Political Forums

Political Forums (http://www.politicalchat.org/index.php)
-   Politics (http://www.politicalchat.org/forumdisplay.php?f=25)
-   -   Introducing the Tea Party’s Horrifying Cousin: Constitutional Conservatism (http://www.politicalchat.org/showthread.php?t=8024)

Tom Joad 08-12-2014 12:55 PM
Introducing the Tea Party’s Horrifying Cousin: Constitutional Conservatism
 
I found this article yesterday and decided to post it because it does a pretty good job of explaining why I don't differentiate between the so called establishment Republicans, the Tea Party, Libertarians, and whatever else there is on the right. To me, they are all Evil.

http://www.alternet.org/tea-party-an...l-conservatism

Quote:
The emerging conventional wisdom that the Tea Party is being vanquished by the GOP establishment, based solely on the fact it is beating primary challengers, is exceedingly myopic. If you believe that, you have a very superficial view of what constitutes “winning.” These primaries are forcing the allegedly mainstream candidates to move far to the right and the performance of the past few years proves that when this happens the Party stays far right as a result of this threat. Primaries can be very effective tools if used properly, and if they are backed up by money and influence, which the far right certainly is, they are formidable instruments of discipline.

Ed Kilgore did an excellent survey of these so-called victories for the voices of reason at Talking Points Memo earlier this week:

Yesterday’s winner Pat Roberts, who already sported lifetime ratings of 86 percent from both the American Conservative Union and Americans for Prosperity, went far out of his way to propitiate the ideological gods of movement conservatism as he fought for reelection. He voted against an appropriations measure that included a project he had long sought for his alma mater, Kansas State University, and opposed a UN Treaty banning discrimination against people with disabilities over the objections of his revered Kansas Senate predecessors Bob Dole and Nancy Kassebaum.
continue

MrPots 08-12-2014 01:15 PM
The funny thing about Pat Roberts is that nobody here in Kansas can think of ONE THING he's done for the state since he's been in office. Yet they keep voting for him.

Tom Joad 08-12-2014 01:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrPots (Post 235869)
The funny thing about Pat Roberts is that nobody here in Kansas can think of ONE THING he's done for the state since he's been in office. Yet they keep voting for him.
Well that's better than voting for some Goddamned commie-lib.

Ike Bana 08-12-2014 04:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Joad (Post 235864)
I found this article yesterday and decided to post it because it does a pretty good job of explaining why I don't differentiate between the so called establishment Republicans, the Tea Party, Libertarians, and whatever else there is on the right. To me, they are all Evil.

http://www.alternet.org/tea-party-an...l-conservatism



continue

I'm not sure exactly what "constitutional conservatism" is supposed to mean. I agree that just the presence of the teabag party has caused the GOP to move even farther to the right, supporting idiotic political endeavors, and maintaining it's anti-gay, anti-minority, anti-women's rights, anti-working class, anti-scientific method, pro-democratized gun carnage, pro-subsidizing of children's religious indoctrination in the public schools, bullshit.

But when I think of "Constitutional Conservatism", it sounds to me like strict Consitutional Constructionism, Original Intent-ism, and all the other phony-ass self-proclaimed non-activist court BS that they pitch day after day. When, in fact, the right is just as invested in "legislation from the bench" as any lefty anywhere. They just want the courts to legislate their stuff, not my stuff.

donquixote99 08-12-2014 07:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ike Bana (Post 235973)
I'm not sure exactly what "constitutional conservatism" is supposed to mean. I agree that just the presence of the teabag party has caused the GOP to move even farther to the right, supporting idiotic political endeavors, and maintaining it's anti-gay, anti-minority, anti-women's rights, anti-working class, anti-scientific method, pro-democratized gun carnage, pro-subsidizing of children's religious indoctrination in the public schools, bullshit.

But when I think of "Constitutional Conservatism", it sounds to me like strict Consitutional Constructionism, Original Intent-ism, and all the other phony-ass self-proclaimed non-activist court BS that they pitch day after day. When, in fact, the right is just as invested in "legislation from the bench" as any lefty anywhere. They just want the courts to legislate their stuff, not my stuff.
Their constructionism isn't really all that strict. It backs up the agenda you mention 100%, believe it or not.... :)

Tom Joad 08-12-2014 08:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ike Bana (Post 235973)
I'm not sure exactly what "constitutional conservatism" is supposed to mean.
You're not sure?

Shit, I haven't a clue as to what the author means by that.

But it doesn't matter,

As far as I am concerned they are all baggers.

Pio1980 08-12-2014 08:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Joad (Post 236043)
You're not sure?

Shit, I haven't a clue as to what the author means by that.

But it doesn't matter,

As far as I am concerned they are all baggers.
I assume it means BOHICA.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

Oerets 08-13-2014 06:21 AM
Constitutional Conservatism, I guess no Amendments would be needed if they ran things.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...s_Constitution



Barney

piece-itpete 08-14-2014 12:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Joad (Post 235871)
Well that's better than voting for some Goddamned commie-lib.
http://ts2.mm.bing.net/th?id=HN.6079...711147&pid=1.7

;)

Pete


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:15 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.