If government IS the the problem, then the Constitution is the BIGGEST problem. Therefore, abolishing the Constitution would solve all problems.

Contrary to Ronald Reagan’s assertion, government is NOT the problem.

Government is OF the people, BY the people, and FOR the people.

If government were the problem, the Constitution would be the BIGGEST problem.

Essentially, that argument – the one that claims “government is the problem” – is a self-refuting idea (aka self-defeating argument). In other words, it inherently & naturally contradicts itself.

The observant (astute) reader will recall that it was Ronald Reagan who made that specious claim.

Again, if “government is the problem,” then anarchy is the answer; for anarchy is the total absence of government.

So… there’s your GOP “logic.”

As I continue to write, and opine, and explain, the GOP has been taken over by radical leftists who are Hell-bent upon destroying government.

Again, I have written, if government is evil, then those involved in government are evil. Why then, would someone admit they are participating in, and desire to participate in an evil process?

That too, it self-contradictory.

And that too – that government is evil – is a GOP argument.

It’s pure idiocy.

—

On Defense In Era Of Anti-Big Government Sentiment

by NPR Staff

Listen to the Story / All Things Considered [11 min 29 sec] / Add to Playlist / Download / Transcript

September 2, 2012

In 1936, President Franklin D. Roosevelt was making the case that government was a necessary and positive part of American life. Contemporary Democrats are having less success with the argument.

Democrats today, for the most part, balance between two slightly competing ideas: that government is part of the solution, while still acknowledging that it can be part of the problem. Meanwhile, they’re up against a long-running Republican messaging campaign against “big government.”

The concept of big government goes back to around the beginning of the 20th century. Princeton historian Julian Zelizer traces the idea to the Wilson administration and its initiatives, including the creation of the Federal Reserve.

“Woodrow Wilson, who is still conservative by modern liberal standards, does allow for a pretty dramatic expansion of government,” Zelizer tells Guy Raz, host of weekends on All Things Considered.

The real turning point, though, was

Paul Ryan’s Catholic Problem

A very succinct OpEd.

—

By Daniel C. Maguire, Professor of Moral Theological Ethics, Marquette University

Posted: 08/21/2012 12:08 pm

Sound the alarm! There has been a Catholic coup d’etat in the United States of America! Six members of the Supreme Court are Catholics (just imagine the furore if six were Muslims or Jews!). Speaker of the House John Boehner and Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell are Catholics. And now, rising to top of this surging Catholic dynasty is the alleged Wunderkind of Republican economics, perky Paul Ryan.

Ryan wears his strange version of Catholicism with a jaunty sophomoric pride. “Catholic social doctrine is indispensable for officeholders.” If only Paul Ryan knew what “Catholic social doctrine” is he would take flight from it just as fast as he is scrambling from the Ayn Rand breasts that, as he has proclaimed, suckled him and inspired all his political and economic views. Catholics who know the difference between Jesus Christ and Ayn Rand skewered perky Paul. They know that Jesus’ mission, unlike Ayn Rand’s, was “good news for the poor” (Luke 4:18). They embarrassed the righteous Ryan when he spoke at the Jesuit Georgetown University carrying a sprawling sign that asked: “Where were you, Paul Ryan, when they crucified the poor?”

Of course they know where he was. He was driving the nails into everything that helps the poor — and remember most of “the poor” are children. Budgets are intensely moral documents. They show where the heart is. To budget-makers we can say: show me the losers and the winners and I will tel you what you are. The Ryan budget plan, embraced by Mitt Romney as “marvelous,” puts greed over need. Among its losers:

Mitt Romney chooses Paul Ryan as running mate; Damage Control begins

Paul Ryan, ‘Brown Noser’? The Wikipedia Edit Wars Begin for Romney’s Running Mate

By Megan Garber

Aug 11 2012, 9:13 AM ET

Now that his candidacy is official, Paul Ryan’s Wikipedia page will become a battle ground.

Paul Ryan’s classmates vote him “Biggest ‘Brown-Noser.'” pic.twitter.com/P2DrIncJ Photo via Twitter via @ryanlizza – Washington Correspondent for The New Yorker, Contributor for CNN

In high school, Paul Ryan’s classmates voted him as his class’s “biggest ‘brown noser.'” This little tidbit is a source of delight for political opponents of the Wisconsin representative-turned-Romney-running mate; to his supporters, in general, it’s an irrelevant piece of youthful trivia.

But it’s also a tension that will play out, repeatedly, in the most comprehensive narrative we have about Paul Ryan as a person and a politician and a policy-maker: his Wikipedia page. Late last night, Politico reports — just as news of the Ryan choice leaked in the political press — the first substantial edit to that page removed an extant “brown noser” mention:

removing prom king and brown noser from article –see discussion on “talk” page

But then another user put the “brown noser” mention back in. Because: relevant!

And then another user removed it again, explaining:

Removed unnecessary statement from Early Life about … “Brown Noser.” This is not needed in article is not common in such brief survey sections.

As of this writing, “brown noser” stands. As does a maybe-mitigating piece of Ryan-as-high-schooler trivia: that he was also voted prom king. But that equilibrium could change, again, in an instant.

Now that Ryan’s confirmed,