- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Racist NYT Editor Sarah Jeong forgets the constitution
Posted on 2/21/19 at 3:12 pm to tiggerthetooth
Posted on 2/21/19 at 3:12 pm to tiggerthetooth
Im sitting here thinking that...i dont believe in reincarnation but im fairly sure that she has been involved in the down fall of many historic civilizations
Posted on 2/21/19 at 3:13 pm to Vestigial Morgan
I'm sitting here reminded that the Founding Fathers limited citizenship to freed White people for a good reason.
Posted on 2/21/19 at 3:17 pm to tiggerthetooth
Tweeting dumbass stuff is now unconstitutional? Are you trying to stifle POTUS?
Posted on 2/21/19 at 3:17 pm to tiggerthetooth
More likely that she's questioning the constitution than forgetting about it. Going by the number of posts saying invoking the 25th amendment is an illegal coup, in spite of it being codified in the constitution, I assume this board doesn't think the constitution is some infallible document. Except when the subject is guns.
Posted on 2/21/19 at 3:18 pm to Tractor Tug60
quote:You're giving him way too much credit. He doesn't even understand what they're spoonfeeding him.
You are wasting your time trying to explain anything to texridder as he’s too stupid to understand anything but dem/prog talking points given to him.
Posted on 2/21/19 at 3:19 pm to tiggerthetooth
quote:This implies that she knew it in the first place in order to forget it.
Racist NYT Editor Sarah Jeong forgets the constitution
Posted on 2/21/19 at 3:20 pm to jbond
quote:
More likely that she's questioning the constitution than forgetting about it
People who question why we have a bicameral legislature set up such that it is are not to be taken seriously.
It is the entire foundation for our system of government. If you either don't know that or can't understand it, you deserve the ridicule.
Posted on 2/21/19 at 3:20 pm to jbond
quote:
Going by the number of posts saying invoking the 25th amendment is an illegal coup
I’d love to hear you argument that the 25th Amendment is appplicable. I’m sure your knowledge of that particular amendment is vast. I would also like to Hear your thoughts on sedition and it’s applicability is the current situation. This should be fun.
Posted on 2/21/19 at 3:22 pm to texridder
quote:
How exactly does that make her a racist?
another brilliant post tex.
Posted on 2/21/19 at 3:22 pm to Cs
Yep, she is a racist, and demonstrates it with her tweets. Now< if she ever happens to hit a white person with her car, her record will condemn her. She forever is branded "racist."
Posted on 2/21/19 at 3:25 pm to Indefatigable
This may sound crazy, but some people prefer the idea of one person, one vote. Disproportionate representation undermines that notion. It's perfectly okay to counter argue that this risks having high population states dominate the legislature. That just means you value giving rural areas an outsized voice.
Let's not forget the context of why our legislature took its current form. It was a compromise that was necessary to form a u ion. Just because something was necessary to form a government doesn't mean it should be kept in perpetuity.
Let's not forget the context of why our legislature took its current form. It was a compromise that was necessary to form a u ion. Just because something was necessary to form a government doesn't mean it should be kept in perpetuity.
Posted on 2/21/19 at 3:28 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
I’d love to hear you argument that the 25th Amendment is appplicable. I’m sure your knowledge of that particular amendment is vast. I would also like to Hear your thoughts on sedition and it’s applicability is the current situation. This should be fun
It's an example brought in to show that even here the Constitution isn't viewed as some transcendent, perfect document without flaws. It's fresh on my mind due to the threads referencing an illegal coup when invoking a legal process was floated.
Posted on 2/21/19 at 3:28 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
Over 3000 people agreed with her. Jesus Christ
You think thats bad?
Posted on 2/21/19 at 3:31 pm to jbond
quote:
One person, one vote
jbond is a liar. That’s not what the link is....
Posted on 2/21/19 at 3:31 pm to jbond
quote:
This may sound crazy, but some people prefer the idea of one person, one vote. Disproportionate representation undermines that notion. It's perfectly okay to counter argue that this risks having high population states dominate the legislature. That just means you value giving rural areas an outsized voice.
Goddamn you're s fricking idiot
Posted on 2/21/19 at 3:32 pm to jbond
quote:
This may sound crazy, but some people prefer the idea of one person, one vote.
A long winded way of saying people prefer mob rule.
Of course Democrats want mob rule. With their reach in Hollywood, the media, and our culture in general they can prey upon the uneducated naive masses and work them up into a fear of racism, sexism, global warming, etc.
Posted on 2/21/19 at 3:32 pm to CptBengal
What portion of what you quoted do you disagree with?
This post was edited on 2/21/19 at 3:33 pm
Posted on 2/21/19 at 3:34 pm to jbond
quote:
Let's not forget the context of why our legislature took its current form. It was a compromise that was necessary to form a u ion. Just because something was necessary to form a government doesn't mean it should be kept in perpetuity.
Good luck with getting the approval of the 40 states "one person-one vote" would screw over. But hey, it was just a necessary component of the union, so it should be a pretty expendable principle, right?
quote:
This may sound crazy, but some people prefer the idea of one person, one vote.
I'm sorry.. are there places where people can vote twice or three times? Maybe you are unaware, but the President of the United States is NOT, and was never intended to be elected by direct popular vote. Neither was the Senate for that matter. The people of the United States are represented by their congressmen, the only federal official they were originally intended to vote for.
Our system of government is entirely predicated on BOTH the people at large and the states themselves having representation. Unfortunately, "progressives" already turned the Senate into a smaller version of the House with bigger districts. Are you advocating to eliminate it all together?
Westminster systems the world over are a prime example of how garbage a "one person-one vote" system is. We fought a war to get away from the tyranny of the majority (Parliament).
Posted on 2/21/19 at 3:42 pm to Indefatigable
The founders also so fit to not have senators directly elected. That was amended eventually, because people recognized it wasn't as democratic as it could be. I don't think a change in Senate makeup will ever be politically feasible, but it's hilarious to me how smugly some are scoffing about the idea as if it wouldn't result in more equal representation. At the very least it's debatable but some of y'all are so dug in you just outright dismiss the debate entirely. It was debatable during the founding but not now?
Posted on 2/21/19 at 3:46 pm to jbond
quote:
It was debatable during the founding but not now?
It was debateable only to the extent that it was found to be absolutely necessary to come to an agreement.
Absolutely none of the factors that gave rise to that decision have changed at all.
What makes you think that a new debate on the issue is warranted?
It may be the single most unchangeable aspect of our entire system of government, in fact it defines our system of government.
This post was edited on 2/21/19 at 3:47 pm
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News