>The presidency is a sham office
I disagree. GOvernment is necessary, but big government is not. Government, and law and order, is quite literally the only thing that separates us from other animals save for our rationality. Anyone who doesn’t believe so in the slightest has discounted the entire animal kingdom as somehow less advanced or capable than humans. Humans have set themselves in such a position that we’re very likely to believe we’re the best animal on the planet, because somehow our intelligence and rationalization skills puts us above other animals. It’s simply not the case. Separated from our laws, order, government, and our fancy toys we’re the worst animal of all mammals. We cannot do anything without wanting to make our situation easier with even the simplest engineering. Every other animal already has their capabilities ready, and they understand survival much more than us, and are willing to do very stupid things for the sake of that survival. We hesitate, overthink, falter, and rely on what we can create to get us out of jams. We must rely on our few defining factors in order to stay in our dominant position.
And I don’t know about you, but I’d like to stay in that dominant position. And the system, on paper and at its core, that is set for the United States is by far the best system ever produced by man for governance and rule of law.
Our problem is corruption, overreach, and no oversight. If you ensure overreach cannot occur because it’s an action of the corrupt, and you ensure that you have neither corruption nor overreach because your government oversight is extremely effective, then you solve the issue. Easy on paper; now you need to put it into practice. Unfortunately, the only way to do so without killing people off in droves is electing them out. We have the tools to do that, but nobody wants to go through the effort to get what they desire. Our citizens have become lazy and inefficient when it comes to the most important positions that they alone have the control of who stays and who does not.
Civic duties and democratic-republic responsibilities are given to the citizen for the reason. So they have control of who is in the drivers seat for a position that is relevant to their jurisdiction. We need to flex this responsibility, and take upon the responsibilities ourselves if there are hardly the willing. There is so much to fix that we either do it now, or we do it later and it’s much more gruesome.
The presidency is an extremely important position in all of this, that should have more capabilities when it comes to the rest of the immediate government. They have a responsibility against corruption and overreach in our key sectors of government. We need to be completely intolerant of corruption and overreach. The corrupt and overreaching must be swiftly brought on trail for their crimes against the United States and her people. If found guilty, the only punishment is death. And vice versa, if the president is corrupt or overreaching, then they can be brought on charges agreed upon by a fair majority of congress and the house. Impeachment is one thing, but serious problems are death sentences. If neither are willing to budge, the military should then be under the command of the people, after consulting all 4 branches, and getting the approval of at least 2, then the current leadership can be either safely dissolved under threat of a hail of bullets, or executed on the steps of capital hill, with the head general of the USMC taking up responsibilities to ensure we get new politicians voted in, by the people.
There is no need to replace the wheel, or reinvent it. Just realign it.
@TheBridge @Anonymous #372F
Drowning is perceived by the brain as painful because it wants it to be in order to alert you that you need to get air, and that it’s a priority. Your body already does this on a lesser scale when holding your breath for extended periods. You are actually more than capable of breathing in enough air to survive for a whole minute, or more, but the longer you hold your breath the more intense your lungs send the signal to your brain to breath new oxygen. This occurs roughly 3 seconds after breathing and not taking another breath shortly afterward. The sensation is like a pressure, and it almost feels like your lungs are empty.
Many people don’t realize that our bodies and brains play tricks on us to get us to stop doing something, or to make us do something. It takes incredible willpower and training to override.
And thus, of course your lungs, their nerves, want to make liquids and other objects entering the lungs painful. They must. Otherwise, you would do it, not realize it, and do it again. If you’ve ever accidentally swallowed water into your lungs before, and felt that terrible sensation, it’s literally nerves saying, “This isn’t supposed to be here! This is painful! Don’t do this again!” and quickly shutting your epiglottis. You feel it as pain, but in reality no immediate damage has been done. It’s a trick the lungs and brain play to get you to comply.
but the longer you hold your breath the more intense your lungs send the signal to your brain to breath new oxygen
Human breath signalling does not care about oxygen, it cares about building up CO2. The most painless death is oxygen-displacing gas that is not CO2. CO, helium, pure nitrogen, whatever, since it allows you to get rid of CO2 and hence completely bypass “you’re suffocating” signalling. You just black out painlessly and die.
@Psy Key
Ah, but rule of law is as dead as the Code of Hammurabi. The Constitution is dead, and doing the Ghost Dance isn’t going to bring it back. There is no law in Ameri-Kwa. None. There is only Lenin’s old question of “Who, whom?” Who is to have power, and against whom is it to be used?
We had a lawfully, legitimately elected President for the first time since Reagan. The Deep State spent four years outright refusing their lawful orders. Remember all the cars around DC with government plates and #RESIST bumper stickers? I sure do. There were no consequences.
The only questions left are who will impose his will upon whom, and by what means. We are past the “politics” place. We are past the “law” place. As a disinterested observer of history, I can only make educated guesses about what comes next. It isn’t going to be pretty.
@Anonymous #372F
See also, Cloward-Piven Strategy. Rather than attempt to describe it, I merely invite you to put those terms into your favorite search engine. You might want to do it through an anonymizing proxy, though. You never know what will draw the eye of the State upon you.
@IvanSatoru
That’s why the supreme court did the right thing by ending the eviction moratorium. It’s amazing the mental gymnastics twitter users are practicing to make people feel bad at the thought of removing the moratorium and forcing freeloaders to get back to work.
@Humble Oriathan
They refused to hear Texas vs. Pennsylvania. They let the Democrats steal an election and didn’t so much as give them a dirty look. Eviction moratoriums are much too little, much too late, to salvage anything at all, especially their credibility.
@Anonymous #1C62
I wonder why they did not do much in response to the corruption in the federal election system nowadays a la Texas VS. Pennsylvania, though?
@Anonymous #D018
At a guess? Fear that Antifa would firebomb their homes and kill their families, and their Secret Service guards would be ordered to turn their backs and let it happen.
@IvanSatoru
He can’t have been the only one. It takes four Supreme Court justices to agree to hear a case. At least six turned their backs on the American people and the Constitution. This isn’t the first time, either. As Heavy Weapons Guy says, “Is not big surprise.”
@Anonymous #D018 @Anonymous #1C62 @IvanSatoru @Anonymous #1C62
Three points:
1): Cultural standing, conservatives in that environment who get to the top are still in a very liberal* space and thus had to learn to navigate it. Don’t think antifa and assassination, but ostracization They live there, they have to work there and are some way just as much a product of that culture.
2): Strategy. The conservatives on the court have been fearful to cause a backlash on certain issues that would damage the reputation of the court. Thus on such issues like gun control, they don’t act. Or act in the most political correct way possible in attempt to win over some liberal justices in a much lesser victory, see Masterpiece Cakeshope V Colorado.
3): Not everything defeat of the right in the supreme court is due to cowardliness. Trump’s legal efforts to defend himself, even if I agree with some irregularities, were idiotically fought in many ways. Also, in a lot of cases, the way the law is interpreted has already been settled or would be hard to justify even in a conservative framework. That’s just what being a judge is.
*Liberal and left. Oh, the US terminology on this is so fraught with confusion. Though I consider it fair to say that the liberals are, or at least were, the left side of the mainstream United States political spectrum, leftism gaining purchase among a large enough group to require me to differentiate between “the left” and liberal, just so I can keep things clear. When I mean liberal I mean a progressive, managerial environment.
If it’s fear of getting snubbed at all the trendiest cocktail parties in NoVa that prevents them from doing their jobs, and not fear for their lives, that’s ten thousand times worse.
Reputation of the court? What reputation?
There is no law. There is no Constitution. Or rather, these concepts only exist when Leftists can use them as verbal cudgels with which to bludgeon anyone who happens to be one millimeter to the right of Pol Pot. The rest of the time, “well, it’s a living document,” meaning that they’re making it up as they go along and they’re admitting to it with smirks on their faces. There is only power, and the only question left is who is to impose his will upon whom.
*I call them all The Left. No one in the US uses the “liberal” label much any more, not that it’s been a relevant or accurate label for anyone on the political scene in over a century.
@UrbanMysticDee
>be Lenin
>believe the rich is oppressive
>is rich
>after revolution have access to nearly unlimited resources
>conveniently ignore this and pretend to fight on behalf of the workers that he helps oppress