re: The Democrats and the Constitution

quote:

---

INCITEMENT OF AN ARMED MOB TO ATTACK CONGRESS

---

Anyone who believes this, and so much so to put in all caps, is exactly why this country is in the shitter. I fricking hate the way you think. Open your eyes and quit eating the bullshite being fed to you. Anyone who objectively looks at the mountains of video from that day, reads the exact transcribed words of Trump's speech, takes time to even PARTIALLY investigate the mountains of evidence of voter fraud, and bothers to look past their bigoted view of one man, would easily see the stupidity of calling the protest an "armed mob", would easily see that there was no "attack" and would also see that Trump, did not, in any way, orchestrate, incite, or condone, ANY of what happened inside the Capitol that day.

I have a working theory on why some people hate Trump vehemently, tell me, were you bullied as a kid or an adult? I can almost guarantee you were, do you have the balls to admit it?

quote:

---

First off, as a left-leaning liberal I believe strongly in constitutional government

---

No - no you don't = you obviously believe in getting away with whatever your current base of power will let you get away with, with absolute hatred for any attempt to discuss the legality, morality, effectiveness, intent, or disruption caused by the action you want to take. You are perfectly satisfied with treating individuals differently because of their alliegence to your planned actions. If someone agrees not to try to stop your intentions, nothing they do can possibly be interpreted as "illegal" and anything that poses a bump in the road is then obviously illegal - or *gasp* RACISSS!!!!!! - or now "INSURRECTION!!!!!"

all that if the "thing" in the above everything or anything are exactly the same action.

Your 'look at me' endorsement of 'constitutional government' in your leading sentence is betrayed as bullshite garbage in the bleating verbiage in your next 30 lines of idiocy.

Our constitution was perfectly written as a basis for a legitimate government where the rights of the individual to be free and able to pursue their individual interest. It did not proclaim itself to be 'perfect' for all time, outlining the process whereby situations outside their knowledge at the time of its writing could be addressed as the public then saw fit.

Hence the AMENDMENT provision - with ample protections against the still obvious protection against mob-rule in a moment of passion.

example - Abortion = obviously a topic absent from the constitution. there is nothing that prevents a group of well-meaning people to assemble a specific argument in support of what they want to make a nation-wide standard of governance - taking that authority away from the individual states to manage as they saw fit. Instead, they cobbled up a fictitious "case" to present to the SCOTUS - which rendered a 'ruling' that still cannot be comprehended after all these years relying on "penumbras from the umbra" (or something like that) to establish what they 'thought' the constitution 'really meant' - and now we have 'constitutional protection' of the 'right to choose.'

To actually cloak that coveted 'right to choose' with a constitutional protection, it should have been defined in clear, easy to understand, written form and submitted to the states as an amendment for the entire nation to endorse - or reject - in verbiage easily understood by an ordinary citizen.

Instead we got 'penumbra from umbra' reasoning based on a 'right to privacy' that has morphed into 'protection' for the 'right' to purposefully kill a healthy baby after its live birth because the 'mother' felt it inconvenient for her to accept the responsibility of 'raising' the child while denying its right to be raised by an adoptive parent. All for "privacy."

And we have seen that exact (lack of) reasoning now expanded to make mental defects "normal" which allow actual men to 'decide' to be women for the sake of being able to shower with high school girls in locker rooms and compete against them in sports requiring muscular strength and skills.

And for the past 50 years we have seen absolute madmen cloak themselves with "constitutional devotion" with the most absurd declarations of protecting the constitution while their actions are not even well disguised efforts to discard it completely. Every activity of the DEMOCRAT party (a "progressive" cabal involving the big 'influencers' of modern thought like the news media, entertainment moguls, big tech oligarchs, university complex, high finance elites, fear-mongering race-baiters, and governmental bureaucracies) is now designed to maintain a facade of a 'constitutional' devotion while actually installing a double-standard for individuals. There is only ONE 'approved' dogma where any other thought process is by definition = inciting a riot = RAYCISSSSS!!!!! = white supremacist = xenophobic = intolerant = misogynist = ad nauseam.

YOU want a 'constitution' which can be interpreted to protect a double standard depending on nothing more than whether or not the ruling class approves of your THOUGHT PROCESS.

quote:

---

left-leaning liberal

---

No shite statement of the century?

You people...

You're a deranged POS completely lacking in reasoning and critical thinking. I'm a Clemson grad btw.

quote:

---

First off, as a left-leaning liberal:

---

quote:

---

but I fell into line & voted for her

---

If you say one you don't need to say the other, it is understood.