Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
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?
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.
Don't tell ME, Dude. 
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.
Tell your lawyer to take it to the Supreme Court - all I can offer is MY humble opinion, and I'm so fucking liberal that I want the states to be free to decide for themselves on things like abortion, marriage rights and the buying and selling and taxing of weed.
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
I guess President Obama's successful landslide re-election was his "Waterloo"
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?
Just took it. The little star it gave me fell right over the 'n' at the end of the 'libertarian'.
But I'm a realist, first and foremost, and a small 'L' libertarian. One who follows the philosophy of libertarianism.
...after having voted, twice, for the late, great Harry Browne.
Countdown until some progressives call Tim Scott an uncle tom or a house ****** in 5...4...3...2....1....
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.
I just heard his salary will be of "a greater impact" as well. 1 MILLION was floated. Cashing-in on public serviceI 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.
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.
I just heard his salary will be of "a greater impact" as well. 1 MILLION was floated. Cashing-in on public serviceI 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.
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.
ummm..... NEWSFLASH, DeMint was basically a walking filibuster.
DeMint is a guy that actually believes the Constitution means what he thinks it says, but like most conservatives hes just hearing things.
living within our means doesnt mean balancing the budget on the backs of the elderly, retired, disabled, and working Americans.
The 61-year-old lawmaker will chuck his $174,000 government salary in favor of a much more lucrative paycheck from Heritage. While the organization did not say how much it would pay DeMint, predecessor Edwin J. Feulner earned total compensation of about $1 million a year, according to the Charity Navigator website.
poor guy will have to settle cashing-in for $1.6 MILL at Heritage. Real t-partier you got there Righties
Looks like he'll prolly move closer to the trough (Wasahington) after cashing-in like cheney did.
Jim DeMint's new job promises a much bigger payday - latimes.com
The 61-year-old lawmaker will chuck his $174,000 government salary in favor of a much more lucrative paycheck from Heritage. While the organization did not say how much it would pay DeMint, predecessor Edwin J. Feulner earned total compensation of about $1 million a year, according to the Charity Navigator website.
Looks like he'll prolly move closer to the trough (Wasahington) after cashing-in like cheney did.
Jim DeMint's new job promises a much bigger payday - latimes.com
The 61-year-old lawmaker will chuck his $174,000 government salary in favor of a much more lucrative paycheck from Heritage. While the organization did not say how much it would pay DeMint, predecessor Edwin J. Feulner earned total compensation of about $1 million a year, according to the Charity Navigator website.
But of course! Dickey Armey got $8 million.....so Jimmy needed his big pay day too. Wealth envy indeed.
Pretty good money for a grass roots party that wasn't led by such leaders. If they didn't actually LEAD the Tea Baggers, what were they then? Tea Bag "community organizers"?
Regards from Rosie
