AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

Obstacle to Deficit Cutting: A Nation on Entitlements

And your claim that he was neither Liberal or Conservative, that is the ultimate copout in my opinion.

You cannot get away with that one.

Your arguments are getting worse by the day.

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html
Article II. Section 1. The President shall, …
Before he enter on the execution of his office, he shall take the following oath or affirmation:--"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Article II. Section 4. The President … shall be removed from office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Article I. Section 8.
The Congress shall have power

To lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;

To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;

To establish post offices and post roads;

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;

To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;

To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;

To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

To provide and maintain a navy;

To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;--And

To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

I claim that the USA's rule of law must be rescued and secured. It is dumb to abandon any part of it because it is more than 10 years, more than 100 years, more than 200 years old, or even because some of it was adopted March 4, 1789. It is a dangerous threat to the security of our liberty to abandon it

A majority of the lawfully eligible voters in the USA know this and will defend the USA's rule of law with whatever lawful means it takes.

is that there are times when the Constitution must be revised to meet the changing technological. In other words, because we have so many communications' devices (just to consider one category) that were unimagined at the end of the 18th C., we must expand the Constitution to cover communications using everything from the telephone to the computer.

Quote:

is that there are times when the Constitution must be revised to meet the changing technological. In other words, because we have so many communications' devices (just to consider one category) that were unimagined at the end of the 18th C., we must expand the Constitution to cover communications using everything from the telephone to the computer.

WHY?
Communications is communications.
The written word is still the written word, no matter what its written on.
If we were to do as you suggest, the Constitution would become such a tangled mess that it would be almost unworkable.
There have been so many advances in communications, then those advances have become obsolete by other advances, that it would not be possible to amend the constitution every time.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Would you agree with me that a literal reading of the Constitution renders Bush's Warrantless Wiretapping program to be illegal

Quote:

Would you agree with me that a literal reading of the Constitution renders Bush's Warrantless Wiretapping program to be illegal

Absolutely.
And I have no problem with the constitution being read and interpreted literally, I actually would prefer it read and interpreted it that way.

So you would have supported impeaching him and sending the guy to jail?

Or doing so now?

Principles for Economic Revival
America's financial crisis, deep recession and anemic recovery have largely been driven by economic policies that have deviated from proven fact-based principles, say George P. Shultz, a fellow at the Hoover Institution, and his colleagues. Here are the priorities that should guide policymakers as they seek to restore more rapid growth.

First, take tax increases off the table:

Higher tax rates are destructive to growth and would ratify the recent spending excesses.
For example, the U.S. corporate tax is one of the highest in the world.
Second, balance the federal budget by reducing spending:

The publicly held debt must be brought down to the precrisis safety zone.
The government should begin by rescinding unspent "stimulus" and Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) funds, ratcheting down domestic appropriations and repealing entitlement expansions, most notably the subsidies in the health care bill.
Third, modify Social Security and health care entitlements to reduce their explosive future growth.

Fourth, enact a moratorium on all new regulations for the next three years:

Going forward, regulations should be transparent and simple, pass rigorous cost-benefit tests and on market-based incentives instead of command and control. Direct and indirect cost estimates of regulations and subsidies should be published before new regulations are put into law.

Fifth, monetary policy should be less discretionary and more rule-like. The Federal Reserve should announce and follow a monetary policy rule, such as the Taylor rule, in which the short-term interest rate is determined by the supply and demand for money. The rate is then adjusted through changes in the money supply when inflation rises above or falls below the target, or when the economy goes into a recession.

Source: George P. Shultz, Michael J. Boskin, John F. Cogan, Allan Meltzer and John B. Taylor, "Principles for Economic Revival," The Wall Street Journal, September 16, 2010.

By DAVID CATANESE | 9/17/10 4:40 PM EDT
Delaware GOP Senate candidate and tea party sensation Christine O'Donnell torched "ruling-class elites" and their "anti-Americanism," in her debut on the national stage Friday, encouraging the room of conservatives to lead a constitutional comeback in this year's midterm election.

O'Donnell's 17-minute speech before the Family Research Council's Value Voters Summit made no direct mention of her primary upset of nine-term Rep. Mike Castle Tuesday; it instead focused on the enthusiasm that's reinvigorated the conservative movement in the two years since President Obama took office.

"The conservative movement was told to curl up in a fetal position and just stay there for the next eight years, thank you very much. Well, how things have changed," O'Donnell said, to cheers.

O'Donnell, who defeated Castle by a 6-point margin despite sustained attacks on her misstatements and financial troubles – past and present — repeatedly chided "the ruling class" and championed "a rowdy revolution of reason."

"The small elite don't get us. They call us wacky. They call us wingnuts. We call us, 'We the people,'" she said to sustained applause. "We're loud, we're rowdy, we're passionate. … It isn't tame, but boy, it sure is good."

She also addressed the personal scrutiny and criticisms she has endured since her candidacy vaulted into the national spotlight just weeks ago, when she appeared to be gaining momentum against Castle in her third shot at a Senate seat.

"Will they attack us? Yes. Will they smear our backgrounds and distort our records? Undoubtedly. Will they lie about us, harass our families, namecall to try to intimidate us? They will. There's nothing safe about it. But is it worth it?" she said.

"Well, let me ask you. Is freedom worth it?" she asked, as the crowd chanted "Yes." "Is America worth it?"

She used her middle-class upbringing in New Jersey to briefly explain one of the most perplexing charges that has dogged her campaign — why it took her more than 15 years to earn her college degree from Fairleigh Dickinson University.

"I never had the high-paying job or the company car. It took me over a decade to pay off my student loans. I never had to worry about where to dock my yacht to reduce my taxes," she said, jabbing at Sen. John Kerry for dodging a six-figure yacht tax in his home state. '"And I'll bet most of you didn't, either."

O'Donnell argued that while Beltway elites are attempting to marginalize their movement, it’s conservatives who represent the core of mainstream America.

Quote:

http://www.crusader.net/texts/mk/index.html
Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler
Volume Two: The National Socialist Movement
Chapter I: Philosophy and Party
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ON FEBRUARY 24, 1920, the first great public demonstration of our young movement took place. In the Festsaal of the Munich Hofbräuhaus the twenty-five theses of the new party's program were submitted to a crowd of almost two thousand and every single point was accepted amid jubilant approval. ...