Sevierville, TN Event- America’s Last Stand

Forgive my cynicism, but Sarah Palin, Allen West, and Rick Santorum do not understand our Constitution -- or they don’t give a hoot what it says. [I don’t know about the others mentioned.]

So WHY do we place all our hopes on Sarah Palin, Allen West, and Rick Santorum? They are ignorant people who never troubled themselves to learn our Constitution so that they could actually honor their Oaths of Office to support it.

The reason we can’t spot these phonies is because WE don’t know what our Constitution says about anything. That failing is so easily remedied….. just read our Declaration of Independence and Constitution over & over until the LIGHT comes on in your head.

Rick Santorum is (a) a mental featherweight, (b) the owner of a complete hodge-podge of random, non-cohesive, uncoordinated political viewpoints which are “conservative” or “pro-freedom” in some cases, but usually in the less important areas, while he has authoritarian views, even totalitarian ones, in many areas too — including things like some crucial areas of freedom of speech. He seems incapable of understanding what a principle really is, except by rote repetition, which is precisely the wrong wrong way of thinking when applying principles. Santorum has a number of “authorities” he appeals to as justification for his motley mess of viewpoints: God, American values, patriotism, the Constitution (usually wrongly), tradition, the law, etc. Noticeably absent is LOGIC. Basically, his REAL primary “justification” for his beliefs is his own random gut feel on any particular issue. All you have to do is listen to him “explain” himself a few times, and it becomes clear that his “method of reasoning” is to go by what he feels, and then to look for a way to rationalize his feeling. He does NOT THINK things through and COME to a conclusion — he STARTS with his conclusion and THEN WORKS BACKWARD to justify or rationalize it. He will “justify” one position on patriotism, though it violates the Constitution, and another on the Constitution (rightly or wrongly) though it violates our rights under the constitution. He’ll justify another position on religion though it violates the Constitution, or vice-versa. He just pulls out his list of authorities, and finds the one or two which seem to justify whichever of his views is under discussion at the moment. He’s a quite stupid fellow so we can’t blame him for being loaded down with errors in almost every one of his major positions. We can blame him, however, for assuming he’s qualified to tell the rest of us what’s right, or for thinking that the random grab-bag of positions he’s accumulated from various sources make him somehow a uniquely creative and different thinker — or for that matter, for thinking he’s a “thinker” at all. The one thing that differentiated him from the other candidates in the Republican Primary debates was that he seemed to be the most clearly deserving of the adjective “moronic.”

Thanks for the “Amen,” Publius.

I was just referred to this site (again, I guess, since my comment’s on it) via a FB comment of yours, and amongst all the above I also read my own comment, which I’d forgotten I’d made. I probably shouldn’t admit it, but after reading it up to the last line, the last line itself then caused me to burst out laughing. It seemed such a polite and almost cordial, and genteel way to lead into, effectively, saying to Santorum “you blithering idiot!!.”

MAYBE my (actual!!) “out loud” laughter is due to a current recurrence of my frequent over-tiredness lately, but I just couldn’t help it. I kinda hope, in one way, that he never reads it, cuz I don’t like to hurt people’s feelings if it’s not necessary, and I think Santorum is not intentionally evil, but just dumb. Still, I cannot and would not back down from my stated opinion of him now that I’ve expressed it, nor alter it to protect his ego, if that were ever asked of me. It was NOT absolutely necessary that I volunteer the WHOLE truth about my opinion of Santorum, but I did, so if called upon to retract it, I would be unable to, for the obvious reason that the truth should not be compromised — that always has bad consequences.

Perhaps more importantly though: why should I deprive others of a possible good laugh, too?