• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Tea Party Type On Majority Rule

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,265
Location
In My Coffee
So, it's been rumored that Boehner is planning to unite with Democrats on some of the major issues. Apparently he's tired of dealing with fringe-Right types.

A Tea Party favorite sums up his view of Majority Rule:

ea Party favorite and second-term Rep. Tim Huelskamp is among the most recent to express concern, saying Tuesday that Boehner “assured us” that he'd seek a majority Republican coalition before proceeding on controversial bills. “Why do we have the majority if we don’t do what the majority wants?” the Kansas Republican told FoxNews.com. “I didn’t come to Washington to give over the House to (Democratic Leader) Nancy Pelosi and moderate Republicans. This really concerns me.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/04/17/boehner-pressed-on-holding-votes-with-no-house-majority-as-guns-immigration/#ixzz2QkqcLSta
Rep. Tim Huelskamp, apparently Working Together is not part of your Agenda.

Even the Tea Party favorites are on-board with Majority Rule.

Which makes me wonder: If a Tea Party favorite is FOR Majority Rule, then how fringe-Right are those who are against Majority Rule?

Just thought I'd link-up this article, and try to get down to whether Majority Rule is 'good' or not.
 
Last edited:

KTCerberus

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2012
Messages
26
Location
Wichita, KS
So... The message I get from hearing you say "...the best we can hope for is for them to do nothing. Stop passing laws!" is that you elect representatives so they can NOT do their jobs? Damn, the constituents must be super easy to please! But then why is the approval rating so atrociously low?

There is the right, the extreme right, the tea party, and then deep space where apparently these no compromise anti-majority folks who don't want any laws passed, and wish Congress was a log jam apparently live.
 

Defrock

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2013
Messages
98
Location
Nokesville, VA
Democracy is tyranny of the majority over the minority. The Constitution limits what the government can do to people, not give it power of what it CAN do for people.
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,170
Location
earth's crust
Democracy is tyranny of the majority over the minority. The Constitution limits what the government can do to people, not give it power of what it CAN do for people.
Maybe an elected dictatorship where killing the dictator is not a crime! A 10yr term, with our bill of rights that actually are cemented , and then after 10 yrs he has to leave the country and never have any contact with another.

A constitutional elected dictatorship...sounds good right???

And have the constitution written in latin.
 

georg jetson

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
2,412
Location
Slidell, Louisiana
So... The message I get from hearing you say "...the best we can hope for is for them to do nothing. Stop passing laws!" is that you elect representatives so they can NOT do their jobs? Damn, the constituents must be super easy to please! But then why is the approval rating so atrociously low?

There is the right, the extreme right, the tea party, and then deep space where apparently these no compromise anti-majority folks who don't want any laws passed, and wish Congress was a log jam apparently live.
Well, I think you might be referencing my post?

Our representatives jobs are to pass laws within the powers given them by the US Constitution and then only when necessary. They don't do that. They have dropped their chains long ago. It is unfortunate that we must make decisions for supporting elected officials based on a defensive strategy alone, but that is the sad state of affairs.

There can be no compromise when it comes to enforcing the several constitutions. They are our only defense.
 
Last edited:

Ca Patriot

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2010
Messages
2,330
Location
, ,
I'm glad the radical fringe Tea Party types didnt work with democrats on the recent gun bill.
 

ron73440

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
469
Location
Suffolk VA
We do not have Majority rule, we have a Republic designed to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority.
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,690
Location
Whatcom County
What majority? If you count the non votes there is only a minority and this is almost always the case politically.

If it is wrong for one person to hold a gun to your head and take a buck out of your wallet or tell you what to wear, drive, eat, how you should work, etc.......what makes it moral for two to do so?
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,200
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
So, it's been rumored that Boehner is planning to unite with Democrats on some of the major issues. Apparently he's tired of dealing with fringe-Right types.

A Tea Party favorite sums up his view of Majority Rule:



Rep. Tim Huelskamp, apparently Working Together is not part of your Agenda.

Even the Tea Party favorites are on-board with Majority Rule.

Which makes me wonder: If a Tea Party favorite is FOR Majority Rule, then how fringe-Right are those who are against Majority Rule?

Just thought I'd link-up this article, and try to get down to whether Majority Rule is 'good' or not.
I'm sorry, B92FSL, but this entire post, and your mode of reasoning, is completely worthless.

First of all, your imagination of a "left/right" political paradigm is false, fictitious, fantastical, etc etc etc.

Specifically, this implied reasoning is illogical to the point of being anti-intellectual, and I'm 99% sure you know that, which makes your doing so rather... distasteful in my view.

B92FSL said:
So, it's been rumored that Boehner is planning to unite with Democrats on some of the major issues. Apparently he's tired of dealing with fringe-Right types.

... SNIP ...

Which makes me wonder: If a Tea Party favorite is FOR Majority Rule, then how fringe-Right are those who are against Majority Rule?
Seriously, shame on you.

As though support for "majority rule" has something to do with one's position on the left-right spectrum... Even if I accepted such a spectrum, this would be a ludicrous argument.

Secondly: The tea party is populist (that's why they suddenly became all anti-immigration even though it started off as a Paul-ite movement). Progressivism is a populist movement. Therefore, they both claim the mandate of "majority rule". Populism isn't a coherent ideology, or even ideological approach: it's nothing more than a set of rhetorical techniques designed to accrue political power to yet another elite through votes. Populism is, therefore, anti-populist.

This, and the tendency for group-think to encourage demagoguery and xenophobia, are the reason that basically every single populist movement in history has been illiberal (classical definition), authoritarian, and generally economically inept as well.

"Majority rule" is about as valid a justification as saying "it's OK to kill you, because when I shoot you, you die", and all you've done is point out exactly why its justification is so meritless – clearly if both "progressives" and "tea party types" can have majorities, than a "majority" is nothing more than a chance alignment of demographics and strategy, and is in no way representative of any sort of consensus view of Americans. (Of course, expecting there to even be a single majority opinion on anything in a country the size of America is an exercise in juvenile perspective). Unfortunately you're too locked in your thoughtless worldview to see this obvious fact.

Before, when I brought up Jefferson, it was to point out that real minds who seek to justify "majority rule", have done a whole hell of a lot better than "it's right because it is"/"might makes right". Believe it or not, I was trying to do you a favor, because there are interesting arguments in favor of majority rule; yours are merely not among them. You might want to read some of their arguments before you come parading idiocy like this around. But no, instead you freely admit "you don't give a FUQ" what great minds in the past have concluded, and you'd rather trailblaze your own inept way to inadequately defending the things you believe.

To whatever extent my feeble abilities enable me to be persuasive, and a challenging debater to folks on both sides of your imaginary partisan divide, I assure you is in no small part to my willingness to consider the reasoning of the past. There is a whole lot to cherry-pick from, and you may find your views refined along the way.
 
Last edited:

JoeSparky

Centurion
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,623
Location
Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
I'm glad the radical fringe Tea Party types didnt work with democrats on the recent gun bill.
This particular "radical fringe Tea Party type" who happens to believe in a SMALL Government based upon the Constitution with maximum liberty and personal responsibility will gladly work with the democrats (or rather progressives) on any gun bill. My standard is: "The US Constitution in the Bill of Rights in the 2nd amendment states that "the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"! As such, NO it will NOT be acceptable to INFRINGE on this RIGHT by imposing this/that restriction!" Oh, BTW, there are several restrictions that have been imposed that need to be repealed OR amend the Constitution to make them NOT VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION!

IF the Progressives can't deal with that.... tough luck!
 
Last edited:
Top