# The Tea Party is not socially conservative my ass **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 11, 2010, 6:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-tea-party-is-not-socially-conservative-my-ass/556760 "2010-10-11T06:09:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 51
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2010, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-tea-party-is-not-socially-conservative-my-ass/556760/1001 "2010-10-25T19:54:52Z")
How can you call him “obviously correct” if he doesn’t present his reasoning? That dissent is legalese for “Fuck the 14th, he’s a damn Chink!”, nothing more. ---
**Author:** ![Shot\_From\_Guns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ccd318/32.png) [@Shot\_From\_Guns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shot_From_Guns)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2010, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-tea-party-is-not-socially-conservative-my-ass/556760/1002 "2010-10-25T20:07:47Z")
Hi, **Bricker**! Thanks for coming to play! Have some apple cider. > [@E-Sabbath](#): > > You are Tycho Brahe and I claim your silver nose. I find myself terribly confused. On one hand, you seem to be referring to a certain _cadence of speech_, often punctuated by _italics_. On the other hand, silver nose. However, as this cider is _delicious_, I have decided instead to focus on delighted slurping as I watch \*\*Bricker \*\*work his magic. ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2010, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-tea-party-is-not-socially-conservative-my-ass/556760/1003 "2010-10-25T20:27:01Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > As early as _United States v. Wong Kim Ark_, 169 U.S. 649 (1898), we learn: > > They go on to declare that Wong Kim Ark is a US citizen by virtue of the Fourteenth Amendment and his birth in San Francisco, even though his parents were alien. But beyond the Fourteenth Amendment, the decision adduces to the common law of England and of the US, and finds that the overwhelming weight of it supports that view as well. > > What precisely are you relying upon for the opposite view? Didn’t anyone notice Wong Kim Ark was Chinese! It’s so obvious he was a robot sent from the future. Another robot was sent to put the birth notices in the paper. And the last robot become our president. Open your eyes people. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2010, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-tea-party-is-not-socially-conservative-my-ass/556760/1004 "2010-10-25T21:09:51Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > “We” are subscribers to the dissenting opinion in that particular dispute, of course. There’s just one teeny tiny problem with relying on the dissent: it has no weight of law. And in fact, the dissent concedes as much: > [@](#): > > … that, if that amendment bears the construction now put upon it, it imposed the English common law rule on this country for the first time, and made it “absolute and unbending” just as Great Britain was being relieved from its inconveniences. Yes. That is what it does. Even if weconcede the dissent’s view that this is the “first time,” despite the conspicuous lack of citation in support of that claim, the dissent cannot and does not claim that the construction offered is beyond the power of the Court to make. In other words, the dissent is saying, “You’re wrong,” not “Your decision is of no legal effect.” ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2010, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-tea-party-is-not-socially-conservative-my-ass/556760/1005 "2010-10-25T21:22:13Z")
This thread was mildly entertaining what with **Morella** the Moron and all, but now that **Bricker** and **Jimmy** are going back and forth with real information, it’s become _interesting_. Thanks, y’all! ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2010, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-tea-party-is-not-socially-conservative-my-ass/556760/1006 "2010-10-25T22:04:47Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > This thread was mildly entertaining what with **Morella** the Moron and all, but now that **Bricker** and **Jimmy** are going back and forth with real information, it’s become _interesting_. Thanks, y’all! But now it’s all serious. Can’t they at least swear and insult each other? At this rate the mods will move it to GD. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2010, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-tea-party-is-not-socially-conservative-my-ass/556760/1007 "2010-10-25T22:11:36Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > There’s just one teeny tiny problem with relying on the dissent: it has no weight of law. > … > In other words, the dissent is saying, “You’re wrong,” not “Your decision is of no legal effect.” Well, right. They are nuts, after all. But I’m not sure what you’re looking for here even in a universe where I really hold these beliefs. Of course it doesn’t have the weight of the law; that’s why it’s a dissent. The point I’m doing my best to make is that, just as the dissenting justices said “you’re wrong” with respect to the historical narrative supporting that particular interpretation of “jurisdiction,” your modern day birther is saying, essentially, that the weight of the law is and has always been wrong. Nobody who goes to the trouble to concoct this kind of constitutional argument, as far as I can tell, actually thinks that a pro forma application of existing federal statutes would result in a declaration of Obama’s ineligibility. They’re saying there’s a latent defect, so to speak, in the way all these cases have proceeded, stretching all the way back to the 19th century, which hasn’t ever been an issue because no president before Obama actually ran afoul of the “appropriate” rule. But he, of course, does. Regrettably so. Also **emacknight’s** butt stinks. ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2010, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-tea-party-is-not-socially-conservative-my-ass/556760/1008 "2010-10-25T22:20:01Z")
> [@Shot\_From\_Guns](#): > > Because \*\*his \*\*entire fucking \*raison d’etre \*on this board is to nitpick other people’s arguments, especially when it involves the law in any way, and then claim that he does it equally to conservatives and liberals. Liberal posters and liberal posts far outweigh the number of conservative posters and conservative posts on this board, and, while I don’t know for sure, it’s possible that liberal posters make more claims about the law than do conservative ones. And then there’s the question as to whether liberal and conservative posters err about matters of the law in equal proportions. So, do you have a cite showing that liberal and conservative posters post about legal matters in equal numbers? And do you have a cite that they err in regard to the law either in equal numbers? If not, then you have no cause to expect **Bricker** to critique them in equal numbers. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2010, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-tea-party-is-not-socially-conservative-my-ass/556760/1009 "2010-10-25T22:24:46Z")
Hush up. We’re listening to the adults now. ---
**Author:** ![descamisado](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e480ec/32.png) [@descamisado](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/descamisado)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2010, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-tea-party-is-not-socially-conservative-my-ass/556760/1010 "2010-10-25T22:26:45Z")
She said “equally,” not “equal numbers,” which one can clearly infer to mean that errors, wherever found and regardless of by whom committed, would be subject to the same electron microscope. ETA: Thanks, **Bricker** , for jumping in (again) and educating us all. ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2010, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-tea-party-is-not-socially-conservative-my-ass/556760/1011 "2010-10-25T22:45:04Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > Hush up. > > We’re listening to the adults now. No kidding. This thread has been ground to it’s knees with Supreme Court cites. Although, I have to admit, “Kwock Jan Fat v. White” is about the coolest court case I ever heard. It sounds like a 4chan topic. ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2010, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-tea-party-is-not-socially-conservative-my-ass/556760/1012 "2010-10-25T22:49:10Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > Pardon, but I don’t see “_people believe UHC is good because they’re young_” anywhere in there. > > And you know why? > > Because it suggests a host of inaccuracies and nonsensities that are nowhere to be found in what I actually said. > > But then you already knew that, didn’t you? Otherwise you’d have paraphrased my comments honestly. Yes, I do know why that prase didn’t appear, because I paraphrased. Are you familiar with what the term “paraphrase” means? Try looking it up, along with “nonsensities.” Then look back on the flaming pile of turd you posted [here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=580311) to see if you should be questioning someone else’s honesty. ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2010, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-tea-party-is-not-socially-conservative-my-ass/556760/1013 "2010-10-25T23:14:44Z")
> [@descamisado](#): > > She said “equally,” not “equal numbers,” which one can clearly infer to mean that errors, wherever found and regardless of by whom committed, would be subject to the same electron microscope. SFG clearly criticized Bricker for correcting liberal posts disproportionately to conservative ones. The only way she could know if he was doing that would be if she had: knowledge as to the number of posts regarding legalities between the two sides; knowledge of number of factual errors committed by both sides; and knowledge that Bricker was responding to liberal errors disproportionately percentagewise. And I’d be very surprised if she had factual answers to any of these three questions at the time she made her post. In fact, I’d be surprised if anyone has the answers to them…or could determine the answers to them. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2010, 11:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-tea-party-is-not-socially-conservative-my-ass/556760/1014 "2010-10-25T23:30:40Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > Liberal posters and liberal posts far outweigh the number of conservative posters and conservative posts on this board… How come you never mentioned this? ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2010, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-tea-party-is-not-socially-conservative-my-ass/556760/1015 "2010-10-26T00:04:33Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > SFG clearly criticized Bricker for correcting liberal posts disproportionately to conservative ones. You’ve inaccurately paraphrased **Shot From Guns**. The key point was that **Bricker** is fond of pointing out how balanced he is. He likes to remind us that he has defended Obama and criticized Bush. So the challenge was thus put forward to “put his money where his mouth is.” Show that he’s balanced by applying his legalese nitpicking to a conservative troll. **Bricker** then gave \*\*Morella \*\*the smack down she so richly deserved. Proving both that he is a man of his word, and that logic/integrity trumps partisan bullshit. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2010, 1:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-tea-party-is-not-socially-conservative-my-ass/556760/1016 "2010-10-26T01:07:14Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > Also **emacknight’s** butt stinks. Also, **Jimmy Chitwood** called Chief Justice Harlan’s a concurring opinion, not a dissent. Somebody smarter than I will need to extrapolate the implications this has in the matter of the odor of Mr Chitwood’s butt. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2010, 1:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-tea-party-is-not-socially-conservative-my-ass/556760/1017 "2010-10-26T01:58:05Z")
Harlan concurred with Chief Justice Fuller’s dissent. It smells like basil. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2010, 2:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-tea-party-is-not-socially-conservative-my-ass/556760/1018 "2010-10-26T02:21:05Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > Harlan concurred with Chief Justice Fuller’s dissent. > > It smells like basil. :smack: Time for **kaylasdad99** to go back to reading for comprehension class. Also,mmmm, basil (not that there’s anything _wrong_ with that). ---
**Author:** ![Morella](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Morella](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morella)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2010, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-tea-party-is-not-socially-conservative-my-ass/556760/1019 "2010-10-26T03:37:40Z")
> [@Shot\_From\_Guns](#): > > Because \*\*his \*\*entire fucking \*raison d’etre \*on this board is to nitpick other people’s arguments _raison d’être_. There is an accent circumflex over the e. Just while we were on the subject of nitpicking… ---
**Author:** ![Morella](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Morella](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morella)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2010, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-tea-party-is-not-socially-conservative-my-ass/556760/1020 "2010-10-26T03:41:31Z")
> [@villa](#): > > This is your knowledge of the Constitution? > > Now, which one of these ended slavery, do you think? It isn’t a tough question - it is even on the naturalization exam. Actually, it is a bullshit question, because both were about ending slavery. The purpose of the 14th amendment was never to make citizens out of anchor babies, or a president out of a Kenyan-Indonesian Muslim. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-tea-party-is-not-socially-conservative-my-ass/556760.md?page=50) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-tea-party-is-not-socially-conservative-my-ass/556760.md?page=52)