When did this start exactly? I know the first time I remember seeing it was in the run up to the invasion of Iraq. Then it was “You don’t think we should go get those terrorists in Iraq? Well you’re on their side, then. You’re a traitor who hates America”.
Then once the invasion started it was “How dare you criticize the president in a time of war. That’s treason!”.
Then once Obama was in office, even the President himself was committing treason according to the Tea Party (in a time of war, of course). First by being in office it the first place, when clearly he was born somewhere in Africa or Indonesia or something. Then by doing pretty much anything else he tried to do, seeing as how it was all part of his Socialist agenda (and therefor treason).
But that’s okay, because now the Tea Party is committing treason. Everybody’s committing treason!
Can you point to another amendment that was passed in this way? Do you want to see a lot of such amendments passed by the same means of hostage-taking in the years to come?
It’s only the first time we allow something to happen that it’s “unprecedented”. The next time it happens it will indeed be what John Mace suggests it already is - “politics as usual”.
That’s allowing for perverse incentives to drive what gets to be in that most sacred document of those very same Teapartiers, the Constitution. Sounds like a good idea to you?
The TACTIC is politics as usual. TACTIC. So what if no one ever did this exact thing before?
As for the constitutional amendment, it’s just a proposal to pass one in the future. They can’t pass an amendment on a simple majority vote, and everyone knows it has to go to the states to ratify. It’s nothing. It’s an empty gesture so the TP candidates can brag about their efforts to get a balanced budget amendment passed.
That’s not really what she said, but even if she did, that wouldn’t be treason. In fact, it is protected speech. If she actually took up arms, then you’re in treason territory.
Can you be specific about who those people are, and what specific things they’ve done that are treasonous? And can you offer a reasonable explanation as to why they haven’t been arrested and charged? Treason is a very serious offense, and if Obama is just turning a blind eye towards these actions, I want to know!
Sure but is your aim narrowly for technical accuracy and nothing else? It is of rather small consequence if a tactic has been used before, if what it’s applied to and the sought objective are unprecedented.
I can use a knife to chop an onion, and I can use it to chop up grandma. The techique is the same but the latter is hardly “chopping as usual”.
Hey we’re trying to pass this thing that I support so why don’t you just move out of the way, it’ll never happen anyway - trust me. Yeah. No.
If I recall correctly both you and AD USAF are self-identified libertarians (correct me if I’m wrong: long time lurker, unfrequent poster) so I get why you would take a relatively laxer view on the amendment process. What I fail to fathom is how there can be a congressional caucus full of people who day in day out subscribe to an ideology that praises the virtues of slow, careful, deliberate change and praises the wisdom of the Constitution, in how it’s set up with separation of powers, checks and balances in order to ensure such slow, careful and deliberate change.
And then go right ahead and say pass this sloppy, unserious amendment - or else we wreck the economy! Don’t worry, it will never be ratified anyway.
Truthfully? I could care less. If it’s a good idea and they can convince 38 state legislatures to pass it, fine by me. If not, then it’s DOA and matters not. There’s a reason why we’ve only had 27 Amendments to the Constitution and only 2 since 1971, one of which dated from 1789.
You put too much into the actions of Congress and not enough into “the several states”. As far as amendments go, that’s a hell of a check against the tomfoolery of US Congressmen. Propose 50 Amendments a year for all I care. When none are adopted and the voters (hopefully) come to their senses and vote them out, everything will be copacetic.
Will you have as much faith in that check when the amendment on the table is something you dont like? Socialization of the means of production - maybe you can imagine something more plausible? Remember, it’s passed in congress and signed by POTUS and now the states can take their time…
If you re-read my post, you’ll find that specifically I said as much.
I assume because they’re not a real threat. The same reason that people who drive 1 mph faster than the speed limit don’t get tickets.
There are people currently working to garner support for Texas to remove itself from the union. As I said in my previous post, I assume that’s treasonous, isn’t it? Isn’t supporting an organization that wants to secede from the union aiding an enemy of that union? I’m actually asking, I don’t really know if it would count.
Remember though, a bunch of states got a fresh crop of hard, hard, hard-right ideologues into the state level houses. How many states have instituted abortion legislation, union-busting, or voter-suppressing laws? This is the best time ever for terrible right-wing nonsense to be added to the constitution. I think the vote would be closer than you might suspect.
Whatever. This vast-right-wing-conspiracy crap is getting old. Do me a favor and check out which states Barack Obama won in 2008, compare them to the ones that John Kerry won in 2004 and Al Gore won in 2000. If the number is less than 12, get back to me.
I’d probably support a balanced budget amendment (depending on the exact wording).
But you mentioned tax increases. Do you think the conservatives in Congress are going to support any balanced budget amendment that allows for the possibility of balancing the budget via taxation?
They are plotting to split the union, that’s just a tiny bit more dangerous than someone going 1 mph over the speed limit, no? Unless they are just talking about it and not actually doing anything.
If they actually take up arms in order to do that, maybe. Have shots been fired yet?
So, there’s two things I’d like to comment on. Firstly, the debt ceiling is going to be raised. I know that the 24 hr cable news networks want nothing more than have us sitting on the edge of our seats, but the debt ceiling is going to be raised. This is just political theater at its best (or worst).
Secondly, if the Democrats in 2007 had done the same thing in order to get Bush to exit Iraq, many of the treason-mongerers here would be praising them as being the ultimate of patriots.
They are plotting to split the union, that’s just a tiny bit more dangerous than someone going 1 mph over the speed limit, no? Unless they are just talking about it and not actually doing anything.
If they actually take up arms in order to do that, maybe. Have shots been fired yet?[/quote]
No, but wouldn’t raising money for an organization with the stated intent of splitting the union be treason? This is the sort of place I’m thinking of: http://www.texasnationalist.com/
I disagree. I would have primary voted and picketed against any congress-person who decided that he would threaten the world economy for a political gain.
I think you’d find most Democrats would agree. Democrats are limp-wrist idealists, remember?
But you know what? The Democrats didn’t do something like this in 2007. And they didn’t do it in 2009 when they were trying to get a public health care bill passed. And they didn’t do it in 2005 over judicial appointments.
The Democrats have been willing to act like responsible grown-ups. And so have many Republicans. But the Tea-Party is acting like a bunch of whiny adolescents.
Believe me, I have checked the entrails, I have looked into smoke, and I have even consulted with the Council of Elders,( I am a Level 45 Cleric, so I have the right to consult the Elders)and they, too, have foreseen doom. You have been forewarned. Midnight will mark the Dawn of the First Day. 72 Hours Remain.
Because they are right wing. The government has always bent over backwards to ignore the transgressions of right wing groups. While spying on and harassing the members of “dangerous left wing” organizations like the ACLU.
