yeah, I get it. They were definitely remarkable thinkers and this isn't their fault. Human nature, powerful forces and all that.

Thing is, that's what they get credit for. Designing some code that will keep the worst parts of human nature at bay. Hard to continue to praise their genius as we watch the opposite happen in real time.

I'm sure USA faded some situations in the past that could have gone down this road and diminished their reputation as political geniuses then - Plot Against America by Philip Roth, for example, seems like it happens in a bunch of 1930s/1940s timelines.

But it didn't and bc humans are results oriented we go on attributing the success/luck of the country to the Constitution and it's authors. Laws are only as good as the people they apply to, as we are seeing now. Turns out all it took to bring that crashing down and for us to welcome our demagogue with open arms was some dumb hats and a professional con man speaking to cultural nihilists at the right economic moment. Seems like a super elite guardian-of-justice-and-law document should have been able to prevent that.

The next time the Democrats get in power in Congress, they need to make some procedural changes related to the Supreme Court. For starters:

1) Votes on confirmation must occur within X months of nomination. Law can't be changed without a 2/3 majority vote.

2) Nuclear option cannot be exercised by a simple majority. 2/3 majority is required.

The problem is that no Congress is bound by a past Congress.

Any rule can be changed with a 51 vote majority. We only have a filibuster because the Senate chooses to. And they choose to retain it because they don't want to face tough votes.

WaPo obtained two draft EO proposals of Trump's next immigration agenda. One focuses on identifying and deporting immigrants who recieve any kind of public benefits. The second order places massive restrictions on which visa holders can join the US workforce.

Trump administration circulates more draft immigration restrictions, focusing on protecting U.S. jobs
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politi...grants-welfare


So immigrants= public charge. From the guy who hasn't paid over a billion dollars in taxes.

Rules don't seem to apply any more here.

Why is it impossible to draft a law that can only be revoked by a 2/3 majority?

When government doesn't adhere to the rule of law, you are a regime.

Ok, srs question, is he misunderstood or is he a raging Islamophobe?

As a point of reference I'll say Bill Maher is misunderstood and I only know this from watching his show. Basically, 1, he's equally derisive towards all religions and, 2, the nature of the show doesn't really allow him to rehash all the premises each time Islam is brought up and make sure everyone is on the same page with the same context, so I don't really fault anybody for thinking Maher is a big fat Islamaphobe. The infamous episode that had the spat between him, Affleck, and Harris is a testament to this.

Reading that Harris blog post feels the same way. It's part common sense, duh, and part nonsensical gibberish but overall feels like I'm jumping in the middle of a conversation. Am I supposed to read his book or at least read all his earlier blog entries?

He's had some lolbad takes of interpreting Quranic scripture but I kinda want to give him another chance.

This is really troublesome:

5. If liberals who refuse to speak honestly on these topics continue to march with Islamists, denigrate free speech, and oppose the work of the real reformers in the Muslim community, they will only further provoke and empower Trump. And Trump, in turn, will empower Islamists the world over by threatening the civil liberties of all Muslims within his reach.


Every debate or argument I've had with an Islamaphobe included the notion, "If you want to just say BOO ISIS=BAD or BOO RADICAL ISLAMISIC TERRORISM=BAD you're not gonna get any pushback." There's not this secret cabal of ISIS supporters lurking about and quite frankly that bolded line is sophomoric nonsense.


p.s. Basically, he seems like he has an identical stance as mine but then will drop these lines that read like he's the exact opposite I'm arguing against. It's bizarre.

If this doesn't galvanize the Dems to obstruct, I don't know what will.

What is the tweet? Cant see on phone.

Colonized giant land with little competition from similarly advanced societies (when's the last time that happened), slavery, more and more land, massive amounts of gold, oil like Saudi Arabia, the whole rest of the industrialized world destroyed in war.

Oh, and huge supply of immigrants who assimilate and love the country.

tl;dr, Mahr and Harris are trolls and only folks like FoldN or Wil really give a **** about them.

Yeah and what have we always done with those immigrants. Send them to the back of the line as far as wages go. They get the toughest jobs for the least amount of pay and then they show up every day and outwork most of the white people that were born here. And they respond by putting up American flags at their house, learning American culture and celebrating holidays like the fourth of July, going to school and becoming advanced professionals that provide high amounts of value to our society, and starting their own businesses which provide useful services for their local communities.

And what do we do? We reward them by letting minority "president" Donnie Twimp pull this crap. We didn't vote for him but he sure as hell is making all of us look bad.

You mean the rules to show up and do your work?

Something I've said before, Trump and the GOP don't want to eliminate immigration and cheap labor, they want to run it like Qatar does.

Because any law can be revoked upon the ratifaction of both Houses and signed by the President.

You would need a constitutional amendment for an "entrenched" law.

Yea I don't get the love for the Founders either. We are talking about stuff that happened 240 years ago as if it's still relevant today.

I especially love those solemn Facebook Live videos of conservatives talking about the constitution while walking with their smartphone. Every single one of them is always a pretentious douchebag. Bonus points when they think they understand the constitution better than a certain black guy with a Harvard degree.

Don't forget some of the most productive agricultural land in the world.

Merrick Garland.

LOL after the past 8 years you gonna say this? Really?

The constitution is pretty great. It doesn't matter what is says though if the executive won't obey the judicial.

+ a million

He's the only nominee the Dems shouldn't obstruct.

I'm a lawyer and I didn't know the answer to this question. This article makes it seems as if it was an open question, at least as of 1997.

http://scholarship.law.georgetown.ed...context=facpub

Not all Islamists are terrorists or ISIS supporters. Many on the left are very hesitant to criticize those within Islam who hold, practice or preach illiberal views and values. Such criticism is often equated with islamophobia, bigotry or racism.

Harris is certainly more nuanced than Maher. If you have no problem with the rather simple picture Maher paints I don't think you'd disagree with Harris.

Lol Al Franken is spitting hot fire right now