|
|
May 18, 2013
|
|
|
|
 ‘Left, Right & Center’: The 112th Congress and YouPosted on Jan 7, 2011
Do left-leaning Americans have something against the Constitution? That’s but one suggestion that conservative guest commentator Jennifer Rubin makes on this week’s edition of “Left, Right & Center,” and needless to say, it doesn’t go over so well. Also, what will all the big changes brewing in Washington mean for those outside the elite political circles in our nation’s capital? The conversation is lively the whole way through this show, what with our divided government reconvening, another looming health care battle and the Pentagon’s marching orders to trim the defense budget providing the easy, light subject matter for Rubin and regulars Robert Scheer, Tony Blankley and Matt Miller to tackle. —KA
|
How the IRS’ Nonprofit Division Got So Dysfunctional
Email 
Print
Share
Email to a friend
Newsletter 
Like Us
Follow Us
Get Our Feed
Tags|Bazaar|Podcast|About Us|Contact Us|User Agreement|Privacy Policy|FAQ: Comments and Moderation | Google+
© 2013 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.
By Steve, January 10, 2011 at 1:27 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Can you find a better fill-in guest than Ms. (Mrs.?)
Report thisRubin? Her kind of nonsense is what I come to Left
Right and Center to avoid.
By skmacksk, January 8, 2011 at 5:07 pm Link to this comment
Jennifer Rubin in her seemingly casual aside, a maladroit put- down, of questioning Robert Scheer and what planet he is on, gives a revelatory view of the Political Theology at the center of Neo-Conservativism. To call it a Theology is not a misnomer but a naming of the core belief of the Neo-Conservative Phenomenology; as the re-definition of Public Reason, as inherent in centers of authority. And not located in the Enlightenment , the Kantian, concept of Public Reason, defined as the sum of the interactions of self-legislating beings, always subject to the ethical interactions of conflicting imperatives ;meeting in conversations - a continuing evolutionary process , mediated by a debate among political equals, and enlivened by constant intellectual interchange. Ms. Rubin, in her statement of challenge to Mr. Scheer, demonstrates her self-elect status , as arbiter and bearer of this new definition of Public Reason ; as residing in her as person: and as not subject to debate or question: an ideology with its center in belief .Her flinty rhetorical style, enmeshed in an a priori rightness, is , then, a product of her Political Romanticism, an American echo of Carl Schmitt, Leo Strauss and her American precursors Norman Podheretz and Irving Kristol: Plato’s Republic being the root of this ‘new’ form of nihilistic political paternalism.
Report thisBy SteveL, January 8, 2011 at 2:17 am Link to this comment
Yeah the Republicans and the right love the U.S. constitution. They also like to
Report thisignore the part that gives Congress exclusive power to declare war. The
Republicans will invite Judge Antonin Scalia to give his views on the original
wording and meaning of the constitution. All the time ignoring that there is
nothing in the Constitution about the Supreme Court or any court being able to
decide the constitutionally of anything. How in the world do Republicans always
reconcile “promote the general welfare” parts of the constitution with their views?
By Bob Kull, January 7, 2011 at 9:22 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
What is Jennifer Rubin doing in the discussion? She seems to be a knee-jerk right wing talking head rather than a thoughtful conversational partner.
Report this