3 ms·
Why do you keep trying to avoid responsibility for what you are directly supporting by trying to blame this "other side" ? It's pathetic. From the perspective
by mindslight 1y ago
Why do you keep trying to avoid responsibility for what you are directly supporting by trying to blame this "other side" ? It's pathetic.
From the perspective of individual rights and liberty, there is only one side that is destroying our country right now. If this "other side" were in power, my quarrel would be with them. But they are not - "your side" is.
- mdhb 1y ago[flagged]
- rayiner 1y agoAre you a partisan? Do you think "emanations from penumbras" is valid constitutional reasoning?
- rayiner 1y ago> From the perspective of individual rights and liberty, there is only one side that is destroying our country right now. "Individual rights" is the tail on the constitution's "democratic republic" dog. It's just as bad when the public's right to regulate individual conduct is incorrectly limited in service of "individual rights," as when individual rights are incorrectly limited in service of expanding government power. > If this "other side" were in power, my quarrel would be with them. But they are not - "your side" is. The other side is in power, insofar as we are living with 60 years of precedents based on "emanations from penumbras." And about 30 years before that sanctioning an unconstitutional administrative state. If we are playing Calvinball, why should I be upset that the government isn't adopting a textualist-originalist view of the suspension clause?