Trump: Americans Who Died in War Are ‘Losers’ and ‘Suckers’

[Starlight]

Whether or not an issue is "pressing" is entirely subjective.

How many generations of slavery are required before abolition suddenly becomes a "pressing" issue I wonder?

I do think though that an issue can become pressing as a result of a problematic SCOTUS decision. e.g. I would say an anti-corruption amendment is now pressing as a result of the dodgy recent SCOTUS "Citizen's United" decision (and related cases McCutcheon, Buckley v Valeo etc). In that sense, there are probably quite a few pressing amendments, depending on which side of the aisle one is on, concerning SCOTUS decisions in the last few decades around gun rights, abortion, homosexuality etc.

As an international observer I would tend to say that there's a two-fold fundamental problem in the US political setup:
a) That SCOTUS, as opposed to congress, is making decisions of national import with regard to moral issues. Such decisions should not be being made by SCOTUS.
b) That SCOTUS judges are political appointees, rather than non-partisan ones.

The way it works currently in the US results in voters who are concerned about a particular moral issue, voting for a person of their 'side' for president regardless of how much they dislike that person personally, in the desperate hope that one day eventually he might appoint a person to SCOTUS, and that that SCOTUS appointee might one day eventually receive a case on that particular issue, and if it so happens that there are enough other similarly appointed SCOTUS judges, then the original voter might get a SCOTUS decision in favor of their side on that moral issue... possibly 20 or 30 years after they cast their vote.

And that is an insane system. It doesn't work like that in any other country whose politics I'm familiar with. American 'single issue voters' being so desperate to get their way on abortion, that they are willing to vote for the Republican presidential nominee time after time, no matter how bad he is personally, in the hope of eventually getting a SCOTUS decision that they haven't yet got in 40 years despite Republican-appointed judges having the majority on SCOTUS all that time, breaks the stupidometer. The stupid doesn't just lie with these voters, it lies in the underlying political setup where (a) it's SCOTUS making these decisions rather than an elected part of government, and (b) SCOTUS is politically appointed. Those two in combination lead to idiocy. Either one of those, and preferably both of those, need to be changed in order to de-insanify US politics and bring it into line with the practices of other Western countries.

[Ronson]

I didn't figure you'd understand that ...

Pretentious people who need 106 words to say "I prefer using definitions" need their mama.

[CivilDiscourse]

Given an amendment is, hopefully, an improvement... your sentence to me reads as "Aside from making improvements, what is there to improve?"

Again, you confuse me by saying what I see as the same thing, but now you're simultaneously fine with and scared of that thing.

On the one hand you say it's an evolving document and you seem okay with that. On the other hand you're apparently scared of people who want to evolve it (who want to "scrap it" and replace it with something similar but saying something a bit different).

You seem a bit incoherent on the issue. It's not apparent whether you think changing the constitution is something scary leftists want to do who are bad and scary for wanting to do it, or something you think the very-wise founding fathers assumed would need to be done and thus they wisely provided a mechanism for making changes to it.

I would say that the point being made (worded poorly) is that the framers introduced a method for amending the constitution. However, because they made that amendment procedure daunting, it requires broad agreement that something is wrong before it can be changed.

While almost anything could be changed via amendment, in reality only things that are largely agreed upon as wrong can really be changed.

Hence the part about "aside from making amendments, what is there to improve".

[Mountain Man]

Pretentious people who need 106 words to say "I prefer using definitions" need their mama.

It's like having our own resident Sir Humphrey Appleby.

Instead of simply saying, "Perhaps the terrorists don't see you as important enough to assassinate," he prefers to say, "In view of the somewhat nebulous and inexplicit nature of your remit, and the arguably marginal and peripheral nature of your influence within the central deliberations and decisions within the political process, there could be a case for restructuring their action priorities in such a way as to eliminate your liquidation from their immediate agenda."

[Gondwanaland]

Pretentious people who need 106 words to say "I prefer using definitions" need their mama.

Seriously. Is she that pretentious or is she like paid by the word to troll the internet or something?

[Ronson]

Seriously. Is she that pretentious or is she like paid by the word to troll the internet or something?

If paid to troll, wouldn't she make a bigger splash on Facebook or Twitter?

I think she likes to hear herself talk (figuratively). The type of person who calls a shovel a "manual earth-manipulating device."

[Gondwanaland]

If paid to troll, wouldn't she make a bigger splash on Facebook or Twitter?

I think she likes to hear herself talk (figuratively). The type of person who calls a shovel a "manual earth-manipulating device."

Well, Facebook maybe. Twitter she'd be limited by character limits which would not be fun for her

[firstfloor]

Support Allison Gill.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/0...sshairs-342332
Help us dump Trump.

[Ronson]

It's like having our own resident Sir Humphrey Appleby.

Instead of simply saying, "Perhaps the terrorists don't see you as important enough to assassinate," he prefers to say, "In view of the somewhat nebulous and inexplicit nature of your remit, and the arguably marginal and peripheral nature of your influence within the central deliberations and decisions within the political process, there could be a case for restructuring their action priorities in such a way as to eliminate your liquidation from their immediate agenda."

There was a real-life 1800s character in England (a knighted person, I believe) who also blathered on endlessly. If I can remember his name I'll post it here. He had some whoppers.

[JimL]

There was a real-life 1800s character in England (a knighted person, I believe) who also blathered on endlessly. If I can remember his name I'll post it here. He had some whoppers.

Why the personal attacks? Oh, I forgot, conservatives in this country have this feeling of intellectual inferiority so are always disparaging those who they percieve to be intellectually superior, the so called elites. It kind of makes you feel better, I guess.

[Ronson]

Why the personal attacks?

A pretentious German attacking Americans every day on an American website deserves some blowback.

Oh, I forgot, conservatives in this country have this feeling of intellectual inferiority so are always disparaging those who they percieve to be intellectually superior, the so called elites. It kind of makes you feel better, I guess.

And then the hypocrite launches into an unprovoked personal attack.

[seanD]

A pretentious German attacking Americans every day on an American website deserves some blowback.



And then the hypocrite launches into an unprovoked personal attack.

If she were pro-Trump, she'd automatically be suspected by JimL as a foreign spy in a hot second.

[JimL]

A pretentious German attacking Americans every day on an American website deserves some blowback.



And then the hypocrite launches into an unprovoked personal attack.

But that's a fact, we here it all the time, the liberal elites, the Ivy leaguers, as if higher education is a bad thing. It's obviously a projection of an inferiority complex.

[Ronson]

But that's a fact,

Yes, your hypocrisy is a fact.

we here it all the time, the liberal elites, the Ivy leaguers, as if higher education is a bad thing. It's obviously a projection of an inferiority complex.

Don't worry, I don't suspect you of a higher education. Otherwise you'd learn to spell "hear."

[JimL]

If she were pro-Trump, she'd automatically be suspected by JimL as a foreign spy in a hot second.

If HP was pro Trump i'd think she was uninformed, naive, or both. The same as I think of all Trumpsters. Trump on the other hand may very well be a foriegn agent.