Utterly Meaningless

These sub-morans have no idea what the word communist (or socialist) even means. To them it’s just a general term of derision.

Evidence of just how successfully our public education system has been sabotaged?

Careful JJ, you are starting to sound like Jeremy from FB 😉

Yeah, sensationalistic language. Good way to vent, bad way to have a point.

No, supporters of the healthcare stuff aren’t communist sympathizers (unless a couple actually are – I’m content to let them label themselves as such if they want).

And it’s not really about robbing rights, it’s about the fedgov increasing it’s power and authority in unconstitutional ways. Conservatives’ beef along these lines started after the Civil war, and peaked when the commerce clause got so wildly twisted.

Healthcare legislation is just the first time the feds get to force americans to purchase a product, even if we don’t want to. That power certainly isn’t anywhere in the constitution or bill of rights.

“what constitutional rights we on the left have deprived him of?”

To answer your question, he’ll need to ask demogogues like Glenn Beck, who is “in the entertainment business,” and “couldn’t care less about the political process.”

…which brings us back to JJ’s comment, I suppose.

Unconstitutional? Really? I didn’t realize that you were a constitutional scholar. Almost all of you colleagues, Rob, have indicated that the ACA is almost certainly constitutional. We’ll find out soon enough, I guess.

And as for the Civil War reference…

Yeah, it’s funny how conservative “arguments” echo those of the racist Southerners from around 1850.

“Unconstitutional? Really? I didn’t realize that you were a constitutional scholar.”

I didn’t realize someone needed to be a scholar to read the consitution and know when something ain’t in it. I did know that liberals tend to believe the average person is too dumb to do their own research though. Yeah, I know I’m just a lowly BS Finance degree holder – barely able to keep my knuckles from dragging on the ground. I appreciate all the overwhelmingly liberal extra-smart folks doing all the heavy thingking for me. Forgive me if I inadvertently fling some poo your way – it’s just instinct.

“Yeah, it’s funny how conservative “arguments” echo those of the racist Southerners from around 1850.”

This, from the guy who poo-poos any similarities between his platform and platforms of socialists and facists? Seems if you get to draw stretched analogies, I should be able to do it as well…

At the end of the day, you don’t need to be a learned professional to understand that the founders never wanted the commerce clause to end up so stretched and twisted. The 10th amendment pretty clearly spelled out what they figured the scope of the fedgov ought to be.

Sorry if I didn’t use big enough words.

The truth hurts doesn’t it?

Fact of the matter is that in America ca. 2010 conservative=racist. Pull the log out of your own eye before you look for splinters in lefties’.

Why is Rob so obsessed with what the founders may or may not have wanted 230 years ago? They also didn’t want women voting and didn’t want blacks counted as actual people.

I read a month or so back where some conservative pundit was actually lamenting universal suffrage. He (of course) blamed a lot of society’s ills on women getting the vote. Seriously.

Where were Constitution patriots during talk of social security privatization? It wasn’t that long ago; were they tea partying back then, too? I don’t remember.

Chris: “Why… so obsessed with what the founders may or may not have wanted 230 years ago? They also didn’t want women voting and didn’t want blacks counted as actual people.”

(O/T: And, who cares whether or not FF’s “intended” a “Christian nation.” They didn’t; but even if they did, so what? They intended a bunch of stuff that is now widely accepted as wrong.)

The dramatic handwringing of otherwise emotion-driven and incurious folk over the FF’s intentions – and the Constitution – is so transparent. Most wouldn’t know a “commerce clause” if it jumped up and bit them.

The NYT had a terrific item this week about who the teabaggers really are. Turns out they’re white (88%) and far-right Republicans. They overwhelmingly think the majority of the country agrees with them. In fact, only 1 in 4 does.

QOTD, just for Rob:

But in follow-up interviews, Tea Party supporters said they did not want to cut Medicare or Social Security — the biggest domestic programs, suggesting instead a focus on “waste.”

Some defended being on Social Security while fighting big government by saying that since they had paid into the system, they deserved the benefits.

Others could not explain the contradiction.

“That’s a conundrum, isn’t it?” asked Jodine White, 62, of Rocklin, Calif. “I don’t know what to say. Maybe I don’t want smaller government. I guess I want smaller government and my Social Security.” She added, “I didn’t look at it from the perspective of losing things I need. I think I’ve changed my mind.”

Source: nytime...l.html

The NYT had a terrific item this week about who the teabaggers really are. Turns out they’re white (88%) and far-right Republicans. They overwhelmingly think the majority of the country agrees with them. In fact, only 1 in 4 does.

That’s very good to hear (that only 1 in 4 agree with teabaggers) because sometimes all their bitching and moaning gets so much coverage outside your country and next to none about the good stuff that I have to wonder if all of you have gone whack-a-doodle-doo.

Audrey: …all their bitching and moaning gets so much coverage outside your country and next to none about the good stuff…

Actually, the coverage *inside* the country sometimes seems the same way. It has been hard to gauge.

“Why is Rob so obsessed with what the founders may or may not have wanted 230 years ago?”
‘Cuz they’s the folks what put the constitution together and got all the states to ratify it and hold it as the supreme law of the land. And it’s not really an obsession, unless all the talk of ‘founder intent’ in the legislative and judicial branch also springs from obsession.

I know you folks wanna rewrite the rules. I also know that y’all have suceeded in doing so in various ways outside of the specified process of adopting amendments. But I figure the constitution as it stood was pretty good, and when it isn’t, the amendment process works just fine and dandy.

“They also didn’t want women voting and didn’t want blacks counted as actual people.”
Really? None of them? Such things weren’t hotly debated topics in Philidelphia? Interesting.

How/Whether to count blacks was of course a major part of the negotiations. I have never read that there was ever any discussion of granting women the vote. Have you?

As for the assertion that the Constitution has been “rewritten,” I’ll quote you: “Really? … Interesting.” The constitution has been interpreted by the SCOTUS. While that, perhaps, is not explicit in the Constitution, it was settled law by the time of Marbury v. Madison. If that was not what the Founders intended they could have spoken up and amended to clarify things. That they didn’t speaks volumes as to their original intent.

And no comment about some of your compatriots wanting to eliminate the 19th?

In the end, the writers of the Constitution didn’t consider the basic human rights of black people to be important enough to enshrine in the Constitution. And 230 years later, all the people that still don’t consider them equals are on your side of the debate Rob. With friends like that…

The only racists remaining in America call themselves conservatives? Hmmm… I’ll have to have a little more in front me than popular media and leftie opinion before I buy that one. My Big D Democrat union seceretary dad has only been in the ground a handful of years, but he was a racist. And one of the last great badge-wearing male chauvenist pigs too, but that’s another story. Suffice it to say I still have his ‘Repeal the 19th Amendment” button in a box somewhere. Right next to his “Reaganomics sucks” hat.

His buddies at the Moose lodge are still kicking, as far as I know.

My beef isn’t with Scotus interpreting the constitution. My beef is how it’s been interpreted. I disagree with a bunch of it. I’m not saying the decisions aren’t valid or binding, I’m saying they’re wrong. (And just to be clear – I and everyone I hang with are seeking redress at the ballot box, not the gun store.)

But anyway – I wanna clear something with you. It’s always fun to try to crystalize the other side down into an easily cut-and-pasted soundbyte. I took this from this thread – just want to make sure I’m accurately capturing your statement and the underlying belief:

———-
Rob: I did know that liberals tend to believe the average person is too dumb to do their own research though. Yeah, I know I’m just a lowly BS Finance degree holder – barely able to keep my knuckles from dragging on the ground. I appreciate all the overwhelmingly liberal extra-smart folks doing all the heavy thingking for me. Forgive me if I inadvertently fling some poo your way – it’s just instinct.

Daryl: The truth hurts doesn’t it?
—————

Do I have that right? I mean, we already know you equate conservatism with racism. I don’t need your blog to prove that. But are you really willing to stand by your claim that Not-Degreed-Intellectual = invalid political opinins?

The truth hurts doesn’t it?

Fact of the matter is that in America ca. 2010 conservative=racist. Pull the log out of your own eye before you look for splinters in lefties’.

I believe I’ve summed up quite accurately the Teabagger Old Party. Perhaps not all Republicans are racist and certainly not all racists are Republicans. But the correlation between those two approaches one.

BTW, I use the terms teabagger, Republican, and conservative interchangeably. It’s the teabaggers’ party now. Have fun!

Fairly answered.

One last thing: I haven’t equated conservatism with the Repulican party since Reagan left office. And I’m nowhere near on the far end of the bell curve on that one.

President Reagan? The one who raised taxes seven out of the eight years he was in office? The one who cut and ran from Lebanon? The one who left us defenseless by dealing with Gorbachev on SALT? The same one who dreamed of a world without nuclear weapons? That Reagan?

Face it, Rob. The GOP is so far to the right today that if Reagan were reincarnated they’d brand him a socialist and run him out of the party.

Hell, look at what they’re trying to do to Lindsey Graham. He’s WAY more conservative than Reagan ever was.