Tentherism: The Bizarre Ideology Behind Tea Partiers' Plans to Kill Social Security and Child Labor Laws

Tentherism is an anachronistic Constitutional theory embraced by a slate of GOP candidates bent on dismantling 100 years of progress.

(Blog Post) More than seventy years ago, the Supreme Court abandoned a brief, disastrous experiment with "tentherism," a constitutional theory that early twentieth century justices wielded to protect monopolies, strip workers of their right to organize and knock down child labor laws. This discredited constitutional theory is back -- with a vengeance -- Full Story »

Posted by Dwight Rousu
Tags Help
Member Tags: Minimum Wage, child labor
Stats Help
# Tweets: 0 (as of 2010-10-25)
Editorial Help
Posted by: Posted by Dwight Rousu - Oct 25, 2010 - 1:34 AM PDT
Content Type: Blog Post
Edit Lock: This story can be edited
Edited by: Jon Mitchell - Oct 25, 2010 - 11:24 AM PDT
Richard Riehl
2.6
by Richard Riehl - Oct. 26, 2010

Nope, not good journalism. Conclusions and generalizations by the writer substitute for actual quotes from the candidates. The tenthers simply want states to take responsibility for what the feds are doing now. That, in itself, is cause for making a case against them, but to claim the entire social safety net would collapse in one fell swoop is oversimplifying to the point of diminishing the writer's credibility. Articles like this one hurt, rather than help progressive arguments to preserve these programs.

See Full Review » (11 answers)
Chris Finnie
2.0
by Chris Finnie - Oct. 25, 2010

It sounded like an interesting piece. But ended up being poorly organized, structured, and supported. I learned little, and wound up being fairly confused by the end. It would have been good if he'd quoted the actual language of the tenth amendment.

See Full Review » (11 answers)
Dwight Rousu
4.2
by Dwight Rousu - Oct. 25, 2010

The article uses some constitutional and political history, and identifies an ancient philosophy that collects many of the tea party Koched up ideas. Interesting.

See Full Review » (11 answers)
Warrior Wheatman
3.0
by Warrior Wheatman - Nov. 1, 2010

Fantastically well contrived to make you think you are about to lose the right to pay your son for mowing the lawn. The intent is to lie and scare and not vote republican. I felt o0bligated to give a review because of comments I have made. I gave up quoting on quoting slights and implicative lies, because the whole article is one such. I would 've prefered to give a '1' or 'F' to save the open-minded from wasting their time.

See Full Review » (17 answers)
Randy Morrow
3.9
by Randy Morrow - Oct. 25, 2010

In other words, the right has a simple plan for American families: making sure that everyone at the dinner table is completely on their own. More »

See Full Review » (10 answers)
Roland F. Hirsch
1.5
by Roland F. Hirsch - Oct. 26, 2010

This blog post has modest journalistic merit. The author lists some of the Democratic Party talking points about Republicans as if they were facts. The tea party candidates are a very diverse group, something the author apparently does not know. A few quotes are taken out of context and labeled with what the author apparently intends as a disparaging word, "Tenthers". The author ignores the fact that the number of minorities in Congress and elected at the state level will go up significantly due to the tea parties supporting candidates such as Allen West, Nikki Haley and Charles Djou. So how can the tea parties be labeled as against freedom for all Americans, when they strongly support equal rights?

See Full Review » (11 answers)
Justin Curry
4.0
by Justin Curry - Oct. 25, 2010

I wasn't familiar with the term "Tentherism," and what it entails in regards to the constitution until I had read this article. The writer did a great job of not only introducing the meaning behind the term itself, but explaining to the reader what it actually implemented. Job well done!

See Full Review » (11 answers)
Anthony Alaniz
3.1
by Anthony Alaniz - Oct. 25, 2010

The piece comes off as attacking more then informing, and it looses any trust of the reader halfway through, though what information is in there, can be helpful to some readers.

See Full Review » (11 answers)
Amanda Peterson
2.0
by Amanda Peterson - Oct. 25, 2010

i dont really understand what this article is trying to say, the writer clearly does not sya any facts, more just rants.

See Full Review » (11 answers)

Comments on this story (3)Help (BETA)

NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

3.1

Average
from 11 reviews (42% confidence)
Quality
3.0
Facts
3.1
Fairness
2.3
Information
4.0
Insight
4.0
Sourcing
2.3
Style
2.7
Accuracy
1.0
Balance
1.5
Context
3.5
Depth
2.4
Enterprise
3.4
Expertise
1.5
Originality
4.0
Relevance
4.0
Transparency
2.0
Responsibility
2.0
Popularity
3.2
Recommendation
2.9
Credibility
3.1
# Reviews
5.0
# Views
5.0
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!