Message from @grant
Discord ID: 496495344524460032
I didn't do any significant amount of it until freshman college.
Course I dropped out after sophomore year
I got a college degree and civics was not a requirement. (Also California)
Wasn't a requirement for me either
I did it because I wanted to learn about U Govt and constitution
Probably motivated by military service
It's when I learned that the term "Bill of Rights" is wildly inaccurate
My USG teacher said "It is a bill of negative rights of government" which is wildly more restrictive than a bill which specified rights could possibly be
Restrictive of government that is
Which is supposed to be upheld by the people
Ideally yes
But people have it backwards now and are waiting for the government to give them their rights back
Well I'd argue it's a problem that unfortunately started with the civil Rights act of '64
Cuz if you want to get super technical about it, the bill of rights doesn't actually apply to individuals
It applies to states.
Which then applies to individuals
More accurately I've seen it described as a deal between the fed and states
I'm still working through the federalist papers. Something I wish I'd done a long time ago
I actually bought a nice bound hard copy version of the Federalist papers a few month ago and have yet to start reading it.
Also rightly or wrongly. I believe the declaration of independence is the philosophical founding document of the country and the Constitution is the nut and bolts of how gov is supposed to work.
As a side note, I heard a fun argument that I liked from Larry Elder. It was: If the government needed an amendment to ban alcohol, why don't they need an amendment for other drugs? He might not be the origin of that idea, but that's who I heard it from.
The declaration of Independence is, imo, at best a ideological ideal but only insofar as the most famous of the sentences. The rest really is just a listing of grievances
Inspiring to be sure, but relatively simple in it's inspiration
@grant I believe this was the argument back before alcohol. I want to say with opium back when it was smoked in pipes at opium dens/bars/whatever.
I'd imagine though Larry Elder simply understands that there isn't any kind of explicit permission for government to make those laws. Those fall under the concept of unenumerated rights
One day Tim Will become a constitutional constructionist. I'm willing to bet on it
Then he'll be a libertarian
Before you even know it
Just wait. One day I believe he will see the superiority of constitutional constructionism. (Literalism)
My issue with @Timcast report on the Kavenah stuff is Tim comes out as a sexist.
"I believe her more than him" so you beleive her based on the fact she is a woman Tim, thats textbook sexism. you should wieght them equally if you are not sexist.
I get he is trying to be compassionate however its actual sexism.
Another prediction. (Though it's already happening). The Democrats start looking for specific statements to try and push the narrative that there is a conspiracy and Kavanaugh is lying. Specifically, they'll look to accuse him of perjury which serves the dual purpose of making him look bad and sets up for later impeachment or criminal proceedings if he were to be nominated.
The specific statements will be borderline. Stuff like dodges or guilt by association issues.
They're ruthless.
I still think this played terribly for the Democrats with anyone right of Bernie Sanders
They are already doing that Pratel
They are trying to paint him as "angry"
The entire thing was to get him to testify so that they can pick it apart.
Seems he lied about his connections to Yale.
@Jes I think he said that because statisically one is more likely to accuse someone of something they did actually do
@Tal,Karpov,AlekhineAllCoolGuys well I'd love to hear it from the horses mouth. it comes accross as sexism.
I believe because of sex
is sexism