'Our Democracy Is at Stake'

eyer

Literotica Guru
Joined
Jun 27, 2010
Posts
21,263
That's the title of Thomas Friedman's latest dump for TNYT...

...here's his closer:

President Obama is not defending health care. He’s defending the health of our democracy. Every American who cherishes that should stand with him.

I'm American and I, like this great nation's founders and framers, detest democracy - majority rule - as a governing principle...

...so, it does not surprise me to read Friedman as just another socialist rushing to prop-up the statist facade of democracy.

The United States of America was framed as a constitutional republic...

...in such a republic, the Constitution is the law of the land and no one - whether individual or majority - is above it.

That's the way it's supposed to work, no matter the individuals through the centuries who've tried their best to sinisterly exploit that saneness. And the fact is, what Friedman and almost all other progressive/democrats are wailing about, that some extremist Congresspeople are assaulting their precious, collective "democracy", is expressly allowed in the Constitution to specifically prevent any majority from obtaining control over individual Americans and, in essence, any democracy to rule.

Freedom of speech was deemed by the delegates to the Constitutional Convention to inherently be beyond the reach of federal government or any rule of any majority...

...yet, many still didn't trust that freedom of speech would be so inalienably revered, so they sought to make it much more clear and republican representatives ratified the Bills of Rights to do just that.

But, alas, free speech as a natural right of man enshrined for a nation of law is just a bunch of words easily susceptible to a democracy...

...because a majority - a nation of men - can do whatever they want.

Tell me, democrats:

What rights do minorities have but the ones dictated to them by your majority?

Democracy, the rule of men, is a detestable enemy of the rule of law which dictates that all men are created equal - majority be damned...

...thus, as an enemy of the rule of law, democracy is a fitting foundation for you progressives/democrats/socialists/statists to start this Constitutional War from, standing shoulder-to-shoulder with your peers, for it is way past time that America finally puts to final death the little democracy bullcrap* which managed to survive the Convention in the first place.


* a majority ruling that certain individuals were only worth 3/5ths as much as other individuals.
 
OK, I read that. Didn't make sense, but I read it.

Can you explain the point you're trying to make without the gimmicky ellipses?
 
OK, I read that. Didn't make sense, but I read it.

Can you explain the point you're trying to make without the gimmicky ellipses?

Sure...

...let me bold it for you:

DEMOCRACY...

...SUCKS.

As do...

...progressives/democrats/socialists/statists like you.
 
gif21.gif
 
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's (or who's)for lunch.

I'm amazed at the amount if people that believe we live in a democracy.
 
Thomas Friedman is an idiotic maroon and you're a fruit loop.

The House Republicans (who have not been the minority for a while...) have had since April to hammer out a budget compromise with the Senate and refused 18 conferences. They are also welcome to exercise their legislative abilities in the future, but they're not doing themselves any favors right now in terms of the next election. No one is saying what they're doing is illegal or unconstitutional, but it's petulant and clearly unethical to anyone with a brain.

This has zero to do with our right to free speech except for that it would have been nice if yours had been revoked before you made this thread.

I'm kidding. I love it when you...

...go crazy.
 
No...

...it's factually not.

But, please try again...

...for the wit which so clearly eluded you.

Pffffftt!
No further attempts at wit are needed.
I aced it.
The really funny thing is, now, for some utterly bizarre reason, bra_boy thinks I am your alt.
 
The man you helped elect to office, Barack Obama, loves place himself above the law...and it's our Republic that is at stake.

You're simply a partisan hack...

...just like your opposite Obama.

Keep pontificating about Obama and his socialism as the great "Leviathan" you have dire need for...

...but don't mention what a sell-out you truly are when, a couple of Aprils from now, you comply with his 'care law and faithfully report proof of your own health insurance coverage to the IRS like a good little lemming.

Whatever kind of statist "Republic" either of you imagine to be for...

...I'd rather see politically, totally dead.
 
Thomas Friedman is an idiotic maroon and you're a fruit loop.

So...

...eat me.

This has zero to do with our right to free speech...

Au contraire...

...Friedman's point is that a majority has the supreme right to decide for all; therefore, ie, if a majority decides free speech should be controlled, then free speech should rightfully - democratically - be controlled.

Now, he or hardly any other progressive will use that same "free speech" example because it plainly strips away their (yours, too?) wolves' clothing...

...but that's exactly what can happen - and does happen - with majority rule.

Or, as my constitutional "democracy" example clearly illustrated...

...if a free majority deems blacks to only be 3/5ths the value of a free man, then blacks are democratically ruled as only 3/5ths the value of a free man.

Lovely, huh?
 
I will like hell.

Really?

Are you going on record now stating that you will not comply with the law dictating the you must provide proof of health insurance each time you file with the IRS?
 
So...

...eat me.

I can't...

...I'm vegan.

Au contraire...

...Friedman's point is that a majority has the supreme right to decide for all; therefore, ie, if a majority decides free speech should be controlled, then free speech should rightfully - democratically - be controlled.

Now, he or hardly any other progressive will use that same "free speech" example because it plainly strips away their (yours, too?) wolves' clothing...

...but that's exactly what can happen - and does happen - with majority rule.

Or, as my constitutional "democracy" example clearly illustrated...

...if a free majority deems blacks to only be 3/5ths the value of a free man, then blacks are democratically ruled as only 3/5ths the value of a free man.

Lovely, huh?

So wait, when the dems had the majority in both houses, they could have voted to end free speech? Fuck! Why'd they blow their load on stupid Obamacare? We could've been rid of Fox news once and for all.

But I thought there was something in that Constitution thingy that addressed laws with which it conflicts...I guess not, though. Maybe I'm thinking of China. The founding fathers really should have thought about that. Think of how convenient it would be if we had some sort of court system that would a help us determine the constitutionality of a law. That would have been really helpful in legitimizing the Affordable Care Act.

In lieu of such a system, we should probably just opt for running things past you first. You've really got a handle on this stuff.
 
Last edited:
...if a free majority deems blacks to only be 3/5ths the value of a free man, then blacks are democratically ruled as only 3/5ths the value of a free man.

Lovely, huh?

Like a lot of things it was a compromise and not a great one. Had things made sense blacks wouldn't have counted as men at all under the Constitution at the time it was written. So lovely might not be the word I'd choose but good yeah.
 
I can't...

...I'm vegan.

So...

...what's that have to do with eating a fruit loop?

And, if you can't eat one...

...how 'bout just tongue massaging one?

So wait, when the dems had the majority, they could have voted to end free speech? Fuck! Why'd they blow their load on stupid Obamacare? We could've been rid of Fox news once and for all.

But I thought there was something in that Constitution thingy that addressed laws with which it conflicts...I guess not, though. Maybe I'm thinking of China. The founding fathers really should have thought about that. Think of how convenient it would be if we had some sort of court system that would a help us determine the constitutionality of a law. That would have been really helpful in legitimizing the Affordable Care Act.

In lieu of such a system, we should probably just opt for running things past you first. You've really got a handle on this stuff.

You understand that the Supremes didn't specifically rule on the constitutionality of the ACA itself...

...right?

You also understand that the Supremes have ruled that slavery is constitutional...

...right?
 
So...

...what's that have to do with eating a fruit loop?

And, if you can't eat one...

...how 'bout just tongue massaging one?

Can't argue with that logic. Fuck! Now I guess I have to give you a blowjob.

Ack! Sorry! I meant "fvck" and "blvwjvb."

You understand that the Supremes didn't specifically rule on the constitutionality of the ACA itself...

...right?

You also understand that the Supremes have ruled that slavery is constitutional...

...right?

God no. I don't understand anything. I have a vagina (wait, is that offensive to you? Should I say uagina?) - I can barely read.

But if I could, I'd be amused that you chose to focus on something I never said that is largely irrelevant to my post rather than the absurdity of your analogy.

So the Supremes are no good either, eh? Is your ideal government just a piece of paper tacked to a corkboard?

*smiles vacantly while twirling hair and trying to appear suitable for marriage*
 
So the Supremes are no good either, eh?

They're certainly good enough for me. Catchy songs, great style, and awesome harmonies - the three pillars of good governance. What more does a gal need?

The+Supremes++HQ+4.png
 
Back
Top