Sick of the GOP

I think Glenn Beck is a nut of the nuttiest sort...the right's version of Keith Olberman. BUT, if people think there is a huge difference between Democrats and Republicans in general, they're fooling themselves.
 
Beck seems angry at Justice Roberts. I think Roberts voted the way he did, not because it is what he wants, but because he sees it as the proper ruling for the court. Its not a matter of whether he is conservative. It is a matter of whether the case before him is constitutional.

I, for one, would love to see the republicans move back to being classic conservatives. Tax less, spend less, actually have smaller & less intrusive gov't. Fiscal conservatism is desperately needed. The social conservatism that has become the norm will be the death of the republicans.
 
I believe the man either caved under pressure from the Left, or he let some of his true colors spill out.
 
WinterBorn said:
What pressure? He has his job for life. What pressure could they bring to bear on him?
Click to expand...

The pressure of the left gearing up to absolutely, in true temper tantrum fashion discredit the court like Obama tried in the SotU address after Citizens United.
 
leaningright said:
I think Glenn Beck is a nut of the nuttiest sort...the right's version of Keith Olberman. BUT, if people think there is a huge difference between Democrats and Republicans in general, they're fooling themselves.
Click to expand...

The only real difference is in what they say, but not much difference in what they do.
 
Occupant said:
The only real difference is in what they say, but not much difference in what they do.
Click to expand...

A lot of that has to do with the Republicans coming through this misguided time of adopting liberal spending positions for the past 20 + years, and wanting to seem above the base tactics of liberals like we see in the passing of the SCOTUS decision on HC, while allowing themselves to be infiltrated by progressives.
 
j-mac said:
A lot of that has to do with the Republicans coming through this misguided time of adopting liberal spending positions for the past 20 + years, and wanting to seem above the base tactics of liberals like we see in the passing of the SCOTUS decision on HC, while allowing themselves to be infiltrated by progressives.
Click to expand...

I don't think the liberals have had to infiltrate the republicans. They have been spending, crusading social causes and damning the opposition well enough on their own.
 
WinterBorn said:
Beck seems angry at Justice Roberts. I think Roberts voted the way he did, not because it is what he wants, but because he sees it as the proper ruling for the court. Its not a matter of whether he is conservative. It is a matter of whether the case before him is constitutional.

I, for one, would love to see the republicans move back to being classic conservatives. Tax less, spend less, actually have smaller & less intrusive gov't. Fiscal conservatism is desperately needed. The social conservatism that has become the norm will be the death of the republicans.
Click to expand...

how can you reconcile those two statements? taxing for everything whether one participates in the commerce or not is not 'smaller and less intrusive'.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
how can you reconcile those two statements? taxing for everything whether one participates in the commerce or not is not 'smaller and less intrusive'.
Click to expand...

Roberts job was not to decide whether it was conservative or not, but whether it was constitutional or not.

I see no problem with what I said.
 
WinterBorn said:
Roberts job was not to decide whether it was conservative or not, but whether it was constitutional or not.

I see no problem with what I said.
Click to expand...

I agree, however, he twisted himself into a pretzel coming to that conclusion to find a path to say that it was...Roberts may have been worried about the perception of the court, but I think he did that more damage if he allowed politics, and optics to rule over Constitutionality.
 
j-mac said:
I agree, however, he twisted himself into a pretzel coming to that conclusion to find a path to say that it was...Roberts may have been worried about the perception of the court, but I think he did that more damage if he allowed politics, and optics to rule over Constitutionality.
Click to expand...

I agree, I think it was a terrible decision that he felt he had to make. Liberals have interpreted me to say this was some kind of 'victory' for conservatives, and that's not what I have stated. I think it was an awful ruling for conservatives and for the constitution. The only 'silver lining' that I could find, was that he rendered, at least, some sort of boundaries and parameters of the commerce clause. After carefully reading the conclusions in the aftermath, I am not so sure he even accomplished that. It seems those were his personal opinions, and not subject to finding of the court, so the issue of the commerce clause remains open.

In defense of Roberts, I think he is a good man who was trying to do the right thing, and he knew that if the court struck this down, the political backlash against his court would be something it could never overcome. Remember, this was a presidential administration's keystone initiative and achievement, not just some random bill. Striking down the entire thing, would have been like SCOTUS striking down the Civil Rights Act or Social Security. The court has always been reluctant to involve itself in politics, and when it has, the result has proven very bad for their reputation. His position almost has to be... hey, Congress, you passed this mess, it's not the court's business to decide if it's wise or unwise. You can do it under the power to tax, and not under the commerce clause, and that is all we're saying about it!

--Let the chips fall where they may!
 
j-mac said:
A lot of that has to do with the Republicans coming through this misguided time of adopting liberal spending positions for the past 20 + years, and wanting to seem above the base tactics of liberals like we see in the passing of the SCOTUS decision on HC, while allowing themselves to be infiltrated by progressives.
Click to expand...

Reagan was far more liberal than Obama. My god man, wake up and look arround. The GOP of today has been totally hijacked by corporate interests.
They are not representing you in any way. They are not fiscally conservative at all. True fiscal conservatives no longer support the GOP.
 
Rune said:
Reagan was far more liberal than Obama. My god man, wake up and look arround. The GOP of today has been totally hijacked by corporate interests.
They are not representing you in any way. They are not fiscally conservative at all. True fiscal conservatives no longer support the GOP.
Click to expand...

There are times when shades of that would bring me in to a small agreement with you on that Rune, however, I don't believe, and probably never will believe that top down governmental command, and control is the way to eradicate that influence. Only the free market can do that. And at least for the moment, 'We the people' are still the final word on how to proceed.
 
j-mac said:
There are times when shades of that would bring me in to a small agreement with you on that Rune, however, I don't believe, and probably never will believe that top down governmental command, and control is the way to eradicate that influence. Only the free market can do that. And at least for the moment, 'We the people' are still the final word on how to proceed.
Click to expand...

Free market? Show me a free market.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top