The Tea Party Constitution Versus the...

The Tea Party Constitution Versus the Thomas Jefferson Constitution

There are 29 comments on the www.thenation.com story from Oct 28, 2010, titled The Tea Party Constitution Versus the Thomas Jefferson Constitution. In it, www.thenation.com reports that:

The default position for Tea Party candidates such as Christine O'Donnell in Delaware, Joe Miller in Alaska, Sharon Angle in Nevada, Ken Buck in Colorado and Ron Johnson in Wisconsin is to declare that if elected -- they will follow the dictates of the Constitution.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.thenation.com.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
koz

Akron, OH

#1 Oct 28, 2010
Thomas Jefferson has no Constitution. He was in France when it was written and ratified, and he is dead now.
Far Away

Anchorage, AK

#2 Oct 28, 2010
Excellent observation, koz.
crayz ox3thongee

United States

#3 Oct 28, 2010
koz wrote:
Thomas Jefferson has no Constitution. He was in France when it was written and ratified, and he is dead now.
happy french fry day 2morroweeeer!:-000
crayz ox3thongee

United States

#4 Oct 28, 2010
Far Away wrote:
Excellent observation, koz.
Anchor Age is far, AK!:-0000000h, U r Sarah edditthe?:-000
shamWoW

Washington, DC

#5 Oct 28, 2010
Just run the Government according to the Constitution. Teach our Government officials what the Constitution is. Get rid of liberal progressives that want to shred the Constitution. Return to the fundamentals of what the federal Government is all about. Stop the pork spending.
scout

United States

#6 Oct 28, 2010
Marxists always claim jefferson, washington, and lincoln, even 'republic' and anything else that legitmates their confusion.
short trus micro bus

Claremore, OK

#7 Oct 28, 2010
the good book (and jesus said), we fight not against principalities but spritiual darkness in high places- (man has never changed)

“"I'm A Great American!"”

Since: Sep 08

Obama Nation! USA! USA!

#8 Oct 28, 2010
short trus micro bus wrote:
the good book (and jesus said), we fight not against principalities but spritiual darkness in high places-(man has never changed)
Nor has God ever changed. He sent us Barack Obama to serve as His Anointed, our nation's President for four years, maybe for eight. He provides the leadership we need at this challenging time.

God is good! All the time!
Mighty Puddy

Washington, DC

#9 Oct 28, 2010
scout wrote:
Marxists always claim jefferson, washington, and lincoln, even 'republic' and anything else that legitmates their confusion.
That makes no sense. The Marxist are obama and liberal progressives. They don't honor the history of this country. They aim to confuse, manipulate, and shove us into their perverted way of thinking. They want that nanny state...the marxist are the socialist democrats. That wasn't even a good try on your part.
Mighty Puddy

Washington, DC

#10 Oct 28, 2010
PooPoo Platter wrote:
<quoted text>
Nor has God ever changed. He sent us Barack Obama to serve as His Anointed, our nation's President for four years, maybe for eight. He provides the leadership we need at this challenging time.
God is good! All the time!
LoL just as there is good there is evil, just as there is light there is dark! Obama is our challenge. He turned on us and lied! He represents the evil one. Careful who you pray to. The evil one comes in sheeps clothing.
crayz ox3thongee

United States

#11 Oct 28, 2010
PooPoo Platter wrote:
<quoted text>
Nor has God ever changed. He sent us Barack Obama to serve as His Anointed, our nation's President for four years, maybe for eight. He provides the leadership we need at this challenging time.
God is good! All the time!
dat y Boeing from cAttle, WA move to Ill 787 wetttdreamliner:-00000
Frank Lee Plain

Sugar Land, TX

#12 Oct 28, 2010
ThatÂ’s a great article. Although some individuals in Tea Party groups are well-intentioned fiscal conservatives, the movement has been hijacked by extremists.

Voters should vote against any candidate backed by the Tea Party. Please visit my blog for examples of ignorant and unethical behavior by Tea Party supporters and links to credible sources:
http://plainhonesttruth.blogspot.com/
Frank Lee Plain

Sugar Land, TX

#13 Oct 28, 2010
koz wrote:
Thomas Jefferson has no Constitution. He was in France when it was written and ratified, and he is dead now.
You're correct, but the article quotes Jefferson's famous commentary on the Fist amendment (the one O'Donnell isn't familiar with). Jefferson wrote:
"I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and state."
Frank Lee Plain

Sugar Land, TX

#14 Oct 28, 2010
*First Amendment
Don Kosloff

Chicago, IL

#15 Oct 28, 2010
Frank Lee Plain wrote:
You're correct, but the article quotes Jefferson's famous commentary on the Fist amendment (the one O'Donnell isn't familiar with). Jefferson wrote:
"I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and state."
Jefferson's commentary did not change the purpose of the First Amendment, which was to leave the question of established religion up to the individual, sovereign states. That is why most states retained their established religions after Jefferson wrote his letter. It is unconstitutional for any President's letter to change the Constitution.
scout

United States

#16 Oct 28, 2010
Mighty Puddy wrote:
<quoted text> That makes no sense. The Marxist are obama and liberal progressives. They don't honor the history of this country. They aim to confuse, manipulate, and shove us into their perverted way of thinking. They want that nanny state...the marxist are the socialist democrats. That wasn't even a good try on your part.
Yes, you're correct, BUT Marxist POSITION themselves behind a cover, as deception-pure-Orwellian. So, they create a dummy organization and call it,'the lincoln group,' or whatever. SOP for Marxists for the past 150 years. It works, as the masses quickly, and stupidly, buy into their charade, with the best of intentions.
Teach

United States

#18 Oct 28, 2010
Good 'ol Mr. Bill, posting yet another rhetoric laden article.

I'm guessing, of course, the John Nichols is a liberal.

He comments on "Citizens United", intimating that the SC decision "rewote" a Constitutional Amendment, then makes the leap to suggest that it could lead the Tea Party candidates to "rewrite" the First Amendment to promote the establishment of religion.

Hilarious.

“Kenyan-born Obama=Antichrist”

Since: Sep 09

Casper, WY

#20 Oct 28, 2010
short trus micro bus wrote:
the good book (and jesus said), we fight not against principalities but spritiual darkness in high places-(man has never changed)
Amen to that. Let's send Obama a message November second! "Many are destined to reason wrongly, others not to reason at all; and others, to persecute those who do reason." Voltaire
OBAMA IS NOT LEGALLY IN OFFICE.
Oops

Chehalis, WA

#21 Oct 29, 2010
Frank Lee Plain wrote:
*First Amendment
Now that was an amazing Freudian slip ...
Oops

Chehalis, WA

#22 Oct 29, 2010
Frank Lee Plain wrote:
<quoted text>
You're correct, but the article quotes Jefferson's famous commentary on the Fist amendment (the one O'Donnell isn't familiar with). Jefferson wrote:
"I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and state."
It is abundantly clear that the purpose of the amendment was
to assure that the federal government would not/could not
declare any one religious denomination the "state religion."

The Holy Roman Empire clearly abused its power over the
State, but so too did the State unduly interfere in the
affairs the Church. This amendment was to eliminate the
possibility of it happening in the United States.

Beyond this prohibition everything else since has been a
distortion of the intent. It was never the intent of the
Founding Fathers to prohibit the acknowledgement of the
role of religion in the life of the American people. The
amendment was to deny any denomination the ability to
assume precedence over any other.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Patriot Act Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Report: Trump says he'll fund wall by cutting r... Apr '16 tomin cali 8
News Trump proposes funding wall by cutting off remi... Apr '16 Toby 3
News Wells Fargo Bank Sued for Awareness of Violatio... (Nov '11) Nov '15 Proud Lesbian 7
News Cheney touts economy, Patriot Act during Missou... (Jan '06) Nov '15 Proud Lesbian 5
News Secret Service Involvement in Gang Stalking (Feb '13) Nov '15 SA_Victim 56
Patriot Act Survey (Oct '15) Oct '15 apgov 1
News Senate clears White House-backed trade bill (May '15) Sep '15 swedenforever 6
More from around the web