Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
Durkin Tactical Franklin Armory
User Panel

Posted: 12/16/2010 4:04:19 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/16/2010 4:09:04 AM EDT
[#1]
Opinions/assholes.

Link Posted: 12/16/2010 4:15:34 AM EDT
[#2]
What the article fails to point out, is that the Tea Party wants to change the Constitution though legal, grass roots means, whereas the Democrats just want to "reinterpret it."

The fact that the author called the country a "democracy" tells me all I need to know........
Link Posted: 12/16/2010 4:23:24 AM EDT
[#3]
Quoted:
WTF.

Clicky Here


Tea Party Bad! Tea Party eat puppies!

Liberals good and care about you.


Typical Liberal tripe and spin.
Link Posted: 12/16/2010 4:27:07 AM EDT
[#4]
If anything kills the Tea Party,it'll be a combination of stagnation,the typically short attention span and what I think will be the end,failing to hold the GOP's feet to the fire IRT spending.

 If it decides to start focusing on social issues because it's too difficult to expect much from the House,I reckon it's over.
Link Posted: 12/16/2010 4:28:18 AM EDT
[#5]
so if a pregeant woman gives birth to her child while breaking into your home you have a duty to provide and care for that Child? GTFO
Link Posted: 12/16/2010 4:30:15 AM EDT
[#6]
The author is right, those would be some pretty big steps toward killing our having and moving yet further toward a coast-to-coast democracy.

The difference is, where he looks at that in horror, I see it as an advertisement. Democracy always dies a violent death, often after a plurality of citizens drain the national coffers by voting themselves money. A representative Republic governing a federation of distinct, individual states is for me.
Link Posted: 12/16/2010 4:33:13 AM EDT
[#7]
That article's incredibly intellectually dishonest.  Very misleading, and that sort of misleading writing for propaganda purposes ticks me off more than just about anything.

Link Posted: 12/16/2010 4:34:21 AM EDT
[#8]
Quoted:
Opinions/assholes.



... and that was a stinky one.
Link Posted: 12/16/2010 4:45:55 AM EDT
[#9]



Quoted:


That article's incredibly intellectually dishonest.  Very misleading, and that sort of misleading writing for propaganda purposes ticks me off more than just about anything.






(Michael Waldman, former head speechwriter for President Bill Clinton, is executive director of the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law and the author of "My Fellow Americans.” The opinions expressed are his own.)

 
Link Posted: 12/16/2010 4:48:46 AM EDT
[#10]
And unemplyment benefits stimulate the economy, and uncloseted gays in the military will not need separate facilities, and.....can we take a break and sing 'Kumbaya?"

Complete BS.
Link Posted: 12/16/2010 5:48:40 AM EDT
[#11]
Quoted:

Quoted:
That article's incredibly intellectually dishonest.  Very misleading, and that sort of misleading writing for propaganda purposes ticks me off more than just about anything.


(Michael Waldman, former head speechwriter for President Bill Clinton, is executive director of the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law and the author of "My Fellow Americans.” The opinions expressed are his own.)



Figures, doesn't it?

Link Posted: 12/16/2010 6:05:48 AM EDT
[#12]
Support for repealing the 17th Amendment among tea partiers certainly is baffling.  For a group of people who decries establishment republicans and RINOs, you would think they would support the 17th.
Link Posted: 12/16/2010 6:12:40 AM EDT
[#13]
I don't see anyone refuting his talking points, just calling him names.
Link Posted: 12/16/2010 6:31:04 AM EDT
[#14]
Socialist love for wealth redistribution may kill it.
Link Posted: 12/16/2010 7:20:20 AM EDT
[#15]
Quoted:
I don't see anyone refuting his talking points, just calling him names.


I'll play.

From http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-12-16/tea-party-love-of-constitution-may-kill-it-commentary-by-michael-waldman.html:

Now Senators John Kyl and Lindsey Graham have suggested rewriting this core part of the national charter. Children born here are not in fact citizens, they argue, if their parents crossed the U.S. border illegally.


So the crux of the argument is that it's wrong to keep people from benefitting from something done illegally, even if the illegal thing is done by someone else (in the above example, the person doing the illegal thing is one's parent).

Therefore, according to that belief system, if my dad steals a million bucks, then gives it to me, it's my right to keep the stolen money.

How very progressive.

Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top