Fifty Ways to Lose Your Freedom (Janice Rogers Brown Speech to Institute for Justice)

Catallarchy ^ | August 12, 2000

[Labyrinthos]

I have chills down my spine. Brown deserves the Supreme Court and we deserve her.

[vrwc0915]

Anyone think she has a chance at being nominated?

[BenLurkin]

Most public speakers tend to do the cut and paste thing.

In particular I thought her musical reference was more apt here -- I ddin't understand it so well on the first one.

[Labyrinthos]

I do, but then again I thought the Mets would win the World Series.

[45Auto]

Do you think President Bush is up to fight?

[KDD]

Now there is a mind.

[MNJohnnie]

I think a lot of the whine all the time crowd are going to be mad no matter who is picked. That is the problem with 100%ism. Sooner or later they realize NO ONE is 100%. So when the always angry chorus finds out JRB views, on say the 2nd Amendment does match theirs, are they going to demand she get borked too?

[B Knotts]

Dunno. He should be.

[chaosagent]

Great Read!

[Steve0113]

ping

[GOPJ]

The American philosophy of the Rights of Man relied heavily on the indissoluble connection between rationality, property, freedom, and justice. The Founders viewed the right of property as “the guardian of every other right” and reasoned that “to deprive a people of this right is in fact to deprive them of their liberty.” The idea of constitutional government is deceptively simple: the government cannot legitimately infringe upon our rights even if the majority votes to do so.

Impressive.

[Pessimist]

Wow!

What a difference from Meirs writings, huh?

Now THAT is a conservative.

One interesting line that might escape notice though:

"Indeed, one of the grave errors of American foreign policy is the assumption that merely installing the forms of a regime like ours — without its foundation — will automatically lead to freedom, stability, and prosperity."

I think she's got that right too.

[Pessimist]

If she speaks anywhere near this well off-the-cuff, she'd positively take apart her senate inquisitors.

[Pessimist]

Its almost like she's channeling Reagan with a better education.

[ConservativeBamaFan]

A democracy is two wolves and one sheep deciding what's for lunch.

[Toidylop]

"hat is why we have a CONSTITRUTIONAL REPUBLIC ( where the minority's rights can't be usurped by a majority vote ) not a DEMOCRACY...

The foundation of government that needs to be repeated and taught and kept for future generation... very basic but paramount important, indeed.

[JeffAtlanta]

Anyone think she has a chance at being nominated?

No way. That would involve a fight with the democrats and republicans don't do that. Instead they adopt and implement the agenda of the democrats and then call it a strategic victory.

We will probably get someone that is weak on everything else, but has a documented anti-abortion record. The democrats will go along with it because they know that Roe will never be overturned anyway and the nominee would do their bidding on every other topic. The republicans would go along with it because she is anti-abortion.

[JeffAtlanta]

That is the problem with 100%ism. Sooner or later they realize NO ONE is 100%.

Do you honestly believe we are naive enough to demand 100%ism? We voted for Bush in overwhelming numbers again in 2004 even after he disappointed us on so many issues but got a lot right.

Your just parroting some talking point from those who try to educate us on being pragmatic. We understand pragmatic and we understand reality - in fact, we understand that being in power means nothing if you're just implementing your adversaries agenda at a slightly slower pace.

[JeffAtlanta]

The Founders viewed the right of property as “the guardian of every other right” and reasoned that “to deprive a people of this right is in fact to deprive them of their liberty.”

This is where those that accept wealth redistribution as long as the one doing it is socially conservative fall flat.