Gingrich’s anti-judicial tirade is an attack on liberty
As historian Newt Gingrich sees it, the American people are suffering “a fundamental assault on our liberties by the courts.” Unless we fight back against this “grotesquely dictatorial” judiciary, our nation is destined to slide toward “a secular, European sort of bureaucratic socialist society.”
More specifically, Gingrich argues that the liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has proved itself to be “anti-American” and thus has forfeited its right to exist. Congress, he says, should simply pass a law to abolish the court altogether, false concerns about “separation of power” be damned.
Gingrich also proposes to haul a series of federal judges before Congress where they can be forced to defend unpopular decisions. As he explained in an appearance on “Face the Nation” Sunday, he would even empower federal marshals to arrest any judges who refused to heed congressional demands for testimony.
According to Gingrich, such steps would have been applauded by our founding fathers, who feared from the beginning that unelected judges would become a tyrannical ruling class. He and his aides lay out that theory, complete with its alleged historical underpinnings, in “Bringing the Courts Back Under the Constitution,” a 28-page white paper available at the Gingrich campaign website.
Those who take the time to read the paper will find that it is less the work of Newt’s inner historian than of Newt’s inner fascist. It represents a profound distortion of our nation’s history, the writings of our Founding Fathers and the basic core of the American philosophy of government. It is dishonest history.
Consider, for example, Gingrich’s underhanded, deceptive attempt to draft Alexander Hamilton as an supporter of his anti-judicial crusade. Using selected quotes from the Federalist Papers, Hamilton is depicted by Gingrich as a supporter of efforts to use the legislative and executive branches to rein in a tyrannical, overbearing judiciary.
That is a 180-degree reversal of Hamilton’s actual position. He saw the courts as vulnerable guarantors of freedom whose independence must be preserved at all costs against the likes of Gingrich.
In Federalist Papers #78, for example, Hamilton writes that the judiciary “is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power; that it can never attack with success either of the other two; and that all possible care is requisite to enable it to defend itself against their attacks.”
In other words, while Gingrich proposes to undermine judicial independence, Hamilton warns us to take “all possible care” to ensure that the judiciary is protected against such attacks.
The debate between Gingrich and Hamilton goes on and on.
Here’s Gingrich:
“A judicial branch that is largely unaccountable and not subject to meaningful checks and balances can — and does — routinely issue constitutional rulings that threaten individual liberties, compromise national security, undermine American culture, and ignore the consent of the governed.”
Here’s Hamilton:
“The complete independence of the courts of justice is peculiarly essential in a limited Constitution…. Limitations of this kind can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void.”
Gingrich denies that “the Constitution empowered the Supreme Court with final decision-making authority about the meaning of the Constitution.” Hamilton, in the excerpt cited above, explicitly says otherwise.
Gingrich proposes that judges must be kept in fear of their jobs through such steps as impeachment and the abolition of courts that offend public opinion. Hamilton warns that “from the natural feebleness of the judiciary, it is in continual jeopardy of being overpowered, awed, or influenced by its co-ordinate branches; and that as nothing can contribute so much to its firmness and independence as permanency in office, this quality may therefore be justly regarded as an indispensable ingredient in its constitution, and, in a great measure, as the citadel of the public justice and the public security.”
But here’s the crux of the issue. It is a commonplace within the conservative movement to point out that “we are not a democracy, we are a republic.” In plain terms, the saying makes no sense; a republic is a type of democracy, just as an orange is a type of fruit.
That said, the phrase does attempt to express a larger and fundamental truth. We are not a democracy in its purest form, in which the majority can outvote the minority on every issue without regard to individual freedom. We exist under a limited government, a government of laws not of men, where the power of the majority is constrained. “A republic, not a democracy” is intended as an endorsement of that principle.
As we’ve seen, however, the majority does not like to feel itself constrained. It gets frustrated when it is told that on matters of fundamental importance, such as religion and free speech, the viewpoint of the majority does not matter because, well, we’re a republic not a democracy and certain things are off limits to the majority. And it is usually the courts that have to deliver that unwelcome message to the majority.
As Hamilton wrote:
“Considerate men of every description ought to prize whatever will tend to beget or fortify that temper in the courts: as no man can be sure that he may not be tomorrow the victim of a spirit of injustice, by which he may be a gainer today. And every man must now feel, that the inevitable tendency of such a spirit is to sap the foundations of public and private confidence, and to introduce in its stead universal distrust and distress.”
That final sentence — ” … the inevitable tendency of such a spirit is to sap the foundations of public and private confidence, and to introduce in its stead universal distrust and distress” — seems directed across the centuries right at Gingrich.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
927 comments Add your comment
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
8:46 am
Normal….
Tread very carefully, remind her you love her and she’s beautiful
AND
have a back up just in case.
Butch Cassidy
December 20th, 2011
8:48 am
Donovan – “Unfortunately, you all are a reflection of San Francisco and Nancy Pelosi.”
Awww…. Why don’t you roll yourself up in the flag and try to get a little more sleep. We’ll wake you when it’s safe to come out again.
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
8:50 am
Donovan
I don’t care much for your way of thinking either Mr.
Gale
December 20th, 2011
8:52 am
I fear if America was a reflection of Newt’s opinions, I would be lucky to escape to a free nation.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 20th, 2011
8:53 am
Donovan – so who are your choices in the upcoming elections?
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
8:58 am
Just FYI, posting will be light the rest of the week. I’m on vacation, y’all.
Lollygagger!!!!!
“I just don’t want to vote for any incumbent, it’s soooo beneath my intellect…”
Right idea, but the wrong reason. If Obama wants my vote, then he needs to grow a backbone. If an incumbent proves they can do the job, I have no problem giving them a chance to continue. However, I will not waste my vote on somebody who couldn’t do the job right the first time. As it stands right now, I don’t know how I’ll vote next fall. I do know that I’m not voting for someone who has less spine than a sour gummi bear though, regardless to who they may possibly appoint. Obama’s 3 yrs into his term and still hasn’t filled all his appointed positions. I know most of that is due to GOP obstinance, but Obama could at least act like he’s gonna fight for something and/or somebody.
St Simons - we're on Island time
December 20th, 2011
8:59 am
Bill Orvis White & Redneck Convert have nothing on this guy, he good.
carlosgvv
December 20th, 2011
8:59 am
joseph – 6:28
All the more reason a third party will form once most of the voters realize what direction the parties are taking us.
cosby
December 20th, 2011
9:01 am
Jay, when are you going to put Obama, Harry and Nancy under such scrutiny..gee…always pointing the finger at the Republicans….but in this case, Newt has a point. the so called judicial system has taken on the tone of legislation and not judication. Newt did suggest that the two other parts of the government – Congress and The White House – combine to keep the balance of power. Perhaps the time has come for this. Judges seem to have a lifetime appointment with no accountability. Look at the two (2) latest appointments to the supreme court and ask youself it they can rule impartially. There is an old rule my dad taught me – you have rights and privaleges, abuse those and you lose them. I lost a few of those rights and privagles granted by him..why, because I abused them.. The same may be said about our current judicial system. time has come to rein them in!
jm
December 20th, 2011
9:03 am
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-20/invention-is-the-mother-of-economic-growth-nathan-myhrvold.html
Gale
December 20th, 2011
9:04 am
For those who think the judiciary oversteps, I would challenge them to completely read some of those decisions they don’t like. Give an open mind to the rule of law they apply to those decisions.
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
9:05 am
have a great vacation, you deserve it after having to read some of our posts
Like USMC said. (and I include some of my posts in the “our” business, above.)
jm
December 20th, 2011
9:05 am
way to go Obama (sarc)
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-16/incandescent-light-bulb-spared-in-u-s-lawmakers-spending-bill.html
AmVet - Just say no to Republican fasicsts.
December 20th, 2011
9:06 am
Blow it all up stands!
(Just the closet anarchist in me coming out!)
Look at your latest presidential creation and your latest Democrat Senate.
And sadly they are STILL a huge improvement over the deadly screw ups that preceded them. Not by a little bit, but my magnitudes of order. THAT is how messed up the guys that YOU voted for were, Donovan.
Here’s a little Xmas candy cane for you to suck on – when the Boy Emperor Emperor left office, only half of the people polled did NOT consider him the worst ever.
(You did a heckuva job connies.)
Own it, for once.
And after you’ve found some redemption for empowering the worst ever then you can cry and whine and pout about their successors.
Enjoy the down time with friends and family, Jay.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 20th, 2011
9:07 am
Brosephus, I have to agree somewhat with Stands. While I don’t like everything Obama has done and I wish he would fight harder for a number of things, sitting out the vote only encourages the Republicans to chase their extreme right wingnuts. The only way to bring this country back to some semblence of center is to hand an extreme overwhelming defeat to the Republicans…. Not just a lost election but an overwhelmingly lost election. Sitting is out is to surpress the vote, exactly want the right nimnods want so their radical base has greater influence.
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
9:10 am
If Obama wants my vote, then he needs to grow a backbone.
I’m going to have to do one of those “perfect is the enemy of the good” arguments and I hate making those. But at the end of the day, the long-term, and very tangible damage a conservative President beholden to the Federalist society’s dogma can do to this republic trumps my desire to see Obama acting like the blaxploitation film hero *I* want him to be.
And yes, I recognize that such talk can embolden Middle-Man to come off as even more of a wuss, to refuse to recess-appoint everyone the Goopers have blocked to date, if he knows he can cruise to victory.
But seriously, do you think the White House thinks 2012 is going to be a walk in the park? Presumably they can read polls, and they know that while they have the upper hand on any of the losers the GOP are likely to put out there, it’s hardly guaranteed, particularly with the voter suppression measures under way in many swing states.
anyway, I’m rambling. I get your point, hope you get mine.
kayaker 71
December 20th, 2011
9:12 am
My favorite Thatcher quote….
To me, consensus seems to be the process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values and policies in search of something in which no one believes, but to which no one objects”.
I really don’t fault Bozo for his beliefs, I just don’t agree with them. They are disastrous for the country in the long haul, long after he stops occupying government housing and is back in Chicago writing his memoirs. He will fade into history, remembered as the only President since FDR who tried and failed to make government supreme. Change is coming… rely on it. America, by and large, does not want to live in an Obama America. He is the diametric opposite to what this country was founded on…. self reliance, accountability, pride in our country and the elimination of meddling in our lives by an incompetent, Jaba the Hut size government who couldn’t run a lemonade stand without going breaking it’s back. No, the judiciary is not the only problem that we have….. far from it.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 20th, 2011
9:12 am
It looks like Newt will be the anointed one. If that’s the best the republicans have to offer it will more than likely be a landslide for Obama.
If the congress and senate don’t get their crap together and reach some sort of compromise I would say that some of them may be taking early retirement.
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
9:13 am
and remember the money …all the new money….the money from secret sources that is already pouring into the 2012
will we let corporate America buy the White House for the GOP?
Paul
December 20th, 2011
9:13 am
Normal
Word of warning on my recommendation: Mrs. Paul took one of the granddaughters with her and they had a great time, but…. every so often the phone rings and it’s “Grammie, can we go get our nails done?” Pumpkins on Halloween, clovers on St Pat’s day, polka dots on some other day… never knew there were so many occasions to pay the nail ladies….
as far as the other, she may be reluctant to bring it up, but you may want to think about, instead of her opening an envelope, just asking her very seriously that you’ve picked up that that is something she’s thought about and whatever she decides, she’ll have your full support. And you can add if she goes for it you’d be happy ’cause you don’t have a clue what to get her for Christmas!
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
9:14 am
Blow it all up stands!
Oh, damn you. Damn you. Damn you all to hell.
Normal
December 20th, 2011
9:16 am
Paul,
More sage advice…I think I’m going to do it. I do have a small standby….and I’ll keep a bag packed for “just in case”
stephen
December 20th, 2011
9:16 am
This comment section was hijacked by 10 yr olds again. I’ll ck back later.
Talking Head
December 20th, 2011
9:16 am
“will we let corporate America buy the White House for the GOP?”
how many times do we have to go through this convo? you are aware that ‘corporate America’ gave more to BO and the Dems in 2008 right?
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
9:20 am
Look at the two (2) latest appointments to the supreme court and ask youself it they can rule impartially.
No more or less than Thomas, Scalia, or Roberts. What’s impartial to one is biased to someone else.
dB
I’m not looking for “perfect” or even John Shaft. What I am looking for is someone who will call the uber-conservative crap for the bullsh*t that it is. I have no problems with some conservative ideas, and I have no problem with some liberal ideas. That said, I don’t care to have the dialogue of the entire country hijacked by the extremes without some whimper of opposition.
Obama is a modern day Reagan Democrat, and there’s nothing wrong with that. To date, he’s been a better conservative president than GW Bush was imho. Given the fact that the GOP has gone so far to the right that they’re almost coming around from the left now, I doubt that the person(s) I’d vote for with a (R) behind their name will even be a candidate by Super Tuesday. I’m not just gonna give my vote to any candidate though. Far too many people died and gave their lives to ensure that I could vote, so I treasure that as much as I treasure my life. I get your point, but my vote has to be earned. That’s just how much I value it.
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
9:21 am
Mr. Head,
We are aware that corporate America has bought ALL politicians — there’s no point in getting into a pissing match of which politician received the most money.
With that in mind, it’s the Democrats who usually look out for the middle class — the problem is they have no backbone to stand up to the GOP who just simply blatantly side with the wealthy on everything — the Democrats (as stands has mentioned before) at least throw us a Milk Bone or two.
AmVet - Just say no to Republican fasicsts.
December 20th, 2011
9:22 am
…you are aware that ‘corporate America’ gave more to BO and the Dems in 2008 right?
And YOU are aware that this is the first time in history a Democrat has performed this Herculean feat, right?
Right???
Because heretofore, you neo-cons have never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever said the very first thing about the corproate ownership of our government.
Strange, huh?
And the moment, another neo-con gets back in the West Wing, your faux outrage will disappear as quickly as it showed up on January 21, 2009…
RB from Gwinnett
December 20th, 2011
9:23 am
“It is dishonest history.”
Consider the source of that statement…. Yawn….
kayaker 71
December 20th, 2011
9:24 am
Granny,
“Corporate America buy the WH for the GOP?” Yeah, right…..Bozo donors in 2011….
SEIU, 28M
Goldman Sachs 1,013,000
Microsoft 852,000
JP Morgan Chase 808,000
Citigroup 736,000
Time Warner 624,000
And that’s when I quit writing. Seems that someone is not only trying to buy the WH but it is those evil 1% who Bozo continues to rant on about. Can’t run a campaign without ‘em. Hypocrisy? Yeah, maybe just a little.
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
9:24 am
Talking Head
and YOU do know that what the results of the Citizens United decision
have been.
Or do we have to lead you through that again?
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:25 am
Obama is leaving his successor a foreign policy fiasco
Only a dolt wouldn’t remember the disaster this guy is creating and vote him out
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
9:25 am
And I have to say I’m with stands on the voting issue — I’m certainly not going to piss away my vote with a non-consequental candidate who has a snow balls chance in hell of winning (like Nader, sorry AmVet) — and I’m certainly not going to give it to any of the GOP candidates unless Huntsman comes from no where to win it. So that leaves me only one choice. Sure Obama has been less than stellar in my opinion, but he has certainly gotten us back where we need to be going.
I had a friend once during the ‘08 election who said, which I agree, that Obama will be one of those Presidents like FDR or Kennedy, which changes the direction of the country. He won’t be anything of substance in history, but we will look back and see that with him, it’s where it started, and also in my opinion, the direction he’s changed is certainly better than his pre-decessor.
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
9:26 am
you can lead a horse to water,
but I see our faux stallions remain thirsty
by choice
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
9:26 am
“And the moment, another neo-con gets back in the West Wing, your faux outrage will disappear as quickly as it showed up on January 21, 2009…”
Amen to that!
AmVet - Just say no to Republican fasicsts.
December 20th, 2011
9:26 am
71, read my 9:22 and convince me that you’ve been lamenting the corporate ownership of our government for years.
Yeah, riiight….
Unlike me and others here, you sovereignty-ceding reactionaries could care less about it.
The ONLY thing you care about was that it was not a Republican who won the pig out at the corporate trough of largesse contest this time…
barking frog
December 20th, 2011
9:26 am
K71, 9:24, that cannot possibly be true, the President was financed
by $50.00 donations on the internet..
carlosgvv
December 20th, 2011
9:28 am
Granny
Why not? We already have the best Congress money can buy.
Mary Elizabeth
December 20th, 2011
9:28 am
“. . .particularly with the voter suppression measures under way in many swing states. . .”
—————————————————–
Voter suppression done by the GOP, I might add. If this is the kind of country you want for yourself and your children, vote GOP in 2012. All the rest is talk (and denial).
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
9:28 am
No jm, only a dolt would say such tripe — if anything Obama’s foreign policy experience has been the best part of his administration. We will just consider the source of your opinion when you say otherwise — for you have no real example except the made up crap in your head to prove otherwise.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:29 am
John McCain wouldve been a better president
And I don’t say that easily
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
9:30 am
Only a dolt wouldn’t remember the disaster this guy is creating and vote him out
I don’t see Obama putting the US into decade’s long military engagements that will cost billions. So far, his foreign policy appears to be simply cleaning up the mess that was left to him. Other than that, he hasn’t exerted much foreign policy at all.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:30 am
Bosch
Exhibit A: Egypt
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
9:32 am
“his foreign policy appears to be simply cleaning up the mess that was left to him”
Which he’s done, or I should say Hilary has done remarkably well. Our leaders can now visit other countries without riot police everywhere.
Talking Head
December 20th, 2011
9:33 am
Bosch,
“With that in mind, it’s the Democrats who usually look out for the middle class”
Really? How’s that? Hasn’t the middle class shrunk in terms of population and household income decline with a Dem controlled congress from 2007-2011 and with a Dem President since 2009?
In what ways do they ‘look out for the middle class?’ Are you referring to legislation that makes the middle class more dependent on government?
Amvet,
You neo-marxists are all about the have nots, and turn a blind eye to corporations when they support whatever you like. Tell me this, your name says ‘Republican Fascists’, how are BO and the Dems not Fascists?
Mick
December 20th, 2011
9:33 am
jm
Egypt? What about their people, don’t they have a say or would you prefer us to be the rulers of the world? This is where the true genius of Ron Paul comes through – he gets it, you don’t and probably never will…
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
9:34 am
Exibit A: Egypt?
Call us when the number of American service members killed there reaches
4500 will ya?
Self Determination can be messy.
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
9:34 am
I should say Hilary has done remarkably well
No argument from me. I think that’s been one of Obama’s best decisions to date. That woman isn’t one to be toyed with.
Normal
December 20th, 2011
9:34 am
Bosch,
First, good morning!
Second, don’t try to “debate” jm…his nose is so far up the GOP azz, that if it made a sharp right turn, jm’s nose would break. You just can’t be reasonable with the unreasonable. Just ignore him.
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
9:34 am
jm,
Only a dolt would use Egypt as an Obama foreign policy failure. He had nothing to do with that. Or do you blame him for every global event? Such power you give to the POTUS who you deem so weak and incompetent.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:34 am
What kind of asinine Senator (Reid) thinks extending a tax cut for two months is good policy?
What a bunch of nuts. Democrats don’t know how to run the government. Tax rates need to be set the whole year, not change mid year.
Democrats are idiots
kayaker 71
December 20th, 2011
9:35 am
AmVet,
Corporate America has financed presidential elections for decades, both Republican and Democrat. Money is handed to favorites under the table, Illegally (China Gate) and by any other means to buy influence. Happens in the Congress and certainly happens in Presidential elections, no matter what the party.
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
9:35 am
neo marxists?
Whatever it is. I’m against it.
Rufus T Firefly 2012
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
9:35 am
“Really? How’s that?”
The tax policy for one thing — they propose legislation that at least tries to give a bone to the working and middle class — always blocked by the GOP or not enough votes to get through because of Blue Dog Democrats.
Next.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:38 am
Exhibit B
European collapse
Wasn’t the miracle worker supposed to fix all these relationships Bush supposedly screwed up? Hmmmm
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
9:39 am
Hasn’t the middle class shrunk in terms of population and household income decline with a Dem controlled congress from 2007-2011 and with a Dem President since 2009?
Dude, the middle class has been under assault since the Reagan revolution. What you’re talking about is no different than jumping off a cliff to your death. Nobody notices all that speed you’re picking up in the air, but that sudden stop at the bottom is what people remember.
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
9:40 am
“Wasn’t the miracle worker supposed to fix all these relationships Bush supposedly screwed up?”
No. Again, do you have anything real to back up your claims, have you ever?
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
9:40 am
What I am looking for is someone who will call the uber-conservative crap for the bullsh*t that it is.
Yeah, I get you. And which, to be fair, Obama does from time to time, but nowhere near often enough to suit me. Of course there’s a whole year’s worth of campaignin’ to come.
Then again, remember this: this is what we elected. Obama made it crystal clear in an interview he gave with Rachel Maddow, shortly before the election:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27464980/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/t/transcript-barack-obama-talks-rachel-maddow-days-election/
[emphasis mine]
“MADDOW: And so, you have the opportunity to say John McCain, George Bush, you’re wrong. You also have the opportunity to say, conservatism has been bad for America. But, you haven’t gone there either.
“OBAMA: I tell you what though, Rachel. You notice, I think we’re winning right now”
There’s “laughter” at that point, but I sure as hell wasn’t laughing. But like I said–that’s what we elected.
…aaaand it should be clear to anyone who ever read “The Audacity of Hope” (as I have) that he was going to be maddeningly conciliatory. The guy *always* tries to see the merits of the other side’s arguments, and he always goes too far in imagining that the other side’s guys are operating with some semblance of integrity.
Talking Head
December 20th, 2011
9:42 am
“The tax policy for one thing ”
Oh you mean like the following:
1. A 156% increase in the federal excise tax on tobacco
2. Obamacare Idvidual Mandate Excise tax
3. Obamacare Employer Mandate tax
4. Obamacare surtax on Investment income
There are about 20 more taxes from Obamacare…but I guess these only impact the rich and not the middle class
But regardless of that, what tax policy? Aren’t the dems always the ones saying we need more revenue?
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:42 am
Exhibit C
Kowtowing to China
Paul
December 20th, 2011
9:43 am
Mick
“Egypt? What about their people, don’t they have a say ”
shhhhh…. that only applies when their citizens do what we want.
And the Egypt card gets played ’cause…. OMG, Muslims are gonna take over that country!!!!
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
9:43 am
Voter suppression done by the GOP, I might add.
I thought that went without saying. It’s been part of their MO for a long time. They simply do not want everyone to vote, who is qualified to do so.
See also:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GBAsFwPglw
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:43 am
Why are democrats against democracy?
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
9:44 am
jm,
When you have an exhibit of substance or something real, then I’ll pay attention to you again, but now you are just simply doing what you always do and just throw out the ridiculous in the hopes that something will stick.
You are just too absurd for words.
David Mooneyhan
December 20th, 2011
9:44 am
What a tuul.
Paul Krugman nailed it:
“Newt Gingrich is what stupid people think intelligent people sound like.”
independent thinker
December 20th, 2011
9:44 am
Just remember it took a ruling by the Supreme Court against Nixon on producing his tapes and papers to shove him out the door and it took a vote against Clinton in the Paula Jones case for the lawsuit to proceed with that incriminating sworn testimony. Even this conservative court with the
Republican bent it has would hopefully be available to control a tyrant who wants to control the judiciary like Newt.
TaxPayer
December 20th, 2011
9:44 am
I really don’t fault Bozo for his beliefs
Save the wear and tear on that keyboard, kay. You made your “feelings” known with one word.
TaxPayer
December 20th, 2011
9:45 am
Why are democrats against democracy?
Perhaps it’s the Republic in US.
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
9:45 am
Talking Head,
For one thing, none of those taxes collectively affect the middle class exclusively, such as the pay roll tax cut which we see now, which the Democrats are trying to extend.
And again, Obama has nothing to do with any of those things. You want to gripe at something, turn your attention to the Hill.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:46 am
“OMG, Muslims are gonna take over that country”
For the clueless, Muslims already have a super duper majority in Egypt
That’s not new
The anarchy is new
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
9:47 am
“Newt Gingrich is what stupid people think intelligent people sound like.”
Exactly.
And stands, I’ll add that in my opinion, one of Obama’s faults is that he also assumes that people that he deals with, who were either elected or in a certain position are intelligent — most of the time, they are not. That’s one of the problems with this country, we have devalued people who are truly intelligent.
Mick
December 20th, 2011
9:48 am
paul
I don’t have time for this foolishness today. As bad as these times are for many, these still are some of the best days of our lives, blamers and whiners – pathetic. All the really cool and smart people here, have a great holiday! The rest?
You too….
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:48 am
Female Egyptian protesters being stripped and beaten (Clinton)
Paul
December 20th, 2011
9:48 am
sfd
Interesting interview. What I heard Candidate Obama in effect saying was, he’ll run against the record of the incumbent Bush because there are Republicans who are not happy with what his administration has done. But if I change tactics and pound Republicanism in general, I probably won’t get their votes.
catlady
December 20th, 2011
9:50 am
Just a preview of what “President” Gingrich would due, dear folks! He doesn’t like it, he has to sit in the rear, he wants it to be different–he will just get rid of it. That old, pesky Constitution! Let Gingrich set it straight! You know he is smarter than 2-3 “regular” folks, right? I mean, that’s what he says, and we know he is always truthful and honest and honorable, right–just ask his ex-wives!
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:51 am
Egyptian museums and artifacts being burned
Manuscripts and artifacts being lost
Good job O
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:52 am
Egyptian general: protesters should be thrown in Hitler’s ovens
Good job O
Egypt is turning into a failed state and succumbing to anarchy
kayaker 71
December 20th, 2011
9:53 am
Cheer up Taxpayer…. maybe you’ll get a Kardashian Christmas card this year. Ought to make your day.
AmVet - Just say no to Republican fasicsts.
December 20th, 2011
9:53 am
You…turn a blind eye to corporations when they support whatever you like.
Are you drinking already???
I have continuously lambasted the hyper-corrupt takeover of our government by the monied interests that Jefferson warned of.
I indicted BHO BEFORE he was even elected and said he was just another corporate-friendly lackey for the big boys. And guess what, TH, I was correct, wasn’t I?
You? You neo-cons screamed that he was the most liberal senator in the history of the universe!! So that makes tow presidents in a row that you have been dead wrong about, huh? (presuming you’ve joined the brigade of TRUE conservatives, who now deem that George of the Bungle was not. LOL!)
YOU now pay lip service to the United Corporations of America ONLY because the GOP lost the battle this time. For the first time in history. As in ever.
Your concern is transparently laughable.
You LOVE that Washington DC is corporate owned territory.
You love that Wall Street got away with economic murder.
You just want desperately to ensure that the GOP regains its historic role as the biggest hog at the trough next time.
And one more time, just so you can contrivesome other irrational canard to accuse me of, a pox on both their houses…
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:54 am
The democratic head of numerous conference committees says democrats won’t conference with the House over the payroll tax cut
Democrats don’t believe in democracy
Dirty Dawg
December 20th, 2011
9:55 am
So Newt says he wasn’t ‘lobbying’ when he got the $1.6 mil from FreddieMac…well the folks that gave him the money thought they were paying for ‘access and influence’, what’s that if not lobbying? Fact is Newt was either being a lobbiest or a ‘con man’ – take your pick Newt.
And while I don’t know the names of any ‘evil’ LEGO characters, but Newt is the human encarnation of him/it/them.
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
9:55 am
dB
I read it. I figured the guy would be a Rodney King “Can we all get along?” type, but I didn’t think he’d be this guy here. I know he has to avoid the “Angry Black Man” label, but I want him to call the GOP’s bluff on something… anything… just to show everyone how crazy some of these people really are. Everybody’s trying to put the blame on Obama like things are all his fault, but Congress is really what’s wrong with this country. Until somebody beats it over the heads of the citizens here (or put it on a 3D bumper sticker), we’re gonna keep seeing the same effing crap year after year.
Paul
December 20th, 2011
9:55 am
Jm
““OMG, Muslims are gonna take over that country” For the clueless, Muslims already have a super duper majority in Egypt”
You’re not too good at getting sarcasm, are you?
And… you post “Exhibit A: Egypt” and then you post “Why are democrats against democracy?”
You say Egypt is an Obama failure cause he left them alone to decide their fate. Then you say it’s democrats who are against democracy You seem confused?
and your 9:36 “European collapse Wasn’t the miracle worker supposed to fix all these relationships Bush supposedly screwed up”
So now a country’s economy can be turned from disaster to wonderfulness because an American president established a good relationship with them? Colin Powell and Condie Rice and Hillary Clinton have a lot to learn -
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:56 am
Democrats want to raise taxes on working class Americans
saywhat?
December 20th, 2011
9:56 am
jm has hemmorhoids
Good job O
saywhat?
December 20th, 2011
9:57 am
oops,typo on hemorrhoids.
good job O
Common Sense
December 20th, 2011
10:00 am
”
In Federalist Papers #78, for example, Hamilton writes that the judiciary “is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power; that it can never attack with success either of the other two; and that all possible care is requisite to enable it to defend itself against their attacks.” ”
Bookman quoting the Federalist Papers. Now I have seen it all.
Now if only things were the same then as they are today so that we could apply those words. But wait….The Federalist Papers are not part of our legal system, and Bookman and other like to point out when it is to their advantage.
You can’t have it both ways.
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
10:01 am
jm
Unless you’re advocating that we invade Egypt, give it a rest. Your ODS is getting to the point where it’s becoming annoying.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
10:01 am
Paul. Nope I got the sarc
More like a sneer
I don’t care if Egypt is Muslim athiest or pagan
I do care that it doesn’t descend into anarchy
The president can influence things. But not our current one
He’s neutered
saywhat?
December 20th, 2011
10:01 am
Somebody feels inferior due to his unnaturally small………..hands.
Good job O.
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
10:02 am
Of course the problem is Congress…and Americans know it.
From Think Progress
“A new Gallup poll reveals that Congress’s approval rating has hit a new record low at 11 percent, with independents giving Congress a 7 percent approval rating. This month’s disapproval rating of 86 percent is “the highest in Gallup history, beating the 84 percent-high recorded in August of this year.”
Meanwhile, President Obama’s approval rating is at its highest in months, according to a new Washington Post/ABC News poll, which shows the president with 49 percent approval among voters and 47 percent disapproval.”
TaxPayer
December 20th, 2011
10:02 am
For all you last-minute Christmas gift shoppers.
saywhat?
December 20th, 2011
10:03 am
Breaks over. Gotta get back to work.
For real this time, good job O.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
10:04 am
Bro
Liberal ignorance has been annoying for a long time
Suck it up
I’m not advocating invasion
The strong arm is what’s needed
Obama is a weakling
Paul
December 20th, 2011
10:04 am
Jm
Okay…. so how would a President Newt or a President Michelle or a President Rick or a President Santorum have ‘inflluenced events enough to have not caused Egypt to be in the state they are in today?
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
10:05 am
Democrats want to raise taxes on working class Americans
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/the-morning-plum/2011/12/20/gIQA9P4v6O_blog.html
“* House GOP shelves up or down vote on payroll tax cut: House Republican leaders announced last night that they will hold a motion to reject the Senate compromise on extending the payroll tax cut. This comes after they had originally announced that they’d hold a straight up or down vote on it.
What exactly does this mean? A Senate Dem aide emails the Democratic perspective:
The bottom line is that after announcing that they would hold an up-or-down vote on passage of the Senate’s bipartisan compromise, Republicans have reversed course and are now refusing to hold an up-or-down vote. The Rule that was reported out last night only allows for consideration of a “motion to disagree with the Senate Amendments.” ,b>Under this scenario, it is impossible for the House to vote to pass the bill.
Anyone in favor of the bill votes “no” (because he/she is voting against the motion to disagree). But even if 218 members vote “no” (which again, in this case means yes), nothing happens. The bill does not pass. In other words, there is no “up” in the “up-or-down.” It is heads I win, tails you lose.
Dems will amplify the case today that Republicans decided against a straight up or down vote because they were worried that the measure just might pass.”
Care to repeat that BS again??? If I didn’t know any better, I’d swear you were a manure farmer based on your spastic posting this morning.
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
10:07 am
jm
Other than invading Egypt, what else can we do? I don’t know what kind of logic you’re using, but you should seek help. Maybe Charter can help you dude.
Mary Elizabeth
December 20th, 2011
10:10 am
Voter suppression done by the GOP, I might add.
I thought that went without saying. It’s been part of their MO for a long time. They simply do not want everyone to vote, who is qualified to do so.
———————————————————
They want to “win” their ideology for this country even through devious and undemocratic means.
These stealthy tactics have been snowballing since ALEC was formed in 1973 when GOP Libertarians lost at the ballot box. Since then, they have gone to the Republican states as their stronghold. There MUST be public outcry against any suppression of the right to vote. That is not democracy and that is not consistent with the tenets of our democratic Republic.
http://kochbrothersexposed.com/voterid/
Talking Head
December 20th, 2011
10:13 am
Voter Suppression? Really? Did they figure out Obama wasn’t going to get reelected and now have to stoop to this?
What Voter Suppresion laws? Like having a valid ID?
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
10:16 am
if I change tactics and pound Republicanism in general, I probably won’t get their votes.
[...]
Everybody’s trying to put the blame on Obama like things are all his fault, but Congress is really what’s wrong with this country.
Both you guys raise useful points, but I want to re-direct just a bit.
There’s a reason I emphasized Rachel’s question about how Obama also has “the opportunity to say, conservatism has been bad for America.”
I sound like a broken record but I will say it again–the only way rationality will ever stand a chance in these political battles is for our side to call out what conservatism HAS BECOME. Not what we think it used to be, or what we, still, consider within ourselves to be “conservative” (with a small “c,” if you like).
I really think that until we come out and call conservatism out, we’ll continue to be at a horrible rhetorical disadvantage. And by calling conservatism out, it will mean calling out some conservative *Democrats* who’ve been just consistently awful–guys like Ben Nelson come to mind.
Because it’s not about party, not at all. If some upstart, rational Republicans emerge to actually run to the “left” of some Democrats on some important issues (don’t laugh, Romney tried to be that guy in 1994, going against Kennedy), they should be encouraged.
RB from Gwinnett
December 20th, 2011
10:19 am
Do you liberals have some sort of mental retardation that keeps you from seeing corporate donations to democrats campaigns or what?? I mean, seriously, how in the hell do you keep making absolutely stupid comments about R’s being bought by corporations while you completely ignore the FACTS about corporate donations to D campaigns? What is wrong with you people?!!