jason (61)
michael (35)
andy (29)
daniel (27)
sharon (26)
leslie (22)
tulipgirl (22)
brian (13)
ben (12)
foomonkey (10)
aj (6)
joe lance (6)
pudding (6)
jeff (5)
agirloutthere (4)
beck (4)
beth (4)
c.davis (4)
davidm. (4)
joe (4)
phil w (4)
rebecca (4)
aaron (3)
hugo (3)
joedumas (3)
joshua (3)
kevin (3)
nj (3)
stelmodad (3)
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
Chatter
Chickamauga Lock Project
Computer
Ed Bryant for Senate
Environment
Family
Fox Den Lane
GulfShore Baptist Assembly
Homebrew
Hurricane Katrina
Movies
National Lampoon's European Vacation
Now Discover Your Strengths
Politics
quotes
Recipes
Religion
Search
Signs
Things to do in Chattanooga
Torchbearers
Work
February 15, 2008
my first response to a Chattanoogan.com opinion piece
To get the context please go here and read the original opinion by Bruce Caldwell. Below is my response, which can also be read here.
Bruce,
Reading your opinion brought to mind a great quote from George Washington's Farwell address. He said this: "If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way, which the constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for, though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit, which the use can at any time yield."
Your argument, which is based on an emotional grab, is a waste of everyone's time. Emotions have nothing to do with enforcing the rule of law. I have read many of your opinions, and have yet to agree fully with any of them. I should have prefaced that last statement with the fact that I am a life-long Republican. You, sir, might call yourself a Republican, but are in fact a Federalist and a RINO (Republican In Name Only). Yes, I know these words are harsh, but the evidence supports them. As Republicans our tent cannot be so big that we stand for nothing because we stand for everything. Being a Republican is about small, fiscally conservative government. Government that is limited in power and government that first asks in every situation "What does the U.S. Constitution give me authority to do?"
Now you should be asking yourself with regard to this FISA bill: What does the U.S Constitution give us authority to do?
The U.S. Constitution: Fourth Amendment says: "and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Bruce please tell us, what would the U.S. Constitution give you authority to do in regard to the FISA bill? I should add before you disregard any more of our founder's wisdom this quote: "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
I read and responded to the same article. Bruce Caldwell takes his opinions from FOX News and conservative blogs. They are not his own. And he certainly doesn't research any issue or check the facts he's misrepresenting. He writes half-truths in poorly constructed "essays" and passes them off as some sort of twisted version of policy and/or punditry.
He has an opinion on everything and a basis for his opinions on nothing. The fact that the Chattanoogan publishes anything he writes astounds me.
Posted by: davidm. at February 15, 2008 10:06 AM