CPAC: Speaker pledges end of American democracy to wild applause.

/—-/ India used to be a democracy, but the new leader is eliminating democratic policies.
You could have reminded him that there are elements of Democracy in every nation but whether or not it is called a "Democratic Nation" depends upon the level/amount of Democratic principles each nation wields. If you compare the US with Sweden then I wouldn't think of the US as a Democratic Nation but if you compare the US with North Korea then I would. Actually, the US is not internationally considered a full Democracy in any case.
 
The words AR-15, Semi-automatic handgun, high capacity magazine, or even shotgun do not appear anywhere in the Constitution either.
So are you saying these things aren't covered by The Second Amendment?
According your own logic the only "arms" covered by the 2A should be flintlocks.
The 2nd refers to arms. Back then regular people, who had the money, owned artillery, and sloops of war.

No government agent tried to stop them.

Why is that?
 
They couldn't bear them even if they wanted to?
Ummm. That's the point. When the 2nd was written no government agent ever tried to disarm ANYONE. They didn't even try to take away their artillery.
 
We stopped being a Republic in 1913. It took time, a couple of amendments and abuse of the fiat currency to acclimate us to it.
Republic is the FORM of our government. It operates FUNCTION under Democratic ideals.
 
The words AR-15, Semi-automatic handgun, high capacity magazine, or even shotgun do not appear anywhere in the Constitution either.
So are you saying these things aren't covered by The Second Amendment?
According your own logic the only "arms" covered by the 2A should be flintlocks.
/——/ Uhhh no. No specific type of “Arms” was mentioned in the 2nd amendment.
 
/——/ Uhhh no. No specific type of “Arms” was mentioned in the 2nd amendment.
Which would naturally infer " armaments of the day " which went onto further stipulate in a well -regimented militia ( aka today's National Guard ) .. Which is why they even bothered with that amendment. It wasn't about civilians at all.but national defense because there was no federal army at the time.
 
Which would naturally infer " armaments of the day " which went onto further stipulate in a well -regimented militia ( aka today's National Guard ) .. Which is why they even bothered with that amendment. It wasn't about civilians at all.but national defense because there was no federal army at the time.
/——/ Nope. Wrong again. Since the first gun was made there was a rush to make them better. Google the Puckle gun, and learn something,
 
Which would naturally infer " armaments of the day " which went onto further stipulate in a well -regimented militia ( aka today's National Guard ) .. Which is why they even bothered with that amendment. It wasn't about civilians at all.but national defense because there was no federal army at the time.
Yes. I only brought up 2A in reference to all of this "strict constitutionalist" bullshit.
MAGAt's seem to love to supposedly "quote" the Constitution and pretend to be literalists.....until of course you quote some part that LITERALLY doesn't even say what they imagine it does, then it's "b-but that's not what it MEANS!"
 
Conservative activist Jack Posobiec joyfully hailed the “end of democracy” at the Conservative Political Action Conference, further emphasizing Republicans’ apparent desire to completely overthrow America as we know it.



Now MAGA are not even hiding their contempt for our democratic institutions.

As Maya Angelou said, “When someone shows you who they are, believe them.”

Note: I know one of the first posts from a MAGA will be we are not a democracy. Yes, that is the exact sentiment I would expect from someone who doesn't care if our democratic institutions are eliminated.

This is a very sad commentary on the complete ruination of conservative thought.
Only sad when mis-reported.
It has totally other origins , and they are juvenille on both sides
1713726394194.png
 
I already know about it. Basically it was the forerunner of the machine gun
Once again.a weapon of war , not meant for civilian use.
/——/ All civilian weapons were first designed for warfare. DERP.
Yes. I only brought up 2A in reference to all of this "strict constitutionalist" bullshit.
MAGAt's seem to love to supposedly "quote" the Constitution and pretend to be literalists.....until of course you quote some part that LITERALLY doesn't even say what they imagine it does, then it's "b-but that's not what it MEANS!"
/----/ Example please.
 
Which would naturally infer " armaments of the day " which went onto further stipulate in a well -regimented militia ( aka today's National Guard ) .. Which is why they even bothered with that amendment. It wasn't about civilians at all.but national defense because there was no federal army at the time.
/----/ "( aka today's National Guard )" NOPE. that's your gun-grabbing opinion.

"Many in the Founding generation believed that governments are prone to use soldiers to oppress the people. English history suggested that this risk could be controlled by permitting the government to raise armies (consisting of full-time paid troops) only when needed to fight foreign adversaries. For other purposes, such as responding to sudden invasions or other emergencies, the government could rely on a militia that consisted of ordinary civilians who supplied their own weapons and received some part-time, unpaid military training."
The Second Amendment conceded nothing to the Anti-Federalists’ desire to sharply curtail the military power of the federal government, which would have required substantial changes in the original Constitution.
Yet the Amendment was easily accepted because of widespread agreement that the federal government should not have the power to infringe the right of the people to keep and bear arms, any more than it should have the power to abridge the freedom of speech or prohibit the free exercise of religion.
the Supreme Court invalidated a federal law that forbade nearly all civilians from possessing handguns in the nation’s capital. A 5–4 majority ruled that the language and history of the Second Amendment showed that it protects a private right of individuals to have arms for their own defense, not a right of the states to maintain a militia.
 
not to mention the 2nd A is clear its specifically for weapons of war,,
/----/ They were the same weapons.
Furthermore, eighteenth century civilians routinely kept at home the very same weapons they would need if called to serve in the militia, while modern soldiers are equipped with weapons that differ significantly from those generally thought appropriate for civilian uses. Civilians no longer expect to use their household weapons for militia duty, although they still keep and bear arms to defend against common criminals (as well as for hunting and other forms of recreation).
 
Conservative activist Jack Posobiec joyfully hailed the “end of democracy” at the Conservative Political Action Conference, further emphasizing Republicans’ apparent desire to completely overthrow America as we know it.



Now MAGA are not even hiding their contempt for our democratic institutions.

As Maya Angelou said, “When someone shows you who they are, believe them.”

Note: I know one of the first posts from a MAGA will be we are not a democracy. Yes, that is the exact sentiment I would expect from someone who doesn't care if our democratic institutions are eliminated.

This is a very sad commentary on the complete ruination of conservative thought.
I swear leftists are leftists partially because they are incapable of understanding anything in its full context, they have lost all ability for independent thinking, critical analysis, intellectual honesty or the use of metaphors or humor as illustration. This New Republic article underscores all that beautifully.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top