Sen DeMint (R-SC) to quit in January

[eflatminor]

No, no rational review of his record indicates anything like your conclusion.

Perhaps I'm misinformed. Please, point to examples of DeMint advocating unconstitutional government power and/or desiring to increase deficit spending.

Seriously, if I'm wrong about the man, I'd like to know.

Sure, check it out for yourself. The man does let the USC get in the way of this rabid, foaming at the mouth social conservatism.

Jim DeMint on the Issues

Sorry, but can you be more specific? Your link is just a list of votes, but I don't see specifically where he voted in such a way that would contradict my statement that DeMint reads the Constitution as written and stands against deficit spending.

You were sure that's not the case when you stated no review of his record would support my conclusion. So please, specifically, where has DeMint contradicted my conclusion?

BTW, calling him "rabid", or any ad hominem attack, does not support your claim.

 

[rightwinger]

DeMint is just a TeaTard

Good to see him go

 

[eflatminor]

DeMint is just a TeaTard

Good to see him go

Yes, we understand your contribution to these discussion is limited to childish name calling.

 

[rightwinger]

DeMint is just a TeaTard

Good to see him go

Yes, we understand your contribution to these discussion is limited to childish name calling.

Calling DeMint a TeaTard is the best available alternative

 

[musingsofacac]

I have always been of the opinion that change has to happen from the outside and from the bottom up. The only way to change Washington is at the grass roots. You can't change it from inside the beltway. Perhaps he believes he'll be more effective this way.

Yes - a heavily funded by rich Republicans think tank is "grass roots".

And you think liberal think tanks are not funded by rich liberals? but whoever said liberals are consistant - you won't let yourself be bothered by that.

 

[mjollnir]

Perhaps I'm misinformed. Please, point to examples of DeMint advocating unconstitutional government power and/or desiring to increase deficit spending.

Seriously, if I'm wrong about the man, I'd like to know.

Sure, check it out for yourself. The man does let the USC get in the way of this rabid, foaming at the mouth social conservatism.

Jim DeMint on the Issues

Sorry, but can you be more specific? Your link is just a list of votes, but I don't see specifically where he voted in such a way that would contradict my statement that DeMint reads the Constitution as written and stands against deficit spending.

I was addressing your statement: "DeMint is a guy that actually believes the Constitution means what is says" and I specifically mentioned his social conservatism.

A. He's a two-fisted supporter of the WOD.
B. He voted for a constitutional amendment to ban 'flag desecration'.
C. Supports a constitutional amend to 'protect traditional marriage.

There are many others listed there.

IOW, he just LOVES big gov't and it's exercise of power over liberties when it suits his purposes. That's what I was addressing.

You were sure that's not the case when you stated no review of his record would support my conclusion. So please, specifically, where has DeMint contradicted my conclusion?

I just showed you.

BTW, calling him "rabid", or any ad hominem attack, does not support your claim.

No, it's not. It's an intensifier, in this case. Would you prefer me to have used 'far right' or 'radical' or perhaps 'ultra'?

It's no slam on his character, it's just a simple explanation of his views.

 

[eflatminor]

DeMint is just a TeaTard

Good to see him go

Yes, we understand your contribution to these discussion is limited to childish name calling.

Calling DeMint a TeaTard is the best available alternative

Yes, thank you for proving my point.

 

[musingsofacac]

I have always been of the opinion that change has to happen from the outside and from the bottom up. The only way to change Washington is at the grass roots. You can't change it from inside the beltway. Perhaps he believes he'll be more effective this way.

I think he probably will be able to have a greater impact outside of congress. I think he is truly concerned about the direction of his country and just wants to find a place where he can make the greatest impact...sad to see him leave the Senate but I understand.

I agree with about 80% of the ideas of the heritage foundation and I think he will be a great spokesperson for them and someone to help them educate the public on the benefits of conservatism and freedom.

 

[kwc57]

Its no wonder considering the shellacking t-party candidates recieved in the latest election. Wonder how much Heritage will pay "Mr. Standing filibuster" in his new role

DeMint will leave Senate to head Heritage Foundation

If I had to deal daily with obstructionists like Obama and Reid who are intent on making every American dependent on gubmint, I'd cut my losses too and go somewhere where I could get some actual good work done.

 

[AVG-JOE]

DeMint is a guy that actually believes the Constitution means what is says. He also thinks we should live within our means and not burden future generations with our largess.

Crazy, I know.

If The US Constitution wasn't subject to interpretation, there would be no need for the US Supreme Court.

Meaning it's impossible to 'believe what it says'... one can only believe what he or she thinks it says, or what (insert your preferred talking head here) says it says, and I'm here to tell you, if the USSC says differently, fuck you. Yeah, even if you're a well paid talking head or even a United States Senator.

 

[eflatminor]

Sure, check it out for yourself. The man does let the USC get in the way of this rabid, foaming at the mouth social conservatism.

Jim DeMint on the Issues

Sorry, but can you be more specific? Your link is just a list of votes, but I don't see specifically where he voted in such a way that would contradict my statement that DeMint reads the Constitution as written and stands against deficit spending.

I was addressing your statement: "DeMint is a guy that actually believes the Constitution means what is says" and I specifically mentioned his social conservatism.

A. He's a two-fisted supporter of the WOD.
B. He voted for a constitutional amendment to ban 'flag desecration'.
C. Supports a constitutional amend to 'protect traditional marriage.

There are many others listed there.

IOW, he just LOVES big gov't and it's exercise of power over liberties when it suits his purposes. That's what I was addressing.

You were sure that's not the case when you stated no review of his record would support my conclusion. So please, specifically, where has DeMint contradicted my conclusion?

I just showed you.

BTW, calling him "rabid", or any ad hominem attack, does not support your claim.

No, it's not. It's an intensifier, in this case. Would you prefer me to have used 'far right' or 'radical' or perhaps 'ultra'?

It's no slam on his character, it's just a simple explanation of his views.

I see now what you're saying. He's not a true libertarian...and I therefore disagree with some of his positions. However, he's a damn sight better than the RINOs and of course, the Obama's of the world with their NDAAs, Patriot Act, and WODs. I do appreciate his fiscally conservative views. Bottom line, I'd take him over just about every other Senator save Rand Paul. I know that just burns your collectivist mind, but that's my position.

 

[mjollnir]

Sorry, but can you be more specific? Your link is just a list of votes, but I don't see specifically where he voted in such a way that would contradict my statement that DeMint reads the Constitution as written and stands against deficit spending.

I was addressing your statement: "DeMint is a guy that actually believes the Constitution means what is says" and I specifically mentioned his social conservatism.

A. He's a two-fisted supporter of the WOD.
B. He voted for a constitutional amendment to ban 'flag desecration'.
C. Supports a constitutional amend to 'protect traditional marriage.

There are many others listed there.

IOW, he just LOVES big gov't and it's exercise of power over liberties when it suits his purposes. That's what I was addressing.

I just showed you.

BTW, calling him "rabid", or any ad hominem attack, does not support your claim.

No, it's not. It's an intensifier, in this case. Would you prefer me to have used 'far right' or 'radical' or perhaps 'ultra'?

It's no slam on his character, it's just a simple explanation of his views.

I see now what you're saying. He's not a true libertarian...and I therefore disagree with some of his positions. However, he's a damn sight better than the RINOs and of course, the Obama's of the world with their NDAAs, Patriot Act, and WODs. I do appreciate his fiscally conservative views. Bottom line, I'd take him over just about every other Senator save Rand Paul. I know that just burns your collectivist mind, but that's my position.

No, that's not what I'm saying. He's a rabid social conservative and absolutely no friend to the constitution, and he SUPPORTED the Patriot Act and the WOD.

And my 'collectivist mind'? LOL! I know it hurts you physically to attempt cogent, rational thinking, but try a little harder.

 

[eflatminor]

DeMint is a guy that actually believes the Constitution means what is says. He also thinks we should live within our means and not burden future generations with our largess.

Crazy, I know.

If The US Constitution wasn't subject to interpretation, there would be no need for the US Supreme Court.

Meaning it's impossible to 'believe what it says'... one can only believe what he or she thinks it says, or what (insert your preferred talking head here) says it says, and I'm here to tell you, if the USSC says differently, fuck you. Yeah, even if you're a well paid talking head or even a United States Senator.

There's "subject to interpretation" and there's the Progressive model, which is to find anyway possible to skirt the idea of limiting government to enumerated powers. I find the latter a disgusting attempt at central planning, which always ends up bad for the regular guy. But hey, maybe YOUR guy really does know what's best for us all...

Anyway, until the Progressive era, we could argue about interpretation with the same idea of limited government in mind. Now we argue if there is anything the federal government shouldn't do. The result has been eroding freedoms, stifled marets and outrageous debt. You and your progressive buddies on the courts do NOT know what's best for everyone else and your attempts to control from the top have done far more harm than good.

 

[eflatminor]

I was addressing your statement: "DeMint is a guy that actually believes the Constitution means what is says" and I specifically mentioned his social conservatism.

A. He's a two-fisted supporter of the WOD.
B. He voted for a constitutional amendment to ban 'flag desecration'.
C. Supports a constitutional amend to 'protect traditional marriage.

There are many others listed there.

IOW, he just LOVES big gov't and it's exercise of power over liberties when it suits his purposes. That's what I was addressing.

I just showed you.

No, it's not. It's an intensifier, in this case. Would you prefer me to have used 'far right' or 'radical' or perhaps 'ultra'?

It's no slam on his character, it's just a simple explanation of his views.

I see now what you're saying. He's not a true libertarian...and I therefore disagree with some of his positions. However, he's a damn sight better than the RINOs and of course, the Obama's of the world with their NDAAs, Patriot Act, and WODs. I do appreciate his fiscally conservative views. Bottom line, I'd take him over just about every other Senator save Rand Paul. I know that just burns your collectivist mind, but that's my position.

No, that's not what I'm saying. He's a rabid social conservative and absolutely no friend to the constitution, and he SUPPORTED the Patriot Act and the WOD.

And my 'collectivist mind'? LOL! I know it hurts you physically to attempt cogent, rational thinking, but try a little harder.

Which Senators do you hold in regard?

I can argue with a guy like DeMint about his conservative tendencies to meddle. We'd disagree on some things, find common ground on others. There is NO talking to a Progressive, who thinks he has every right to impose his will on others.

I don't know which one you are and I don't really care. DeMint at least had the balls to challenge the growth of government. His social conservatism means little compared to the taxes, spending, debt, and market meddling he stood against.

 

[mjollnir]

I see now what you're saying. He's not a true libertarian...and I therefore disagree with some of his positions. However, he's a damn sight better than the RINOs and of course, the Obama's of the world with their NDAAs, Patriot Act, and WODs. I do appreciate his fiscally conservative views. Bottom line, I'd take him over just about every other Senator save Rand Paul. I know that just burns your collectivist mind, but that's my position.

No, that's not what I'm saying. He's a rabid social conservative and absolutely no friend to the constitution, and he SUPPORTED the Patriot Act and the WOD.

And my 'collectivist mind'? LOL! I know it hurts you physically to attempt cogent, rational thinking, but try a little harder.

Which Senators do you hold in regard?

None that I can think of.

I can argue with a guy like DeMint about his conservative tendencies to meddle. We'd disagree on some things, find common ground on others. There is NO talking to a Progressive, who thinks he has every right to impose his will on others.

That's irrelevant to anything that I've stated here.

I don't know which one you are and I don't really care. DeMint at least had the balls to challenge the growth of government. His social conservatism means little compared to the taxes, spending, debt, and market meddling he stood against.

His social conservatism has increased the gov't in size, scope and power, and no amount of rationalizing will get you around that fact.

 

[eflatminor]

No, that's not what I'm saying. He's a rabid social conservative and absolutely no friend to the constitution, and he SUPPORTED the Patriot Act and the WOD.

And my 'collectivist mind'? LOL! I know it hurts you physically to attempt cogent, rational thinking, but try a little harder.

Which Senators do you hold in regard?

None that I can think of.

I can argue with a guy like DeMint about his conservative tendencies to meddle. We'd disagree on some things, find common ground on others. There is NO talking to a Progressive, who thinks he has every right to impose his will on others.

That's irrelevant to anything that I've stated here.

I don't know which one you are and I don't really care. DeMint at least had the balls to challenge the growth of government. His social conservatism means little compared to the taxes, spending, debt, and market meddling he stood against.

His social conservatism has increased the gov't in size, scope and power, and no amount of rationalizing will get you around that fact.

Yes, I wish the Senate was full of true libertarians that never sought to increase government in any way, shape or form. It's not reality, so I think about what we have. I see DeMint as far better than the average big government progressive meddlers that dominate in Washington. Not perfect, but comparatively better for at least talking a fiscally responsible game.

 

[Politico]

Has nothing to do with anything other than he got a better job. And he gets a retirement penion for the rest of his life. Win win.

 

[mjollnir]

Which Senators do you hold in regard?

None that I can think of.

That's irrelevant to anything that I've stated here.

I don't know which one you are and I don't really care. DeMint at least had the balls to challenge the growth of government. His social conservatism means little compared to the taxes, spending, debt, and market meddling he stood against.

His social conservatism has increased the gov't in size, scope and power, and no amount of rationalizing will get you around that fact.

Yes, I wish the Senate was full of true libertarians that never sought to increase government in any way, shape or form. It's not reality, so I think about what we have. I see DeMint as far better than the average big government progressive meddlers that dominate in Washington. Not perfect, but comparatively better for at least talking a fiscally responsible game.

I don't see his record as reflecting that at all, but we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[eflatminor]

None that I can think of.

That's irrelevant to anything that I've stated here.

His social conservatism has increased the gov't in size, scope and power, and no amount of rationalizing will get you around that fact.

Yes, I wish the Senate was full of true libertarians that never sought to increase government in any way, shape or form. It's not reality, so I think about what we have. I see DeMint as far better than the average big government progressive meddlers that dominate in Washington. Not perfect, but comparatively better for at least talking a fiscally responsible game.

I don't see his record as reflecting that at all, but we'll have to agree to disagree.

That's fine. I don't claim to know everything about the man, but I haven't seen anything to suggest he isn't at least a fiscal conservative, which I appreciate.

For what it's worth, where do you fall on the 'ol Nolan Chart?

 

[Stephanie]

Its no wonder considering the shellacking t-party candidates recieved in the latest election. Wonder how much Heritage will pay "Mr. Standing filibuster" in his new role

DeMint will leave Senate to head Heritage Foundation

So this is your opinion. Duly noted. Thanks. Troll thread closed.

IOW's- you can't refute what I said

oh boy dots..we know Democrats NEVER leave unless they are forced out or are thrown in jail....but sometimes people get fed up with things and LEAVE..

sheeesh