Advertisement
Advertisement
Mar 27, 2013
Small u 201701251613
Apr 2, 2013
Small u 201701251613
  1. Images
    Mickey 13 gc insider over 4 years ago

    I don’t know if Morin is being sarcastic or critical, but as I see it the founders did build in the ability to change in the future. The Ninth Amendment is testament to that. The fact that the Constitution can be amended and added to shows that they had the foresight to anticipate the need for flexibility.

     •  Reply
  2. Missing large
    Odon  over 4 years ago

    Good summary.

     •  Reply
  3. All seeing eye
    Chillbilly  over 4 years ago

    I like this cartoon. It’s fair to question whether our constitution can endure.

     •  Reply
  4. Myid
    DBrannonWriter  over 4 years ago

    Sometimes you just say, WTF, and go with it

     •  Reply
  5. Amnesia
    Simon_Jester  over 4 years ago

    Let us consider something:

    Prior to the ratification of the Constitution, America was governed by The Articles of Confederation, a government that had no power to levy taxes, and was virtually powerless over the states, The execuitve brach was impotent and the elected representatives had practically zero ability to regulate commerce or business. And even if they’d had it, a ‘no’ vote by any single state was enough to derail any legistlation.

    It was, to paraphrase Grover Norquist, ‘a goverment small enough to drown in a bathtub.’ The same type of government the Tea-Party Republicans have advocated again, and again, and again,( But only since Obama’s election ) The articles of Confederation was probably the closest thing to a Libertarian goverment this country has ever had.

    It was a train wreck, America was bankrupt, could not meet it’s debt payments. The British still had troops garrisoned here, and there was nothing we could do to dislodge them. This country was the laughingstock of Europe. Bets were being taken on how long it would take the whole thing to collapse

    And THIS type of helpless Federal Government is where the Tea-Party wants to take this country…AGAIN?

     •  Reply
  6. Amnesia
    Simon_Jester  over 4 years ago

    As another of our resident righties might put it, I’d consider that a badge of honor

     •  Reply
  7. Computerhead
    Spyderred  over 4 years ago

    Unlike ol’ Bruce, some actual facts about the tea party: A Gallup poll conducted in March 2010 found that—other than gender, income and politics—self-described Tea Party members were demographically similar to the population as a whole. When surveying supporters or participants of the Tea Party movement, polls have shown that they are to a very great extent more likely to be registered Republican, have a favorable opinion of the Republican Party and an unfavorable opinion of the Democratic Party. The Bloomberg National Poll of adults 18 and over showed that 40% of Tea Party supporters are 55 or older, compared with 32% of all poll respondents; 79% are white, 61% are men and 44% identify as “born-again Christians”,compared with 75%, 48.5%, and 34% or the general population, respectively.

    The 2010 midterm elections demonstrated considerable skepticism within the Tea Party movement with respect to the dangers and the reality of global warming. A New York Times/CBS News Poll during the election revealed that only a small percentage of Tea Party supporters considered global warming a serious problem, much less than the portion of the general public that does. The Tea Party is strongly opposed to government-imposed limits on carbon dioxide emissions as part of emissions trading legislation to encourage use of fuels that emit less carbon dioxide. An example is the movement’s support of California Proposition 23, which would suspend AB32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006.190 The proposition failed to pass, with less than 40% voting in favor.Many of the movement’s members also favor stricter measures against illegal immigration.Polls found that just 7% of Tea Party supporters approve of how Obama is doing his job compared to 50% (as of April 2010) of the general public,180 and that roughly 77% of supporters had voted for Obama’s Republican opponent, John McCain in 2008.A University of Washington poll of 1,695 registered voters in the state of Washington reported that 73% of Tea Party supporters disapprove of Obama’s policy of engaging with Muslim countries, 88% approve of the controversial Arizona immigration law enacted in 2010 which requires police to question people they suspect are illegal immigrants for proof of legal status, 54% feel that immigration is changing the culture in the U.S. for the worse, 82% do not believe that gay and lesbian couples should have the legal right to marry, and that about 52% believed that “Compared to the size of the group, lesbians and gays have too much political power”.[

    So what we have is a bunch of people who are financially comfortable, older, not representative of most of the country, and feel that they will lose what they have if anyone else gets more; i.e., zero-sum mentality. willing to step on the heads of anyone who is not them to keep what they have. No wonder they are Republicans.

     •  Reply
  8. Missing large
    archimedeslives  over 4 years ago

    So many statements above so much misinformation. Number one the constitutional convention while convened to revise the constitution was intended from the very beginning by many of the participants to actually write a new document. Madison and Washington chief among those who held this position. The amendments though not included in the original draft sent out for ratification were understood my the states to be an addendum that would be added. The reason the Bill of Rights was not added orignally was time. The convention wanted to close and people wanted to get home. Many founders did not think the Bill was necessary since the rights clearly not removed by the constitution but Mason, Gerry and others realized if it was not specifically written into the constitution later folk would manipulate the facts. More Republicans voted in favor of the Civil Rights Act than Democratics so that old canard of, “those democrats became today’s Republicans” is full of shite. Why would the racist Democrats leave a party they were the majority of to join a party they would be in the minority. Let’s look at those that voted against it in the Senate Hill and Sparkman of Alabama - Fulbright and McClellan of Arkansas - Holland and Smathers of Florida - Russell and Talmadge of Georgia - Ellender and Long of Louisiana - Eastland and Stennis of Mississippi - Ervin and Jordan of North Carolina - Johnston and Thurmond of South Carolina - Gore Sr. and Walters of Tennessee - H. Byrd and Robertson of Virginia - R. Byrd of West Virginia

    Tell me, which of these folks became Republicans?

     •  Reply
  9. Missing large
    SClark55 gc insider over 4 years ago

    Morin is the one stepping into uncharted waters – the Founding Fathers plainly knew more about history and governance than he ever will.

     •  Reply
  10. Missing large
    Marty Z  over 4 years ago

    Bruce, regarding “a few polls”:*1,695 is a rather large sample compared with most polls. The math shows that a sample size of 600 is 95% likely to be accurate within +/- 3%. A sample size nearly 3 times as large will be considerably more accurate. Even if spyderred’s numbers shift a point or 2, the implications are the same. And when several polls all say nearly the same thing, the validity is greater yet.* In other words, like them or not, they are statistically valid.

     •  Reply
Sign in to comment
Advertisement

More From Jim Morin

Advertisement