Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

SHRED

(28,136 posts)

4. it was a bit tongue-in-cheek

Reply to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 04:21 PM

Dec 2011

My belief is that those who claim to be "strict constitutionalists" haven't a clue what they are talking about and this would throw them a bit considering how much RW'ers hate the postal service.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

8 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Something for the "strict Constitutionalists" [View all] SHRED Dec 2011 OP

Citizens United also comes to mind as something they should oppose. LonePirate Dec 2011 #1

done. they're established. doesn't say the government can't then sell them off to private interests! unblock Dec 2011 #2

So we DO want them to be strict constructionalists or NOT? Nuclear Unicorn Dec 2011 #3

it was a bit tongue-in-cheek SHRED Dec 2011 #4

I got the gist of what you were shooting for but I still think it's Nuclear Unicorn Dec 2011 #5

good points...that's exactly where they go (no further) SHRED Dec 2011 #6

I'd like to say on a personal note Nuclear Unicorn Dec 2011 #7

nice...back at ya SHRED Dec 2011 #8