The older I get, the earlier it gets late.

Sunoverbeach wrote:

You guys keep quoting the constitution... I believe that might now be a relic of the past. Our country has an expiration date now. It's over.

At least you got what you wanted though... temporarily anyway. It's all temporary... and you all are cheering for it's demise.

So now that it's going away... what do you hope China replaces it with?

bgz wrote:

"You ain't seen nothing yet," Waters said from the steps of the court. "Women are going to control their bodies no matter how they try and stop us. The hell with the Supreme Court. We will defy them. Women will be in control of their bodies. And if they think Black women are intimidated or afraid, they got another thought coming."


Maxine Waters


Does she get a pass because she's a woman,black,a democrat???????Or should the FBI be unleashed on her............I'm leaning towards the FBI.The left makes hay with every word a conservative speaks so why not.Two can play this game and its damn well time for the right to start playing hardball.

Whistlebritches wrote:

Ben, do you actually read what you post?

BuckyB93 wrote:

So you don't like anybody quoting those wurds in the Constitution, wurds that had specific meanings to those dead guys in the 18th Century, meanings that do not jive exactly with their corrupted progressive interpretations today?
I think what really bothers you is the original meaning and intent of those wurds.

When are you going to realize that POLITICAL PROGRESSIVISM doesn't lead to PROGRESS, but only to societal decay and the eventual demise of the perpetual indivisible union? I think the Chicoms as well as their progressive counterparts in the U.S. like AOC and her Bolshevik friends mentioned in my previous post are cheering for that day, assuming they still exist also then, which is hard to believe since their progressive societies are also in a state of decay.

RayR wrote:

I am :

1. American;
2. Floridian; and a
3. Seminole County, FL resident.

In that order with the overwhelming majority focused on #1.

rfenst wrote:

The original words as I remember reading them were intended to be malleable... hard to do so, and rightfully so, but malleable none the less.

You can't control what it turns in to... if we're going to just let the next generation come in and say, nah... we don't like that one, we're going to go back and undo it... and anything else we don't like.

Then we no longer have a country, not for real anyway... maybe an abstraction of one... at least while the façade holds up.

Again, that's what you want, no large system. Localized systems only that work in isolation of each other. That's what you want. Everyone to fend for themselves, f*ck everyone who doesn't think like me.

Back to the age of conquerors and raping and looting and pillaging.

To think it would devolve into anything other than that is naivety... it's devolved into that every time throughout history.

What makes this time different?

bgz wrote:

I identified as a machine gun.

ZRX1200 wrote:

Seriously?!? You basically think there's no point in having laws period because they can be changed, right? You do realize the entire Bill of Rights were not in the constitution originally. They were the first amendments to said document.

Sunoverbeach wrote:

Seriously?!? You basically think there's no point in having laws period because they can be changed, right? You do realize the entire Bill of Rights were not in the constitution originally. They were the first amendments to said document.

Sunoverbeach wrote:

ToTal CoDsWaLloP! Did you know the Constitution would have never been ratified by the majority of the states to begin with if there wasn't a Bill of Rights included acknowledging the rights of the individual? You seem to think the Bill of Rights was an afterthought after it was ratified.
Did you know some of the framers of the Constitution felt there was no need for a Bill of Rights because they felt that the document already made it clear what the limits on the government’s powers were? Laughable isn't it considering the government as it turned out still doesn't seem to recognize any limits to its power in many cases when those limits get in the way of robbing and pillaging?

RayR wrote:

You know the framers weren't as smart as you think they were... their rules were only intended for white people only originally... and on top of that, they didn't even have iphones. They were basically monkeys with wigs

bgz wrote:

I heard, later on, there were Lilly-White racist Northerners who only wanted brown and black folk counted as 3/5 human for congressional representation whereas Southerners wanted them recognized as 100% human no matter if they were slaves or not. Weird huh?

RayR wrote:

Couldn't trust monkeys with wigs back then no matter what they said or what side they were on.

That would be a good name for a tv show, monkeys with wigs.

We learned not to trust them. We still don't trust them even though most of them don't wear wigs anymore.

bgz wrote: