Well, now, it's not like the Founders designed a democratic nation so much as one that ensured the control of a white male sub-1%. So, arguably, all the little fascists are on to something.
And of course the anti-law GOP majority at SCOTUS is ready to do what they must to ensure what can be called the 1,000 Year GOP Reich.
But, but what about the Silent Majority, that imaginary herd of true blue Americans who deserve to determine the fate of the country every four years? Are they to be abandoned in favor of the Selectoral College? How, um, fortuitous.
Many people, right-wingers especially, think that the 3/5ths compromise was some sort of concession on the part of slave states, that the choice was between counting each slave as three-fifths of a person or a whole human being when apportioning representation in Congress. In reality, the choice was between 3/5 and zero, since in all other things slave states did not treat slaves as humans, but property, and property can't vote. The compromise was a concession on the part of free states, and gave the south disproportionate influence in the House and the Electoral College.
Of course, today's bigots wouldn't even allow D.C. to be 3/5ths of a state.
"The Supreme Court held in 1868 that once a state enters the union, the relationship is “indissoluble.” "
Thankfully, the Roberts Court is doing everything it can to completely wipe out the principle of stare decisis and to make precedent a quaint notion. If something happens to Biden and Harris becomes president, I think we'll see a near-instantaneous suit by Texas that it MUST be allowed to secede because they're not going to be under the thumb of that woman! And Roberts and the rest to palm off an opinion that basically says "Sure, we fought war over this question, and this Court has ruled many times on this question, but LOL, why not? Let the new nation of Texas be established!"
"It would have been better if the founders had never been hypocrites. But we should feel deeply grateful for that hypocrisy, because it was the irritant that created the pearl."???
Sort of like Ike Turner demanding gratitude for Miss Tina Turner winning all her Grammies
Anytime someone prefaces an argument by citing the constitution, all I can think is, "What I'm about to hear is complete bullshit from a moron." The biggest tell is in the constitution itself: the 18th amendment prohibited the manufacturing and sale of alcohol in the US, and the 21st amendment, regarding the 18th, is "lol jk." Which means any of this can be changed whenever we want---including the second amendment.
Great idea about the Mall. It's certainly less than ten square miles and not in a current state, so it qualifies. Push it up through White House to Lafayette Square and down around Tidal Basin. Nobody lives there anyway. States are where voters are.
That line of Goldberg's about the Founders being an oyster is incredibly telling as an illustration of what I call the Scalian hermeneutic. Their intention in writing all this shit is of no relevance to what the words actually mean, in the Republican view. They were just irritated, and the words assembled themselves around the irritation. That's the source of their magic power, that nobody composed them.
"...conservatives have been getting away with anti-democratic fuckery for so long they’re inclined to try anything to keep the ball rolling,..." and they're always assisted mightily by 85% of the media.
One thing we can be pretty confident about the Founders: If it helps you get re-elected, they were probably for it.
Americans have been so conditioned by 40 years of Reaganism to think that tax rates are set somewhere in the Constitution that I'm actually kind of grateful there are Senators who are old enough to remember what the US looked like before it left for a long trip on the good ship Libertarian Paradise.
The GOP has almost convinced people its impossible for governments with money to do positive things. But its clear there are a whole lot of D legislators who were waiting for the dam to break and are now not just ready to tax obscene wealth but aren't fazed by the choking sobs of rage on the WSJ Op Ed pages.
but but.... didn't Jesus himself write the constitution and hand it down from on high to Saint Washington at the holy site of Mt. Vernon? And if Jesus is OK with slaves being 3/5 of a person then who are we to argue?
The compromises the northern states made with the southern states has been a poison pill that continually disrupts and threatens the union (see: War, American Civil). In that same spirit, the union should have never taken their boot off the necks of the Confederates, but they did, and within days Lincoln was dead and we have spent the next century and a half fighting with these degenerates. I'm not simply saying "Pennsylvania good, Mississippi bad" (although I can tell you which state I'd rather live in), but the overall battle of abolitionists vs slavers has been the defining characteristic of this country since its inception (genocidal maniacs can be included with the racists). Mitch McConnell may not own people or lead an army into an indigenous settlement, but is he not of their ilk?
Moving on...
"For instance, the Admissions Clause gives Congress the power to admit new states but no power for expulsion or secession."
Weird that the Admissions Clause deals with Admissions. And did anyone else note it is a Clause?
"In that vein, some legal scholars have contended that just as the Constitution provides a way for states to enter but not leave the union, the Constitution provides a way for land to enter the district but not to be given away."
That's a fair point. Never has the federal government given land back to states in any way, shape or form. Definitely there are no former national parks whose land is now controlled by state or county governments or even private enterprises. These folks are legal scholars the same way Lionel Hutz is an attorney or Nick Riviera is a doctor.
The core of Conservative philosophy is that Man is a Creature Fallen from Grace, and requires the instruction of Religion and Domesticity, or as I would put it, fear of God and the love of a good woman, to keep him from being a howling animal in a pit filled with beer cans and pizza boxes.
Well, now, it's not like the Founders designed a democratic nation so much as one that ensured the control of a white male sub-1%. So, arguably, all the little fascists are on to something.
And of course the anti-law GOP majority at SCOTUS is ready to do what they must to ensure what can be called the 1,000 Year GOP Reich.
But, but what about the Silent Majority, that imaginary herd of true blue Americans who deserve to determine the fate of the country every four years? Are they to be abandoned in favor of the Selectoral College? How, um, fortuitous.
Many people, right-wingers especially, think that the 3/5ths compromise was some sort of concession on the part of slave states, that the choice was between counting each slave as three-fifths of a person or a whole human being when apportioning representation in Congress. In reality, the choice was between 3/5 and zero, since in all other things slave states did not treat slaves as humans, but property, and property can't vote. The compromise was a concession on the part of free states, and gave the south disproportionate influence in the House and the Electoral College.
Of course, today's bigots wouldn't even allow D.C. to be 3/5ths of a state.
"The Supreme Court held in 1868 that once a state enters the union, the relationship is “indissoluble.” "
Thankfully, the Roberts Court is doing everything it can to completely wipe out the principle of stare decisis and to make precedent a quaint notion. If something happens to Biden and Harris becomes president, I think we'll see a near-instantaneous suit by Texas that it MUST be allowed to secede because they're not going to be under the thumb of that woman! And Roberts and the rest to palm off an opinion that basically says "Sure, we fought war over this question, and this Court has ruled many times on this question, but LOL, why not? Let the new nation of Texas be established!"
Jesus Fuck, JG:
"It would have been better if the founders had never been hypocrites. But we should feel deeply grateful for that hypocrisy, because it was the irritant that created the pearl."???
Sort of like Ike Turner demanding gratitude for Miss Tina Turner winning all her Grammies
Anytime someone prefaces an argument by citing the constitution, all I can think is, "What I'm about to hear is complete bullshit from a moron." The biggest tell is in the constitution itself: the 18th amendment prohibited the manufacturing and sale of alcohol in the US, and the 21st amendment, regarding the 18th, is "lol jk." Which means any of this can be changed whenever we want---including the second amendment.
Great idea about the Mall. It's certainly less than ten square miles and not in a current state, so it qualifies. Push it up through White House to Lafayette Square and down around Tidal Basin. Nobody lives there anyway. States are where voters are.
That line of Goldberg's about the Founders being an oyster is incredibly telling as an illustration of what I call the Scalian hermeneutic. Their intention in writing all this shit is of no relevance to what the words actually mean, in the Republican view. They were just irritated, and the words assembled themselves around the irritation. That's the source of their magic power, that nobody composed them.
Next they'll argue that since there aren't any slave states left to admit for "balance', D.C. can't become a state.
"...conservatives have been getting away with anti-democratic fuckery for so long they’re inclined to try anything to keep the ball rolling,..." and they're always assisted mightily by 85% of the media.
And Goldberg...meh, what a schlub.
One thing we can be pretty confident about the Founders: If it helps you get re-elected, they were probably for it.
Americans have been so conditioned by 40 years of Reaganism to think that tax rates are set somewhere in the Constitution that I'm actually kind of grateful there are Senators who are old enough to remember what the US looked like before it left for a long trip on the good ship Libertarian Paradise.
The GOP has almost convinced people its impossible for governments with money to do positive things. But its clear there are a whole lot of D legislators who were waiting for the dam to break and are now not just ready to tax obscene wealth but aren't fazed by the choking sobs of rage on the WSJ Op Ed pages.
but but.... didn't Jesus himself write the constitution and hand it down from on high to Saint Washington at the holy site of Mt. Vernon? And if Jesus is OK with slaves being 3/5 of a person then who are we to argue?
Bleah.
"...the Founders would rise from the dead, march on Washington like the Justice League..."
Write it, Roy. It has "OSCAR" potential.
The compromises the northern states made with the southern states has been a poison pill that continually disrupts and threatens the union (see: War, American Civil). In that same spirit, the union should have never taken their boot off the necks of the Confederates, but they did, and within days Lincoln was dead and we have spent the next century and a half fighting with these degenerates. I'm not simply saying "Pennsylvania good, Mississippi bad" (although I can tell you which state I'd rather live in), but the overall battle of abolitionists vs slavers has been the defining characteristic of this country since its inception (genocidal maniacs can be included with the racists). Mitch McConnell may not own people or lead an army into an indigenous settlement, but is he not of their ilk?
Moving on...
"For instance, the Admissions Clause gives Congress the power to admit new states but no power for expulsion or secession."
Weird that the Admissions Clause deals with Admissions. And did anyone else note it is a Clause?
"In that vein, some legal scholars have contended that just as the Constitution provides a way for states to enter but not leave the union, the Constitution provides a way for land to enter the district but not to be given away."
That's a fair point. Never has the federal government given land back to states in any way, shape or form. Definitely there are no former national parks whose land is now controlled by state or county governments or even private enterprises. These folks are legal scholars the same way Lionel Hutz is an attorney or Nick Riviera is a doctor.
The core of Conservative philosophy is that Man is a Creature Fallen from Grace, and requires the instruction of Religion and Domesticity, or as I would put it, fear of God and the love of a good woman, to keep him from being a howling animal in a pit filled with beer cans and pizza boxes.
Pack the court, I says. If FDR considered it, we ought to act on it. That's progress, by jingo! That's progress, I say!