DJT

Well, it was called the 10th Amendment, but the federal government decided if that one was important, they wouldn’t have made it the tenth.

Precisely. I don’t know why certain people want “congress to do their job and make more laws and regulations”. I swear some people would prefer it if the government would tell them when to eat and shit. If that’s what you want there are already plenty of laws to break, and you can go to prison and have the government do just that for you.

The House more responsibly than just writing laws. They also have oversight and investigatory functions, which is what they’re exercising. If all they did was write laws, they might as well stay home, because Biden has made it pretty clear he’ll veto anything the Republicans get through to his desk. It looks bad upon the incumbent nominee to sign his opponent’s legislation into law.

Corporate media is also out in force covering for Biden curing cancer. How many times is the White House going to change official transcripts to keep Biden from sounding as stupid as he is? https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/posts-misleadingly-claim-biden-said-145805847.html

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.

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.

That’s all good and well, but who gets to pick the winners and losers when affirming the rights of one violates the rights of another? The answer is, your rights end where mine begin, but there has been a “progressive” push to diminish that separation. When the extent of one’s rights becomes muddled, people begin giving up rights, some willingly, others forced. That’s not an improvement for anyone. (This has nothing to do with flag burning… more to do with the general state of our country right now from 2nd amendment to affirmative action to gay cakes to preferred pronouns to trans sports to…)

… and duels.

Yes… but it’s not a video. Sorry to disappoint.

Male Manatee literally F’ed to death by his brother … and it was Ron Desantis’ fault because of Don’t Say Gay. Obviously.

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.

I’d also add that all campaigns be completely publicly financed and limited to a three-month election season, but that would require a constitutional amendment excluding political speech from the first amendment. I wrote a 60-some-odd-page capstone about campaign finance reform and the First Amendment, arguing the McCain-Feingold Act was unconstitutional (in part) for its limits on campaign spending and, in turn, speech. This was almost four years before Citizens United v. FEC. I’m pretty sure Anthony Kennedy plagiarized some of my work in his Supreme Court opinion, so I regret being so convincing.

It was in response to part 1 of my post just above it… though, I’m confused because he said it was not a bad idea just before he said it wasn’t a good idea.

Don’t rag on SBF… he’s a hero.

So what you’re saying is, it’s people’s willingness to kick someone’s ass for burning the flag that gives it any meaning, because without the asskicking, it would be little more than an inconsequential temper tantrum?

If I were to make a bill regarding federal representative pay/ terms with the goal of getting money out of politics and the best possible candidates, it would be this: 1.) Once elected, all personal property (other than primary residence), business interests, savings, stocks, trusts, etc. are liquidated and signed over to the treasury. 2.) All House members are paid $200k/yr for first term, $250k/yr for second term, and $300k/yr for third term, with a limit of three terms. 3.) All Senators are paid $400k/yr for first term and $500k/yr for second term, with a limit of two terms. 4.) When representative leaves office in good standing (defeated or term-limited), they will receive a yearly pension equal to the highest salary earned and health insurance through the Obamacare portal for life. 5.) Any income above the yearly pension amount will be federally taxed at 99.95%. (I might up those salaries… double perhaps)

I’m really hoping the next TikTok challenge is to go to a small town and light a flag on fire.

They are a security risk. Everyone knows the easiest way to hack an octogenarian is to send them an email offering free tokens for online slots. They can’t help themselves.

Age limits seem more important than anything at this point. Biden got lost leaving the podium multiple times in the past month, McConnell forgot he was at a press conference yesterday, Feinstein was told how to vote today… Why do we allow geriatrics make decisions that will affect the country for a greater number of years than the number of weeks they have to live?

Correct. That’s how I took it as well.

One legal analyst on CNN called the situation exceptionally rare and described it as a wedding ceremony where both the bride and groom objected to marriage.

The left used to hate big pharma and the military industrial complex, but TDS has made them bedfellows.

OK, all of those things were pushed for the globalist agenda and to prevent Trump from winning in 2020. Now they all fit your definition.

Pangolins caused covid There was no lab leak China didn’t know about Covid until 12/19 Covid is deadly to healthy people Inefficacy of Covid shot Fauci cover up of gain of function research Trump being a xenophobe for banning travel from China Masks are effective “2 weeks to flatten the curve” Hospitals were overrun Sanitizing everything prevents Covid Trump said drink bleach Trump said drink aquarium cleaner BLM riots don’t spread Covid, but outdoor church services do 10 foot social distancing, 6’, 3’ Wrestlers wearing masks and not shaking hands before/after matches prevents spread of Covid Remote learning was good for students Remote work is good for employers

If you take the hundreds of mass shootings with handguns and compare them to the several with AR’s each year, there are far, far more deaths by the former. Yes, you’ll hear about the few mass shootings with AR’s each year, while you don’t hear a peep about the 3-4 each week using 9mm’s in Chicago alone. Pretty sure you were just saying heart issues in healthy young men aren’t any more prevalent, they’re just being reported on more. That reasoning works for you there, but not here?