- Joined
- Jun 22, 2019
- Messages
- 14,992
- Reaction score
- 12,381
- Location
- Oregon's High Desert
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
LOL Making things better or more sensible, or more supportive of our goal of forming a more perfect union isn't seeking a socialist utopia. Those don't exist. I don't seek what is impossible.Then maybe you should stop seeking the perfect socialist utopia that you've been seeking.
Just curious, what does a "more perfect union" look like. When are we going to stop screwing around with the people of this country and start allowing them to enjoy THEIR life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. We are not all the same, one thing that is the same about us is, we all have different opinions, and you know, that's okay. It stops being okay when one faction tries to force their opinion on the masses at whole, it doesn't matter what faction you belong to, just leave the people alone.LOL Making things better or more sensible, or more supportive of our goal of forming a more perfect union isn't seeking a socialist utopia. Those don't exist. I don't seek what is impossible.
It's introducing the reason for and concept of the following ruleset.quote
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.end quote
Do you know why its the First 52 Words of the United States Constitution ?
Then maybe you should stop seeking the perfect socialist utopia that you've been seeking.
The real socialists, you're seeking, kill those people, NO QUESTIONS ASKED. Go try your bullshit under Putin, and see what happens. I dare you. You'll be running back to us conservatives so ****ing fast it'll snap your neck. Your ideas are foolish stupidity to say the least.As opposed to actively establishing RW socialism to require conformity to the Rep/cons version of utopia by taking away others' rights to have only rights consistent with the RW idealism of heterosexual, misogynist, xenophobic, racist white males.
What kind of crap is that... We don't live under Putin!!!The real socialists, you're seeking, kill those people, NO QUESTIONS ASKED. Go try your bullshit under Putin, and see what happens. I dare you. You'll be running back to us conservatives so ****ing fast it'll snap your neck. Your ideas are foolish stupidity to say the least.
You might want to revisit the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and find out just who opposed this legislation, the same goes with the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Here's a clue, it was the democrats on both accounts. One thing that is held true of the liberal left, project their bigotry on the opposing party and convince the people that it wasn't them that did this but the, as you put it, Right Wing White people. It seems that you have bought into this, hook, line and sinker. It wasn't the Right Wing White people that wanted slavery, in fact most who were opposed to slavery were Right Wing White people. Jim Crow laws were enacted by the Southern Democrats or as they were called Dixiecrats, to suppress the back votes in the south and enforce a new brand of slavery. Most Right Wing White people will tell you that the opening words of the preamble "WE the PEOPLE" mean just that, ALL PEOPLE, and it doesn't matter what color you are. So, I don't know what Reality you are living under, but your post is full of misconceptions.What kind of crap is that... We don't live under Putin!!!
------
Right Wing white people DO NOT, AND WILL NOT dictate over America nor American Society... We've endured 100's of years of that savagery and barbarism and all its racist ignorance.
White Right Wing White People DON'T OWN AMERICA... the sooner white people get that through their heads, the sooner they will stop trying to act like they "Own" America.
These Right Wingers, fight against THE PREAMBLE, simply because they can't make it "be only for white people". They had no problem with in during the 100's of years of Slavery when they dominated everything, they had no problem with it, during the 100 yrs of Jim Crow, when all the Bastardizations of Laws was done to support Racism's Segregation, and Business had no problem with it, when they could suck up as much government assistance funds and use them to benefit "white's only"...
NOW, people know those PRINCIPLES AND VALUES stand for All of America and All of America's Society.... So Now, the Right Winger want to say the Preamble is meaningless, only because its not longer considered to push the Constitutional backed Legislation to be just for white people.
You might want to acknowledge the Democratic Party of TODAY ..... is NOT the same Right Winger Segregationist of the Past. maybe you should vist the Goldwater, Nixon and Reagan Republicanims... to see and know that the Racist, Segregationist, Anti Government Types and Anti Immigration Types are REPUBLICANS.You might want to revisit the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and find out just who opposed this legislation, the same goes with the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Here's a clue, it was the democrats on both accounts. One thing that is held true of the liberal left, project their bigotry on the opposing party and convince the people that it wasn't them that did this but the, as you put it, Right Wing White people. It seems that you have bought into this, hook, line and sinker. It wasn't the Right Wing White people that wanted slavery, in fact most who were opposed to slavery were Right Wing White people. Jim Crow laws were enacted by the Southern Democrats or as they were called Dixiecrats, to suppress the back votes in the south and enforce a new brand of slavery. Most Right Wing White people will tell you that the opening words of the preamble "WE the PEOPLE" mean just that, ALL PEOPLE, and it doesn't matter what color you are. So, I don't know what Reality you are living under, but your post is full of misconceptions.
Our Constitution has come along way since its inception, 27 amendments have been added to correct oversights and we are not done yet.
The more "white people" in general face and speak out of these fact, the better America will be...You might want to acknowledge the Democratic Party of TODAY ..... is NOT the same Right Winger Segregationist of the Past. maybe you should vist the Goldwater, Nixon and Reagan Republicanims... to see and know that the Racist, Segregationist, Anti Government Types and Anti Immigration Types are REPUBLICANS.
It would be to your benefit to follow history with more detail, not try and ignore the Political Flip, to not acknowledge the Racial makeup of Today's Republicans, Right slanted Libertarians and Right slanted Independents.
- We've gone over this 100 times in this Forum... people simply don't keep up... and some have selective amnesia, and some try to gloss over facts they don't want to acknowledge.
Everyone should know, the DIXIECRATS were SEGREGATIONIST..... They despised the Party of Lincoln... After the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, they no longer wanted to be Democrats, because President Lyndon B. Johnson passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act and LBJ was a Democrat, and LBJ passed the Voting Rights Act and the Immigration Act of 1965 and put a Black Man on The Supreme Court.
Segregationist White People "went stone crazy'''...!!!! they tried every means they could to roll back Civil Right, one by trying to infiltrate the Republican Party, and the NON SEGREGATIONIST dominated the Democrat Party once the Southern White Segregationist began Voting Republican, and the Northern Right White Racist and MidWestern Racist began voting Republican.
Liberal Minded People who embrace Multiracial, Multiethnic and Multicultural America, became the Party of The Democrats, which still exist this very day.
White Segregationist Racist have tried every trick they can conjure up to push White Nationalism... They hated the 1965 Immigration Act, which is why to this very day after their attacks, we no longer have the Immigration Reforms that could have built onto the 1965 Immigration Act... Becasue WHITE PEOPLE did not want to see NON WHITE PEOPLE have the same IMMIGRATION RIGHTS... as white people form countries that are predominantly with white people.
America's biggest problem has always been (Some) "White People".... and Their Racism....
America's Values and Principle within THE PREAMBLE
is not a problem and has been and is a good thing!!
The problem is... created by WHITE PEOPLE who do not want it to apply to and for "All American People'
-------------------------
Within the American White Race, unfortunately they have such vile within (A SEGMENT OF) their Race, until the segment of Racist Bigots, Attack the U.S. Capitol, because Racist and Bigoted Whites Could Not steal and hijack and complete their attempted Coup D'etat
These White Racist, have a long history of Attacking Anything and Everything That has anything to do with supporting Equality of Citizen as Person, who is Individual.
No, they are the arguments made by those explaining to voters just what the Constitution means and how it is supposed to work, in order to convince the voters to support it. There's a reason why the Federalist Papers are quoted in Supreme Court opinions regularly.The Federalist papers are not the Constitution.
Yup, the Preamble explains what the purposes of the Constitution is, and the rest of the Constitution lays out how those purposes are to be accomplished.It's introducing the reason for and concept of the following ruleset.
It's damn near the dictionary definition of what "preamble" means.
You are discussing nothing. Hence his post.We could discuss the current war on potatoes?
You might want to acknowledge the Democratic Party of TODAY ..... is NOT the same Right Winger Segregationist of the Past. maybe you should vist the Goldwater, Nixon and Reagan Republicanims... to see and know that the Racist, Segregationist, Anti Government Types and Anti Immigration Types are REPUBLICANS.
It would be to your benefit to follow history with more detail, not try and ignore the Political Flip, to not acknowledge the Racial makeup of Today's Republicans, Right slanted Libertarians and Right slanted Independents.
- We've gone over this 100 times in this Forum... people simply don't keep up... and some have selective amnesia, and some try to gloss over facts they don't want to acknowledge.
Everyone should know, the DIXIECRATS were SEGREGATIONIST..... They despised the Party of Lincoln... After the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, they no longer wanted to be Democrats, because President Lyndon B. Johnson passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act and LBJ was a Democrat, and LBJ passed the Voting Rights Act and the Immigration Act of 1965 and put a Black Man on The Supreme Court.
Segregationist White People "went stone crazy'''...!!!! they tried every means they could to roll back Civil Right, one by trying to infiltrate the Republican Party, and the NON SEGREGATIONIST dominated the Democrat Party once the Southern White Segregationist began Voting Republican, and the Northern Right White Racist and MidWestern Racist began voting Republican.
Liberal Minded People who embrace Multiracial, Multiethnic and Multicultural America, became the Party of The Democrats, which still exist this very day.
White Segregationist Racist have tried every trick they can conjure up to push White Nationalism... They hated the 1965 Immigration Act, which is why to this very day after their attacks, we no longer have the Immigration Reforms that could have built onto the 1965 Immigration Act... Becasue WHITE PEOPLE did not want to see NON WHITE PEOPLE have the same IMMIGRATION RIGHTS... as white people form countries that are predominantly with white people.
America's biggest problem has always been (Some) "White People".... and Their Racism....
America's Values and Principle within THE PREAMBLE
is not a problem and has been and is a good thing!!
The problem is... created by WHITE PEOPLE who do not want it to apply to and for "All American People'
-------------------------
Within the American White Race, unfortunately they have such vile within (A SEGMENT OF) their Race, until the segment of Racist Bigots, Attack the U.S. Capitol, because Racist and Bigoted Whites Could Not steal and hijack and complete their attempted Coup D'etat
These White Racist, have a long history of Attacking Anything and Everything That has anything to do with supporting Equality of Citizen as Person, who is Individual.
Perhaps worded a little strongly, but essentially correct. The "more perfect union" means "more perfect than under the Articles of Confederation."
True, the Preamble is not a legally binding statement. What it is, IMHO, is the finest short statement of the fundamental purposes of government in history.
Nope, not even. True, the Constitution was written entirely in secret, and with good reason. But it was ratified in the full light of day, with often long and rancorous public debate. And while it required nine of the thirteen states to ratify it for it to go into effect, in each state the question was decided by a simple majority vote of the delegates elected to the ratification conventions.
No, it is not. In a democracy, whatever the majority wants it gets--the less that is true, the less of a democracy that system of government is. What the Constitution creates is a constitutional federal democratic republic ("republic" defined as any system that mixes the three "pure" forms of government--monarchical, aristocratic, and democratic--into a Rube Goldberg device).
It doesn't matter whether it's direct or representative, a democracy is a system where the majority gets what it wants. To the extent that a system has institutions and procedures in place to prevent that, it isn't democratic. And the Constitution (and the state constitutions) are full of them.You're pretending that I am speaking of democracy as a pure or direct democracy. I am not. I said "representative" democracy. Which is definitively the American form of a federalist republic. The American federalist republic is a representative democracy.
Nope, it doesn't, I have no problem envisioning a republic with a monarch as the chief executive. If we passed an amendment making the presidency a life-long, inherited position--a king--and left everything else the same, we'd still be a republic.The leanest definition of a republic specifically excludes monarchical.
< Sigh > Finally, you get to your point. You could've just stated this in post #1 without all the pointless verbosity - there apparently to give some sort of credence or weight to your point (which it doesn't).
How in the world do you get a mutable Constitution from the phrase "to make a more perfect union?"
And the nonsense that this means (from your table) "to make everything in our country as perfect as possible" is sheer, unadulterated BS.
This is classic progressive tripe - just another in a long, sad history of progressives trying to undermine the Constitution so they can replace it with something more to their liking.
Not buying it for one second.
No one is selling you anything, The Document existed long before you existed, and maybe before your ancestry ever came to this country, so, your opinion's about the documents are your choice, but it does not change the words of the documents, nor what the scholars through history have extracted and associated to the principles and values.< Sigh > Finally, you get to your point. You could've just stated this in post #1 without all the pointless verbosity - there apparently to give some sort of credence or weight to your point (which it doesn't).
How in the world do you get a mutable Constitution from the phrase "to make a more perfect union?"
And the nonsense that this means (from your table) "to make everything in our country as perfect as possible" is sheer, unadulterated BS.
This is classic progressive tripe - just another in a long, sad history of progressives trying to undermine the Constitution so they can replace it with something more to their liking.
Not buying it for one second.
LOL Making things better or more sensible, or more supportive of our goal of forming a more perfect union isn't seeking a socialist utopia. Those don't exist. I don't seek what is impossible.
SEE Post # 83 from another Thread
It's about "THE CONSTITUTION" and the fact that The Constitution, makes no mention, no reference, no suggestion, and no constitutional provision for Political Parties.Why, what is in it that is pertinent in any way ?
It's about "THE CONSTITUTION" and the fact that The Constitution, makes no mention, no reference, no suggestion, and no constitutional provision for Political Parties.
People have been "groomed and indoctrinated" to think it has to be a standard to have Political Parties... IF they had not been groomed and indoctrinated, we would not see people claiming to be a member of "any" Political Party (Gang).Has anyone stated that it does ?
People have been "groomed and indoctrinated" to think it has to be a standard to have Political Parties... IF they had not been groomed and indoctrinated, we would not see people claiming to be a member of "any" Political Party (Gang).
I would take Education to Re-Educate People, of the True and Real Divisiveness which is Political Parties.
In America, its ONE PERSON, ONE VOTE... IF, we had a more "Educated Population" and especially in "Civics of American Representative Democracy" who actually were groomed and educated to "Understand legislation", WITHIN a Governing System that Governs by and through Regulatory Governance. People would know more and be better equipped with knowledge and understanding enough not only to know how to Choose elected representatives; people would know how to hold State Representative, both In-State and In-Federal Congress to Account for Themselves and Stand Responsible to The Majority and Minority Their District is Comprised of, ONLY then would State Representative know how to be better at Crafting Legislation.
The same is True for "Senators" - Every State is comprised of People who have a Majority Consensus and a Minority Consensus, and NO Senator can do the Job, without Respect for both the Majority Consensus and the Minority Consensue within their respective State.
We would also, NOT HAVE a Supreme Court with any Judges claiming themselves Democrat or Republican, they would be simply Judgest dealing with the Constitution and the Laws of The Land. Their Decision would deal with how the their summary impacts both the Majority Consensus and the Minority Consensue of Citizens within any given District and any given State...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?