Responding to E.J. Dionne

Left-wing columnist E.J. Dionne’s columns run regularly in the Albuquerque Journal. He is a dyed in the wool statist and I rarely bother to respond to his nonsense, but he wrote a few things about the incoming Republican Congress, the Tea Party, and the Constitution that I take issue with.

First, he claims that the Tea Party has “treated the Constitution not as a collection of shrewd political compromises, but as sacred scripture.” This is simply not true and it misunderstands the meaning of the Constitution which is meant to serve as the law of the land. The Constitution DID indeed contain numerous compromises, most notably over slavery. The document has been altered (amended) numerous times over the years to fully acknowledge the equality of blacks and other minorities. The Bible on the other hand is unaltered and unalterable.

This is Dionne’s fundamental misunderstanding of the Constitution. He believes that it should be “living.” That is, it should be interpreted broadly in such a way as to accommodate his big-government agenda. The Tea Party and other conservatives may disagree with the 16th Amendment which legalized the income tax, but we at least recognize that it was the right way to change the original intent of the Constitution.

As for his statement that “tax cuts add to the deficit,” Dionne is simply assuming, as do many on the far left, that all wealth belongs to the government and that it allows us, the peons, to keep the scraps. This is not the way our government was intended to operate and it is simply immoral. Sorry E.J., only spending increases the deficit!

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

4 Replies to “Responding to E.J. Dionne”

  1. Simply put, do not believe the LIBERAL Media. Their mantra and playbook are decades old. They are running out of BS to fill our “stupid” minds with. In knowledge, there is power.

  2. Tax cuts free up more money for capital investment. Capital is the seed corn needed for investing in jobs, technology, and new businesses – all of which creates wealth and will reduce the deficit if, at the same time, government spending is cut. Simple economic logic that seems to fall sorely short of Dionne’s comprehension.

  3. After your doing the research, I challenge anyone to direct me to any society where the socialist agend has ever been successful. It failed in Germany, Italy, Spain, The USSR (there called Communism) and it has created a failed economy in Cuba, Venezuela, and anywhere it has been tried. I rarely respond to emotional blackmail to motivate me to action. I always make an effort to understand and to take action based on the documented facts rather on a pie in the sky utopia that may be my self-crafted desire. Which Socialist or Communist society has ever worked? Our constitution is the law of the land and it is designed to provide protection and defend the protected rights of all legal U.S. citizens, not to just the ruling class or the special interests. If we look at the Special Interests in U.S. history, it has been the constitution that has allowed those interests to be curtailed. If we do away with it or grant “the wise” the privilege of destroying our constitution, we may be rewarded with that society that the progressive liberals are so fearful may come to the U.S.

  4. Good ol’ E.J. First of all, he needs to do away with that photo that runs in the Journal. I don’t care what you say, first impressions are the most lasting.
    I cannot stand his whiny editorials and they’ve almost caused me to cancel my Journal subscription (along with that those of a few others). I ultimately decided that it’s OK to see him there, spouting his fundamentally anti-American point of view. It only serves to let the patriotic, educated, rational folks see the folly of his ways….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.