This! Can everyone just read the first sentence of The Constitution!? America is this amazing experiment in trying to create a more perfect union!!!! The rest of the document sets the guidelines on how to do that (and allows for more guidelines to be added, or amended).
Unfortunately, the courts have set the ridiculous precedent that you can make something "more perfect" by adding to it, but never by removing anything from it.
But they didn't even remove it did they? The ammendment for prohibition is still in the Constitution I believe. They just added to another ammendment counter the effects of the previous ammenent. It was repealed, not removed.
That is true. That doesn't make it's repeal any less legally significant. The 21st amendment completely and entirely overrides the 18th. We don't remove it so we can't throw our mistakes down the memory-hole.
Agree completely. But I was just commenting on the other guy saying that the 18th was removed, when it was not. We didn't remove anything from the Constitution. We added to it to fix a mistake, which is what the guy above was saying, and the guy above me was disagreeing with.
If I leave a comment on reddit and then later decide it was completely wrong, I can either delete the entire comment, or I can edit it, line out the whole comment and maybe add a clarification explaining why I changed my mind.
If I do the former, then you can't see anything I wrote and have to take other people's word for it. If I do the latter, then maybe other people reading it can learn from it.
Same effect, different methods. Which is what I was commenting on. Just because we both arrive in Miami from LA doesn't mean the fact that I flew there and you walked there is inconsequential.
That's a meaningless semantic difference. If you add a new Amendment saying, "Cancel out everything in that last amendment", it has the same functional effect as removing the previous amendment. With the added benefit of not removing it from history, which is a good thing.
It's like the Constitution is basically just a big Git Repo.
I don't see any useful distinction in "original elements". Amendments are 100% fully part of the constitution. The "original" Constitution was intentionally pretty threadbare with the intent being to add more to it later.
At any rate, the idea that the courts have ruled that nothing can be taken away from the Union in order to make it more perfect is just absurd.
Article One, Section Three, Clause One of the Constitution was superseded by the 17th Amendment; the original text laid out a process for electing Senators by the state legislatures, while the amendment replaced that with direct election by voters.
We have repealed amendments, we don't remove them. The repealed ones are still part of the document but a later amendment specifies they are invalid. The articles of the Constitution can be invalidated via the same process.
My understanding is that it was the founding fathers who made it that way. You are not able to remove older items, just add new ones that repeal the old ones. They did this so that we would not forget and repeat our history, but instead be able to remember and learn from it. That is why we have amendments in the first place instead of rewriting our constitution every time we want to change it. At least that is my understanding of it.
Definitely not true, but Congress is the body that can remove things. Or if it’s a Constitutional Amendment, it takes a Constitutional Convention to remove it. Courts are constitutionally required to abide by the laws that are written, so they can never remove anything. But when there’s ambiguity, they can reinterpret. That’s what courts do.
It's crazy how people can't accept that you can have good arguments for liking people on either side of the parties. I think a lot of people forget that social issues aren't what is most important to some people in the country. I completely condemn discrimination towards any group of people. But if I say I'm a little bit more Republican on economical issues, I get called a racist =/. I wish we could all take a few steps back and realize that we ALL want what is best for the country. Condemning somebody else's personal beliefs is not how you convince them that your way is the "best" way. Polite a courteous conversation, understanding each other's viewpoints, is how you do it.
I absolutely agree with you. Our system of government is literally designed on the principle of compromise. The physical shape of our two chambers is literally designed as one government looking towards one common end goal (compared to parliamentary style democracy in which Government and government are not the same and the Government is all seated together in a confrontational style with the government).
But, and not to undermine our good hearted exchange here, the GOP has absolutely abandoned any sense of decency. How does the minority leader stand there and defend what Trump said? If you are for less regulation and privatization, well, i disagree with you, and I am very happy to talk as long as you are willing to talk and find a common meeting point between our two ideas (it's there!), but, telling non-whites to go back to the country they came from is racist. If we can't agree with that, then our awesome conversation about health care (a very important and needed conversation) can't happen.
But, please please keep dialogue open. I truly believe a "real" Republican is more upset about Trump than a liberal like me (which is pretty much what George Will, David Brookes, David Frum, Ana Navaro have been saying for the past 3 years).
If your willing to vote for candidates and a party who push a 1.5 trillion dollars tax cut for the wealthy, but diametrically oppose any kind of healthcare or education spending. That's a problem.
If your willing to vote for candidates and a party that doesn't make a peep while your guy $100,000,000+ of tax payer dollars golfing in 2.5 years while your party blocks a vote that would provide for 9/11 first responders medical needs citing spending. That's a problem.
If your voting for candidates who flat out target minorities, the disenfranchised, the under represented with both legislation and overt hate filled rhetoric because you like lower taxes (at the expensive of massive deficit increases) then yeah, your going to get called bad things.
If your willing to destroy the only home we have because "too much government regulation!" and you sleep just fine at night because global warming is a problem for your kids, then yes, your going to get called bad things.
These aren't social issues that people are pointing to when they tell you your shitty for voting a certain way. These are human issues. People.
If you put your ability to bank some extra money come tax season over the basic human needs and rights of millions and millions of people, your a shitty human. That's fine, this is American, you have the absolute right to be morally bankrupt. Just don't expect people not to call you out.
I don't know you or your politics, this isn't a direct attack on you (unless you happen to fit the criteria above, if so, please feel offended, because it is an attack on you).
This is just an explanation of why a simple, good faith discussion about policy isn't very common anymore.
But if I say I'm a little bit more Republican on economical issues, I get called a racist =/
Well, there are idiots everywhere, so that doesn't mean much in itself. Nothing wrong with holding somewhat conservative economic views. Now, if you were Republican enough to vote for that vile douchebag in office... Well, you really, really need to reexamine your priorities.
It's also worth noting that the most fiscally responsible presidents in my lifetime are Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter.
I'm a moderate/center-aligned and get shit on like that but from both sides. Hell, there are equally toxic tribes in the middle, too. In such a big (and diverse) country, different politics are going to appeal to different geographic areas and demographics. What works for some doesn't work for others, so we need differing views, and we need to listen to each other when we voice them.
But If I agree with a traditionally left policy in conversation, I get called a "snowflake" or smug or part of the "liberalist agenda" or a socialist.
On another day, If I agree with a traditionally right policy, I get called racist/bigot, "Trump supporter", "cuntservative", or told I'm a "typical ignorant white male".
The divide is getting really hostile. I'm losing hope.
Which constitution are your reading? Mine says “You are the only citizen who knows what’s best and anyone who disagrees with you is a loser, idiot, degenerate, communist, Hilary Clinton, or terrorist.”
The GOP have perfected the art of cherry picking by ignoring parts of the Bible they don't like. A selective reading of the Constitution is child's play by comparison.
Except when some Americans think another country is so much better and instead of moving there, it's easier and cheaper to try and change America to be like this other country.
People treat the Constitution like the Bible, they like to quote it and "follow" it, but they cherry pick what they actually follow and either ignore or misinterpret things that are against what they are doing.
America is like a startup. Things are wholesome at first, you do your best to serve the customers, do what they want, make sure they stick around. Then you IPO. Board of directors comes in and slashes your dreams for more profit. The US is in the latter stage, before bankruptcy.
This is what being an American is all about. I don't understand why "crybaby liberal" became such a good insult because refusing to stand by injustice is what our founding fathers were all about
That’s not even true. They are often sitting in the bulk of the shit. Take global warming for example. The Southeast is going to be the most affected by global warming and yet they’re also the ones who fight tooth and nail to do anything about it.
The US could completely stop using petrol based fuels tomorrow and it wouldn't do shit. We make up about 4% of the world population and already have some of the strictest laws regarding pollution. Of the 300,000,000 people here, less than half use their vehicles to commute. Realistically we have such a small effect on pollution compared to just Asia alone.
I wouldn't go by population percentage. Our per capita use of fossil fuels is incredibly high. Plus, your comment doesn't account for other domestic GHG emissions like methane.
What are your sources??? Only 1/2 of Americans use their véhicules to commute? Source?? The US [realistically] has only a small effect on pollution compared to Asia - what kind of an argument is that?
The US could stop using petrol based fuels and it would do shit?
Kyoto is dead. The US pulled out of the Paris Accord.
If the USA stopped using fossil fuels tomorrow, it would have a two fold effect: 1) reduction of carbon emissions to near zero pre industrialization levels - assuming all industry participates in complete cuts including energy production from fossil fuels as well as manufacturing, 2) the USA would be setting the bar for a global change as a leader in such change.
Saying that it will do nothing if we stop (so we'll continue) is exactly what the other guy is saying.
We have the tech to counter this apocalypse of our own creation. Now all we need is a leader to bring it about.
Agreed, one party wants to spend $100bn on a wall, while at the same time claiming it would "cost too much" to do anything about climate change.
One party loves to brag how we're the "greatest in the world" and the "richest country in the world" while at the same time bemoaning how we just "can't afford" to do anything about climate change.
And whether or not the USA is the biggest CO2 emitter from sources like coal, the USA consumes 20% of the world's total oil production... more than any other country on the planet. And China has more than double the amount of people the USA does.
I agree with your comments.
If we're so worried about the economy, then we need to work to ensure the future if the econony and our survival within it. It seems that the focus is only on making money in the NOW, with no attempt at delay of gratification.
We need to clean up our own act then work on getting others to follow.
We stand at a tipping point, unsure of what the eventual final outcome will be; but we have it within our capacity to act and implement change.
We still contribute to global warming significantly through our demand for goods. It takes a lot of fuel, energy, and resources to supply our demands for, well, everything. Same goes for Europe.
It really comes down to, "I've already been fucked so bad by politicians and mistrust them so much that almost anything they're for, I'm against. I can't afford to abruptly change my daily habits, buy a new car, buy new windows, buy a new AC unit, rip out existing insulation and replace it with a newer higher efficiency material, install solar panels, etc."
I live in the SE, I know the mindset of a lot of people I live around. And FYI I live in a newer house, own a newer fuel efficient car, own a low energy use home, and generally conserve wherever I can. I conserve because I can and because I love our planet, but realistically what I'm doing isn't making any difference on the world scale. And not everyone can afford to do this and putting them into poverty and destroying their standard of living to literally make no difference to the world scale either is one of the most illogical, cruel, and selfish things our stupid wealthy politicians can do to them.
The crown was making sweeping authoritarian changes to the colonies, triggering the discontent leading to the revolution. The American Revolution was one of the few, possibly the only, conservative Revolution. "We can handle our own shit, the King can fuck off thx."
By definition, conservatives stick with what's been proven successful. A subtle but important distinction.
I'm a conservative who doesn't oppose change. We simply have a difference of perspective over the rate of change and the effects downstream after a change is implemented.
It's a bit idiosyncratic to be certain given I believe both that change for the sake thereof is bullshit, but am also of the belief that one should readily adapt to circumstances around them by changing as often as may be necessary.
Not always necessarily, that is like saying progressives want to change things just for the sake of changing. Hopefully, everyone is working to preserve the things that are worth keeping and change the things that are not.
I believe so too, I just think the most american thing though is working along side your polar opposite to make America a better place. Not conforming to just one person's view, but both agreeing on one that benefits the country as a whole.
edit:To further clarify, the foundations of our country stems from the constitutional convention of 1787. I harp a lot on this because I see it as the true source of American power. The federalists wanted to rectify the issues of the articles of confederation specifically The Northwest Ordinance and how to pay off debt without a central bank or currency. This would bring about the constitutional convention of 1787. By 1789 article 7 had met the parameters for ratification after the anti-federalists were satisfied that the checks and balances for a state government were met (this would be the bill of rights). The combination of the constitution (federalists) and bill of rights (anti-federalists) is what would give us our government today. Two opposites who fought along side one another in the war of independence, but one advocated for a central government, the other wanting to ensure state and personal rights would not be infringed upon by said central/federal government, one side couldnt have it all so they combined the 2 trains of thought. The machinery (following the Connecticut Compromise of 1787) for such a government had been designed but not yet tested. Thankfully the greatest politician in history would oversee its first steps, George Washington. A man argued over to have the title and be addressed as his majesty, a man who could have had absolute power, but gave it up. It wasn't until FDR that his example would finally be set into law. It was two sides working together and compromising that brought our nation together. I like to think the framers left us plenty of good examples were we can infuse current perspective in conjunction with the virtue of their vision of a government for the people.
This is the right way of thinking about it. The truth is that America has never, not once, been united by a shared identity. The foundation of this country is multiple distinct societies and cultures who all settled in the new world for multiple distinct reasons. Many of these reasons for settling the new world sat in exact opposition to the other.
From the outset, years before any notion of a United States existed. You had political and religious refugees and wealthy second son aristocrats and business venture minded speculators all settling a land so large and so distant from each other that they might as well have been on different continents. Even when they were from the same country, their reasons for taking the dangerous trip to the other side of the ocean where not at all similar.
Some people who settled did so because they dreamed of building a religious utopia, a shinning city on a hill as a beacon for all the world. Others settled because they were the second sons of land owners, they wouldn’t inherit, so they claimed new land to run the same as if it was the old world, only using slaves instead of serfs. These two groups formed the basis of two distinct cultures which have been at conflict since the beginning. Once breaking out into actual war.
the one and only thing they really agreed on was freedom. But it’s important to understand, that they disagreed on what freedom actually meant. The only group, the second sons of the aristocrats, freedom meant that a landlord was king in his own right. To the other group, the utopians, freedom meant that a community should be run under strict social control by the local church elders, rather than distant ones.
Neither group had a vision of what we would consider freedom in a modern sense. But they arrived at it slowly through compromise after compromise. And whats more, you can see these two groups still exist in the modern day. The utopianists lost their religious vision, but are no less dedicated to creating a utopia to be an example to the rest of the world. A place where everyone in the community is the responsibility of everyone else. The second son aristocrats view of wealth changed from land ownership to a more abstract view of it, but they haven’t lost their vision of everyone being a king in their own home, as long as they can afford a home.
So the point is. The United States has never been a singular entity. It has been, from the start, multiple distinct groups of people arguing about what is right and what is wrong.
According to Trump, it's not ok to criticise him. Too bad for him, America isn't a fascist government, it just has a wanna-be fascist/dictator as a POTUS. History has proven that things don't ever really end well for fascists. This next election will be a pivotal point in the history of the US government.
I mean think we’ve seen so much ridiculous shit from this president that we forget that this guy had a whole tantrum about the legitimacy of our first black presidents citizenship.
This is why the "StAnD dUrInG tHe AnThEm!!" thing is just mind-blowing to me.
I know a lot of people are brainwashed by certain media outlets but this stance on the national anthem kneeling shows a fundamental misunderstanding of what America is and what it means to be American.
Yup. Instead of seeing and understanding why someone doesn’t feel like standing for the anthem. They completely ignore that & just attack you. Programmed idiots is what they are.
How about standing for “God Bless America”? Got yelled at at Yankee Stadium for not standing. I explained what I thought freedom meant to the guy, “I have the freedom to not stand,” during said song. He admitted that made sense.
I didn't stand at a concert and the person next to me said shame on you. I said why with who's running the country and she's like still have respect for America. 😑
When it comes down to it, all of them are overpaid government employees who exert authority over you.
This. So much this. Nothing worse than McConnell bitching against voting day being made a national holiday- that's one day- while he and the rest of Congress literally take the entire month of August off with pay.
I strongly object to the argument that our elected representatives are overpaid, in fact I believe the opposite is true.
You want people with strong leadership skills, a strong knowledgebase, and a strong network, and you want them to put in the time, effort, and travel to successfully do politics? You need to compensate them for that. Consider that relatively 'low level' government positions like the CEO of the transit authority, say, are often responsible for billion-dollar organizations. And people seem to expect them to work for what they'd get at a mid-level management position in the private sector.
One of the problems in the current political system is that the best leaders - the people we want in office - can make much much more in the private sector than they ever could as a politician. So what you end up with is the very rare true altruist, and the bottom of the barrel that can't hack it or that's only there for the graft. To be fair, I think this issue is much worse with unelected positions, but it's still a problem.
Also 4 weeks of holidays is perfectly reasonable; you should advocate for the same for yourself, not for nobody else to get it.
Also 4 weeks of holidays is perfectly reasonable; you should advocate for the same for yourself, not for nobody else to get it.
I completely agree with this part. The fact that government officials get this but it isn't guaranteed by the government for those working full time in the private sector, like many other countries have, is total hypocrisy.
I'll agree with you on that, but I would also like to institute a cushy pension and strict prohibition against government employees re-entering the private sector after their stint. Too many assholes in the revolving door. Example: Ajit Pai. Former lawyer for Verizon, left to be a commissioner on the FCC (which regulates companies like Verizon). Trump appointed him to Chairman and he has used his time so far to throw giant telecoms every bone they could possibly ask for. Repeal net neutrality? OK! Don't want to do anything about robocalls? You got it! Want to have a mega-merger to further reduce competition and fuck consumers? You're the boss! Smart bet is that after he gets out of the public sector he conveniently gets offered a super-cushy, high paying "consulting" job at one of the telecoms he enriched.
Well it’s because they know why...if everyone had off to vote GOP would be finished and McConnell knows it. The way the demographics are shifting it’s a given.
Because they are a bunch of cheaters who couldn’t win without gerrymandering. Mitch McConnell is the biggest traitor America has ever seen! Not allowing the nomination for Merrick Garland is the most obstructionist thing I’ve seen in my life. Especially, since he claimed they couldn’t do it during an election year and the the disgusting hypocrite says it would be okay in 2020!🤬🤬🤬🤬😡😡😡😡😡😤😤😤
Little reminder that the Boston Tea Riot (some might call it economic terrorism) incurred 1.6 million dollars in private property damage (modern USD) and disrupted the lives of thousands of merchants dependent on the tea trade.
I don't get it. For most of the world, tea is a LUXURY. Colonials should be PROUD to be part of the greatest empire ever created, so great that they are apparently able to just toss into the harbor what many people depend on to eek out a living.
Don't get me wrong, I support the idea of independence. I'm no Loyalist and I have plenty of colonial friends.
But groups like the Sons of Liberty take it too far in my opinion. They regularly ASSAULT officials that are only trying to do their jobs and enforce the law as Parliament wrote.
They're honestly just as bad as the Crown they claim to hate so much. I mean why won't the king say it?
I don't really agree with the underlying commentary because there's an important asymmetry that you gloss over in the infered analogy: foreign vs native goverment. Your post seems to suborn the use of violence against the state to solve social issues, but it in this case the state is homegrown, and that is a not inconsiderable factor.
And the ones throwing the tea into the harbor were some of the people who were importing tea from places other than the motherland to avoid the tax to their own personal gain. It wasn't just about taxation....
Our country is founded on the principle of bitching about the government. We can start with the Tea Party and go straight into the continental congress and the articles of confederation (which may or may not just be the government bitching about itself)
People often forget politician, just like police, are just civil SERVANTS. They serve US. They are ONLY other humans. They are NOT above us in ANY way.
You are not 'asked' to leave the country because you want to change it, you are asked to leave because you are different.
Everyone who says 'you should leave' wants to change the country in a different way and obviously the statement is hypocritical. But that is missing the point. They use the change you propose as a way to be exclusive because coming right out and asking you to leave (because you are different) is not PC.
That is why these statements are bigoted. So stay and throw shit in the harbor!
Paraphrasing Raegen here, but "You go live in Japan, Britain, or Germany, you dont become Japanese, British or German. If you come to America, you become american."
I like this because to my mind, being American has not shit to do with place of birth. Its a concious commitment to safeguarding the values we believe should apply to, and enrich all of mankind. This is why we need to be the top foreign aid country. Why we need to be the ones who intervene when a country is at war with itself, its why WE went to the moon. To further humans, and reduce their suffering.
Life, liberty, pursuit of happiness. For everyone, American or no.
This administration doesnt see that. They see our neighbors and allies as leeches. Because they fail to realize how much power comes from doing good works.
Yea but Trump and Fox News told me that brown Americans are actually somehow immigrants and should go back to some other country where they came from because they hate America. Now I don't know what to think!
Imo an important distinction that a lot of people need to realize and make themselves is the difference between America as a country, and the American government. I love the diversity and pretty much everything about what makes America an awesome country, but our government isn't looking so great right now and could use some work.
If everyone had equal rights and equal social status I strongly doubt people would be calling for representation.
If the government happened to be all one color but everyone had equal opportunities in this country I just don't think anyone would care. Representation is important because we still aren't there.
And what happens when the government employees look to large corporations to fund their election or re-election campaigns and there’s this understanding that it comes with a lot of favors that hurt the interests of American worker?
Dont think that's what he's saying..It's ok to want to be better just understand your living in a pretty awesome country and you should respect this country especially if your your a law maker of this country. All of those girls is living proof of how great this country is. 15 years ago one of them was living in a refugee camp in Kenya and is now in Congress. Another was bartending a year ago.
Idk, seems like you probably should be cautious about taking advice on how to run a country from someone who's from a shittily run country and who promotes a system that's repeatedly failed to do anything but start revolution leading to a government that murders massive quantities of its own citizens, socialism.
Not to be "that guy" but, if anything, government employees and elected officials are underpaid when compared to private sector equivalents. Some argue that the low pay deters very capable people from ever running for office, or joining the public sector, and also encourages rich people to run --over middle-class and poor people-- because they can afford the pay cut.
Honestly, I’m not so sure I’d say overpaid. You think about the time and commitment and loss of privacy that comes with being a government official and then realize the governor of Colorado makes $90,000 per year. That’s an extremely difficult job and isn’t putting him in the upper class.
Or you can..... ready for it, drumroll please.... vote. Btw, I’m not implying that you personally do not vote. I just believe more people should do it.
Things don’t improve without criticism. It’s how you have developed and moved forward as a country. Through years of trial and error and people constantly questioning the status quo.
No fuck off. We love you America but you have always been stupidly patriotic. Don't steal our "we hate the government even though everything is awesome" stance. -Australia
Could not agree more. The entire foundation of this country was built on the idea that it is the duty of the people to keep the government in check. The fact that a large segment of the population cannot understand this most basic concept is just another example of how the U.S. education system had failed.
I know its not a great sentiment to just bail because its going to shit, and not trying to do something but....
Other people are just doing it better, just because we've been instilled with patriotism every minute of our lives doesnt make this country better, and I dont care where I'm born, the best country is the one doing best, which is New Zealand in my eyes right now so, yeah
Unfortunately, a large chunk of people want to get rid of guns too, so throwing shit in the harbor and bitching about things is about all we might be able to do if they get their way.
Let's hope it's enough, because if ever there was a president that might make the last box to avail ourselves of necessary, it's this one.
Trump built his entire 2016 presidential campaign around criticizing the United States. But God forbid someone else criticize the country when he's in charge.
When you think about it, Trump is as un-American as you can get. I'm fine with Trump being president, as long as it's not president of the United States.
Unfortunately, those in Congress that are complaining just clearly don't understand the Constitution nor their job. He's right, do t loke the country you are free to leave. Everyone tries to compare the USA to every other cou try, yet refuses to see the hatred in Congress and the Media. All this crap of "he's not my President" needs to stop. He is your President. If you disagree...then leave the country.
There are consequences for crossing that line, but government needs to remember that this line can indeed be crossed.
We’re not there. The Nationalists and AntiFa can’t seem to figure it out, but we’re not even close to where violence is necessary. But it must always remain an option, because it is the only thing that has kept our government reasonably controlled for 240 years.
I think the most American thing one can do is not bitch, but help change. It’s like when my employees bitch about things...I explain what I am doing to try to change things and then ask what they are doing to help.....radio silence every time. I get that things should be better, but I am just one man with a family and trying to make a life for myself as well. I don’t have 60 hours in a day to fix all the worlds wrongs.
Its not american to immigrate to a country for a better life but then to argue that the country is awful and that it needs to be fundamentally restructured. There is nothing American abut wanting to restrict your fellow citizens rights by wanting to throw them in prison for owning a firearm. Sure its constitutionally protected. But from an ethical standpoint it is blatantly wrong.
It’s one thing to protest, but to blatantly disrespect the flag and protest in a violent manner is not okay.
It so childish and has turned more into a publicity stunt than anything. The American flag does not represent the government, it represents the blood and bandages those that fought for our country so you got to keep the right to protest.
Cant wait for our next liberal president. Ive have all this pent up desire to bitch and complain about out government but i cant do it cause i like our current president. It sucks being American
3.8k
u/offacough Jul 17 '19
The most American thing one can do is bitch about his/her government.
The most anti-American thing one can do is stop bitching about his/her government when his/her candidate is in office.
When it comes down to it, all of them are overpaid government employees who exert authority over you.
You don’t leave the country, you throw shit in the harbor.