Lisa Murkowski, in a recent interview with MSNBC's Rachel Maddow, derided the Constitution as being out of the mainstream.

When somebody like Joe Miller or those within the Tea Party suggest that the safety net programs -- whether it's unemployment, medicaid, social security -- that somehow or other these are unconstitutional because they're not enumerated within the powers of the constitution, that somehow or other we should just be eliminating these, I think that is out of the mainstream.

Watch the clip here.

(h/t Kenneth)

  • Comment Filters
Contributor Comments
Member Comments
Comment Popularity

Comments :

Trace Urdan
Joined
May '10
Trace Urdan

Appearing on Rachel Maddow should be enough by itself to prevent her from being elected. But the point she is making shouldn't be mocked. It's at the very heart of the discussion and bears a thoughtful response. How much is enough? Too much? Where does one draw the line? The strictly Libertarian view is as much of a non-starter with the electorate as would be a strictly Socialist view. So being persuasive that the middle is far further to the right should be the talking point and frankly should be one that Lisa Murkowski should be making to Rachel Maddow if she was really serious about trying to represent the middle rather than simply engaging in a bitter struggle to preserve her family birthright.

mesquito
Joined
May '10
mesquito

Sadly, she's right. The Constitution doesn't live here any more.

Bryan G. Stephens
Joined
May '10
Bryan G. Stephens

This needs to be fought. We need a return to our founding. The fact that the elites have thrown the great documents of our nation away is no reason to abandon them. The power of the Constitution and the Declaration are strong. Americans are getting to know them again.

Decline is a choice. Tyranny is too.

Jason Hart
Joined
May '10
Jason Hart

Given the market for "mainstream" media these days, I'd say this supports our hopes that the Constitution is due for a roaring comeback!

Lisa Murkowski:

...that somehow or other these are unconstitutional because they're not enumerated within the powers of the constitution...

Gotta love the use of "somehow or other" here, suggesting a thing is crazy immediately before contradicting herself with that thing's definition. Yes, Senator, lots of things which are not enumerated in the Constitution happen to be unconstitutional! Funny how that works.

Brian Watt
Joined
Jun '10
Brian Watt

Hmmm...most everything with a Marxist or socialist tinge is not enumerated in the Constitution...wonder why that is. Perhaps because the very self-reliant Founders felt that this was not the purview of government. The government does not prevent affluent individuals from contributing to those who are in need and many certainly do. And others could probably do more. Heck, a homeless family might be right comfy on John Kerry's yacht (wherever it happens to be berthed) or in one of Murkowski's homes.

The issue that Ms. Murkowski does not address is the unrestrained colossal growth of government to administer all these benevolent and kind-hearted programs. Instead of articulating the need to review and eliminate as many redundant, failed and needless agencies of the government, she instead sees fit to marginalize and reduce what it is the Tea Party movement is advocating - not the complete elimination of all services but a complete review of the federal government to see what indeed can be eliminated. It apparently doesn't bother her that the new healthcare law alone created 159 new government agencies. But what the heck, America can afford it all...can't it?

River
Joined
Aug '10
River

Bryan G. Stephens: This needs to be fought. We need a return to our founding. The fact that the elites have thrown the great documents of our nation away is no reason to abandon them. The power of the Constitution and the Declaration are strong. Americans are getting to know them again.

Decline is a choice. Tyranny is too. · Oct 27 at 5:57pm

The big dirty secret of the Democrat Party is their contempt for the Constitution and Declaration. They lie all the time about it, proclaiming their patriotism, and until now have gotten away with it.

First of all, as atheist/agnostics, they can't embrace human rights "...endowed by their Creator...", but they know they'll never be elected if their true agenda is revealed. They want and expect an elitist tyranny, a la Plato's Republic of philosopher kings.


Joined
Sep '10
kylez

What gets me is the way liberals always attack any view different from their own as "not mainstream", as if that somehow proves it is a bad idea. It always leads to circular reasoning too, because coincidentally it is always liberals who decide what "the mainstream" is, having control of most media, education etc. Funny though, I've always thought a big part of the emotional appeal of the Left was precisely that it is different from what the common citizen or mainstream believes.


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading

Welcome Visitor

Already a Member?
Please Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Join Ricochet today!

Already a Member? Sign In