Jump to content

the problem with our government


Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, Plasmodium said:

The problem with our government is steadfast resistance to change.

It was purposefully designed that way for good reason. Do you think the US would still exist if it changed as quickly as our attention does?

Sure we can elect a bunch of new flavor of the day House Reps every couple of years, but they really don’t matter since we have Senators to prevent the tyranny of memes. Then we have the SC to keep them all in check by upholding the laws of the land. Of course there is a mechanism for the laws of the land to change through constitutional amendments, but that process is difficult, once again, to prevent the tyranny of memes.

The more you read the Federalist papers, the more obvious it becomes that our system of government was set up absolutely brilliantly. “Progressive” judges and justices are the problem with our government, not the conservative ones, as their attempts to change our system without going through the proper channels will be our downfall.

  • Fire 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DJT said:

It was purposefully designed that way for good reason. Do you think the US would still exist if it changed as quickly as our attention does?

Sure we can elect a bunch of new flavor of the day House Reps every couple of years, but they really don’t matter since we have Senators to prevent the tyranny of memes. Then we have the SC to keep them all in check by upholding the laws of the land. Of course there is a mechanism for the laws of the land to change through constitutional amendments, but that process is difficult, once again, to prevent the tyranny of memes.

The more you read the Federalist papers, the more obvious it becomes that our system of government was set up absolutely brilliantly. “Progressive” judges and justices are the problem with our government, not the conservative ones, as their attempts to change our system without going through the proper channels will be our downfall.

Thomas Jefferson thought it ridiculous for one generation to impose it's will on another, so he thought the constitution should be rewritten every 20 twenty years.  Now we are up 11 or 12 generations.  The 2nd amendment refers to muskets, for crying out loud!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Plasmodium said:

Thomas Jefferson thought it ridiculous for one generation to impose it's will on another, so he thought the constitution should be rewritten every 20 twenty years.  Now we are up 11 or 12 generations.  The 2nd amendment refers to muskets, for crying out loud!

Oh, so now you care what that racist slave owner thought? 🤔 We do have an 80 year old president who imposes his sniffing on unsuspecting children.

Yes, you’re right. Muskets were the “assault rifles” of the day, so the populace owning them gave them a fighting chance against a tyrannical government. The assault rifle of today is the M4, but populace is not allowed to own them. Why not? Could it be that the government has moved toward tyranny?

And why is every thread turning into a gun debate?

Here’s my proposal for gun reform. It’s all or nothing:

1) Legal age to purchase a firearm is raised to 25.

2) Legal age to vote in any local, state or federal election is raised to 25.

3) Exceptions to 2 and 3 for military and law enforcement.

Let’s see how serious democrats are about saving “children”. If they are children and not responsible enough to own firearms, they sure as hell aren’t responsible enough to vote.

Edited by DJT
  • Fire 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Plasmodium said:

Thomas Jefferson thought it ridiculous for one generation to impose it's will on another, so he thought the constitution should be rewritten every 20 twenty years.  Now we are up 11 or 12 generations.  The 2nd amendment refers to muskets, for crying out loud!

the first refers to printing presses

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problems with this country run much deeper than term limits for Congress, whom the CIA and bureaucrats already call ltemporary hires.”  It’s deeper than insider trading or campaign contributions or lobbyists, all already covered by law.  Better enforcement and accountability could help, as well as your vote, which could be aided by an honest press.  But Congress’ long standing commitment to delegating its responsibilities to executive branch agencies is what has built the condescension to call them temporaries.  The public is noticing this arrogance and the antithetical nonsense it creates for them to endure, they just don’t always know where its root lies.  RFK Jr has dealt with and studied it for years and talks extensively about it, Trump speaks and reacts to it out of instinct.  Biden, and many of those insider trading, fund raising, elected for life legislators are just along for the ride.  
 

Some of this has been wrangled with by the current court, mostly to do with the EPA.  

Edited by Offthemat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

On the issue of term limits, this on the Dianne Feinstein issue:

 

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2023/07/feinstein-watch.php

I see corporate media is ragging on McConnell full-tilt to distract from that and Biden’s latest (there are a dozen flubs from the last week, but can only post one video at a time):

He’s so sincere about it, too.

IMG_1902.webp.5324e5a860cc9c4db7a2a30f8cb5abd2.webp

Edited by DJT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...