Sick of the GOP

[Granule]

To all Republicans, Tea Party supporters and anyone else who claims to be on the Right, what are your thoughts on this article?

http://www.glennbeck.com/2012/06/28/...e-with-spines/

[leaningright]

I think Glenn Beck is a nut of the nuttiest sort...the right's version of Keith Olberman. BUT, if people think there is a huge difference between Democrats and Republicans in general, they're fooling themselves.

[WinterBorn]

Beck seems angry at Justice Roberts. I think Roberts voted the way he did, not because it is what he wants, but because he sees it as the proper ruling for the court. Its not a matter of whether he is conservative. It is a matter of whether the case before him is constitutional.

I, for one, would love to see the republicans move back to being classic conservatives. Tax less, spend less, actually have smaller & less intrusive gov't. Fiscal conservatism is desperately needed. The social conservatism that has become the norm will be the death of the republicans.

[Granule]

I believe the man either caved under pressure from the Left, or he let some of his true colors spill out.

[j-mac]

I believe the man either caved under pressure from the Left, or he let some of his true colors spill out.

Isn't that a problem with our system then?

[WinterBorn]

I believe the man either caved under pressure from the Left, or he let some of his true colors spill out.

What pressure? He has his job for life. What pressure could they bring to bear on him?

[j-mac]

What pressure? He has his job for life. What pressure could they bring to bear on him?

The pressure of the left gearing up to absolutely, in true temper tantrum fashion discredit the court like Obama tried in the SotU address after Citizens United.

[Banned]

I think Glenn Beck is a nut of the nuttiest sort...the right's version of Keith Olberman. BUT, if people think there is a huge difference between Democrats and Republicans in general, they're fooling themselves.

The only real difference is in what they say, but not much difference in what they do.

[j-mac]

The only real difference is in what they say, but not much difference in what they do.

A lot of that has to do with the Republicans coming through this misguided time of adopting liberal spending positions for the past 20 + years, and wanting to seem above the base tactics of liberals like we see in the passing of the SCOTUS decision on HC, while allowing themselves to be infiltrated by progressives.

[WinterBorn]

A lot of that has to do with the Republicans coming through this misguided time of adopting liberal spending positions for the past 20 + years, and wanting to seem above the base tactics of liberals like we see in the passing of the SCOTUS decision on HC, while allowing themselves to be infiltrated by progressives.

I don't think the liberals have had to infiltrate the republicans. They have been spending, crusading social causes and damning the opposition well enough on their own.

[SmarterthanYou]

Beck seems angry at Justice Roberts. I think Roberts voted the way he did, not because it is what he wants, but because he sees it as the proper ruling for the court. Its not a matter of whether he is conservative. It is a matter of whether the case before him is constitutional.

I, for one, would love to see the republicans move back to being classic conservatives. Tax less, spend less, actually have smaller & less intrusive gov't. Fiscal conservatism is desperately needed. The social conservatism that has become the norm will be the death of the republicans.

how can you reconcile those two statements? taxing for everything whether one participates in the commerce or not is not 'smaller and less intrusive'.

[WinterBorn]

how can you reconcile those two statements? taxing for everything whether one participates in the commerce or not is not 'smaller and less intrusive'.

Roberts job was not to decide whether it was conservative or not, but whether it was constitutional or not.

I see no problem with what I said.

[j-mac]

Roberts job was not to decide whether it was conservative or not, but whether it was constitutional or not.

I see no problem with what I said.

I agree, however, he twisted himself into a pretzel coming to that conclusion to find a path to say that it was...Roberts may have been worried about the perception of the court, but I think he did that more damage if he allowed politics, and optics to rule over Constitutionality.

[Canceled]

I agree, however, he twisted himself into a pretzel coming to that conclusion to find a path to say that it was...Roberts may have been worried about the perception of the court, but I think he did that more damage if he allowed politics, and optics to rule over Constitutionality.

I agree, I think it was a terrible decision that he felt he had to make. Liberals have interpreted me to say this was some kind of 'victory' for conservatives, and that's not what I have stated. I think it was an awful ruling for conservatives and for the constitution. The only 'silver lining' that I could find, was that he rendered, at least, some sort of boundaries and parameters of the commerce clause. After carefully reading the conclusions in the aftermath, I am not so sure he even accomplished that. It seems those were his personal opinions, and not subject to finding of the court, so the issue of the commerce clause remains open.

In defense of Roberts, I think he is a good man who was trying to do the right thing, and he knew that if the court struck this down, the political backlash against his court would be something it could never overcome. Remember, this was a presidential administration's keystone initiative and achievement, not just some random bill. Striking down the entire thing, would have been like SCOTUS striking down the Civil Rights Act or Social Security. The court has always been reluctant to involve itself in politics, and when it has, the result has proven very bad for their reputation. His position almost has to be... hey, Congress, you passed this mess, it's not the court's business to decide if it's wise or unwise. You can do it under the power to tax, and not under the commerce clause, and that is all we're saying about it!

--Let the chips fall where they may!

[Rune]

A lot of that has to do with the Republicans coming through this misguided time of adopting liberal spending positions for the past 20 + years, and wanting to seem above the base tactics of liberals like we see in the passing of the SCOTUS decision on HC, while allowing themselves to be infiltrated by progressives.

Reagan was far more liberal than Obama. My god man, wake up and look arround. The GOP of today has been totally hijacked by corporate interests.
They are not representing you in any way. They are not fiscally conservative at all. True fiscal conservatives no longer support the GOP.