Why do we care what this dumb fuck thinks? He doesn't even know what socialism is our Marxism.
this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2023
85 points (87.0% liked)
politics
19104 readers
3067 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Ignore influential conservatives at your peril. They're the ones who create narratives.
Yup. It’s like clockwork.
That’s why it’s interesting to hear conservatives before their spin machine goes to town. Slightly different topic, but not really.
Once you know what the conservative talking heads are saying it is easy to provide fact based evidence that counters their narrative before they start using it in normal conversations.
Know your enemy, especially since my experience to them is a criminal offense. If we don't know their thoughts on the matter we can't begin to unravel it for the indoctrinated.
14th amendment: passed Congress on June 13th, 1866.
Das Kapital was first published in 1867.
You have to be really ahead of the game to build a gateway for something that is published next year, in another language, and on another continent when the fastest form of travel between the two took weeks.
It was done with young Tom Edison's steam-powered time machine.
Sadly the machine was destroyed during the battle of wizards at Menlo Park. That's how we ended up with evil Edison taking control in this timeline.
Tesla, Edison was a very successful capitalist but not an inventor himself. People will say the modern lightbulb but that was patented by his company not invented by him.
My favorite is the story of Edison calling Tesla out to fix iirc generators of Westinghouse design. Tesla then fixed it and was never paid because like Trump Edison often refused to pay debts.
Ed: you can downvote but it will still be just as true with our without.
My favorite (actually true) story was that Edison possibly had a French inventor disappeared on a train. The man had been hard at work and created a supposedly superior prototype movie projector that would surpass Edison's fledgling efforts. He was on that train, with his machine, to attempt to gain capital from investors and commercialize the product. He and the machine were never seen again.
Probably wouldn't have happened if good Edison had still been around...
Also, Edison is just Elon Musk. Possibly reincarnated by use of a Lazarus machine.
Obviously the authors were in communication with each other while writing. /s
After reading this article, Kirk has a very clearly superficial understanding of the 14th amendment. Some people here may have heard along the way something along the lines of "we're a collection of soverign states" or some bullshit like that. And that mostly true pre-14th amendment, the 14th amendment was the thing that changed that.
Remember, we fought a civil war and the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendment are the ramifications of that war. The 13th answered, finally, the whole 3/5th comprimise thing that the Constitution indicated that Congress was supposed to fix sometime in 1808. Obviously "kicking the can" has been a tradition of Congress for quite some time.
provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article
And the 15th amendment grants Congress the power to slap State laws that try to enforce themselves via racial pretexts. Remember, Congress cannot directly legislate elections with the exceptions that are carved out in the Constitution. State's like to pass all manner of laws with justifications like "it's for the children" or whatever and the entire point of Courts looking at things Congress brings to bear is to check for "pretextual" arguments. Pretextual arguments being ones that "we say it's for this purpose, but in reality it is for this other purpose that we're not allowed to pass laws on".
Case in point, Tennessee's recent "Pride parade ban" law that was supposed to be "for the safety of the children" was tossed out as pretextual and no Federal Judge could find in the text how the law wouldn't be abused to rob people of their first amendment right and there were lots of "clues" that robbing a particular group of people of their free speech was the actual intent. Remember, we've got 200+ years of history of States saying one thing and actually doing the other, it's not a recent invention and something the Federal Courts have to always be on the look out for.
So that out of the way the 14th amendment changes fundamentally how the actual law is applied to people. Which is interesting that Kirk is all about changing it because it's literally the 14th Immunities clause that was used in McDonald v. City of Chicago to strengthen the 2nd amendment's right to gun ownership. So, for all the folks saying we need to review the 2nd if we're going to review the 14th, no worries, because that would become automatic in a review of the 14th since SCOTUS has now connected the two.
The 14th amendment is so litigated because it fundamentally changes how the US operates. It empowers the Federal government while depowers the States, when you take the context of the Civil War into account, the reason why Congress thought the 14th was a good idea becomes clearer.
So the vast litigation of the 14th is to ask the question, "How much power did the 14th hand over to the Federal government and remove from the States?" And we're still answering the multitude of questions coming from that. So Kirk wondering why so much gets answered by "the 14th Amendment!" is because he lacks understanding what the 14th does and why it was pitched in the first place.
There's always going to be a power struggle between Federal and State governments. For the first part of the US, deferrence was given to the States and it resulted in a war. So to fix that issue and hopefully prevent yet another war, that giving the States benefit of the doubt was "slightly" removed and penalities for those trying to "overthrow" the Federal system were explicitly enumerated. Because, those at the time understood, our form of government has this power struggle between Federal and State and that one civil war wouldn't be the end of that struggle.
Does the 14th answer all the problems with that struggle? No, of course not. But it puts the ball in the Federal government's hands first to solve it going forward. Because putting it first in the various States to solve....well it just didn't quite work out the way we had all hoped. And of course, over the course of history we've had various flavors of Judges who want to apply that wisdom to various cases to various degrees. The power struggle between Federal and State still exists, the entire point it to have an avenue to resolve it without a need for breaking out the horses and cannons.
Now I say all of this and let's all take a quick look around to see how well that's going. Yeap. That's why Judges matter. But back to the subject at hand, Kirk is trying to read the 14th without any context or understanding of application, which that's what we would expect from a fifth grader reading it for the first time. So we all should treat Kirk's opinion as such.
Yes, well you know the framers of the Constitution obviously didn't mean any of that. All those historical facts are just alternative facts that are getting in my way of reality. Historical context is just a Marxist plot to make America socialist and something about ANTIFA and illegal immigrants. /s
Failed College Dropout Pretends to be Constitution Expert
Oh we're going to parse the language of the constitution mow? Let's start with the 2nd amendment.
Oh the constitution is Marxist now? Ok let’s rewrite it then. Starting from the top and definitely don’t skip #2.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
We didn't have, and the founding fathers didn't want, a standing army. Too many French & English kings used them to suppress their people.
I’ve seen the memes of this guy, but never saw a video of him until now. The memes nailed his face to head ratio perfectly.
Stop Streisand effecting these morons
The only time I want to see this man is when he's affected by tiny face syndrome.
So all the time?
Does anyone else just lock onto the panicked and insecure look these guys carry in their eyes when they spout this absolute bullshit? This guy, Ben Shapiro, and others, ALL get this same insane stare like their head is going to explode when they go on these rants that make zero sense. The darting eyes, constant shuffling in posture, and shaky voice that sounds like it will crack from stress at any moment. It's so pathetic and creepy, I almost feel bad haha
Is it just me or does he look like someone drew a derpy face on a balloon and let out half the air?
They say every time someone sees his face for the first time, it gets .000000001% smaller.
My first thought was "where the fuck is his chin?". Your description is spot on.
Never even heard of this guy.
“Charlie Kirk rages….”
Good.
Holy forehead Batman!
He really is odd looking, isn't he.