From ‘Protect Democracy’ to ‘Purge the Constitution’ in 6 Months

Doc7505

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
23,414
Reaction score
41,649
Points
2,430

From ‘Protect Democracy’ to ‘Purge the Constitution’ in 6 Months

16 Aug 2025 ~~ By Jeff Childers
1755455190144.webp
Without a new Constitution? I just want to stop right here, just for a moment, and point out how Democrats spent the last four years —right up to November, 2024— practically writing songs about how important it was to protect our wonderful democracy.
Now, six months later, they want to throw it out and start over.
“There’s no ideal democracy out there in the world,” the author generously allowed. “But I think, it’s fair to say that our system is not really democratic, as much as it might purport to be one.”
It only took six months. Now, the author thinks America should delete half of Congress, demolish and rebuild the Supreme Court, and prune several branches from the Constitution, like lopping off the Electoral College. In other words, the hysterical screed was nothing new; just the usual regurgitated progressive talking points, but repackaged for post-pandemic audiences (with short memories) in intellectual-sounding word salad, and this time, under the banner of it’s not even a democracy anyways.
And what about that subheadline: the left can’t win without a new Constititution? They’re not even pretending it’s about making things fair or more democratic. It’s just about winning.
~Stop~
The two moronic authors of this banana-republic manifesto were no random Twitter trolls. They are two classic deep staters, with approved Ivy League credentials, who should know better. Steven Simon was described as holding “senior positions in the State Department and at the National Security Council.” And Jonathan Stevenson “served on the National Security Council staff during the Obama administration.”
The authors complained at length about Trump’s national guard deployments, especially in LA, casting them as terrifying encroachments of military force into domestic situations. Only at the op-ed’s tail end, and in passing, did they mention that the Ninth Circuit has upheld the legality of the President’s orders. Oh, that. Just never mind.
~Stop~
Citing treasonous former Joint Chiefs Chairman Milley as a military exemplar should have been instantly disqualifying. It is like complaining about OnlyFans and virtual prostitution, then waxing nostalgic for virtuous crime-fighting pioneers like Jack the Ripper. Not a good look.
Between the two op-eds, over a span of 48 hours, the Times promoted a soft call for a military coup, and pushed a piece seriously arguing that the Constitution and the U.S. Senate prevent the United States from achieving “real” democracy. To call these things bad ideas does violence to the notion that ideas can be bad.
The funniest part is that at the same time, the Times is complaining to anyone who’ll listen about Trump’s authoritarianism. But who, pray tell, is actually advocating for scrapping the Constitution and putting the military in charge?

Commentary:
In truth, Democrats are no longer the Democrats of yesteryear. They’ve completely been infiltrated and taken over by the CPUSA masked as Democrats for a Socialist America. Their aim is to shape America into their image of a Socialist Marxist Society. Just ask Zorhan Mamdani. Americans are now asking questions of the “Democrats” relating to their attitude against high crime, immigration, and the Dem’s willingness to accept Hamas terrorism and genocide over Israel.
Marxist know that they cannot take the U.S. by force but only from within.
Changing the Constitution in their favor is just one more step they would like to accomplish.
 
Last edited:
Ross Douthat: Osita Nwanevu, welcome to “Interesting Times.”

Osita Nwanevu: Thanks for having me.

Douthat: We’re going to talk about how radical ideas and radical critiques from the left might end up being very influential in Democratic Party politics going forward. But before we get there, I want to go back to the last election, which the Democrats had basically presented themselves as defenders of our democracy against the threat of authoritarianism, fascism, or at the very least, a dangerous kind of populism.

And what you saw in 2024 was the failure of that argument, because in the end, Donald Trump didn’t just win the Electoral college, he won the popular vote. Our democracy as it exists today voted for him. So to start, could you talk a little bit about that Democratic message and why, from your perspective, it failed?

Nwanevu: Sure thing. So I think many voters went to the polls in November understanding the election as being a referendum on democracy in precisely that way. I think the people thought that they were being asked to judge, on one hand, a set of abstract ideals that their civics teacher might have told them was important in high school or grade school; on the other, the price of groceries and the cost of living.

I think a lot of Americans looked at that choice and they said: well, hell, I’m going to go with my own economic well-being — the hope, which I think was a misguided hope, that Donald Trump’s going to improve conditions within the economy. And so the abstractions that Democrats ran on, the conception of democracy that they put forward, wasn’t compelling for a lot of different reasons.

Early last year, Gallup did a poll where they found that more than 70 percent of Americans didn’t believe that democratic institutions were functioning properly. So when Democrats came out and said that our democracy needs to be protected and saved, I think a lot of Americans doubted whether they had a functional democracy to save to begin with.

 
More right-wing garbage,

too funny

and who btw is this:auiqs.jpg::
Spurwing Plover
1 day ago

The UN/CFR/Globalists want to totally replace the U.S. Constitution with various UN Treaties and Accords we already know that Democrat/Traitors like Kerry who signed the Small Arms Control Treaty for Democrat/Traitor Obama and the Paris Accord plus the rest of the Globalists Plans
 
Ross Douthat: Osita Nwanevu, welcome to “Interesting Times.”

Osita Nwanevu: Thanks for having me.

Douthat: We’re going to talk about how radical ideas and radical critiques from the left might end up being very influential in Democratic Party politics going forward. But before we get there, I want to go back to the last election, which the Democrats had basically presented themselves as defenders of our democracy against the threat of authoritarianism, fascism, or at the very least, a dangerous kind of populism.

And what you saw in 2024 was the failure of that argument, because in the end, Donald Trump didn’t just win the Electoral college, he won the popular vote. Our democracy as it exists today voted for him. So to start, could you talk a little bit about that Democratic message and why, from your perspective, it failed?

Nwanevu: Sure thing. So I think many voters went to the polls in November understanding the election as being a referendum on democracy in precisely that way. I think the people thought that they were being asked to judge, on one hand, a set of abstract ideals that their civics teacher might have told them was important in high school or grade school; on the other, the price of groceries and the cost of living.

I think a lot of Americans looked at that choice and they said: well, hell, I’m going to go with my own economic well-being — the hope, which I think was a misguided hope, that Donald Trump’s going to improve conditions within the economy. And so the abstractions that Democrats ran on, the conception of democracy that they put forward, wasn’t compelling for a lot of different reasons.

Early last year, Gallup did a poll where they found that more than 70 percent of Americans didn’t believe that democratic institutions were functioning properly. So when Democrats came out and said that our democracy needs to be protected and saved, I think a lot of Americans doubted whether they had a functional democracy to save to begin with.

I think that is fairy accurate. But right now I bet there are millions who wished they voted for that abstract concept. Because there was more to the Democrats than that abstract concept.

A NEW WAY FORWARD FOR THE MIDDLE CLASS A Plan to Lower Costs and Create an Opportunity Economy
Harris/Walz 2024
 
Last edited:

You believe the USA is a "democracy?"​


We digress:

"From ‘Protect Democracy’ to ‘Purge the Constitution’ in 6 Months" - Sounds like Project 2025
Not really. The founders did believe in generational conventions to change the constitution. There are some issues that exist today that did not in the 1700's.
 
That cut & paste (no link) article is about the view of a nobody Osita Nwanevu -- not the Democrats :auiqs.jpg:

and wtf is this Jeff Childers
:rofl:


and flopping aces website? :laughing0301:
~~~~~~
Read more:
 
Doc7505, stop your idiocy.

You no more speak for MAGA GOP than Jeff Childers for the Democrats.

Look up 'hubris' and see your squirrel face picture next to it.
 

From ‘Protect Democracy’ to ‘Purge the Constitution’ in 6 Months

16 Aug 2025 ~~ By Jeff Childers
Without a new Constitution? I just want to stop right here, just for a moment, and point out how Democrats spent the last four years —right up to November, 2024— practically writing songs about how important it was to protect our wonderful democracy.
Now, six months later, they want to throw it out and start over.
“There’s no ideal democracy out there in the world,” the author generously allowed. “But I think, it’s fair to say that our system is not really democratic, as much as it might purport to be one.”
It only took six months. Now, the author thinks America should delete half of Congress, demolish and rebuild the Supreme Court, and prune several branches from the Constitution, like lopping off the Electoral College. In other words, the hysterical screed was nothing new; just the usual regurgitated progressive talking points, but repackaged for post-pandemic audiences (with short memories) in intellectual-sounding word salad, and this time, under the banner of it’s not even a democracy anyways.
And what about that subheadline: the left can’t win without a new Constititution? They’re not even pretending it’s about making things fair or more democratic. It’s just about winning.
~Stop~
The two moronic authors of this banana-republic manifesto were no random Twitter trolls. They are two classic deep staters, with approved Ivy League credentials, who should know better. Steven Simon was described as holding “senior positions in the State Department and at the National Security Council.” And Jonathan Stevenson “served on the National Security Council staff during the Obama administration.”
The authors complained at length about Trump’s national guard deployments, especially in LA, casting them as terrifying encroachments of military force into domestic situations. Only at the op-ed’s tail end, and in passing, did they mention that the Ninth Circuit has upheld the legality of the President’s orders. Oh, that. Just never mind.
~Stop~
Citing treasonous former Joint Chiefs Chairman Milley as a military exemplar should have been instantly disqualifying. It is like complaining about OnlyFans and virtual prostitution, then waxing nostalgic for virtuous crime-fighting pioneers like Jack the Ripper. Not a good look.
Between the two op-eds, over a span of 48 hours, the Times promoted a soft call for a military coup, and pushed a piece seriously arguing that the Constitution and the U.S. Senate prevent the United States from achieving “real” democracy. To call these things bad ideas does violence to the notion that ideas can be bad.
The funniest part is that at the same time, the Times is complaining to anyone who’ll listen about Trump’s authoritarianism. But who, pray tell, is actually advocating for scrapping the Constitution and putting the military in charge?

Commentary:
In truth, Democrats are no longer the Democrats of yesteryear. They’ve completely been infiltrated and taken over by the CPUSA masked as Democrats for a Socialist America. Their aim is to shape America into their image of a Socialist Marxist Society. Just ask Zorhan Mamdani. Americans are now asking questions of the “Democrats” relating to their attitude against high crime, immigration, and the Dem’s willingness to accept Hamas terrorism and genocide over Israel.
Marxist know that they cannot take the U.S. by force but only from within.
Changing the Constitution in their favor is just one more step they would like to accomplish.

What democracy? The right get a massive unfair advantage.

I changed computers and I don't have the file that shows how many votes the Reps and Dems got in the Senate elections for the last three cycles (ie, when every seat has been contested) but it basically shows the Dems with a HUGE majority of votes, and yet the Reps often get more than 50 seats in the Senate.

Trump's victory this time around was the first time since the 1980s that a non-incumbent Republican had won the popular vote in a presidential election, but both Trump and Bush winning with LESS VOTES than their opposition. The Democrats cannot do that, it's impossible, the system is so bent towards the Republicans.
 
15th post
democracy is mob rule which is why we are a Republic
We have neither democracy nor a republic. For decades we have a fascist oligarchy. The people don't control the government, special interests, especially those in Tel Aviv, control the government.
 
Back
Top Bottom