Go Back   Bloggingheads Community > Diavlog comments
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Notices

Diavlog comments Post comments about particular diavlogs here.
(Users cannot create new threads.)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-15-2011, 08:17 AM
Bloggingheads Bloggingheads is offline
BhTV staff
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,936
Default All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-15-2011, 11:03 AM
Stapler Malone Stapler Malone is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 213
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

When it comes to running-mates, isn't Romney/Perry pretty obvious, a la JFK/LBJ?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-15-2011, 01:56 PM
Brn Brn is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Eastern NC
Posts: 27
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

I'm not sure that Mr. Smith understands what those who support the 10th Amendment really think if he believes that it is a contradiction to support using it to limit federal overreach and at the same time to have a constitutional amendment against Gay marriage or abortion. We don't believe that the federal government shouldn't do anything, just that it should only do things that are specifically enumerated.

BTW, I disagree with the policy of either of those amendments, but I wouldn't claim that those who do are hypocrites for supporting them.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-15-2011, 02:45 PM
apple
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brn View Post
I'm not sure that Mr. Smith understands what those who support the 10th Amendment really think if he believes that it is a contradiction to support using it to limit federal overreach and at the same time to have a constitutional amendment against Gay marriage or abortion. We don't believe that the federal government shouldn't do anything, just that it should only do things that are specifically enumerated.
Actually, it is hypocritical. On one hand, Rick Perry demands "states' rights", and even raises the possibility of secession, and on the other hand, he supports two amendments that would limit states' rights even further. It's comparable to advocating "individual rights" in the abstract, and then supporting various constitutional amendments to severely restrict individual rights in an unprecedented manner.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-15-2011, 03:12 PM
sugarkang sugarkang is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Cali, Small-Govt Liberal
Posts: 2,186
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by apple View Post
Actually, it is hypocritical. On one hand, Rick Perry demands "states' rights", and even raises the possibility of secession, and on the other hand, he supports two amendments that would limit states' rights even further. It's comparable to advocating "individual rights" in the abstract, and then supporting various constitutional amendments to severely restrict individual rights in an unprecedented manner.
It would be hypocritical if he were a libertarian; he's not. It's perfectly consistent with what he believes and it's legal to do so if the political will exists; it doesn't.
__________________
The mixing of populations lowers the cost of being unusual.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-15-2011, 03:26 PM
apple
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by sugarkang View Post
It would be hypocritical if he were a libertarian; he's not. It's perfectly consistent with what he believes and it's legal to do so if the political will exists; it doesn't.
It's hypocritical because he's an avowed advocate of states' rights who even threatened to secede over the matter. It's not even consistent with what he believed a few weeks ago. Legality is a red herring, as any amendment to the constitution would be technically legal, even one legalizing slavery, it says nothing about whether or not he's being a hypocrite.

It's comparable to someone advocating "individual rights", while simultaneously supporting measures to trample on them, like an amendment legalizing slavery - also 'legal'.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-15-2011, 03:55 PM
badhatharry badhatharry is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: eastern sierra
Posts: 5,413
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by apple View Post
It's hypocritical because he's an avowed advocate of states' rights who even threatened to secede over the matter. It's not even consistent with what he believed a few weeks ago. Legality is a red herring, as any amendment to the constitution would be technically legal, even one legalizing slavery, it says nothing about whether or not he's being a hypocrite.
just a simple-minded, not very clever question. How does one threaten to secede?
__________________
"By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it." Adam Smith

Last edited by badhatharry; 08-15-2011 at 04:07 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 08-15-2011, 05:35 PM
apple
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by badhatharry View Post
just a simple-minded, not very clever question. How does one threaten to secede?
We've got a great union. There's absolutely no reason to dissolve it. But if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, you know, who knows what might come out of that.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 08-15-2011, 06:24 PM
badhatharry badhatharry is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: eastern sierra
Posts: 5,413
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by apple View Post
We've got a great union. There's absolutely no reason to dissolve it. But if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, you know, who knows what might come out of that.
so you're saying that? or you're saying Perry is saying that?
__________________
"By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it." Adam Smith
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 08-15-2011, 06:59 PM
apple
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by badhatharry View Post
so you're saying that? or you're saying Perry is saying that?
Guess.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 08-15-2011, 10:00 PM
badhatharry badhatharry is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: eastern sierra
Posts: 5,413
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by apple View Post
Guess.
But again no one is threatening to secede by saying' who knows what could come of that?' Is that the most emphatic thing he said?
__________________
"By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it." Adam Smith
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 08-16-2011, 08:11 PM
apple
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by badhatharry View Post
But again no one is threatening to secede by saying' who knows what could come of that?' Is that the most emphatic thing he said?
Why would you even bring it up? Do you think that there is a reasonable explanation for this statement, and the other statements he has made about secession.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 08-17-2011, 10:54 AM
badhatharry badhatharry is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: eastern sierra
Posts: 5,413
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by apple View Post
Why would you even bring it up? Do you think that there is a reasonable explanation for this statement, and the other statements he has made about secession.
The reasonable explanation is that people are sick of Washington D.C. and all of the talking head, Harvard grads who purport to know what's best for the rest of us. You haven't provided anything else about secession that says he takes this kind of populist rhetoric seriously. After all, he is running for president, presumably of the United States.
__________________
"By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it." Adam Smith

Last edited by badhatharry; 08-17-2011 at 11:38 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 08-17-2011, 05:23 PM
apple
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by badhatharry View Post
The reasonable explanation is that people are sick of Washington D.C.
Irrelevant. If he was sick of Washington D.C. (funny how he 'became' sick three months after Obama was inaugurated), why didn't he say that? Why did he bring up secession, multiple times? Why would someone do that? Like I said, there is no reasonable explanation for why he brought up secession.

Quote:
Originally Posted by badhatharry View Post
and all of the talking head, Harvard grads who purport to know what's best for the rest of us.
Better Harvard grads than the most ignorant and ignoble of men pretending to know what is better for other people, like this Texas thug who makes veiled threats against the chairman of the Federal Reserve. Rick Perry might not be terribly smart or educated, but that does not mean that he does know what's good for you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by badhatharry View Post
You haven't provided anything else about secession that says he takes this kind of populist rhetoric seriously.
Well, apparently, you think that what Perry says isn't to be taken seriously. I agree, but in a different way. Also, populist rhetoric? I thought Republicans were patriotic. Why would he bring up secession to win a Texas primary?

Of course, the answer is that most Republican primary voters are batshit crazy.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 08-17-2011, 08:02 PM
badhatharry badhatharry is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: eastern sierra
Posts: 5,413
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by apple View Post
Irrelevant. If he was sick of Washington D.C. (funny how he 'became' sick three months after Obama was inaugurated), why didn't he say that? Why did he bring up secession, multiple times? Why would someone do that? Like I said, there is no reasonable explanation for why he brought up secession.
I haven't read anything except the one quotation that you put out. I guess you take it very seriously and assume that somehow this guy had a big secret plan to secede from the union. It's hard to buy that, but you apparently do.

Quote:
Better Harvard grads than the most ignorant and ignoble of men pretending to know what is better for other people, like this Texas thug who makes veiled threats against the chairman of the Federal Reserve.
From what I heard the veiled threat had to do with whether Bernanke would increase the money supply right before the election thereby benefitting Obama in some way. Also some people believe that increasing the money supply only serves to devalue the dollar. Mentioning treason wasn't such a hot idea.
__________________
"By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it." Adam Smith
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 08-17-2011, 08:29 PM
apple
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by badhatharry View Post
I haven't read anything except the one quotation that you put out.
And that's not really my problem. No, I don't think he had any concrete plans, but the fact that he would mention secession three times, shows that he is a complete lunatic, because only a lunatic would make such statements.

Quote:
Originally Posted by badhatharry View Post
From what I heard the veiled threat had to do with whether Bernanke would increase the money supply right before the election thereby benefitting Obama in some way.
In some mysterious way, yes.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 08-17-2011, 09:19 PM
badhatharry badhatharry is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: eastern sierra
Posts: 5,413
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by apple View Post
And that's not really my problem. No, I don't think he had any concrete plans, but the fact that he would mention secession three times, shows that he is a complete lunatic, because only a lunatic would make such statements.
OK. you think he's a complete lunatic. I don't. I guess we're going to find out a whole lot more about this guy in next year. And I bet, because he seems to be a pretty savvy politician, he's going to begin to be pretty careful from now on about the ammunition he hands to his opponents.
__________________
"By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it." Adam Smith
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 08-15-2011, 05:10 PM
Brn Brn is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Eastern NC
Posts: 27
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

No, it isn't hypocritical. The 10th Amendment/States Rights position is that the Constitution reserves some powers to the federal government and everything else to the states. If the Constitution is amended to add a power to the feds, then it is then amoung its enumerated powers.

You and I may disagree that those powers should be added to the federal government (though if you are pro-choice, you don't, you just disagree with the policy outcome), but Gov. Perry's position is internally consistent.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 08-15-2011, 05:34 PM
apple
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brn View Post
No, it isn't hypocritical. The 10th Amendment/States Rights position is that the Constitution reserves some powers to the federal government and everything else to the states. If the Constitution is amended to add a power to the feds, then it is then amoung its enumerated powers.
And a true advocate for states' rights would not support depriving states of even more rights, especially when that same person is complaining that the federal government has too much power to begin with. The constant and irrational excuse-making for a miscreant and creep like Rick Perry is not only nauseating, it bodes ill for the future. It is clear that people are preparing themselves to vote for this creature.

Tell me, is someone who believes that states should be abolished as jurisdictions independent from the federal government a supporter of states' rights, if he holds all the other positions of Rick Perry? Does someone who believes that slavery should be legalized again believe in individual rights?
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 08-15-2011, 06:37 PM
Sulla the Dictator Sulla the Dictator is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 1,364
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by apple View Post
And a true advocate for states' rights would not support depriving states of even more rights
Under ANY circumstances? A belief in state's rights isn't a cult. It's the rational belief in decentralized power being better for liberty. If you believe a fetus is a baby, and dissecting that baby and then throwing it away is a violation of it's liberty to live, then your duty is clear. That is why we have an amendment process.

I think any amendment banning abortion is pie in the sky for right now. Roe, however, is bad law and should be done away with as soon as possible.

Quote:
especially when that same person is complaining that the federal government has too much power to begin with.
There is no one serious who finds the federal government's use of powers as listed in the amendments of the Constitution to be all that onerous. The problem is the federal government's use of clauses in the articles of the Constitution to expand power beyond any reasonable interpretation of the document. The Commerce clause being the biggest problem by far, justifying everything from health care to gun control.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 08-15-2011, 07:09 PM
apple
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sulla the Dictator View Post
Under ANY circumstances? A belief in state's rights isn't a cult.
They could have fooled me. States' rights have been used to justify everything, from slavery, to segregation, lynching, but now that the descendants of the slaveholders, segregationists and lynchers find themselves on losing ends of debates (note: I am not talking about you here), states' rights suddenly mean nothing. As far as I know, no advocate of states' rights simultaneously advocated for constitutional amendments abridging these states' rights.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sulla the Dictator View Post
It's the rational belief in decentralized power being better for liberty. If you believe a fetus is a baby, and dissecting that baby and then throwing it away is a violation of it's liberty to live, then your duty is clear. That is why we have an amendment process.
I note that you do not defend the marriage amendment, school prayer amendment, and the host of other federal measures demanded by the religious right as being similarly rational.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sulla the Dictator View Post
There is no one serious who finds the federal government's use of powers as listed in the amendments of the Constitution to be all that onerous. The problem is the federal government's use of clauses in the articles of the Constitution to expand power beyond any reasonable interpretation of the document. The Commerce clause being the biggest problem by far, justifying everything from health care to gun control.
That's all fun and games, but if someone opposes this sort of thing, it hardly justifies advocating for measures to enhance federal power, especially over areas that have always been under the control of the states.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 08-15-2011, 10:13 PM
Brn Brn is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Eastern NC
Posts: 27
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

So are you arguing that abortion should be back under state control?
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 08-15-2011, 10:26 PM
sugarkang sugarkang is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Cali, Small-Govt Liberal
Posts: 2,186
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brn View Post
So are you arguing that abortion should be back under state control?
I am pro-choice, but I would give up abortion for everything else that would come from a strong 10th Amendment -- if that were the choice. True federalism would take us back to state experimentation and smaller government which is crucial for new entrepreneurship and innovation going forward. Besides, it wouldn't make abortion illegal in every state -- just some. You gotta make trade-offs in life.
__________________
The mixing of populations lowers the cost of being unusual.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 08-15-2011, 10:44 PM
badhatharry badhatharry is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: eastern sierra
Posts: 5,413
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by sugarkang View Post
I am pro-choice, but I would give up abortion for everything else that would come from a strong 10th Amendment -- if that were the choice. True federalism would take us back to state experimentation and smaller government which is crucial for new entrepreneurship and innovation going forward. Besides, it wouldn't make abortion illegal in every state -- just some. You gotta make trade-offs in life.
Besides, it's always nice to have a reason to take a trip. And think of the revenue enhancement for states where abortion is legal. Hotels, restaurants,... in fact some states might see it as detrimental to their budgets to prohibit abortion. There's a lot to consider.
__________________
"By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it." Adam Smith
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 08-15-2011, 11:16 PM
whburgess whburgess is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,202
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by badhatharry View Post
Besides, it's always nice to have a reason to take a trip. And think of the revenue enhancement for states where abortion is legal. Hotels, restaurants,... in fact some states might see it as detrimental to their budgets to prohibit abortion. There's a lot to consider.
I can see the abortion vacation ads now.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 08-16-2011, 08:10 PM
apple
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brn View Post
So are you arguing that abortion should be back under state control?
I am an advocate of liberty, not states' rights. My position is consistent. Rick Perry's is not.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 08-16-2011, 12:31 AM
Sulla the Dictator Sulla the Dictator is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 1,364
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by apple View Post
They could have fooled me. States' rights have been used to justify everything, from slavery, to segregation, lynching, but now that the descendants of the slaveholders, segregationists and lynchers find themselves on losing ends of debates (note: I am not talking about you here), states' rights suddenly mean nothing.
They "mean nothing" only if we accept your premise that there is a contradiction. We do not accept that premise, that is what we are debating.

Quote:
As far as I know, no advocate of states' rights simultaneously advocated for constitutional amendments abridging these states' rights.
Oh? Pro-gay marriage advocates argue for state's rights, and simultaneously advocate for constitutional amendments abridging the rights of the states. The Constitution is the PROPER method of removing state authority, and everyone agrees that this is so.

Moreover, even the "villains" of the narrative have held this position. There was an anti-miscegenation amendment proposed, and of course the infamous Corwin amendment. Everyone knows that the Constitution is the proper pathway for transformative changes in the balance of power.

Can you point me to a state's rights advocate who has said the Constitution is not the highest law?

Quote:
I note that you do not defend the marriage amendment, school prayer amendment, and the host of other federal measures demanded by the religious right as being similarly rational.
Those are all pipe dreams. The committed religious voters are making a mistake by aping the left. But let us remember who has warped the fabric of the state; the left. They have used the courts to buy on the cheap what would have been expensive and difficult through law. But PASSING things through the Congress is how law gains legitimacy in the nation.

Quote:
That's all fun and games, but if someone opposes this sort of thing, it hardly justifies advocating for measures to enhance federal power, especially over areas that have always been under the control of the states.
What is left for the state's to control? Gay marriage and the color scheme of the governor's wallpaper? Why do you care about either of these "powers"? They're phoney. The states are practically nothing more than provinces in the current order.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 08-15-2011, 06:32 PM
Sulla the Dictator Sulla the Dictator is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 1,364
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by apple View Post
It's hypocritical because he's an avowed advocate of states' rights who even threatened to secede over the matter.
Rick Perry never threatened to secede.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 08-17-2011, 12:51 AM
Dr. Johnson Dr. Johnson is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 7
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

While we're fretting about hypocrisy, let's not ignore the hypocrisy of Evan Smith. He's clearly a partisan leftist who favors raising "revenue" i.e., taxes. Yet he presents his publication a nonpartisan, nonprofit operation. The rather obvious purpose of doing so is to dodge tax liability.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 08-17-2011, 09:20 AM
apple
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Johnson View Post
While we're fretting about hypocrisy, let's not ignore the hypocrisy of Evan Smith. He's clearly a partisan leftist who favors raising "revenue" i.e., taxes. Yet he presents his publication a nonpartisan, nonprofit operation. The rather obvious purpose of doing so is to dodge tax liability.
I think DenvilleSteve has a new nickname.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 08-17-2011, 08:44 PM
Don Zeko Don Zeko is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Exiled to South Jersey
Posts: 2,436
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Johnson View Post
While we're fretting about hypocrisy, let's not ignore the hypocrisy of Evan Smith. He's clearly a partisan leftist who favors raising "revenue" i.e., taxes. Yet he presents his publication a nonpartisan, nonprofit operation. The rather obvious purpose of doing so is to dodge tax liability.
Believing that raising taxes ought to be part of how we reduce the budget deficit makes you a "partisan leftist" who shouldn't enjoy non-profit tax status? Huh?
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 08-15-2011, 06:31 PM
Sulla the Dictator Sulla the Dictator is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 1,364
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by apple View Post
Actually, it is hypocritical. On one hand, Rick Perry demands "states' rights", and even raises the possibility of secession, and on the other hand, he supports two amendments that would limit states' rights even further.
The 10th amendment acknowledges the primacy of other amendments in the Constitution. To pass an amendment requires a broad national consensus, not a 51% majority. There is no contradiction.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 08-15-2011, 07:03 PM
apple
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sulla the Dictator View Post
The 10th amendment acknowledges the primacy of other amendments in the Constitution. To pass an amendment requires a broad national consensus, not a 51% majority. There is no contradiction.
This is like saying that a constitutional amendment establishing monarchy as the official form of government would not be undemocratic, because it would have to be democratically approved by the states.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 08-16-2011, 12:15 AM
Sulla the Dictator Sulla the Dictator is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 1,364
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by apple View Post
This is like saying that a constitutional amendment establishing monarchy as the official form of government would not be undemocratic, because it would have to be democratically approved by the states.
Well that is functionally true. A properly voted on constitutional amendment establishing monarchy as the official form of government wouldn't be undemocratic, by the definition of each term. Indeed, a limited monarchy need not even rid itself of democracy.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 08-16-2011, 08:13 PM
apple
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sulla the Dictator View Post
Well that is functionally true. A properly voted on constitutional amendment establishing monarchy as the official form of government wouldn't be undemocratic, by the definition of each term. Indeed, a limited monarchy need not even rid itself of democracy.
Yes, but I am not talking about a gutted European-style monarchy, I am talking about the real deal here. You're confusing process and substance here. The process by which a monarchy is established, is not undemocratic. But the substance is. You can't say: someone who favors establishing monarchy is not favoring something undemocratic, because it has to be approved by the people's representatives. Yes, that is the process, but what about the substance? The same thing applies to Rick Perry.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 08-15-2011, 03:51 PM
ledocs ledocs is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: France, Earth
Posts: 1,165
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Evan Smith was quite good. How is this possible, he doesn't write for "Reason" or "National Review Online," why was he even on? Since it sounds like the Republican nominee could very well be Perry, let's have more Evan.

I don't know anything about Perry, I don't even know what he looks like, except that I just looked at a picture. Wow, he's good-looking. People never say this, I guess that's not in good taste. Althouse will say it. This guy looks like James Brolin. If he were not governor, he could either be a country music star or play one in the movies.

It sounds like people are saying he's a right-wing Bill Clinton, without the quasi-intellectual background.
__________________
ledocs
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 08-15-2011, 03:57 PM
badhatharry badhatharry is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: eastern sierra
Posts: 5,413
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Quoting ledocs: I don't even know what he looks like, except that I just looked at a picture.
hmmm

Quote:
Originally Posted by ledocs View Post
Wow, he's good-looking. People never say this, I guess that's not in good taste.
lot's of people say this. he's adorable.
__________________
"By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it." Adam Smith

Last edited by badhatharry; 08-15-2011 at 04:05 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 08-15-2011, 04:28 PM
bkjazfan bkjazfan is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: South Los Angeles, Ca.
Posts: 1,192
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by badhatharry View Post
hmmm



lot's of people say this. he's adorable.
It's almost a necessity that a president should have above average looks. The days of having a Grover Cleveland president who was overweight with a triple chin are over.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 08-15-2011, 04:47 PM
miceelf miceelf is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,569
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by bkjazfan View Post
It's almost a necessity that a president should have above average looks. The days of having a Grover Cleveland president who was overweight with a triple chin are over.
Well, and being overweight wasn't necessarily a negative back then. So Cleveland doesn't necessarily prove that unattractiveness used to be okay. For that, one has to go back to Abe Lincoln.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 08-15-2011, 05:17 PM
badhatharry badhatharry is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: eastern sierra
Posts: 5,413
Default Re: All-Texas Edition (Erica Grieder & Evan Smith)

Quote:
Originally Posted by miceelf View Post
Well, and being overweight wasn't necessarily a negative back then. So Cleveland doesn't necessarily prove that unattractiveness used to be okay. For that, one has to go back to Abe Lincoln.
he looks good in marble.
__________________
"By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it." Adam Smith
Reply With Quote
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.