There is a segment of the country that believe the constitution is nothing but an antiquated piece of history and its usefulness retranslated into the living constitution.
The term general Welfare in the constitution is one of the most misinterpreted terms that allows the FREEE rand entitlement syndrome we experience today.
Most areas of the Constitution are cut & dry; but then ( sigh ), we have the so called Constitutional scholars who make it their life mission to reinterpret every word. Like out of control Hasidic Rabbis arguing over the Tora.
Seems libs want to discard logic and adapt a free for all. Ladies & Gentlemen, allow me to introduce the new & improved no rhyme or reason constitution. Order is absolutely necessary for a country to stay on the rails; and I do not mean a population under a thumb. You know exactly what I mean.
I’m surprised thy haven’t introduced the word woke into the new and improved constitution.
Yes and they have been replaced by right-wing extremism, racism, and historical revisionism.
Do often repeat what the MSM talking points are? Seems you bought in to NPC meme!
I’m sorry but your sentence structure is really unclear. You might want to work on that a bit before trying to communicate with other people.
Do you want to back up what you are saying with any kind of evidence?
Before you ask what my evidence is I will gladly provide it to you. We have a president who stood up and said that there were very fine people who marched in Charlottesville. They were actual Nazis who were chanting “the ■■■■ will not replace us” - very fine people. We have a president who employs white nationalists in positions of power in his administration. We have a president who is selectively honoring the worst and most racist aspects of American history while glossing over the times where we didn’t do so well and should be reflecting on them as a society.
Our country at the moment is in a constitutional crisis. Yet because you got completely BTFO by me in another thread you felt it was appropriate to come over and harass me on something that you obviously have zero knowledge about.
Do you want to talk about the Constitution or not? You seemed to struggle with the basic concepts of the First Amendment in the other thread, so let’s just talk about the whole thing right now.
Of course it didn’t, but are you suggesting any opposition to the amendment that essentially made right that wrong?
Yeah, and under great pressure (surely from JK as well) he walked that back, only to revert a few days later back to his perennial racist stance.
It’s your hurt feelings that you projecting not to mention practicing passive aggressive behaviour! My point is all things you are ranting and babbling on about is the same exact narrative that MSM is propagating which only suggests your views are myopic in nature and are symptomatic of person wanting to support their confirmation bias! We see this all the time with clueless lefties, now we can add you to the list as well!
Let me get this straight.
Your argument is that because I have made comments that are similar to comments that others have made on the news that I must be misinformed.
On what planet does that even make sense?
Try looking at it this way…the commentary that is offered on the news is generally middle of the road and accepted by the majority of the population. Unfortunately, we have a president who is trying to convince a large segment of the population that the news and that independent journalists are enemies of the people. Like any true authoritarian dictator, Trump wants all of his followers to look to him for the official version of the truth because the media is not to be trusted. This has happened a few times before in recent history. You might want to look into it.
Thanks you just proved my point! Why are you here? You think your arguments are going to sway me to your side? If you can’t make a convincing argument without resorting to your TDS how is that supposed increase your numbers at the voting booth? It’s about policies and your side has lost that argument already! Next!
So you agree that Trump is an authoritarian dictator who disregards the First Amendment?
You see? You simply can’t answer direct questions instead just conflate and put words into people’s mouths? How old are you again? Pretty childish on your part not to mention being intellectually dishonest! No wonder why progressives are hated!
LOL! You respond without addressing anything and can only come up with really weak and cliche personal attacks. I’m really sorry to have invaded your safe space like this but this is a site dedicated to free speech and open to all views.
Do you want to talk about the Constitution or not?
Do you want to talk about the First Amendment or not?
Do you want to talk about the constitutional crisis facing the American people right now, or not?
If you want to start over, then answer my question first! Stop with all your other bullshit you are going on about and lay off the aderall, you are embarrassing yourself!
Which question was that? This incoherent word salad?
And how old are you? Do GTFU!
I’m not really suggesting anything.
The document must be understood in the correct historical context.
Plato said over 2,200 years ago that democracy is mob rule.
Of course it will be mob rule if you allow mob to participate in politics.
Lincoln did exactly that with his proverbial “of the people, by the people, for the people” which the Founding Fathers never intended.
I completely agree with that.