« A Palestinian State, Side by Side With... | Main | HRC, Sexism, and Female Democrats Over 40 »

January 09, 2008


Robert C. Cheeks

Constitutionalsim dead? Yes, but I'll go to my grave an anti-Federalist!
You should examine this premise at length, I'd enjoy reading your conclusions. Are we then, the Athenians? And, who is the tyrant?

Butler T. Reynolds

Decades of public schooling does seem to have that effect on peoples' view of the Constitution.


Paul's an unserious candidate; if he were, he'd at least control his message.

As I said in a debate on the Reason blog, at least the paleolibertarians thought logically and realized if you opposed federal overreach, you had to probably dislike FDR, Lincoln, etc. They also seem to forget people then and in the 80s and 90s were libertarian/constitutionalist for bread-and-butter reasons: distaste for government wealth redistribution to lazy parasites, hatred of meddlesome affirmative action, and general antipathy to alliance of big government and countercultural. Hence, the rheotric of welfare queens in the 80s.

Alex Cacioppo

You know, it's good to see, every so often but these days few and far between in this cloud of chatter and shrill intellectual debauchery, intelligent and perceptive commentary like yours. Yes, the Constitution has become irrelevant; I came to that conclusion myself two years ago, just before the mid-terms. It ought to make us all ashamed, but it's no less true.


While I concur fully with your analytical framework, I dissent from your nomenclature.

To call Paul a "constitutionalist" (as opposed to the far more accurate "neoconfederalist") is to give him credit he does not deserve.

I see much evidence that Paul is utterly contemptuous of the Fourteenth Amendment. I see no evidence that he is respectful of the Ninth Amendment. He rejects all the "constitutionalist" foundations for a presumption of liberty from non-federal (and not just federal) government action.

Unenumated rights, substantive due process, heightened scrutiny (indeed, judicial review itself), incorporation of the Bill of Rights -- all irrelevant to Paul's political philosophy.

There is more to being a "constitutionalist" than an obsession with Article I, Section 8.


Boy, you guys are easy to fool with misinformation.

Ayn-al Rand

Libertarian can never fail!

It can only BE failed!!

All my glibertarian friends and me, like, TOTALLY thought Ron Paul wasn't a real Libertarian... I just forgot to mention it until a day after his campaign humiliatingly crashed and burned in New Hampshire!


I think you should take the time to find out properly what paul and his campaigns' about. Seriously. You might learn something.

Ron Paul Supporter

The most important freedom is the freedom to own niggers!

How DARE that nanny-state RINO, Abraham Lincoln, violate our precious freedoms that way!

Doesn’t he know that big gubmint meddling in the economy is always destructive??


I love ignorant comments like Rensdog, as if you haven't indicated in your posting that your IQ is many orders of magnitude above his, most Paul supporters, and a lot of other people.

Sirius Patriot Producer

FYI: This post was read on Air on the Mike Church Show today on Sirius's Patriot Channel. There will be a link to the audio (mp3) later today.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo


  • Moral philosophy, political commentary, and elevated snark from a licensed technician. Further Details »


  • Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay Learn More
    Web PoMoCo
    Listed on BlogShares Technorati blog directory