Well, the reason that the slaves were eventually freed was the Constitution, it was like the conscience of the American people. Unfortunately there were some court decisions like Dred Scott and others that defined some people as property, but the Constitution kept calling us back to "all men are created equal and we have inalienable rights" in the minds of God. But a lot of the move to free the slaves came from the people, it did not come from the federal government. It came from a growing movement among the people, particularly people of faith, that this was wrong. People like Wilberforce who persisted for years because of his faith and because of his love for people. So no liberal is going to win a debate that big government freed the slaves.To be fair, his answer may have been ghost-written by another South Carolinian.
Showing posts with label Jim DeMint. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jim DeMint. Show all posts
Wednesday, April 09, 2014
...and the Maps?
Former Senator (now Heritage Foundation chief) Jim DeMint on how the slaves were freed (via Jon Chait):
Friday, March 18, 2011
"Round Two" Roundup
That will be the last time I refer to the round of 64 as "round two". Stupid play-in games. And stupid Marquette for blowing my bracket halfway to St. Louis. (Also, with respect to the Hoyas: "Actual Jesuits could play better than Georgetown is right now.").
* * *
Grant Hill's response to being thought of as an "Uncle Tom". Ta-Nehisi Coates has characteristically insightful comments.
Minnesota Republicans propose criminalizing possession of money by the poor. No, seriously.
Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) was for Romneycare before he decided it was a "colossal mistake".
Color me unconvinced, but Ed Kilgore thinks Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) could make a serious play in the Iowa caucuses. If it happens, it won't be because she's less "flawed" than Palin (I'm unconvinced that she's actually more media savvy), but because Republican crazification can never be underestimated.
GreaT post at Post-Bourgie on how being a Black kid growing up on the rough side of Philly turned the writer into a feminist.
Latinos in California are fleeing the GOP in droves. Can the rest of the West be far behind?
Keep the IRS Out of My [Girlfriend's] Uterus!
* * *
Grant Hill's response to being thought of as an "Uncle Tom". Ta-Nehisi Coates has characteristically insightful comments.
Minnesota Republicans propose criminalizing possession of money by the poor. No, seriously.
Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) was for Romneycare before he decided it was a "colossal mistake".
Color me unconvinced, but Ed Kilgore thinks Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) could make a serious play in the Iowa caucuses. If it happens, it won't be because she's less "flawed" than Palin (I'm unconvinced that she's actually more media savvy), but because Republican crazification can never be underestimated.
GreaT post at Post-Bourgie on how being a Black kid growing up on the rough side of Philly turned the writer into a feminist.
Latinos in California are fleeing the GOP in droves. Can the rest of the West be far behind?
Keep the IRS Out of My [Girlfriend's] Uterus!
Labels:
abortion,
basketball,
Black,
California,
Feminists,
GOP,
health care,
internal minorities,
Jim DeMint,
latinos,
Michele Bachmann,
Minnesota,
Mitt Romney,
poverty,
racism,
Republicans,
taxes
Monday, May 04, 2009
Our Plan is Freedom
Senator Jim "30 GOP" DeMint (R-SC) lays out his plan for making the GOP a big-tent party.
Do you even think he realizes how "government makes too many of our decisions" and "social policies should be set through a democratic process" are the complete, utter, opposites of each other? It ain't unelected judges who brought us Social Security, Medicare, and the various other "tax and spend" policies DeMint decries. We got those through the democratic process.
Meanwhile, if DeMint is serious about this devolving/small-government ideology, then I look forward to his votes to reverse DOMA and the federal partial birth abortion ban. Except -- I keep forgetting! Being a "small government" Republican is a sacred, inalienable principle that "government can only intervene in the areas I care about."
To win back the trust of the American people, we must be a "big tent" party. But big tents need strong poles, and the strongest pole of our party -- the organizing principle and the crucial alternative to the Democrats -- must be freedom. The federal government is too big, takes too much of our money, and makes too many of our decisions. If Republicans can't agree on that, elections are the least of our problems.
[...]
Freedom will mean different things to different Republicans, but it can tether a diverse coalition to inalienable principles. Republicans can welcome a vigorous debate about legalized abortion or same-sex marriage; but we should be able to agree that social policies should be set through a democratic process, not by unelected judges. Our party benefits from national-security debates; but Republicans can start from the premise that the U.S. is an exceptional nation and force for good in history. We can argue about how to rein in the federal Leviathan; but we should agree that centralized government infringes on individual liberty and that problems are best solved by the people or the government closest to them.
Moderate and liberal Republicans who think a South Carolina conservative like me has too much influence are right! I don't want to make decisions for them. That's why I'm working to reduce Washington's grip on our lives and devolve power to the states, communities and individuals, so that Northeastern Republicans, Western Republicans, Southern Republicans, and Midwestern Republicans can define their own brands of Republicanism. It's the Democrats who want to impose a rigid, uniform agenda on all Americans. Freedom Republicanism is about choice -- in education, health care, energy and more. It's OK if those choices look different in South Carolina, Maine and California.
Do you even think he realizes how "government makes too many of our decisions" and "social policies should be set through a democratic process" are the complete, utter, opposites of each other? It ain't unelected judges who brought us Social Security, Medicare, and the various other "tax and spend" policies DeMint decries. We got those through the democratic process.
Meanwhile, if DeMint is serious about this devolving/small-government ideology, then I look forward to his votes to reverse DOMA and the federal partial birth abortion ban. Except -- I keep forgetting! Being a "small government" Republican is a sacred, inalienable principle that "government can only intervene in the areas I care about."
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Drown This
Best intro to a piece covering Arlen Specter's defection goes to WaPo writer Dan Balz:
Meanwhile, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) finds reason to celebrate, saying "I would rather have 30 Republicans in the Senate who really believe in principles of limited government, free markets, free people, than to have 60 that don't have a set of beliefs." John Cole points out that at this rate, the GOP should get there by 2016 and also asks if "the GOP small enough to drown in a bathtub yet?"
How much more can the Republicans take? Demoralized, shrinking and seemingly lacking an agenda beyond the word "no," Republicans today saw their ranks further thinned with the stunning news that Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter is switching parties and will run for reelection in 2010 as a Democrat.
Meanwhile, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) finds reason to celebrate, saying "I would rather have 30 Republicans in the Senate who really believe in principles of limited government, free markets, free people, than to have 60 that don't have a set of beliefs." John Cole points out that at this rate, the GOP should get there by 2016 and also asks if "the GOP small enough to drown in a bathtub yet?"
Saturday, February 02, 2008
Dueling Assholes
The Berkeley City Council versus Senator Jim DeMint. Maybe if they distract each other sufficiently, they won't do anything else that requires my attention.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)