
Just the bleepn facts,
It seems you are very opinionated. You also make wild assumptions about other people’s beliefs without asking them or getting to know them.
Project much?
You make lots of assumptions about this blog, Amanda, me, Democrats and even Libertarians without asking or understanding anything of your topic. Why is that? Then when people point out that you’re uninformed and insulting you play victim and whine.
ConservativeChristian says:
I prefer talking to other people here like Fred and ElBruce. I would appreciate it if you did not write me anymore. I honestly have no interest in having conversations with you.
This is blog, I don’t write “to” you, I make fun of you. I don’t care whether you like it or not, that’s what’s going to continue to happen. Stop whining concern troll. We know your type. You’re just another boring sockpuppet libertarian freak.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:06 pmShayne,
I see your point. I dont think of myself as a Libertarian since I have been of voting age, my trend has been to vote Democrat 99% of the time, but perhaps you are right.
I do like the Libertarian party somewhat, I don’t agree with everything, but then again does anyone who thinks agree 100% of the time with any party they support.
I’m glad that you are welcoming me to stay here. A few people like you have been courteous. Others have not.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:07 pmjust the bleepn facts, I don’t know what you did but Conservative Christian doesn’t want to talk to you any more. Are you alright? Can you handle the rejection? :)
September 25th, 2009 at 2:07 pmFred says:
If you don’t know what’s going on, it would be best if you didn’t comment.
If you continue, I can only assume that your wish is to confuse the issue, which I suspect was your goal all along in light of your first post.
That’s always the goal of concern troll. They’re just whiny professional victims. So boring.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:07 pmWe have a troll that claims to be a libertarian that believes in socialized medicine, and not a racist who believes in school segregation! ROTFL! Talk about looooonnnnnniiieeee! ;)
September 25th, 2009 at 2:08 pmWhat’s the word? Projection? When have you ever provided a single fact? When have you contributed anything more than what is in your post above?
See why people tell you to f uck off?
September 25th, 2009 at 2:09 pmGee, another interesting coincidence:
If a concern troll walks like a bircher and quacks like a bircher, it’s obvious he must be a bircher.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:09 pmShayne says:
just the bleepn facts, I don’t know what you did but Conservative Christian doesn’t want to talk to you any more. Are you alright? Can you handle the rejection? :)
I know! What will I do? I live and die on the approval of an anonymous sockpuppet whiny uninformed troll! My self esteem will be wrecked forever! ;)
September 25th, 2009 at 2:09 pmYou do know that Ron Paul is a Republican and not and Independent don’t you?
September 25th, 2009 at 2:09 pmgag order says:
just the bleepn facts says:
So, you’re just flinging shit, again? No examples? Loser!
Projection…. ZZZzzz….
September 25th, 2009 at 2:10 pmReggie, yeah, CC is probably Lew in drag…
September 25th, 2009 at 2:11 pmFred
This is believable. I would put nothing past the GOP, to use people diametrically opposed to their true Neocon ideology as pawns the stir up a ruckus.
I never tried to confuse the issue. I support health care reform. All I ever said was I didn’t like people calling someone who loves the Constitution names.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:11 pmgag order – flagged.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:12 pmgag order says:
You’re just another boring sockpuppet libertarian freak.
Why did you change from “republicans hate facts” to your new stupid name? Isn’t that called a “sock puppet?” I believe so.
Says the sockpuppet.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:13 pmThat’s exactly why we elected Obama.
To expect he’d have all that straightened out already is a pretty high expectation, don’t you think?
Don’t you think some more time should be taken to see what the results will be?
September 25th, 2009 at 2:14 pmWe the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
A clear statement of intent, this Preamble thing. Like the founding fathers had an idea that this more perfect Union might have meant that the states should work together to the common cause of union. You know, that the states should work together so that the US didn’t just exist as a bunch of people who thought like maybe it would be a good idea if we did things in some sort of united fashion so that, well, maybe the areas that are more sparsely populated might have an equal voice or that maybe we shouldn’t end up like Europe where you have a bunch of ethnic diversity dividing small groups into smaller groups that would fight with each other and never decide to make something like the European Union and…
Crap. If the trollish types want to ignore the name of their own country and the stated intent of the founding fathers, well, there is a reason why their numbers are dwindling.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:15 pmConservativeChristian says:
Fred
This is believable. I would put nothing past the GOP, to use people diametrically opposed to their true Neocon ideology as pawns the stir up a ruckus.
Duh.
ConservativeChristian says:
I never tried to confuse the issue. I support health care reform. All I ever said was I didn’t like people calling someone who loves the Constitution names.
Actually they don’t love the constitution, they hope to pervert it to their radical agenda and wrap it like a flag around their Unamerican behavior.
People that love the constitution don’t talk about shooting the president, tea staining the flag, and talk of revolution because they don’t like the popular winner of an election or the laws enacted legally. The whole point of you 10thers is that you don’t have a constitution leg to stand on, but that doesn’t stop you from lying. Because that’s what righties do – lie.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:16 pmShayne,
Yes I know Ron Paul is a Republican. I never was able to vote for him. I live in NY, not Texas. He was not on the ballot in NY for President. He is the only Republican (in Congress) I can think of that I admire very much. I’ve been voting since the ’80s. I’ve only voted once for a Libertarian candidate and twice for a Republican. All my other votes have been for Democrats.
To say my past voting history has been 99% Democrat is probably very close to being accurate.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:16 pmgag order says:
gag order – flagged.
Can’t take the truth, coward?
Project much?
September 25th, 2009 at 2:16 pmConservativeChristian says:
Shayne,
Yes I know Ron Paul is a Republican. I never was able to vote for him. I live in NY, not Texas. He was not on the ballot in NY for President. He is the only Republican (in Congress) I can think of that I admire very much. I’ve been voting since the ’80s. I’ve only voted once for a Libertarian candidate and twice for a Republican. All my other votes have been for Democrats.
To say my past voting history has been 99% Democrat is probably very close to being accurate.
So you’ve only voted once? You admire Ron Paul? LOL! That guys a complete lunatic! Of course you admire him! Just move to Somalia, they’re a perfect paradise for a religious conservative libertarian like yourself! No big government! ;)
September 25th, 2009 at 2:17 pmTom Baker,
Yes he deserves more time, but he has done and said some things which disturb me greatly.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:17 pmConservativeChristian says:
Tom Baker,
Yes he deserves more time, but he has done and said some things which disturb me greatly.
Nothing is more disturbing than you birthers and tenthers! Nothing that Obama has said is disturbing in any rational world. In the world of the libbieloon, you’re scared of your own shadows.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:19 pmgag order says:
Project much?
Never.
Lie much?
September 25th, 2009 at 2:19 pmgag order says:
Publishing what people do in their private lives when it doesn’t involve their jobs is a smear.
Is Craig or Vitter any different? Done in private? Monica did it for free as far as we know. That’s the only difference yet there seems to be a double standard, right?
What Ensign, Sanford, Craig, Gingrich and Vitter did with their personal lives involves their jobs, but only because set the standard for their own conduct. None of the Dems are calling for their resignations. In fact, the Republicans made Craig resign. The problem with these Republicans is that they violated their own standards for conduct and the Dems are having a field day pointing out the hypocrisy.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:20 pmgag order says:
Duh.
Most intelligent thing you’ve ever posted. ;)
Must be nice for you to hear a vocabulary word you understand…. ;)
September 25th, 2009 at 2:21 pmWell, we don’t like songs like Barack the Magic Negro either but you can’t just focus your whole philosophy and discussion on just one thing now can you?
I mean, Obama did nothing to deserve that but the tenthers actually made an effort to stand on that ground and defend it.
They branded themselves and your inability to see that has filled many kb of posts here.
You will have to have some other thoughts than Amanda was out of line because she wasn’t. If you can’t see that then you need some critital thinking classes.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:21 pmpags2, pointing out his own smears, hypocrisy and idiocy won’t help gag, he’s too busy with his teabagging and gagging… ;)
September 25th, 2009 at 2:22 pmThis kind of statement from a troll reveals a mental derangement that should be easy to diagnose but may not be easy to cure.
The fact that the troll has provided not so much as one simple truth and yet professes to be the sole owner of truth is very telling, I must say.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:25 pmNot likely, CC is just another paulbot and bircher sent by Eric Odom to spam Think Progress.
He gave himself away when he mentioned his admiration for Lew Rockwell and Judge Napolitano.
That raised a red flag and set off alarm bells.
The far right Paulbots are controlling the Republican message right now, and unless the Republican party spurns Ron Paul and moves back towards the center, they’re toast in 2010.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:26 pmwell, maybe we should go for states rights. And while we are at it, why should a state government have any power to decide? Take it to the city and town level. While we are at it, lets just go back to feudalism where who ever has the money and castle gets to tell everyone how to live.
Yes, that is what it is all about. Let’s just go back in time. Progress is highly over rated.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:27 pmFred,
I have taken critical thinking classes, seriously not being sarcastic with you. If there is a song Barack the Magic Negro, that is not right, I don’t need to hear the lyrics to understand that it is derogatory. There are better ways to protest what a politician does. Amanda was not out of line, if this group of people desire to be called “tenthers”. If they do not want to be called this, she might just be out of line.
I don’t really care so much about what she wrote anymore, understanding that this is a blog and even the people here who like what is written don’t consider it a legitimate source of information.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:28 pmgag order says:
That raised a red flag and set off alarm bells.
Must be very loud in an empty head, right?
Please, share your expertise on the subject! Are you remembering how it feels every time I clock you? ;)
September 25th, 2009 at 2:30 pmReggie,
I am proud of supporting Ron Paul. He is the exact opposite of his Republican couterparts. There are many Democrats in Congress who acted very much like Republicans during the Bush-Cheney years and even now.
Despite being a registered Democrat and voting Democrat nearly exclusively, I am a free thinker and do not blindly follow the party line. I urge all here to consider what Ron Paul has proposed with an open mind and open heart.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:31 pmWe all love the Constitution and don’t appreciate those who imply they are the only folks who respect it while misinterpreting it.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:31 pmgag order says:
Fred says:
I noticed you ignored my poll that proved you wrong, above. Wouldn’t that make you a liar?
No one care’s who’s pole you gag on, we’re not interested in your teabagging. Or your inability to tell the difference between a consensual private act and a criminal one. I bet you have a lot of experience with the criminal acts – don’tcha? ;)
September 25th, 2009 at 2:32 pmConservativeChristian says:
Fred,
I have taken critical thinking classes, seriously not being sarcastic with you.
There’s no evidence to support that claim.
ConservativeChristian says:
If there is a song Barack the Magic Negro, that is not right, I don’t need to hear the lyrics to understand that it is derogatory. There are better ways to protest what a politician does. Amanda was not out of line, if this group of people desire to be called “tenthers”. If they do not want to be called this, she might just be out of line.
So then you using the term Socialist was out of line? Or is hypocrisy something they didn’t teach you in critical thinking?
ConservativeChristian says:
I don’t really care so much about what she wrote anymore, understanding that this is a blog and even the people here who like what is written don’t consider it a legitimate source of information.
ROTFL! Funny, that’s exactly how Fox and you trolls are perceived!
September 25th, 2009 at 2:34 pmgag order says:
If they do not want to be called this, she might just be out of line.
amanda is what’s known as a “fringer.” So are most of the progressive posters.
Says the “fringer”… ;)
September 25th, 2009 at 2:35 pmConservativeChristian says:
Reggie,
I am proud of supporting Ron Paul. He is the exact opposite of his Republican couterparts. There are many Democrats in Congress who acted very much like Republicans during the Bush-Cheney years and even now.
See that’s how we know you don’t understand critical thinking! ;)
ConservativeChristian says:
Despite being a registered Democrat and voting Democrat nearly exclusively, I am a free thinker and do not blindly follow the party line. I urge all here to consider what Ron Paul has proposed with an open mind and open heart.
There’s nothing “Democratic Party” about you or Ron Paul. It is not the “Democrat” party we are the “Democratic” party, and if you were one you’d know this. You are completely blind, and there’s nothing “free” about your thinking. You’re a libbieloon just like your den mother jeffie bovine.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:37 pmgag order says:
pags2 says:
Are you saying the democrats hold themselves to a much lower standard?
Clinton and the Dems have never made any similar statements about personal lives like the Republicans. The Republicans are convicted by their own words not the Dems. In answer to your question, yes there is a different standard. When the Dems start making pronouncements about moral stardards, then they will be bound to their own words.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:37 pmWell, if you paid attention, you’d realize that Democrats hold Republicans to a much lower standard.
Given the body of evidence, it’s understandable, but I don’t think it helps the Republicans to live up to their potential.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:38 pm“demasiados duendes” (too many trolls)
This thread was thoroughly hijacked by a “duende de la preocupación” (concern troll).
Moving right along…
September 25th, 2009 at 2:38 pmFred says:
The fact that the troll has provided not so much as one simple truth and yet professes to be the sole owner of truth is very telling, I must say.
Lunatics like this one can’t hear, read or comprehend what a fool they are. There’s no hope, no cure, no fix for their lunacy. They need to be marginalized just as their counterparts in the muslim world must be by the mainstream that sees their right wing religious zealot goals and says no.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:39 pmAw, that’s cute… our widdle troll is making up names for progressives now, just like the big kids do.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:39 pmBut it is a legitimate source of information. You will not find a single article that is not researched and sources cited.
The authors words are opinion but the facts are still facts.
This is the difference between TP and red state or rush or beck.
You should already know this simple and obvious fact. That you don’t is disturbing to say the least.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:41 pmgag order says:
just the bleepn facts says:
Do you always talk to yourself? Isn’t that borderline schizophrenic?
Yeah, I’m the schizophrenic one! ROTFL! ;)
My guess is that you’re a sociopath? Feel no empathy? Love to torture things? How many people have you left buried by the roadside? And you think people can’t see who/what you are? ROTFL! ;)
September 25th, 2009 at 2:41 pmgag order says:
Well, if you paid attention, you’d realize that Democrats hold Republicans to a much lower standard.
Nice spin….
Facts are all spin to you aren’t they? Explains why you’re so “fringe”… ;)
September 25th, 2009 at 2:42 pmConservativeChristian: “Although I dont agree with the Libertarians on every issue, I would like to see this party replace the big government neoconservative element in the Republican party.”
People can argue about this issue or that until they turn blue in the face. The bottom line on libertarian philosophy is that it gives maximum power (you can call it “freedom” if you like) to corporations. Even a cursory look at our history shows that in the absence of government regulation, you have corporate power. Corporate power is not only un-democratic, but has little or no interest in the well-being of society especially when that well-being runs counter to profit.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:42 pmShayne,
That is a good point and I am glad you love the Constitution. It sounds like those you call tenthers are using it when it is only appropriate for their political gain, but never invoke the Constitution and tenth ammendment to defend this nation against tyranny.
May the peace and love of Jesus Christ be with you,
Leaving here for today, maybe I will chat with you again in the future
September 25th, 2009 at 2:43 pmgag order says:
just the bleepn facts says:
You were much more entertaining as the cap quack/republicanshatefacts. I suggest you change back.
You were never entertaining, same old lunatic screaming for help… And too sick to know it… ;)
September 25th, 2009 at 2:44 pmWell said, NinerFan. Concise and compelling.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:44 pmConservativeChristian says:
Shayne,
That is a good point and I am glad you love the Constitution. It sounds like those you call tenthers are using it when it is only appropriate for their political gain, but never invoke the Constitution and tenth ammendment to defend this nation against tyranny.
If they invoked the constitution to defend against tyranny they would have stood up to bush as he was shredding the constitution. Or did you miss the past 8 years?
ConservativeChristian says:
May the peace and love of Jesus Christ be with you,
May the reason of science, facts and rational thought someday reach you and pull you from the depths of ignorance, superstition, racism, bigotry and hatred. I’m not holding my breath!
ConservativeChristian says:
Leaving here for today, maybe I will chat with you again in the future
Please don’t, you’re a boring useless concern troll with nothing of substance to add… Like Mizz gagsalot.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:47 pmgag order says:
You didn’t respond to my post in 386 so I will assume you are in agreement with my analysis.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:48 pmConservativeChristian says:
I think the Department of Education is wasteful and superfluous.
And yet, the alternative is to leave everybody uneducated. The establishment of public education in America was followed within a generation by our rise as a superpower.
You haven’t provided any examples of waste in it, nor have you explained what it is “superfluous” to.
.
gag order says:
Your huffington poll numbers say 65% in favor of public option.
My apologies, I assumed you know how to follow a hyperlink trail. Huffpo did not conduct the poll. Here is the source of the polling data.
.
gag order says:
Below is an actual poll on health care reform. You do the math.
Following Speech, Support for Health Care Reform Up to 46%
Below, where? Do you know what a URL is? You just posted a title. However, I’ll Google it…
Ah, here it is. Rassmussen poll, dated Sept. 11th 2009.
The poll I cited is dated Sept. 25th 2009, which means that between our citations, we can conclude that support for the plan is up almost 20% in the last two weeks.
.
ConservativeChristian says:
Also just because she didn’t invent that term, it doesn’t mean it is automatically OK to use derogatory names when talking about other people.
Please explain what is derogatory about the term “tenther.” Mind you, it doesn’t apply to everyone who “loves the Constitution.” I love the Constitution. But I don’t see “tenther” as applying to me, because I respect the whole document equally, and don’t pick and choose certain portions at the expense of others.
This is exactly what many of these right-wingers do. They “love” the Constitution in much the same way that an abuser “loves” his battered wife, trying to force it to be something it is not.
.
ConservativeChristian says:
Niner Fan, I think of Libertarians as a blend of good values of the Democrats, good values of Republicans, some bad values of the Republicans and a healthy does of skepticism of the Federal government.
I think of Libertarians as people who if they took their extremist position to its natural and logical conclusion, should be better referred to as Anarchists.
.
ConservativeChristian says:
I would appreciate it if you did not write me anymore. I honestly have no interest in having conversations with you.
Responding to people who are mean to you will lead you to a very, very bad place. Unless you’ve got a game-winning argument or insult for them, it’s just going to lead to tears all around. I recommend you skim over the less cogent responses and only return responses to substantive arguments.
.
ConservativeChristian says:
I am proud of supporting Ron Paul. He is the exact opposite of his Republican couterparts.
The best thing I can say about Ron Paul is that he is not a hypocrite in any way, shape or form. In today’s political environment, that’s no mean feat. But it’s not enough to be consistent, you also have to have a rational approach. Dismantling government would constitute dismantling America itself, for all practical purposes. Anarchy cannot stand.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:48 pmI agree Ralph, well said niner. The problem is conservatives only entrench when faced with facts that violate their preconceptions. The concern troll will never hear you. Neither will teabagging gagger. They’re locked into a belief where facts are nothing more than spin to them… They are unreachable.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:49 pmNinerFan,
From what I have read and seen, the Libertarian Party is opposed to large corporations and their ability to dictate what goes on in Washington. They seem to be a defender of the common man and an enemy of Big Pharma and The Military-Industrial complex. I agree that the US is in the merciless grasp of Corporatism. I think the Libertarian Party is a better second party to come into power than the status quo of the Republican Party being party number two.
Fred:Others here told me that this is just a blog and basically not a source of news. They told me not to get myself crazy over the articles because they are editorials with a biased slant.
I have no opinion yet because I only read one article! This is my first day here.
May the peace and love of Jesus Christ be with you. I really have to leave now.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:49 pmConservative Christian: “I am proud of supporting Ron Paul.”
OK, just so we’re clear, you’re a life-long democrat who agrees with the argument that there should be no Dept. of Education, Dept. of Transportation, FDA (no federal oversight of the drugs they sell us), EPA (no federal protection for the environment), no public libraries, absolutely no federal regulations on financial markets, no regulations on corporations, no campaign spending limits, no publicly held National Parks and, incredibly, federal laws limiting a woman’s right to choose to have an abortion at the same time.
Is that correct or were you unaware that these are Ron Paul’s positions?
September 25th, 2009 at 2:50 pmSeptember 25th, 2009 at 2:52 pm
No way that just the bleepn facts is republicans hate facts under a different name.
The increase in grammatical skills and decrease in reliance on capitalization aside, there is nothing similar about either the writing or debating styles.
Just thought I’d throw that out there.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:53 pmConservativeChristian says:
NinerFan,
From what I have read and seen, the Libertarian Party is opposed to large corporations and their ability to dictate what goes on in Washington. They seem to be a defender of the common man and an enemy of Big Pharma and The Military-Industrial complex. I agree that the US is in the merciless grasp of Corporatism. I think the Libertarian Party is a better second party to come into power than the status quo of the Republican Party being party number two.
Then you’ve read nothing. The libertarians believe in deregulation entirely, and getting the government out of corporations. You’re confused.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:53 pmThere are Libertarians which are an organized group and libertarians who adhere to a philosophy. The Libertarians have incorporated an economic theory that has nothing to do with libertarian philosophy which emphasizes individual freedom. That freedom is not dependent on any economic theory. This Libertarian economic philosophy is a perversion of libertarian. Read Thoreau.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:53 pmElBruce: “The best thing I can say about Ron Paul is that he is not a hypocrite in any way, shape or form.”
That’s very generous of you. I would agree if I ever heard him honestly say where he stands on a variety of issues when given the chance. Have you ever heard him tell a television interviewer that he doesn’t think we should be testing the drugs the pharma industry cooks up for us or that he doesn’t like the idea of public libraries?
September 25th, 2009 at 2:53 pmConservativeChristian says:
Fred:Others here told me that this is just a blog and basically not a source of news. They told me not to get myself crazy over the articles because they are editorials with a biased slant.
This is a blog that covers and cites news sources. The articles link to the original material, editorials do not. You are confused.
ConservativeChristian says:
I have no opinion yet because I only read one article! This is my first day here.
Then why did you offer your opinion as worth anything? It isn’t. You’re just a concern troll.
ConservativeChristian says:
May the peace and love of Jesus Christ be with you. I really have to leave now.
May the reason of facts and rational thinking free you from the confines of superstition, bigotry and hatred that cover you now.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:55 pmEl Bruce,
We were less wasteful and better educated compared to other industrialized nations prior to the creation of this Federal Agency. The purpose of a Federal agency collecting taxes to redistribute when I already pay close to $4000 a year on school tax seems superfluous to me. So much money is lost in the process on administrative and other costs.
Our local school district here on Long Island is excellent. I pay through the nose for it, but my child gets a good education in a safe environment. I also don’t like having a CIA, NSA, FEMA, Dep’t of Homeland Security and FBI.
Wouldn’t it be easier to just have the FBI and CIA? I think our government is wasteful and has an insatiable appetite for taxation and bloating itself.
Meanwhile we waste all this money on war and do not have medical care for everyone. The US Department of Education began operating in 1980 and frankly we were doing better as a nation educating our children prior to the creation of this agency.
You may not agree with me. But I think we waste an awful lot of money in Washington.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:56 pmgag order says:
just the bleepn facts says:
Smidget just called you stupid! LOL!
I was compared to you? ;)
September 25th, 2009 at 2:56 pmConservativeChristian: “From what I have read and seen, the Libertarian Party is opposed to large corporations and their ability to dictate what goes on in Washington.”
No, the Libertarian Party not only opposes any and all government regulations on corporations, but also opposes any spending limitations on them during elections and with respect to lobbying activities. They are actually the opposite of what you perceive and if you’re honestly interested, I can explain why that is.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:57 pmI certainly did not call anyone stupid.
I am about to, though. You ready? Here goes:
gag order – you’re a fcuking moron.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:58 pmConservativeChristian says:
El Bruce,
We were less wasteful and better educated compared to other industrialized nations prior to the creation of this Federal Agency. The purpose of a Federal agency collecting taxes to redistribute when I already pay close to $4000 a year on school tax seems superfluous to me. So much money is lost in the process on administrative and other costs.
That’s your opinion. Prove it. Back it up with facts if you can. We both know you can’t…
Another libbieloon ron paul liar.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:00 pmIs that teabagger here still gagging on her stupidity? ZZZzz…
September 25th, 2009 at 3:01 pmCorrection for you ConservativeChristian
The Dept of Ed was split off from the Dept of Health, Ed, and Welfare in 1980. But, the Dept of Health, Ed, and Welfare was started in 1923.
So…if you’re claiming that things were better for education prior to 1980, then you must be supporting the consolidation of the Dept of Health and Human Services and the Dept of Ed back into the single Dept of Health, Ed, and Welfare. If you are, instead, simply advocating for the dissolution of the Dept of Ed altogether, then I would suggest that you have much less of a clue about this subject than you seem to think you have.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:02 pmReggie would like being called a Obamabot or an Anybot?
I have posted no links to advertisements selling goods or services, so how exactly am I spamming this thread?
I never even voted for Ron Paul, however he’s one Republican I happen to like. The Republicans themselves hate him, shouldn’t this tell you something?
I voted Democrat my whole life and I get slammed by someone else who claims to be a Democrat for voting one time in my life for a Presidential Candidate who was neither Republican or Democrat?
You are a bit extreme. This all or nothing concept can lead to blindly following a single party. Single party systems always lead to tyranny.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:03 pmgag order says:
smidget says:
No way that just the bleepn facts is republicans hate facts under a different name.
The increase in grammatical skills and decrease in reliance on capitalization aside
—————
LOL!
Nouns and verbs are free. You should try using a few. We’ll know you’re ready for middle school that way! ;)
September 25th, 2009 at 3:03 pmgag order @ 420
And? just the bleepn facts has better grammar than republicans hate facts, and jtbf doesn’t rely on capitalization as heavily as rhf did. How does that equate to calling either party stupid?
Your ability to comprehend a simple English statement is truly pathetic. Let me guess – home schooled?
September 25th, 2009 at 3:04 pmonservativeChristian says:
We were less wasteful and better educated compared to other industrialized nations prior to the creation of this Federal Agency. The purpose of a Federal agency collecting taxes to redistribute when I already pay close to $4000 a year on school tax seems superfluous to me. So much money is lost in the process on administrative and other costs.
The schools in Illinois are paid for by the local property taxes and not federal money. Any educational dollars from the fed are distributed with strings attached as to how the dollars are spent. The schools are free to reject the federal dollars and therefore, have no obligations that are attached to those dollars. I can assure you that the feds collect a lot less than $4k for your taxes used for education. Your argument is bogus.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:05 pmOh, look!
gag order figured out how to use the vote down feature. Surprise. No one else on this board would have voted down me calling it a fcuking idiot…because it IS a fcuking idiot.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:05 pmConservativeChristian says:
Reggie would like being called a Obamabot or an Anybot?
For someone that claims to know nothing of blogs, and who only attends blogs with a free and polite exchange of ideas, you sure have a commanding set of slurs at your disposal.
ConservativeChristian says:
I have posted no links to advertisements selling goods or services, so how exactly am I spamming this thread?
Ron Paul/Libertarian spam…. ZZZzz…
ConservativeChristian says:
I never even voted for Ron Paul, however he’s one Republican I happen to like. The Republicans themselves hate him, shouldn’t this tell you something?
You said you would vote for him, and you voted for the Libertarian party because he wasn’t around. That endorsed candidates and parties.
ConservativeChristian says:
I voted Democrat my whole life and I get slammed by someone else who claims to be a Democrat for voting one time in my life for a Presidential Candidate who was neither Republican or Democrat?
Yet by your own admission you share no values with Democrats.
ConservativeChristian says:
You are a bit extreme. This all or nothing concept can lead to blindly following a single party. Single party systems always lead to tyranny.
You are a bit extreme if you believe in Libertarians. They want to dismantle our entire government and way of life. That’s insane, and so are you for buying off on their radical agenda!
September 25th, 2009 at 3:05 pmConservativeChristian says:
You are a bit extreme. This all or nothing concept can lead to blindly following a single party. Single party systems always lead to tyranny.
He who serves two masters, serves neither. Care to know who said that?
Belonging to a single party isn’t the same thing as having only one party. The only way the Republicans die, is if the tenthers and birthers like you kill them. Your choice!
September 25th, 2009 at 3:07 pmsmidget
I will have to correct you. The Department of Ed begain in 1979 and became functional in 1980. To call it a spin off when prior to 1979 it was not another source of taxation is disingenuous. This is like saying Homeland Security is a spin off of the FBI. What is the point? We are spending way more tax dollars on unneccessary agencies. Our spending is wreckless and has not educated us any better or made us any safer.
The fact remains as said by Bush 2 “is our children learning?”
The answer is we were better off prior to 1979.
Are we using our resources efficiently? The answer is no.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:08 pmConservativeChristian, I would believe you were honestly here to discuss libertarianism or whatever if you responded to my post about where Ron Paul stands. It’s comment number 405. My point is that if you love Ron Paul, you must either agree with these things or not understand that this is where Ron Paul stands. It’s just a little hard for me to believe that someone who claims to be a life-long Democrat could agree with Ron Paul on these various issues.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:10 pmConservativeChristian says:
smidget
I will have to correct you. The Department of Ed begain in 1979 and became functional in 1980.
The Department of Education was created in 1867.
Don’t debate topics you have no knowledge of. It just confirms you are either intentionally trolling or completely stupid.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:11 pmConservativeChristian says:
We are spending way more tax dollars on unneccessary agencies. Our spending is wreckless and has not educated us any better or made us any safer.
That is a case of “not in my backyard syndrome” because what you think are unnecessary may be thought of as necessary for others.
Politics is the art of determining whose ox gets gored.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:11 pmpags2
You don’t agree with me, but my argument is far from bogus. We can build our own schools on Long Island and educate our children and do it better and more efficiently if the US Department of Education did not come into existence in 1979.
When you add another layer of bureaucracy you introduce waste.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:11 pmWe are wasting money that could be better spent.
NinerFan says:
It’s just a little hard for me to believe that someone who claims to be a life-long Democrat could agree with Ron Paul on these various issues.
Not as hard as it was for me to believe it wasn’t a racist while it claimed desegregation was bad and unnecessary… ;)
September 25th, 2009 at 3:12 pmThe United States Department of Education, also referred to as ED or the ED for (the) Education Department, is a Cabinet-level department of the United States government. Created by the Department of Education Organization Act (Public Law 96-88), it was signed into law by President Jimmy Carter on October 17, 1979 and began operating on May 4, 1980.
The Department of Education Organization Act divided the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare into the Department of Education and the Department of Health and Human Services. The Department of Education is administered by the United States Secretary of Education.
You are confusing this with the National Bureau of Education, which had a different function than what was instituted in 1979 and cost far less $ to operate.
wrong again just the bleepn falsehoods
September 25th, 2009 at 3:14 pmAnd this theory has scientific backing. It’s an example of what sociologists call “motivated reasoning”, although in the case of trolls, you can safely replace “reasoning” with “rationalization” since they’re incapable of reasoning in the first place.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:14 pmConservativeChristian says:
pags2
You don’t agree with me, but my argument is far from bogus. We can build our own schools on Long Island and educate our children and do it better and more efficiently if the US Department of Education did not come into existence in 1979.
The department of education came into existence in 1867. Don’t debate things you know nothing about.
ConservativeChristian says:
When you add another layer of bureaucracy you introduce waste.
We are wasting money that could be better spent.
Layers also do oversight which can reduce waste, abuse, corruption and incompetence. It’s a sword that cuts both ways.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:14 pmI’m sorry, ConservativeChristian, but you are wrong.
First of all, the signing of the bill that created the Department of Education took place in 1979, but the organization itself was not created until March of 1980.
Secondly, prior to the creation of the Department of Education, education was governed on a federal level by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. This department was in fact paid for by tax revenues, just like the federal Department of Revenue is now. The remainder of the organization (or for the purposes of simplification, the “Health” and “Welfare” parts of it) were split off into the current Department of Health and Human Services.
These are historical facts. They are not opinions to be debated.
So again, I ask you…if education was better prior to the creation of the Dept of Ed, I must conclude that you are suggesting that we consolidate the Dept of Ed and the Dept of HHS into one dept again, as it was prior to 1980, and thus we will revert back to the previous system, still funded by tax payer dollars just like it has been since 1923.
Of course none of this really changes anything as local schools are paid for by local taxes such as property taxes, and are only subsidized on a federal level. The Dept of Ed is primarily focused on higher education.
I would also like to make note that the Dept of Ed is by far and away the smallest cabinet-level department in the entire federal government. You are chasing the wrong truck on this one, puppy. There are bigger fish to fry that don’t directly harm the future of our children and our country through their dissolution.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:14 pmConservativeChristian says:
Reread my post. Your schools are paid for by your own state or local taxes. The feds have nothing to do with the bureaucracy of the schools. The feds fund various programs that schools are free to reject the funds. No one is forcing that money on them.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:15 pm“just like the federal Department of Revenue is now”
should read:
“just like the federal Department of Ed is now”
I got all flustered and was typing faster than my mind was working, apparently.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:16 pmNiner Fan,
I dont agree with Ron Paul on everything. I agree with him on many issues and so should other Democrats.
He isn’t universally disliked by his fellow Republicans for no reason. He is basically the opposite of the GOP.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:16 pmConservativeChristian says:
You are confusing this with the National Bureau of Education, which had a different function than what was instituted in 1979 and cost far less $ to operate.
wrong again just the bleepn falsehoods
Don’t bring a knife to a gunfight. From the ED website:
The original Department of Education was created in 1867
http://www.ed.gov/about/overview/fed/role.html
The ED has a long involvement in education. Your ignorance just makes you look foolish.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:16 pmConservativeChristian says:
Niner Fan,
I dont agree with Ron Paul on everything. I agree with him on many issues and so should other Democrats.
Yet the ones we shouldn’t agree with him on dismantle our country. No thanks
ConservativeChristian says:
He isn’t universally disliked by his fellow Republicans for no reason. He is basically the opposite of the GOP.
No, he’s basically an extreme version of the GOP.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:18 pmsmidget
Let’s just compare the tax dollars spent post 1979 to pre 1979 and let’s see the results when comparing how our children did against students from other industrialized nations
Let’s not get into a semantics match. It is a proven failure and waste of money.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:18 pmgag order says:
Layers also do oversight
They do? ;)
When you get in the real world, and aren’t living in your mother’s basement you can find out about audits and oversight… ;)
September 25th, 2009 at 3:19 pmCancervativeChristian says:
You blew your cover.
Eric Odom is not pleased.
Now get on your knees
and make it up to him.
Your life sucks, doesn’t it?
September 25th, 2009 at 3:20 pmConservativeChristian says:
smidget
Let’s just compare the tax dollars spent post 1979 to pre 1979 and let’s see the results when comparing how our children did against students from other industrialized nations
Don’t forget to use adjusted dollars, or cost per gdp or better yet cost per median salary.
ConservativeChristian says:
Let’s not get into a semantics match. It is a proven failure and waste of money.
Lets not get into the conservative habit of claiming something is proven when there is no such proof and all they mean is they have an opinion they don’t want challenged.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:20 pmDon’t bring a gun to a tank fight…the office of education was repealed in 1972, it had a different role and function than what was created in 1979. The funding and scope of this department post 1979 is radically different than prior
September 25th, 2009 at 3:21 pmreggie
My life has been great since I accepted Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior
September 25th, 2009 at 3:22 pmAre you seriously suggesting that the decline in education results in this nation over the last thirty years is largely due to the creation of the Department of Education?
Sounds like that’s your argument.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:22 pmag order says:
just the bleepn facts says:
Are you black or mexican? Both?
Are you racist or ignorant? Both?
September 25th, 2009 at 3:22 pmConservativeChristian says:
reggie
My life has been great since I accepted Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior
If your life were so great, you wouldn’t be so insecure and so full of fear, hate and anger at our country and your fellow americans.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:23 pmGaggingONIT
You are such a pathetic piece of garbage. A brainwashed moron reciting the idiocy you were programmed with. I long for the old days when morons like you had the decency to be ashamed of your abject stupidity. You are a pathetic shitweasel
September 25th, 2009 at 3:24 pmCC
I didn’t say that the current Dept of Ed was better than the previous system. You inferred that for some odd reason.
I didn’t get into a semantics match, I simply corrected your blatantly wrong information.
You claimed that the Dept of Ed was completely not in existence prior to 1979, and this is flatly wrong. It was simply governed by a consolidated department. This is fact. This is not something that is up for debate. If you insist on denying this reality, then I have no choice but to assume that you are an idiot, and I don’t think you are an idiot. I think that you are stubborn and don’t like to admit when you are wrong, but that doesn’t make you stupid.
In reality, even the creation in 1980 of the Dept of Ed was little more than allowing it a cabinet position. The actual Dept of Ed, which was housed within the cabinet-level Department of Health and Human Services was, as jtbf stated, created in 1867. The source of this fact? THE DEPT OF ED. The name and the specific location within the government has changed, and the current incarnation was, in fact, created in 1980 (after the 1979 signing of the bill by Pres. Carter), but has been in existence for 142 years.
You cannot, therefore, blame the recent failings of the educational system on the Department of Education. Instead, blame it on the far more recent idea of cutting government funding to important things like education and shuffling it to swell the defense spending to nearly $1 trillion dollars a year, not including our war efforts.
Sorry, man, but the problem isn’t the Dept of Ed. It’s Republicans.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:24 pmConservativeChristian says:
Don’t bring a gun to a tank fight…the office of education was repealed in 1972, it had a different role and function than what was created in 1979. The funding and scope of this department post 1979 is radically different than prior
So you refuse to admit you were wrong. Thought so. The federal government has had a significant role in schools since the 1800s when the original department of education was formed. Your ignorance of that and your insecurity that prohibits you from admitting you were wrong is classic wingnut.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:25 pmgag order says:
just the bleepn facts says:
Are you black or mexican? Both?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Just STFU you racist ignorant pile of dogshit
September 25th, 2009 at 3:26 pmConservativeChristian says:
My life has been great since I accepted Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior
Jesus is free to vote Dem, Rep, Lib, or any other party when he becomes a US citizen. Otherwise, he is irrelevant to this discussion.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:27 pmYou know, it’s hard for me to conceive of an issue that was MORE important for the federal government to address than education.
But, since public education is a “socialist” concept, and education in general opens minds, I can see why righties are so down on it.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:30 pmCC = pwned
Now back to the thread.
The whole 10th amendment claim is childish, ridiculous and pathetic. This is nothing more than veiled racism, bigotry and zealotry.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:30 pmConservativeChristian says:
From what I have read and seen, the Libertarian Party is opposed to large corporations and their ability to dictate what goes on in Washington.
If you reduce regulation and government interference in the economy, then large corporations gain in influence. In a lawless state of nature (aka. libertarian paradise), the strong get stronger at the expense of the weak. Were the libertarian agenda to be passed, without government to put a brake on their expansion, the largest corporations would have vastly more power than they do now.
.
ConservativeChristian says:
Others here told me that this is just a blog and basically not a source of news. They told me not to get myself crazy over the articles because they are editorials with a biased slant.
The selection of which items TP covers do have an political bias; TP almost entirely covers items which are or should be embarrassing to the right wing. However, the news items themselves are reported factually. There’s a difference between cherry-picking and blatantly lying.
.
ConservativeChristian says:
The purpose of a Federal agency collecting taxes to redistribute when I already pay close to $4000 a year on school tax seems superfluous to me. So much money is lost in the process on administrative and other costs.
How much? How much money would it cost to do it otherwise? Claiming the existence of waste without being able to produce statistics is meaningless. I could just as well say that public education costs less than half of what it would cost through other methods, and have produced exactly as little supporting evidence as you have.
.
ConservativeChristian says:
I also don’t like having a CIA, NSA, FEMA, Dep’t of Homeland Security and FBI.
Wouldn’t it be easier to just have the FBI and CIA?
Don’t forget the ATF. I agree that there are too many federal intelligence/police agencies, and I suspect that the job could be done much more efficiently with fewer of them.
.
ConservativeChristian says:
I think our government is wasteful and has an insatiable appetite for taxation and bloating itself.
I would prefer to say that it is much easier to establish a new regulation or program than it is to retire one once it has served its purpose, or once a better way of doing things appears. Over time, government tends to aggregrate programs beyond what’s
However, much of the reason this is so is actually due to resistance from the libertarian-leaning Republicans. If a bill were to be introduced to start from scratch and re-think government operations, they would use that opportunity to destroy those necessary services. Therefore Democrats prevent such bills from coming to the floor, and we’re left with a patchwork system of government sevices which could be much more effective and efficient if we could ever get the opportunity to redesign them from the ground up.
However, this is the inevitable price of Democracy. You only get thorough and complete decision making that isn’t a hodge-podge of competing viewpoints under an absolutist dictatorship. There has been much literature on the subject, but there’s really no way to have truly effective and efficient governance without sacrificing equal representation in government. As Churchill, put it, “It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.” They say that Hitler “made the trains run on time.”
Government waste is not the enemy of liberty, it is the price of it.
.
ConservativeChristian says:
You don’t agree with me, but my argument is far from bogus. We can build our own schools on Long Island and educate our children and do it better and more efficiently if the US Department of Education did not come into existence in 1979.
History refutes this claim. The schools used to be much worse before the federal government was involved.
Your 1979 citation is a bit of a misdirection:
The DHEW, which used to be in charge of education nationwide was established in 1953.
If the federal government is not involved in education, then we have the problem of some communities getting no education. There’s no coherent argument which can be made to say that education is bad and/or that children should not be educated. Therefore, if we should educate children anywhere, then we should see to it that they are educated everywhere.
The only alternative is to allow children in some areas to receive no education. I can’t imagine how you intend to support that position.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:33 pmActually bleepn facts, I had to do a study on this and the US has had various departments concerned with education. I think what went down in 1979 did cost us more dough like the point this guy is making, but the research I had to do was with how effective it has been in making us competitive. The comparison nations were Germany, Switzerland and Japan.
I didn’t have to research the costs associated with, just the effectiveness of the agency. It was a snore but I earned brownie points helping my professor with the study.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:34 pmElBruce,
I just logged on, what the hell does this have to do with the article? I saw the number of comments and figured this had to a juicy blog
September 25th, 2009 at 3:35 pmmeant to write had to be a juicy blog, why is everyone talking about the Department of Education?
September 25th, 2009 at 3:36 pmLet’s see, CC, who has been to many political blogs, NOW understand that this is “just a blog.”
Uh huh.
The syntax reminds me of backup.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:37 pmCC – HOW EXACTLY WOULD YOU PROPOSE our elected representatives stop them. By Assassination?
September 25th, 2009 at 3:38 pmRUCerious
LOL I would have been game for assassination with W if Cheney weren’t waiting in the wings
September 25th, 2009 at 3:39 pmjust the bleepn facts
I think that the discussion of the Dept of Ed is a 10th Amendment issue.
I also think that it’s completely appropriate that there at least be some federal standards in regards to the educational system. To leave it entirely up to the states would result in discrepancies that could seriously damage a child’s prospects as far as out of state colleges or employment opportunity. We already have a fair number of problems by simply allowing licensing of professionals to be dictated by the state. I’ll use an example of which I am familiar – I can sit for the CPA exam in Kentucky with a BS in Accting (or a related field), provided that part of that degree comes with 39 hours of business course, 27 of which have to be accounting or finance courses. In Florida, however, which has a dramatically less complicated accounting system, I would be required to have a Master’s degree. That could mean that if I get a CPA license in Kentucky, that it may not transfer to Florida, leaving me without option to move to that state unless I am willing to go through further education and re-licensing.
Not imagine extrapolating that out to every state in the union with regards not to professional licensing, but to simply applying to colleges in other states. What a nightmare.
I truly believe that people who want to dismantle the Dept of Ed have completely lost their damn minds, and have little or no ability to think things through to their logical conclusions. This would be a catastrophe. For a group of people who claim they are on the side of personal freedoms, it seems like an awful lot of their policies would restrict people in a heavy-handed way.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:41 pmYou mean this isn’t a blog? LOL what did he think it was, a Walter Cronkite report? Who is CC anyway?
September 25th, 2009 at 3:41 pmI think Conservative Christian’s problem with the Dept. of Education can be summed up with another of his statements:
“My life has been great since I accepted Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior.”
It’s almost always the same thing. They object to the fact that public money is not spent for the teaching of Christian dogma.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:43 pmLiberalLinebacker, most threads that get a lot of comments do so because of contentious conversations — usually the result of trolls.
This one is no exception. Although, to be fair, ConservativeChristian has conducted himself as a respectful, largely oppositional voice, which can generate a lot of activity. Most of us have some questions about his authenticity, but he has not behaved as a troll.
gag reflex, on the other hand, is a different story. But gag reflex alone would not have been able to drive the comment count this high.
You’ll like ConservativeChristian, though. He thinks along your lines.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:43 pmI don’t know the Department of Ed didn’t seem to have much positive effect according to my professor’s study, again why is everyone talking about this. It has nothing to do with the article.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:44 pmOh yeah LiberalLinebacker getting along with a guy called ConservativeChristian, I dont see that happening
September 25th, 2009 at 3:45 pmralph, you always come up with the cutest names for our trolls. gag reflex. That’s just classic.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:46 pmCC – I thought you were leaving? Bless us again, and LEAVE.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:46 pmNinerfan
there was a guy here saying teach Christianity in the public schools, that is like a accounting nerd walking into a biker bar!!!
September 25th, 2009 at 3:47 pmJust goes to show what labels are worth.
(I’m not really a llama, either.)
September 25th, 2009 at 3:48 pmIs CC Crazy Cat lady?
September 25th, 2009 at 3:48 pmThanks, smidget. It’s childish, I know. But it makes me giggle.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:48 pmbut if you were a llama it would be amazing, being able to type and all, espeically if you were a trained Ecuadorian Whooping Llama and now for something completely different
September 25th, 2009 at 3:49 pmLiberalLinebacker says:
I don’t know the Department of Ed didn’t seem to have much positive effect according to my professor’s study…
Fun game everybody! Try to spot the laughably hypocritical self-contradiction in the above sentence!
September 25th, 2009 at 3:50 pmRalph,
So ConservativeChristian is a liberal?
September 25th, 2009 at 3:50 pmgood point… man, I could make a killing on Animal Planet. I’d have my own show and everything.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:51 pmralph the wonder llama says:
(I’m not really a llama, either.)
Uncyclopedia begs to differ, ralph. :)
September 25th, 2009 at 3:51 pmElBruce
Lighten up I was desperate to get on the good side of a prof at college for recommendations, I didn’t exactly have a promising football career. I got cut immediately, not that I ever expected to play in the NFL. It wasn’t my study.
I remember that US kids were doing poorly compared to Japanese, Swiss and German school kids, it was depressing, especially in math and science.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:53 pmWhat a bunch of walking hypocrites! They claim to “value” the Constitution one moment, but then they turn around and start talking about rebelling against “big government”
September 25th, 2009 at 3:53 pmYeah Ralph, your show would kill Survivor and American Idol if it had the same time slot
September 25th, 2009 at 3:54 pmAh!!! CC is born again. THAT explains a TON.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:54 pmConservativeChristian is a bit of an enigma. He calls himself by that name, but claims he’s a registered Democrat and votes Democratic. Yet he fears the Federal Reserve and the growth of government in general and fervently admires Ron Paul.
As I said, some here dismiss his authenticity. I have my doubts but I’m still willing to give him the benefit of those doubts, especially as long as he continues to conduct himself as a gentleman.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:55 pmIt would be cool if you really were a llama, btw. Or a locust, as I recall you went by for quite some time. The question really, is, are you really a Ralph?
It wouldn’t matter, I don’t suppose. Just curious.
In any case, are any of us that which our name suggests?
Is Eugene Debs really Eugene Debs? Probably not, since the real Eugene Debs died in 1926.
Is Politically Superior actually superior? All evidence suggests that no, in fact, it is not.
Is LiberalLinebacker actually a linebacker? (legit question…are you? That would be awesome…football rules).
Am I really a smidget? No, that’s just what my husband calls me because I’m 5?1? and he’s 6?5?. He says it’s supposed to “short” and “midget” combined. Then years after he started calling me that I googled it on a whim and found it in urban dictionary….it means “tiny p e n i s.” Now it’s even funnier.
Just saying….
September 25th, 2009 at 3:57 pmI dont like the Federal Reserve, I like Ron Paul I mean as far as Republicans go, but he is really a Libertarian in a Republican suit.
Aren’t we supposed to not like the Federal Reserve and the Bush bailouts as Liberals? I am confused here, why is he calling himself conservative?
September 25th, 2009 at 3:58 pmI played linebacker at a major Iowa school, which means Iowa or Iowa State…LOL
I was cut by the Baltimore Ravens almost immediately it was humiliating
September 25th, 2009 at 4:01 pmsmidget
What if was Eugene Debs ghost?
I think petite woman are sexy, oh no I am turning this place into a pickup joint!
September 25th, 2009 at 4:02 pmYes, I am a Crazy Cat Lady.
Great story smidget!
September 25th, 2009 at 4:02 pmLiberalLinebacker says:
I remember that US kids were doing poorly compared to Japanese, Swiss and German school kids, it was depressing, especially in math and science.
They all have public education programs at the national level too. In a discussion regarding whether the federal government should be involved or not, that point is irrelevant, or at least could be used to support the claim that we need more public education rather than less.
.
Crazy Cat Lady says:
Ah!!! CC is born again. THAT explains a TON.
Not necessarily. The only theological bone to pick I have with born-agains is that Calvinism (which is the theology all “born again” or “fundamentalist” Christians adopt, whether they know it or not) denies the necessity of actually doing good in the world. Predestination refutes the proposition that how you treat others has anything to do with whether you are saved.
Howver, there’s no reason why a moderate convert to Christianity shouldn’t be able to also be rational and ethical. The insistence by many on the fundamentalist fringe that Christianity requires refuting all science and opposing those who try to help their fellow man, has as little to do with mainstream Christianity as did David Koresh and Jim Jones. In order to push such people to the margins, we have to embrace the possibility that a responsible, reasonable form of Christianity can come to the forefront in this country.
September 25th, 2009 at 4:03 pmLinebacker, my guess is that ‘conservative” is just how he sees himself. He has as much as admitted that he doesn’t really fit into any category completely, and agrees with some positions people have stated here.
September 25th, 2009 at 4:05 pmralph @ 491
I don’t buy that he’s a Democrat. Nothing that he has stated has been even slightly in line with the Democratic Party ideals, even as they were years ago. If he really is a registered Democrat, I would think that his parents were Dems and he registered as they did before he had any actual party identification of his own.
he is clearly more in line with the Republicans. It seems as though Libertarians twerp his bird. Unfortunately, though many Libertarians are quite thoughtful and intelligent, they are also thisclose to being anarchists. I can’t get behind that…though I have to say that Ron Paul is speaking my language with regards to the criminalization of pot on a federal level. I think he just says that so the younger folks will think he’s cool, though. :)
O/T and a total side note – Rand Paul is running for Jim Bunning’s Senate seat next year. That should be interesting here in the Bluegrass. Especially if Mongiardo (our Lt. Gov) runs as well. It will be a tight contest.
September 25th, 2009 at 4:05 pmElBruce
But this geek professor blamed it all on our culture in the end, he didn’t lay the blame on Dept of Ed or the state schools. Although he wasn’t exactly praising the Board of Ed or even promoting it to remain in place.
September 25th, 2009 at 4:07 pmLinebacker, humiliating it may have been, but I bet a great experience.
I really like the way the NCAA puts it these days:
“There are more than 380,000 student-athletes, and most go pro in something other than sports”.
September 25th, 2009 at 4:09 pmLL – I am sorry to hear that. Football is the greatest sport ever invented. (You did a report on the Dept of Ed in college? I did one on the History of Football.) And of course, I am not referring to soccer (which under no circumstances will ever be considered “football” in my world). At least you got to play on a college level. That’s more than most people can say. My brother (who is quite a bit younger than me) is shopping college teams right now. It’s looking pretty good for him. He will never be anywhere near a pro field unless something extraordinary happens to him during college. Short of the hand of a non-existent God coming down and blessing him with skills he currently doesn’t have, collegiate ball will be the end of his football career.
Crazy Cat Lady -
September 25th, 2009 at 4:11 pmIt’s awesome that you can admit that. :)
Smidget,
Why would a Republican say he is a Democrat, what is the point? I scrolled way back to see what he wrote. He trashed Bush and Cheney and said several times he was in favor of health care reform. Which is not a Ron Paul position. Then he says he agrees mostly with Ron Paul but not on every issue.
He seems legit? I think Ralph nailed it. He is confused. Maybe he feels the need to use the word Conservative because he is a Christian. He appears to be devout from his polite manner and blessing everyone as he left the blog.
September 25th, 2009 at 4:13 pmYes I know, I guess I am a professional, gym teacher and high school football coach that is
September 25th, 2009 at 4:14 pmsmidget says:
It would be cool if you really were a llama, btw. Or a locust, as I recall you went by for quite some time. The question really, is, are you really a Ralph?
It wouldn’t matter, I don’t suppose. Just curious.
In any case, are any of us that which our name suggests?
Is Eugene Debs really Eugene Debs? Probably not, since the real Eugene Debs died in 1926.
Is Politically Superior actually superior? All evidence suggests that no, in fact, it is not.
Is LiberalLinebacker actually a linebacker? (legit question…are you? That would be awesome…football rules).
That may be true, but I go to USC and I am a Kitty, well according to my students I am…
September 25th, 2009 at 4:14 pmsmidget,
you know what i love? The way the game was played before my time. Particularly in the ’70s, the way offensive linemen had to block and the way receivers had to earn their catches. It meant the offensive linemen had to be far more mobile and the running game was waaay more interesting. Sweeps, traps, negative influence runs. I have DVDs of many old Super Bowls and film (yes actually film) my dad was friends with late Bob Carroll and we have film of the old games we need to somehow transfer to a digital form of media,
My dad was a college coach. He just retired.
I love talking about football history.
September 25th, 2009 at 4:17 pmSmidget
I volunteeted to help a prof with his study on comparing our educational system to that of the Swiss, Japanese and Germans.
September 25th, 2009 at 4:19 pmSmidget
What college teams are interested in your bro? Think he will get a full ride?
September 25th, 2009 at 4:20 pmJust a quick observation.
Once Conservative Christian disappears, LiberalLinebacker shows up, posting with almost the same “concern” sentence structures.
Koinkadink?
Maybe.
And just for the record, I am a DRxJ (whatever that is. I’m just glad it doesn’t translate to tiny tallywacker!)
September 25th, 2009 at 4:22 pmLL@504
Fair enough point…it’s not that I am accusing him of lying, I’m saying that I don’t buy him as a Democrat. That doesn’t mean he’s not registered as a Democrat, just that I don’t think he actually is one. I didn’t really make that clear.
Like I said, he seems to be quite taken with the Libertarian point of view, which is considerably conservative ideology, but it’s a true conservatism, not that vitriolic conservatism that people like Limbaugh and Beck are pushing lately.
Obviously, his view on health care is the outlier here. Very strange that one would not be supportive of a federal educational department (problems with the Dept of Ed aside, we really do need some type of unifying regulatory board so students can cross state lines without worrying that, for example, New Jersey’s classes won’t transfer to Vermont…you know?) would be supportive of a socialized health care policy…though he DID state that he only supports such a thing on a state level, which falls back in line with the Libertarian view of state’s rights and the suppression of the federal government.
September 25th, 2009 at 4:22 pmI’ve learned much about Libertarianism in the last six months, it seems to be drawing in people from the GOP who now don’t like the GOP and also getting some Dems who don’t like the current fiscal policies and are against big brother government.
I know what you mean Conservatism is not Neoconservatism, there’s a divide in the GOP, the good guys will become Constitution Party or Libertarian or even Moderate Dems, but they will leave like rats on a sinking ship
September 25th, 2009 at 4:27 pmDRxJ
I still say that it’s to indicate my short stature. It’s just funny that it turned out to be such a graphically inaccurate description years after my husband started saying it. I think it’s hilarious, personally.
LL
I agree on the prior decades of football. What fascinates me is the EARLY football, like when it was first invented in the mid-1800s. Little is known about the actual rules of the game, or how it was scored. For example, the score of the the first game that UK (at the time they were Kentucky State College) played in 1881 was 7 1/4 to 1.
My bro is looking into mostly local colleges. He has been approached by Campbellsville University (a private college in central KY) and offered a full scholarship to play for them. But I think he’s really more interested in Marshall University. He has been invited up to check out their program, and he’ll be going up there in November. I personally would rather him go to Marshall, it’s just up the road from us (we live in a town called Grayson, and Marshall is in Huntington, WV, it’s literally a half an hour up I-64 from us), they’re a Division I-A school, and Marshall has a great medical school (he’s interested in Medicine as a career).
September 25th, 2009 at 4:31 pmWell, this thread is officially derailed. I’ve got to go. Football game tonight!
Talk to you all later!
Nice talking to you, LiberalLinebacker, ralph, Crazt Cat Lady, and yes, you too, ConservativeChristian.
September 25th, 2009 at 4:38 pmLiberalLinebacker says:
Smidget,
Why would a Republican say he is a Democrat, what is the point?
It’s called concern trolling. It’s a way to say I’m one of you, listen to me, let me help derail you away from the Democratic party. The Republicans have been using this marketing and pitching tactic for the last 50 years.
September 25th, 2009 at 4:47 pmLiberalLinebacker says:
But this geek professor blamed it all on our culture in the end, he didn’t lay the blame on Dept of Ed or the state schools.
So it’s just coincidence that the irrelevant tangent you introduced could be interpreted to support that position in the scope of this discussion? If so, I recommend that you either stay on topic or openly pick a side.
.
LiberalLinebacker says:
I know what you mean Conservatism is not Neoconservatism, there’s a divide in the GOP, the good guys will become Constitution Party or Libertarian or even Moderate Dems, but they will leave like rats on a sinking ship
The Constitution and Libertarian parties are pretty far from moderate. They both call for massive changes in society. It’s the moderate conservatives that I’m concerned about. They aren’t being represented by any party at present.
September 25th, 2009 at 4:49 pmLinebacker, have you checked out the documentary on the AFL on Showtime?
They got some great footage and they go into exhaustive detail. I think you’d like it.
September 25th, 2009 at 4:59 pmElBruce says:
The Constitution and Libertarian parties are pretty far from moderate. They both call for massive changes in society. It’s the moderate conservatives that I’m concerned about. They aren’t being represented by any party at present.
I would disagree. Moderate conservatives are well represented by Democrats – heck Obama is even one.
Liberals would be calling for a single payer health care system and far more liberal agendas than Obama or most Democrats have.
September 25th, 2009 at 5:00 pmsmidget, always a pleasure.
September 25th, 2009 at 5:01 pmGotta agree with you, bleepn facts. It’s the liberals who aren’t really being represented by a party. It’s a function of the myopia of conservatives that they don’t recognize how well their interested mesh with the Democrats.
September 25th, 2009 at 5:04 pmElBRuce
I honestly dont care about the subject. I didnt think it was irrelevant because you were all engaged in talking about the Dept of Eductation. I just want to teach physical education and coach football and make a positive impact on the young men I teach and coach. I have no side. I think local governments are perfectly capable on running schools. I often agree that some Federal agencies are a waste of taxpayer money, the key is choosing the right agencies to eliminate.
I disagree. I think the Constitution Party is less moderate and the Libertarian party is more moderate. Moderate conservatives are likely to become Libertarians or just sometimes vote Dem and sometimes GOP.
September 25th, 2009 at 5:16 pmRalph thanks for the link to the AFL documentary
September 25th, 2009 at 5:20 pmElBruce-
My experience with the born-again is that they have that superior “holier-than-thou” attitude – something I cannot stand. I was not commenting on the actual religious part of it. I’m sorry I was unclear.
September 25th, 2009 at 5:21 pmMy experience is different Cat Lady,
the born again types are usually repentent and humble. It’s the conservatve Catholics and the Bible Belt thumping Baptist crew that has that holier than thou attitude.
September 25th, 2009 at 5:23 pmLiberalLinebacker says:
My experience is different Cat Lady,
the born again types are usually repentent and humble. It’s the conservatve Catholics and the Bible Belt thumping Baptist crew that has that holier than thou attitude.
The evangelicals are “born again types”, and they are anything but humble.
September 25th, 2009 at 5:46 pmsmidget – my sister’s have disowned me, because I’m honest and I call BS. Whatever. If that’s “crazy” I’m happy to live it!
And here’s how geeky I am – my cats are named John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. ;)
September 25th, 2009 at 5:50 pmLiberalLinebacker says:
ElBRuce
I honestly dont care about the subject. I didnt think it was irrelevant because you were all engaged in talking about the Dept of Eductation. I just want to teach physical education and coach football and make a positive impact on the young men I teach and coach. I have no side.
It’s your civic duty as a citizen to care about our government and your responsibility. I would hope someone teaching young people values, would have better ones they live by than you exhibit.
LiberalLinebacker says:
I think local governments are perfectly capable on running schools. I often agree that some Federal agencies are a waste of taxpayer money, the key is choosing the right agencies to eliminate.
What about when local governments are strapped from cash because their industrial base has been destroyed by outsourcing and globalization? That’s what many communities face, and why federal agencies and taxpayer money exists.
The key is choosing the right policies that improve education, and social and economic welfare of impoverished areas as that’s what impacts education the most.
LiberalLinebacker says:
I disagree. I think the Constitution Party is less moderate and the Libertarian party is more moderate. Moderate conservatives are likely to become Libertarians or just sometimes vote Dem and sometimes GOP.
You’re wrong. The Libertarians want to dismantle the entire society as it exists – it’s hard to be more radical than that.
September 25th, 2009 at 5:50 pmLiberalLineBacker, you aren’t liberal, and you’re a great example of what happens when students no longer have citizenship and civics in their education experiences.
September 25th, 2009 at 5:51 pmMr. Ensign: People who hold their marriage vows pretty high think you are a hypocrite.
September 25th, 2009 at 6:43 pmjust the bleepn facts,
You are rude, ignorant and abrasive. Please don’t write me anymore. I don’t care what you think. Wait let me retract that statement. I know that I am saying or doing something right when you slime up the blog with offensive and childish behavior.
If you ever agree with me, that is when I will know I have said something wrong.
Please don’t write to me ever again. You heinous piece of s**t
September 25th, 2009 at 7:47 pmLiberalLinebacker:
Was our new concern troll’s feelings hurt, poor baby?
September 25th, 2009 at 8:03 pmLiberalLinebacker says:
I have no side. I think local governments are perfectly capable on running schools.
So the quality of education that a given child should receive should continue to be based primarily on the property values of the local area? If you live in Beverly Hills, you get a great education, but kids in rural Oklahoma get screwed? I have a problem with that. There should be a mitigating factor in this regard. “Local” should be as defined as broadly as possible, considering that there is no argument to be made that less education can possibly be better anywhere.
.
LiberalLinebacker says:
Please don’t write to me ever again. You heinous piece of s**t
Let me give you a hanky and a shoulder to cry on. If you believe you’re right, then you’ll be willing to ignore the less circumspect of the regular commenters. The degree to which their barbs get to you displays the degree to which you’re unwilling to stand up for what you purport to believe in.
September 25th, 2009 at 8:30 pmEnsign: Tenthers Who ‘Hold The Constitution Pretty High In Their Lives’ Should Be Able To Ignore Health Mandate
~replica watches~buy replica watches online~cosplay costumes~StarCraft CD Key
September 25th, 2009 at 9:58 pmWho Wrote Ron Paul’s Racist Newsletters?
Libertarian movement veterans, and a Paul campaign staffer, say it was “paleolibertarian” strategist Lew Rockwell
source
September 26th, 2009 at 12:13 amJohn Ensign is bug f%*# crazy.
September 26th, 2009 at 12:14 amLiberalLinebacker says:
just the bleepn facts,
You are rude, ignorant and abrasive. Please don’t write me anymore.
Ah, another sockpuppet repeating Conservative Christian’s exact words earlier tonight. You are rude, abrasive and ignorant, and I’ll condemn your words as much as I want. This is a blog and it’s as much my right to write to/about/over you as much as I want to.
LiberalLinebacker says:
I don’t care what you think.
And I don’t care what you write, because you don’t think. And that’s why I point out your hypocrisy and idiocy.
LiberalLinebacker says:
Wait let me retract that statement. I know that I am saying or doing something right when you slime up the blog with offensive and childish behavior.
Your response is entirely childish and impetuous. Sounds like I’ve done enough right to get under your thin ignorant skin. Victory for me – again.
LiberalLinebacker says:
If you ever agree with me, that is when I will know I have said something wrong.
yeah, that’s the obvious conclusion! LOL!
LiberalLinebacker says:
Please don’t write to me ever again. You heinous piece of s**t
Please don’t come back to this blog again under another sockpuppet and you’ll get your wish. Accusing others of being rude and abrasive while calling them a “heinous piece of s**t” is both hypocritical and typical of the hate filled lunatic fringe you represent. ZZZzzz…
September 26th, 2009 at 5:04 amConservativeChristian:
So you have no problem with the fact that Ron Paul published
racist newsletters?
Are you a racist too?
September 26th, 2009 at 2:38 pmConservativeChristian:
You told us that you’re a big fan of Lew Rockwell.
Doesn’t it concern you that it was Lew Rockwell who wrote those racists newsletters that Ron Paul Published in his own name?
September 26th, 2009 at 2:44 pmConservativeChristian:
Since your hero Lew Rockwell
September 26th, 2009 at 2:46 pmis a member of the
John Birch Society,
can I assume that
you’re a member too?
Ron Paul: Obama’s Healthcare Plan Will Make Things Much Worse …
http://www.ronpaul.com/2009-06-15/ron-paul-obamas-healthcare-plan-will-make-things-much-worse/
September 26th, 2009 at 5:09 pmkwsventures says:
Ron Paul: Obama’s Healthcare Plan Will Make Things Much Worse …
What, Ron Paul being against it is supposed to convince me of something? Paul’s political philosophy has about the same amount of depth as a teaspoon or a middle-class college freshman.
September 26th, 2009 at 5:10 pmYou almost fooled me until you let this slip out.
September 26th, 2009 at 5:59 pmLL will be added to the list of your socks
in the troll hunter scouting book.
“Ensign: if you don’t really care about the Constitution that much, then you do have to actually pay your taxes.”
… yeah, that makes opposite-world sense somehow…
September 27th, 2009 at 2:50 amChange? What change?
http://geraldcelentechannel.blogspot.com/
September 27th, 2009 at 3:18 pmEnsign does not even make any sense in this claim as far as I can see. Actually although he says people that believe in the Constitution, I would guess that is not exactly what he means. gögüs büyütme
October 2nd, 2009 at 7:00 am