That’s my Governor!

It's the right thing

and maybe my Senator – talking American. Property rights, freedom of religion, tolerance – doesn’t get more American.

AND ON THE OTHER HAND: Sen. Cornyn (R-TX), a man of modest intelligence and accomplishment (he does have great hair, let’s give him that), a man of the Party that claims it’s going steady with the Constitution and got that document wearing their class ring, is clueless about the real issues involved. He wants to bow to the thing the Founders feared most – the tyranny of the majority.

9 responses to “That’s my Governor!

  1. Ms. Holland,

    Good luck with Charlie Crist. The man is so much like my Senator Arlen Spector, Pa. Which ever way the political winds are a blowing, that’s which way he will head. He will sell you guys out someday, like he did us .

    It’s a little ironic to hear you list ” the tyranny of the majority. ” Even to list the Founding Fathers. Weren’t they just slave ownin, women oppressin, rich white guys ? Doesn’t the Constitution say whatever you imagine it to say ?


    • You’re the very devil Alan 🙂 I’ve always been in awe of the Founders and have for some years been reading my way through a few dozen histories and biographies of the period. I think the best so far have been Ron Chernow’s Hamilton and David McCullough’s John Adams.

      Like all humans, they were flawed. They were also of thier times – after all, women didn’t get the vote until 245 years later. So they were hardly unique in those respects. But in spite of their flaws and their vastly different political philosophies and views of Federalism vs Confederation, they managed to close themselves up in a smelly hot room over a hot summer in Philadephia and negotiate and compromise and fight and carry on in all sorts of ways until they could walk out of there with that document.

      An interesting aside is that they weren’t supposed to be writing an actual Constitution – they sort of finessed that in. They were sent by their respective States to revise the Articles of Confederation. They were so secretive about it that they pledged never to utter the actual word ‘constitution’ outside of each other’s company.

      Stinkin’ compromisin’ liars. Thank goodness.


    • Alan, What Cornyn and others are so carelessly advocating is the very defininition of what the Founders warned us about when they enshrined protections AGAINST the tyranny of the majority. Nothing ironic – simply tells me these guys really don’t understand the Constitution. Actually, as I’ve said before, I really don’t htink that crowd ever much liked the Bill of Rights anyway.


  2. Protection from the tyranny of the majority was arguably the central idea of the Constitution. Everything, including the entire Bill of Rights is centered on this concept.

    The quintessential Enlightenment thinker Jefferson had the temerity to be born into relative wealth? What hypocrisy.


    • I remember when Clinton nominated Lanie Grenier (?) as solicitor general or atty general or somelthing like that, and she used the phrase ‘tyranny of majority’ and the GOP establishment came down on her like she’d said she had Mao’s love child. Clinton, of course, immediately caved.


  3. Ms. Holland,

    Tyranny of the Majority,. How about tyranny of the temporary majority? Like forcing the unwilling to buy something they do not want. One of my favorite philosophers was an English author who hated Americans and the Scottish, although his best friend and biographer was a Scot. Samuel Johnson’s line was ” the majority are wicked “. That would fit most of the politicians in Washington.


  4. Well Alan, the majority is always temporary – till it switches to the next temporary majority. Oh those elections.

    We seem to share an admiration for Samuel Johnson. I treasure my copy of Boswell’s Life of Johnson (althought it’s been a few decades since I read it.)


  5. Ms. Holland,

    I cannot believe it. Samuel Johnson just does not seem to be your type. He was super religious and would make me look like a liberal.

    But, I really wanted to bring up an irony. Certain Liberals, one at the Washington Post and the other Maureen Dowd ( hey you both are Maureens ), are calling for George W. Bush to weigh in on the Mosque controversy. In other words, bail poor Barry out.

    I just think it very amusing that people like Dowd want Bush to help them save Obama . Dowd never had a kind word when Bush was President. If liberals could have an anti-Christ Bush was it .


    • My admiration for Johnson is because his love of language deeply affected our language. And I love language. Also, he was irreverant, rude and very very interesting. The opposite of what today we would call ‘politically correct’ or ‘politically cowardly’. I like irreverant people.

      No one is calling for Bush to bail out Obama. People are asking Bush to step in and try to tone down the anti Muslim rhetoric. Bush was good on that issue and him speaking out could make a difference. (Although it seems today’s republicans desert thier recent presidents as soon as htey’re out of office and start calling them ‘not conservative enough’. As in Nixon could never make it today; he’s be a liberal. Ike would be a communist I guess)


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s