Twitter | Search | |
Rich Lowry Nov 22
I really appreciated this conversation with who was unfailingly fair-minded and civil 1/
Reply Retweet Like
Rich Lowry Nov 22
Replying to @RichLowry
The long conversation was, with fair warning, edited down, and not maliciously or unfairly. But inevitably some points are lost 2/
Reply Retweet Like
Rich Lowry Nov 22
Replying to @RichLowry
Folks on Twitter have focused on what I say about Trump and Democrats, but this line in that passage was left on the cutting room floor: “Who's going to do more long-term harm and harm to the institutions of the country?”
Reply Retweet Like
Rich Lowry Nov 22
Replying to @RichLowry
Sean was kind enough to provide the text of the unedited answer and here it is 4/
Reply Retweet Like
Rich Lowry
It’s not as though the Left has been scared straight in the Trump era into a rigorous constitutionalism, or Elizabeth Warren wouldn’t have gotten so much traction or sympathetic press coverage prior to her Medicare for All debacle 5/
Reply Retweet Like More
Rich Lowry Nov 22
Replying to @RichLowry
I expand on this point in a recent column 6/
Reply Retweet Like
Rich Lowry Nov 22
Replying to @RichLowry
And it’s relevant here that almost no one on the center-left objected to Obama’s “pen and phone” governance, or his unilateral re-writing of immigration law 7/
Reply Retweet Like
Rich Lowry Nov 22
Replying to @RichLowry
The Left still believes in a “living Constitution” that is an infinitely malleable means of law-making from the judiciary and an administrative state unmoored from traditional constitutional constraints 8/
Reply Retweet Like
Rich Lowry Nov 22
Replying to @RichLowry
Would it really be so hard for progressives to say of Obama’s unilateral immig law, “I support the goal, but he doesn’t have the authority,” or to say of much of what Trump has done or said, “He has the legal or constitutional authority, but he shouldn’t have done it”? 9/
Reply Retweet Like
Rich Lowry Nov 22
Replying to @RichLowry
But the Left, as a general matter, doesn’t think this way. Again, if it did, it would be appalled that Elizabeth Warren is running on a program dismissive of constitutional and legal constraints. It’s not 10/
Reply Retweet Like
Rich Lowry Nov 22
Replying to @RichLowry
Finally, judges aren’t everything and they don’t erase Trump’s flaws but because he is allied with the conservative legal movement, he is nominating judges who will apply an originalist understanding of the Constitution for a generation and when he’s long gone END/
Reply Retweet Like
James Cook Nov 23
Replying to @RichLowry
It's almost as if - now that the right has been revealed to have only been paying lip service to "rigorous constitutionalism," limited government, rule of law and all the rest - their biggest criticism of the left is that they haven't adopted the right's former talking points.
Reply Retweet Like
Jeremy Rosen Nov 22
Replying to @RichLowry
Might take you more seriously if you explained why you thought a wealth tax was unconstitutional instead of just declaring it so.
Reply Retweet Like
Ho Ho Roh! Nov 23
Replying to @jnrosen @RichLowry
The same reason the income tax was until they passed the 16th Amendment. Also they already paid taxes on it as income. So it is double taxation.
Reply Retweet Like
what am i for Nov 23
Replying to @RichLowry
wanting everyone to have healthcare < caging children
Reply Retweet Like
ZaxxonGalaxian Nov 23
Replying to @whatamifor @RichLowry
Shorter Rich Lowry: “I don’t care about all of the damage Trump is doing because he isn’t hurting rich white guys like me!”
Reply Retweet Like