Seriously, do these people understand how bat-guano-shit insane they appear?
The Best Way To Save The Constitution From Donald Trump Is To Rewrite It
Perhaps you have wandered through much of your life only mildly aware and mostly indifferent to the fact that there is something called Constitution Day. If so, consider me a fellow traveler.
But in these times, in the wake of the Jan. 6 committee’s work exposing Donald Trump’s assaults on rule of law and the orderly transition of power, many responsible people have concluded that Constitution Day complacency is a privilege we can no longer afford. The official holiday was Sept. 17 (you knew that, right?) and in the week before and continuing this week there have been a gusher of speeches and symposiums devoted to extolling the Constitution and illuminating the threats to it. (snip)
The occasion underlined two related Trump-era paradoxes that likely will shape our politics long after Trump’s shadow lifts.
First, Trump is properly seen as a constitutional menace, but from a progressive perspective many of the most offensive features of his tenure were not in defiance of the Constitution. Instead, they flowed directly from its most problematic provisions. He was in office in the first place because the presidency is chosen by the Electoral College rather than by the popular vote. His influence will live for decades because partisan manipulation of the Senate’s judicial confirmation power gave him three Supreme Court justices, who have no term limits and face no practical mechanisms of accountability. Like some other presidents, but more so, he used the Constitution’s absolute pardon power for nakedly self-interested reasons. In short, Trump may be an enemy of the Constitution but he is also the president who most zealously exploited its defects.
Obviously, getting rid of the Electoral College is a big thing for the Progressives (nice Fascists), who aren’t happy that they can lose playing by the established rules
Correcting or circumventing what progressives reasonably perceive as the infirmities of the Constitution, in fact, seems likely to be the preeminent liberal objective of the next generation. Progress on issues ranging from climate change to ensuring that technology giants act in the public interest will hinge on creating a new constitutional consensus. Trying to place more sympathetic justices on the Supreme Court is not likely to be a fully adequate remedy. There are more fundamental challenges embedded in the document itself — in particular the outsized power it gives to states, at a time when the most urgent problems and most credible remedies are national in character.
They are likewise unhappy they can’t jam their unhinged agenda through at the national level. They talk a lot about “democracy”, but, aren’t happy they can’t get it through playing by the established rules.
Here, though, is where the breakdown in constitutional consensus becomes potentially climactic — as it did during the Civil War, and threatened to in the New Deal. Popular majority or no, most of those amendments would be opposed by conservatives — which under the terms of the existing Constitution means they likely would not pass. It takes three quarters of the states to approve an amendment, a provision that gives many small, conservative states wildly disproportionate power over the fate of the nation.
This is hardly a new problem, but it is one that threatens to reach a breaking point. The political scientist Norman Ornstein has popularized an arresting statistic, one that is validated by demographic experts. By 2040, 70 percent of Americans will live in just 15 states. That means 30 percent of the population — coming from places that are less diverse and more conservative — will choose 70 senators. Already each senator from Wyoming, the least populous state, exercises his power on behalf of less than 600,000 people, while each senator from California, the most populous, represents nearly 40 million. This distortion of democracy, already hard to defend, could become the defining feature of national life.
See, it’s a big problem that the system works as written
But there are other ways short of violent rupture to survive those moments, as now, when the Constitution no longer reflects the imperatives of the moment. One of those ways is when artful improvisation creates a new consensus. The Supreme Court struck down much of FDR’s initial program, but the New Deal’s core assumption — that we live in a national economy with a robust and responsive national government — prevailed, helped along by a dramatically new understanding of the interstate commerce clause. Another way to survive is good luck. In the Cold War, presidents had (and still have) a power never contemplated in the Constitution — the ability to blow up the world with nuclear bombs on command, in minutes, with no approval by Congress or anyone else.
In other words, they’re say F the Constitution, just do as they want. Because Trump, you know.
Quipped after Don Q Trump’s Sean Hannity interview…
Teach that 2nd Amendment that you hold do dear: does it allow the government to put ANY restrictions on gun/weapon ownership? Taken at face value it doesn’t seem to restrict at all. Should felons be able to have their gun rights taken away?
Any criminal punishment involves taking away rights. Being tossed in the slammer, fined, losing gun rights… those are all a loss of rights imposed when convicted of a crime.
Should felons be able to have their gun rights taken away?
For what felony and for how long? If they kited a check then no they should not have their gun rights taken away. If the stole a car for a joy ride at 15 no they should not have their gun rights taken away. But if they committed a violent crime by all means yes. If they feloniously assaulted a person, robbed them at threat of harm yes they should loos their gun rights.
I fail to understand what voting has to do with being guilty of a crime, any crime. I do realize that criminals are 90% democrats also so it’s not in my best interest to say this.
Then comes the question of “how long”? Should that 15 year old joy rider loose his RTKABA for life? 10 years? 20 years? If a person committed no violence and physically hurt no one why should he be unable to defend himself and his family till the day he dies?
I can understand forcing a sex predator to register all his life but if a chick forged a $500 check wouldn’t society be better served depriving her of her ability to own ink pens than carbines?
BTW Hairy, how many child predators has the biden régime prosecuted from the Epstein/Maxwell affair? I guess if your customers are all rich democrat leftists they are immune from prosecution for deviant sexual acts with minors. Especially millionaire Martha’s Vineyard donors.
MAGA
Lucio typed: how many child predators has the biden régime prosecuted from the Epstein/Maxwell affair?
PedoDon was accused of raping a 13 year old girl at Epstein’s Manhattan mansion (where pedoDon used to hang out).
How many child predators did the pedoDon Q régime prosecute from the Epstein/Maxwell affair?
Rimjob was accused of assraping his prepubescent grandson.
Everything with you goes back to Trump. Why is that? You want to date him? Your fallacy has no bearing on my question. You support perversion or not?
Why did you assrape your prepubescent grandson?
Your Trump derangement Syndrome has taken over your personality (for what it was worth) and now you have transformed into a total imbecile. Pathetic but expected from a leftist.
Carolan typed: Everything with you goes back to Trump. Why is that?
Donald Q tRump and his cult of domestic terrorists are attempting to take over the United States. It’s Jonestown writ large, with the United States of America in the lurch. Donald Q uses his cultists as pawns for his own purposes only. And you fall for it repeatedly.
We get it. Don Q has no principles except promoting what’s best for Don Q, so he morphed into a pro-christian-white nationalist, immigrant hating, government hating, democracy hating, defense hating, Muslim hating, Black hating, Putin/Russia-loving, Dicktator wannabe. He correctly calculated that there were enough christian-nationalist leaning Republicans who hated Hillary Clinton to get him close enough for a Nov surprise. He even pulled the formerly pro-invasion GOP (remember Iraq) into an anti-defense party. Cultists such as you and Teach recognize that Don Q can do no wrong.
There is a sizable minority of insecure Americans who believe in the conspiracy that the Dems and an international cabal of libs, Jews, non-christians, gays and non-white globalists are working to ‘replace’ white, christian, conservatives with non-white, non-christian voters. These white, christian nationalists are terrified to the point of violence and civil war. Don Q has become their savior.
Carolann: Do you agree with the QAnon conspiracy that a global cabal of Satanic, cannibalistic, pedophile lib/dems are kidnaping kids and that Donald Q is the Chosen One to stop it?
Wow! The progressive left are now worried about the Constitution…. Usually they see it as an impediment to their agenda.
Trump Derangement Syndrome is truly a strange condition. It takes an ordinary bat squeeze crazy lefty and leads them make the oddest, contradictory statements attempting to make a casual observer conclude that they have actually read the Constitution and understand it. Of course they haven’t, they’ve skimmed over it and read what they want it to say.
