With polling showing over 80 percent of Americans in favor of voter ID laws, it is hard to come up with reasons why you need an ID to board a plane but not vote in a federal election. That was particularly glaring this week when Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) required people to show an ID to attend his campaign events after opposing an ID requirement to vote. So if you want to hear Ossoff speak against voter ID, you will have to show your ID. Now Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) has a rather bizarre argument: the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, if passed, would likely violate the 19th Amendment to the Constitution.
CNN Host Kasie Hunt told Raskin that “Voter ID is supported by the majority of Americans. But there are Democrats on the Hill and you voted against this? Why not support voter ID?”
Raskin then had this curious response:
“… what’s wrong with the Save act? What’s wrong with it is that it might violate the 19th Amendment, which gives women the right to vote, because you’ve got to show that all of your different IDs match. So if you’re a woman who’s gotten married and you’ve changed your name to your husband’s name, but you’re so now your current name is different from your name at birth. Now you’ve got to go ahead and document that you need an affidavit explaining why. And why would we go to all of these, troubles in order to keep people from voting when none of the states that are actually running the elections are telling us that there’s any problem.”
In fact, under various voter ID laws, states can create systems to address issues such as different maiden names or name changes following a divorce, including requiring a standard attestation provided by the state. Nothing in the SAVE Act requires birth certificates be brought to polling places. It allows for the use of a signed attestation supplied by the state.
As for identification, various forms are allowed:
The legislation would require documentation that shows an individual was born in the U.S., including either:
- An ID that complies with the REAL ID Act and indicates the holder is a citizen;
- A passport;
- A military ID card and military record of service that shows a person was born in the U.S.;
- A government-issued photo ID that shows the person’s place of birth was in the U.S.;
- Other forms of government-issued photo ID, if they’re accompanied by a birth certificate, comparable document or naturalization certificate.
Now, on the 19th Amendment, Raskin’s argument is simply ridiculous. Indeed, if this were credible, why has it not been used successfully against prior state voting ID laws? Rather than making this claim on CNN, it would be interesting for Raskin to try it in court once the SAVE Act passes.
It is unlikely to succeed because the 19th Amendment guarantees the right to vote, but, like all citizens, women can be asked to prove their eligibility to vote. The suggestion that requiring a signature on an attestation form is a barrier to voting is simply incredible.
The Nineteenth Amendment provides:
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Requiring proof of your identity neither denies nor abridges the right to vote. Indeed, for supporters of voter ID laws, it protects the right to vote by ensuring that only eligible voters are counted in elections.
Would requiring the REAL ID also violate constitutional rights like the right to travel or association for those with name changes? Of course not. The government may require basic identification for such transactions while creating reasonable methods of addressing name or address changes.
The claim of a 19th Amendment violation is spurious but par for the course in our current political environment. As with claims that democracy is about to die, these inflammatory claims are designed to distract voters who overwhelmingly support Voter ID. Democratic members are unified in opposing such laws. That is a debate that should be resolved on the merits, not meritless constitutional claims.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
I always thought Raskin looked like a rat.
He looks like how I imagine the character Ellsworth Toohey from Ayn Rand’s “The Fountainhead”
This sounds like the kind of thing Trump would say.
I guess that great minds really do think alike.
Thank you.
I will probably be pilloried for my comment, but no matter. The problem with the SAVE Act is that it is simply another paranoid solution in search of a problem. For those of you who have a sincere interest in bringing an informed voice to the debate, I strongly recommend reading “The Right to Vote” by Alexander Keyssar. In the interest of full disclosure, Alex Keyssar is an historian, a former classmate of mine and one of the smartest people I ever met. His book is widely available and is generally considered to be the definitive history of voting in this country. It’s also a great read.
in order to buy Keyssar’s book, wrapped in black plastic covering, the buyer needs to present a valid ID to show proof of age to buy p0rn.
Michael,
respectfully – you have offered an opinion in the most generic of possible forms.
You have not offered anything to be able to discuss that opinion – besides and appeal to an authority, and worse still you prop up your authority with a circular appeal to your own authority.
I have no idea about Alexander Keyssar but you have given me no reason to wish to read him.
Why should he know anything more than anyone else ?
The history of voting in the US is chock full of fraud and corruption of all kinds.
We went through 30 years of h311 before starting late in the 19th century 38 states enacted secret ballot constitutional emendments in an attempt to thwart massive fraud.
Lyndon Johnsons narrow victory by fraud in his first senate race is mythical – and was eventually confirmed absolutely late in the 20th century.
Is there anyone doubts that the Dallys controlled politics in Illinois for decades, in NYC Tammany hall controlled it even longer.
When the HAV act eliminated mechanical voting machines in the early 21st century, almost every single machine was found to have had gears filed down to down ratio the votes of specific candidates – but often those alterations stayed in place for DECADES unintentionally impacting myriads of elections.
Regardless what we KNOW about election fraud is that if you are not constantly diligent it WILL happen.
WE also KNOW that the claims that various forms of fraud are low are distorted.
In much of the country in most election one candidate is likely to win by 20pts.
Fraud in those elections is impossible. You can not inject 20pct of fraudulent ballots without raising everyones hackles.
Even if there is no obvious evidence of Fraud when the polls show one candidate with a 20pt lead – there WILL BE an investigation.
Election fraud is ALWAYS at the margins.
There were myriads of credible allegations of election fraud in the Newsome recall election.
But there were no investigations – even though some fraud was near certain – why ?
Because Newsome survived recall by over 4M votes – that much fraud in one state is just not possible.
Could there have been a grand total of 44,000 votes of fraud in 3 states in 2020 ?
TRIVIALLY,
And in fact with certainty there was. The question is whether it changed the outcome.
One of the reasons we have election laws, and on of the reasons it isvery very important to follow them,
is because while there are some forms of fraud we can find no matter what – in AZ there were 48.000 absolutely fraudlent votes cast in 2020
13500 people cast 48,000 votes. That is fraud. But we do not know who each of them voted from each time, so we have no clue how it effected the election.
Nor do we KNOW that those people actually committed the fraud. One of the problems with mailin voting is that political operatives can go over public voting records and find people who have not voted in the past several elections and inject mailin votes for them relatively easily.
This is one of the reasons that secret ballots rquire ONLY state printed ballots that NEVER leave the custody of the state.
That makes forged ballots harder, and makes forged ballots easier to detect.
No other develoed country – and very few countries in the world have mailin voting.
IT CAN NOT BE DONE SECURELY.
Do we have a number of states with successful mailin voting ?
Absolutely. about 70% of people would behave morally and ethically even if there was no enforcement of the law.
but 30% will not.
Further as we have seen in all those purportedly wonderful nordic social democracies, When everyone is from the exact same tribe and religion.
social and culture norms prevent all kinds of misconduct.
But as we have seen in those same nordic social democracies – increase the diversity of the population – by even 10% and crime skyrockets.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a fairly famous libertarian – she is also an american born in Somalia.
And she has commented on the somali fraud in MN.
HE comment was that it was inevitable. The Somali moral norms are much different from this country.
The somalias’s getting millions in frad in the US and shipping that money back to Somalia are doing exactly what their society and morality demands. She pointed out that for many years whe was living outside of Somalia in dangerous conditions – and still her tribe in Somalia made sure she was supported. That is the culture, that is their morality.
The US is the most diverse country in the world. That is on NET good, but presuming that it is ENTIRELY good is idiocy.
Regardless, if you make election fraud possible, if you make it easy – it is going to happen. Not everywhere all the time.
But absoltuely when the chances of success are great and the odds of getting caught are low.
If your historian makes any other claim – he is either ignorant of reality or immoral.
If you value the Constitution, then Trump is the one you should oppose.
Neither Turley nor the MAGAs care about the Constitution.
So true, there is no legal basis for Social Security and Medicare; those programs cannot be taxed for or funded and they cannot be regulated per Article 1, Section 8.
“YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE CONSTITUTION!”
Under the Constitution, you’re on your own, comrade!
The Constitution provides Freedom and Self-Reliance.
You want “free stuff” and “free status.”
That is all.
Anonymous,
If we value the Constitution and what it stands for, peraps the vast majority of politicians and jurrists are the ones we should oppose – regardless of party affiliation.
“YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE CONSTITUTION!”
Karl Marx and the American juristocracy demolished private property, etc., when the Founders understood it to be essential:
“[Private property is] that dominion which one man claims and exercises over the external things of the world, in exclusion of every other individual.”
– James Madison
Why ?
That piece of communist excrement probably considers the constitution illegal. He is an evil human being who follow in the footsteps of his Marxist father. I wish he would follow in the footsteps of his son who committed suicide. He would reduce his carbon footprint
From a systems perspective, the debate should start with the output we are trying to achieve. That output is a verifiable, accurate, and clean election in which only eligible citizens vote. If we cannot agree on that goal, then disagreements over process are inevitable, because people will keep adjusting inputs and procedures to produce the outcome they prefer.
Once the desired output is clear, the real discussion should be about designing processes that reliably produce it. That includes accommodating normal variation among citizens while still maintaining verification and integrity. The solution is not to abandon standards, but to build processes that make it reasonably accessible for eligible citizens to meet them.
In short, we should be debating both the required outcome and the best processes to achieve it, not treating election integrity and access as competing values when they are, in fact, complementary.
“The Democrat Party is, and always has been, the party of human bondage.
They owned the slaves.
They fought the war to keep them.
They founded the KKK to terrorize them once they were free.
They wrote the Jim Crow laws to chain them all over again.
They invented poll taxes, literacy tests, and lynch mobs to crush any hope of equality.
Every single depraved chapter of racial oppression in America has Democrat fingerprints smeared in blood across it.
Don’t feed me that “parties switched” fairy tale.
That’s a modern lie fabricated to whitewash their filth.
The racist Southern Democrats didn’t suddenly become Republicans…they stayed Democrats until they rotted in the ground, and their voters only flipped decades later when Democrats realized they needed a new mask and started pretending to give a dam* about civil rights for cold, calculated votes.
The Ku Klux Klan was born in 1865 in Pulaski, Tennessee, by Confederate veterans…all Democrats.
Nathan Bedford Forrest, their first Grand Wizard, was a Democrat delegate.
The KKK was nothing less than the terrorist enforcement wing of the Democrat Party, designed to lynch, burn, and intimidate black voters and any Republicans daring to enforce Reconstruction.
Democrats fought tooth and nail against every major civil rights advance:
I. Opposed the 13th Amendment…abolishing slavery…100% of Republicans voted yes in the House, while a pathetic fraction of Democrats did.
II. Opposed the 14th Amendment…citizenship and equal protection…and the 15th Amendment (voting rights)…Democrats in Congress and state legislatures dragged their feet, sabotaged, and defied them at every turn.
III. Imposed and defended Jim Crow segregation for nearly a century…Democrat governors, mayors, and sheriffs like Birmingham’s Bull Connor…a loyal Democrat…unleashed dogs and fire hoses on peaceful black protesters.
IV. Filibustered the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for 75 f—ing days…led by Robert Byrd, Democrat senator, former KKK recruiter, and exalted cyclops who filibustered for over 14 hours straight.
It was Republicans who smashed that filibuster, provided the decisive votes, and forced the bill through.
Then there’s Lyndon Baines Johnson, that crude, racist Texas Democrat who threw around the hard N and R like it was punctuation in private conversations.
After signing the Civil Rights Act…only because political reality and public pressure left him no choice…LBJ bragged to two governors on Air Force One:
“I’ll have those [expletive] voting Democratic for 200 years.”…. “Expletive” being hard N and R.
He didn’t say that out of love.
He said it because he understood the psychology of control cold: hand out just enough government scraps to create dependency, keep them terrified of losing the drip-feed, breed learned helplessness across generations, and you own their souls…and their votes…for centuries.
That is the true Democrat legacy: not freedom, but a new kind of plantation.
Swap iron shackles for welfare checks, crumbling projects, fatherless homes, failing schools, and endless victimhood scripts.
Keep them enraged, afraid, addicted to the state, and convinced that any escape attempt is betrayal…and they’ll line up every election to thank their overseers with blind loyalty.
The venom here isn’t mine.
It’s etched into the Democrat Party’s DNA.
For 160 years they’ve mastered the art of controlling black America through fear, guilt, paternalism, and handouts disguised as justice.
And the most depraved part?
They’ve convinced millions it’s “compassion” while quietly laughing at the chains they forged.”
WAKE UP, BRAINWASHED PEOPLE WHO STILL REFLEXIVELY VOTE DEMOCRAT!
“THE RECONSTRUCTION AMENDMENTS OF A SOCIAL WORLD”
13TH, 14TH, 15TH, 19TH
BROUGHT TO YOU BY KARL MARX AND ABRAHAM LINCOLN, FELLOW TRAVELERS
IT COST AMERICANS THEIR CONSTITUTION, BILL OF RIGHTS, AND FREEDOM.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
“The workingmen of Europe…consider…that it fell to the lot of Abraham Lincoln…to lead his country through the…RECONSTRUCTION OF A SOCIAL WORLD.”
– Karl Marx Letter to Abraham Lincoln, 1865
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/iwma/documents/1864/lincoln-letter.htm
As usual, Turley provides the MAGA spin. Americans DO favor voting security, and in most places you must show ID to vote; but Americans DO NOT favor having to prove also prove citizenship in order to vote. We have never been a country in which you have to carry around your “papers” to prove you are a citizen and to be required to produce them on demand, but that’s what Trump and Republicans want because it would mostly be used against brown and black people. It’s what ICE is doing–and MOST Americans oppose this Gestapo-inspired tactic.
Here’s what’s wrong with not only needing to show ID to vote–which you have to do everywhere, BUT ALSO prove citizenship. Your new secure driver’s license with the star, that you can use to board a plane, will not work. Passports would work, but only about 50% of Americans have passports, and most minority voters and/or those in the lower socioeconomic strata of society–which are the ones Republicans want to disenfranchise–do not have them. Republicans KNOW this, which is WHY they are pushing for it. You might be able to use your birth certificate, but if you don’t have one, it’s a major hassle to get one. And, for people who took their spouse’s name after marriage, their ID would not match their birth certificate anyway, so that’s out, leaving only the passport route, which is time consuming and costly, especially for lower income people.
The BIG THING Turley is leaving out is that there has NEVER BEEN widespread voter fraud involving non-citzens trying to vote in the first place, and most Americans do NOT support having to prove citizenship, so conflating the desire for secure voting with needing to prove citizenship is disingenuous. It’s a solution in search of a problem that doesn’t exist, but the real agenda is to suppress the vote of probable Democrat voters. BUT that’s not how the MAGA spin goes. This is all part of the desperate effort by Republicans to avoid the shellacking they know is coming in November. So, Turley and other MAGA media try to sell this as voting security, which it is not. A bonus to today’s MAGA piece–a swipe at Rep. Raskin.
If the law requires citizenship in order to vote WHY would you not have to prove it in order to vote? More than half the states require it already and minority turn out has increased.
Because the government already knows who is a citizen. The same government that wants proof of citizenship to vote is the same one that issues proof of citizenship documents.
You’re so naive. As if little county offices are honest. Laughable.
Try getting proof of criminal history from Venezuela, Haiti, Somalia 😂.
“Americans DO NOT favor having to prove also prove citizenship in order to vote. ”
FALSE
https://sharylattkisson.com/2024/10/poll-majority-demands-citizenship-proof-for-voting/
. How can anyone give proof of citizenship when we don’t know what it is?
Personal responsibility isn’t it. I KNOW, ask your mother and father if they’re citizens and gramma and grampa ☺. Then pull a fast one that will skew the whole system ☺. The another fast one and get people killed or murdered ☺.
What tangled webs we weave…
Personal note: I no longer watch any news and not much media either. I tuned in today to get an update on Guthrie and to read P. Turley. Not doing kamala again, not evah seeing Crockett or RICO Cortez again or any other bunk and junk.
“We have never been a country in which you have to carry around your “papers” to prove you are a citizen and to be required to produce them on demand”
Correct.
SCOTUS has ruled that you can not be required to produce ID when wondering arround in public.
But you are required to provide proof that you are licensed to drive,
can legally work in the US,
that you are eligible to vote.
None of those are new.
The SAVE act does not change anything about eligibility to vote, it just tightens the requirements to prove it before registering.
You can not be required to provide “papers” if you are just wandering around.
But if law enforcement has “reasonable suspicion” that you have done something illegal – even something minor
they are allowed to ask for ID and detain you until they can ID you
This si NOT new, it is also not part of the SAVE act
It is also obvious to all but morons.
You can not avoid criminal culpability by refusing to identify yourself.
This is the state of US law, it has been the state for decades.
Ohio V Terry was decided in 1968.
Do not piss all over ICE or make this idiotic “Gestapo: claims because ICE is following laws and law enforcement procedures that have been the norms for many decades.
I would note that Ohio V Terry just gave SCOTUS’s impramatur to state laws that had been in place for decades.
So we are talking CENTURIES of law enforcement practice.
If you do not like that – change the law or amend the constitution.
John Say is a MAGA-media paid commentator. He spends his time trying to stop the hemorrhaging of support away from Trump and toward Democrats.
“John Say is a MAGA-media paid commentator.”
If anyone wishes to pay me – I will happily accept.
I will even spend more time rducing typos and other errors.
But sadly no one is paying me.
Further – I am NOT MAGA I am libertarian.
Is there a assertion of law or fact in my post that is incorrect ?
“He spends his time trying to stop the hemorrhaging of support away from Trump and toward Democrats.”
Yesterday 42 protesters were arrested in Minneapolis, …. by MPD.
Walz and Frey did not chose to return to enforcing the law – even when ICE was the target because Trump and ICE are hemorrhaging support.
But you are free to beleive whatever delusions you wish.
“Your new secure driver’s license with the star, that you can use to board a plane, will not work.”
It will if your state implimented the citizenship mark.
BTW 76 % of minorities approve.
Finally the law already requires you to BE a citizen to vote in federal elections – that is not new.
The SAVE act merely requires states to Verify that you are a citizen before allowing you to vote.
There are many ways to do that. You only have to do that ONCE when you register.
But you can register without proving citizenship, and if you do then you must provide proof of citizenship when you VOTE.
There are many ways you can do that.
If all else fails you can do so by affadavit.
Are you honestly claiming that minorities are too stupid to get drivers license – which usually REQUIRES proof of ID – and the most common way to do so is a BIRTH CERTIFICATE, which also proves citizenship.
In my state you MUST appear in person to get a Drivers License.
You MUST prove identity.
You MUST provide a social security card AND one of the following
Birth certifitcate
Certificate of citizenship
Certicicate of naturalization.
Valid US passport.
Those documents are REQUIRED to have matching information.
If they do not you are required to provide proof of name change – such as a court order or marraige license.
This is the requirements for a drivers license or a FREE State ID
and they have been the requirements for DECADES.
I provided the above 50 years ago.
Are you saying black and brown people are too stupid to do that ?
Yes they are.
“The BIG THING Turley is leaving out is that there has NEVER BEEN widespread voter fraud involving non-citzens trying to vote in the first place,”
How would you know ?
Just to be clear – Citizenship is just a PART of SAVE.
The REAL objective is to preclude people who are NOT REAL from voting.
That is why the inperson registration requirement.
While Mailin voting is unconstitutional in 38 states – despite some state court rulings.
And there are many problems with mailin voting.
One of the largest is that there is no verification that a mailin voter is real.
Note to readers: John Say NEVER cites any sources for what he claims are facts–wonder why?
Because the primary source of his information is the voices in his head.
He is profoundly mentally impaired.
ad hominem is not an argument
ad hominem is not an argument
John Say
I am not attempting to argue ANYTHING with you. I have absolutely no interest in attempting to argue with you. As Mark Twain said, “Don’t argue with idiots. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience”
I am simply making the completely neutral observation that your comments here are mind numbingly incoherent, irrational, nonsensical diatribes of disconnected and irrelevant thoughts that are typical of those suffering from mental illness.
As such, your comments have virtually no credibility, especially when you post interminably long Youtube videos from your fellow cranks as “evidence” of the veracity of your comments.
You have absolutely no credibility whatsoever.
You live in a fantasy land of delusion and mental illness.
ARe you unable to find the text of the Save ACT ?
I did provide a link in one of my posts ?
Do you have ANY example of a premise or a logical expression that I have made that is false ?
Am I required to provide a source that the sun rose today ?
In the real world people earn a reputation for truthfulness (or lack thereof),
and THAT is how we measure there assertions NOT sources.
Regardless we live in the internet era – you can easily find source for every assertion I make.
DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH.
“but Americans DO NOT favor having to prove also prove citizenship in order to vote”
Wrong. Why do you believe untrue things and then spread them? You’re a liar!
Americans favor proving you are a citizen when you register. Normal Americans aren’t gypsies so it’s only needed when you move and settle down somewhere. rare. Voting ID is to prove you’re you. registering the day of is the unusual practice.
Americans favor only Americans voting. Get used to it because that’s how it’s going to be going forward and that means the left will completely die out. your dumb strategy circumvented, thanks Trump!
. Proof of citizenship with a photo ID? Laughable
The Bee is reporting that Democrats may support the voter ID law if death certificates are added to the list of acceptable IDs.
Today, Bad Bunny is set to perform in the Super Bowl’s halftime show, and President Trump is angry about it. “I think it’s a terrible choice,” Trump seethed recently, referring to the Puerto Rican performer and the band Green Day, who will also play during the San Francisco event. “All it does is sow hatred,” Trump added. “Terrible.”
Though Trump said that’s not why he’s skipping the event—it’s “too far away,” he insisted—this anger at Bad Bunny captures something important about our political moment. As many noted, it comes after Bad Bunny harshly attacked ICE during his Grammy Award acceptance speech last week, using the movement phrase “ICE out” and claiming of ICE’s victims: “We are Americans.” In response, the White House stupidly raged that he’d attacked “law enforcement.”
But something deeper is going on here than Trump’s usual lashing out at a critic. This clash hints at a genuine fear on Trump’s part that he’s on the defensive big time in the war over ICE—not just in the political war, not just in the war that’s shedding American blood in the streets, but also in the culture war. Because the battle over ICE has become a culture war all unto itself. And Trump is losing it.
The president has long regarded pro and college football—the players and fans, at least—as “his” part of the culture. During his first term, it was commonplace for him or other MAGA personalities to share video of football stadiums in red America cheering him wildly. His propagandists hailed these spectacles as barometers of what “Real America” believes. Just as Trump thinks that biker gangs, cops and coal miners naturally love him, he believes deep in his brainstem that all these tough guy players with forearm tattoos and their cheering, violence-relishing fans just have to be his people.
Indeed, Trump and MAGA have reacted with particular vehemence when opinions they despise have crept into the world of football. He raged wildly back in 2017 when African American football players took a knee to commemorate Black Lives Matter during playing of the National Anthem. Liberal Taylor Swift’s relationship with pro-receiver Travis Kelce became a source of deep angst on the MAGA right.
Trump views the NFL as a place where violence and toxic masculinity should be celebrated.
In other words, this should be Trump’s cultural territory. Football has been an arena in which some of the biggest cultural battles of the Trump era have been fought—and Trump and MAGA seem to think it’s turf they should own exclusively.
But it isn’t.
You could see this misplaced confidence on display last October, when Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem declared that ICE will be “all over” the Super Bowl, warning people to stay away unless they are “law-abiding Americans who love this country.”
Translation: This is MAGA territory, and ICE will be hailed as conquering heroes at the Superbowl, so suck on that, libs!
Now, however, ICE enforcement operations at the Superbowl have quietly been canceled.
It’s absolutely plausible that a significant ICE operational presence would face hostility at the Super Bowl—hardly a spectacle Trump and Noem relish
Lurking behind all this Trump-NFL weirdness is a broader form of hubris. Trump and MAGA have long assumed that MAGA-adjacent parts of the culture will rally to ICE violence.
Yet large swaths of the culture, including typically MAGA-friendly ones, like the NFL, have now turned against all of this at a deep level.
Bad Bunny is a symbol of cultural diversity. If the NFL owners see Bad Bunny as good for business, that’s very bad for the Trump regime.
Whether Trump knows it or not, he’s losing this culture war very, very badly.
What does that have to do with voter ID, DNC-paid troll/bot?
The NFL, NBA, MLB, USTA, LIV Golf et al., have stolen American sports from Americans, which makes them all direct and mortal enemies of America and Americans.
The invasion and fertility rate “death spiral” continue to the demise of America.
The existential threat of these foreign contagions must be constrained to the international Olympics.
Good god anonymous……your rant has nothing to do with John’s post. Start your own blog. Now, as a woman and a lawyer I find this argument by Osdoff a total joke.
Keep whistling past that graveyard.
“Today, Bad Bunny is set to perform in the Super Bowl’s halftime show”
Who cares ?
I do not care if Bad Bunny or Whoopi Goldberg or Billie Ilish performs.
I will be happy to listen to their performance – if it is good,
and do not give a schiff about their politics.
However if they USE their Superbowl performance to shill their politics – they should be banned.
Save that for the Grammies
“Bad Bunny harshly attacked ICE during his Grammy Award acceptance speech last week”
Outside the fr left – NO ONE CARES.
I have no interest in “Bad Bunny”
I like Billie Ilish – but like many performers whose politics are far left – I pay ZERO attention to their moronic political statements.
They are perfectly free to offer them. Though they do risk pi$$ing off their audience,
Regardless what I care about is their performance NOT their politics.
I do not ask my grocer what his politics is, I ask him how much eggs cost.
With respect to the idiotic anti-ICE nonsense of the left.
It is true that the massive effort by the far left to undermine ICE has worked – ICE is -20.
But outside of the far left no one is trying to get rid of them.
Nor has the attacks on ICE resulted in changes in support for deporting criminal illegals or all illegals.
The stupidity of left wing nuts was aptly exposed by Billie Ilish’s idiotic staement on the Grammies.
The Tongva tribe is California is now asking when she will return her mansion to them.
Who are “ICE’s victims” ?
56% of Minnesotans want state and local authorities to cooperate with ICE to deport criminal illegals.
No the left is NOT winning the culture war.
You “Won” aspects of that decades ago, and since you are on a self inflicted losing streak.
absolutely americans have decided correctly that homosexuals are entitled to the same rights are everyone else.
But they have not changed their minds about “what is a woman”
Few care if adults adopt the attire of the opposite sex, or even mutalate their bodies to appear more like the opposite sex.
But that does not make you the opposite sex, any more than painting a mural on your house changes it into a waterfall.
People overwhelmingly want voter ID and contra another poster here – they overwhelmining what proof of citizenship to vote.
People overwhelimingly STILL want criminal illegal immigrants deported – they are NOT “members of our community” no matter how much those of you on the left try to cosplay otherwise.
A substantial minority STILL want ALL illegal immigrants deported – again they are NOT “members of our community” no matter how much those of you on the left try to cosplay otherwise.
The country is not Xenophobic, it is not anti-immigrant. It is anti-lawlessness.
They believe that the law should decide who is allowed into the country,
and that the citizens through their elected representatives should decide who and how many that is.
Not lawless far left wing nuts.
No you are not winning the “culture war” – you are losing it.
You are on the wrong side of aall the issues people care about
You are under the delusion that making people hate Trump or ICE
actually changes their views on issues.
” In response, the White House stupidly raged that he’d attacked “law enforcement.””
Of course he had, as are you.
ICE is not doing anything that law enforcement does not do, and in fact statistically they are LESS prone to error, excessive force ETC than other LEOs.
The left is making hay out of the fact that even the best of the best will make frequent mistakes if they are doing 1M arrests per year.
ICE has a fraction of the deaths per arrest that normal officers do.
Yes, when you are attacking ICE you are attacking law enforcement.
“This clash hints at a genuine fear on Trump’s part that he’s on the defensive big time in the war over ICE”
Lots of spin speculation mind reading an emotion – are there any FACTS ?
Peoples views regarding deporting illegals are unchanged.
Trump is not on the defensive YOU are.
the fact that 56% of minnesotans wanted the local and state LEOs to cooperate with ICE risked a red wave in MN in 2026,
and THAT is why it is actually Walz and democrats that made the changed.
Trump changed his language and sent a guy with a suit instead of a guy in combat fatigues to stand in front of cameras in MN.
Walz called in the NG to defend federal property and Frey has MPD thwarting illegal acts by protestors.
And THAT is why ICE can sent 700 officers elsewhere.
You can also tell who capitulated – because left wing nuts are protesting Walz in the Capital.
“not just in the political war, not just in the war that’s shedding American blood in the streets”
More people were killed BY criminal illegals in the midst of ICE operations than idiot left wing nuts.
“but also in the culture war. Because the battle over ICE has become a culture war all unto itself. And Trump is losing it.”
It is a part of a culture war – but it is the left that is losing it.
You MIGHT have persuaded people they want a kinder gentler ICE to deport illegal aliens.
But outside of far left wing nuts – people still want illegals deported by pretty much the same numbers as they did in 2024.
The DO NOT consider illegal aliens their “community” – only left wing nuts do.
“The president has long regarded pro and college football—the players and fans, at least—as “his” part of the culture.”
The fans inarguably yes. SOME of the players YES, all of the players NO.
No one has ever claimed that half time entertainment is right leaning, or that many individaul players – such as Colin Kapernick are.
But the sport itself absolutely possitively is.
If you want to know about the culture shift – watch the Bud Weiser Commercial.
The Clysdales are back, Eagles are Back, Pride in America is Back.
What is gone is pro trans nonsense.
“During his first term, it was commonplace for him or other MAGA personalities to share video of football stadiums in red America cheering him wildly. ”
And common for left wing nuts to show football players kneeling or playing the “black national anthem”
Things have changed – the left lost.
“His propagandists hailed these spectacles as barometers of what “Real America” believes. ”
Correct, not half time entertainment, not a few left wing nut players.
“Just as Trump thinks that biker gangs, cops and coal miners naturally love him”
Probably – as well as autoworkers, oilmen, Nascar fans, ….
“he believes deep in his brainstem”
Back to mind reading.
“that all these tough guy players with forearm tattoos and their cheering, violence-relishing fans just have to be his people.”
To a large extgent they are.
“Indeed, Trump and MAGA have reacted with particular vehemence when opinions they despise have crept into the world of football. He raged wildly back in 2017 when African American football players took a knee to commemorate Black Lives Matter during playing of the National Anthem. Liberal Taylor Swift’s relationship with pro-receiver Travis Kelce became a source of deep angst on the MAGA right.”
Ignoring the exaggerated emotion – correct – ignoring minor factual errors.
Where have all the left wing nuts gone ? the NFL ended taking a knee, and outside of Half time entertainers politics is either forbidden or right leaning.
“Trump views the NFL as a place where violence and toxic masculinity should be celebrated.”
That is not Trump’s view – that is pretty close to litterally the appeal of nearly all competitive sports.
Wither it is UFC or boxing or NFL. There are rules for the game, and teamwork, strategy and tactics are extremely important.
But if you loose the phsical conflict – you lose the game. If the defensive line manhandles the offensive line consistently – the other team wins.
If the offensive line exhausts the defense – that team wins.
There are no female players in the NFL.
All other things being equal, the smartest team wins.
All other things being equal the team int he best physical shape wins.
Football and most competitive sports are about masculinity and even lesbians cheer on their team.
“In other words, this should be Trump’s cultural territory”
It is.
“Football has been an arena in which some of the biggest cultural battles of the Trump era have been fought”
Nope, they are just one of many battlefields.
One the left is LOING
“But it isn’t.”
ROFL
“You could see this misplaced confidence on display last October, when Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem declared that ICE will be “all over” the Super Bowl, warning people to stay away unless they are “law-abiding Americans who love this country.”
Translation: This is MAGA territory, and ICE will be hailed as conquering heroes at the Superbowl, so suck on that, libs!
Now, however, ICE enforcement operations at the Superbowl have quietly been canceled.
It’s absolutely plausible that a significant ICE operational presence would face hostility at the Super Bowl—hardly a spectacle Trump and Noem relish”
It is also possible and more plausible that Noems rhetoric accomplished its purpose – and illegal aliens stayed away from the Super Bowl.
It is also possible that Trump decided that MAGA needed to watch the superbowl.
That if they wanted to watch ICE – they could do that anytime.
Just as Trump replaced Greg Bovino in combat gear with Tom Homan in a suit.
While continuing to arrest over 1000 criminal illegals in Minneapolis.
Unlike left wing nuts – Trump is not stupid.
He knows what people want, and he knows how to change tactics to get those results with the lest problems.
“Lurking behind all this Trump-NFL weirdness is a broader form of hubris. Trump and MAGA have long assumed that MAGA-adjacent parts of the culture will rally to ICE violence.
Yet large swaths of the culture, including typically MAGA-friendly ones, like the NFL, have now turned against all of this at a deep level.”
Only in your head. With few exceptions the vocal attacks on ICE come from the same places.
Further those people are doing horribly. Walz and Frey are now being attacked by their own.
People do not want to see how the sausage is made – and the left has been slightly successful in making the enforcement of immigration law as ugly as possible.
But people still want the sausage.
Just a week ago – Democrats were going to shut down the government to defund ICE.
What was accomplished ? The SAVE Act was pulled for a coming stand alone fight that will be bloody,
but is once again democrats fighting on ground where 80% of the country opposes them.
If they lose – they lose, even if they win they lose.
We have had a year long battle – Democrats have thrown everything they have at Trump,
And the generic ballot is esentially unchanged, and Trump’s approval is essentially unchanged.
And we are headed into 2026 – and Republicans have a tailwind.
Absolutely the odds favor democrats retaking the house.
Betting odds have D’s taking the house, and republicans keeping the senate.
They also have republicans winning in 2028 55:44
“Bad Bunny is a symbol of cultural diversity.”
Nope – just a symbol of the entertainment insustry.
” If the NFL owners see Bad Bunny as good for business”
Of course they do. Theyalready are maxed out on MAGA viewers,
The entertainment is pretty close to ALWAYS from the left,
Left wing nuts on the fence about the Superbowl will show up for a left wing nut.
“that’s very bad for the Trump regime.”
No regime, and not bad.
“Whether Trump knows it or not, he’s losing this culture war very, very badly.”
ROFL
John Say continues to demonstrate his profound mental impairment by posting yet another screed of of psychotic verbal diarrhea in his usual stream of consciousness, and pressure of speech style, further confirming his gravely serious mental illnesses of bipolar disorder and schizophrenia.
His compulsive expression of every disconnected, irrelevant and nonsensical thought that flitters through his impaired mind is becoming increasingly bizarre in ever more lengthy and discursive diatribes of irrational gibberish and gobbledegook .
He clearly has absolutely no life outside of this pitifully miserable excuse for a legal blog except for watching Youtube videos from cranks with whackadoodle conspiracy theories, which he occasionally posts here as “evidence” that he is correct in his delusional and psychotic thinking.
In reality, his only source of information is the voices in his head.
Ad Hominem is not argument.
Is there a factual claim or logical expression that I have asserted that you can show as incorrect ?
You like to rant about mental health
Is your mental capability sufficient to actually make a proper argument ?
You know Facts, Logic, reason ?
Nothing I have seen from you suggests that you can.
And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.
Matthew 7:3-5
Before fixating on the mental health of others – you should take care of your own.
I do not need your help.
But YOU absolutely need your help.
ATS – I doubt anyone but me reads your idiotic replies.
And I get a kick out of how stupid they make you look.
John Say,
Good comment!`
Yesterday the MPD arrested 42+ riotous ICE protestors – several for Assault.
Absolutely Trump is losing and the left is winning.
ROFL
I honestly do not care – and if it actually Made the NFL money and attracted more viewers – Great.
I did not watch the Super Bowl or the half time performance. I am not the target audience of either.
Atleast some fans were upset,
https://patriotfetch.com/2026/02/halftime-show-debacle-bad-bunny-cultural-conflict-super-bowl/
But again I am entirely for free markets – and if having Cheech and Chong fart out the national anthem makes the NFL the most money – so be it.
But the initial reviews outside the MSM are not good.
If you can get a license to drive an 80,000 lb truck with not speaking or reading English, voting should be a breeze!!
. A single comment: PT has decided before SCOTUS opinion: Is born in United States sufficient to claim citizenship?
Citizenship is inherited either from a natural born parent or naturalized parent.
Law is lawful. It is not to be twisted nor made crooked. This concerns a material matter and conforms to ethics.
The constitution explicitly says that anyone born in the USA or naturalized is a citizen. Not one word about ones parents. As far as the constitution is concerned, citizenship is not ever inherited.
Citizenship by being born abroad to a US citizen exists only by statute, which Congress could change tomorrow morning if it liked. Citizenship by birth in the USA cannot be changed without a constitutional amendment.
. Untrue, children not born in the United States but whose parents naturalized inherit citizenship if under age.
The 14th was written when? It addresses ex slaves and native Americans.
For ourselves and posterity…
That poor 14th has been twisted and turned. Amazing.
. Untrue, children not born in the United States but whose parents naturalized inherit citizenship if under age.
Not according to the constitution. Their citizenship is granted by statute, which Congress can change whenever it likes.
The 14th was written when?
Written 1866, ratified 1868. How is that relevant?
It addresses ex slaves and native Americans.
No, it does not. It addresses ALL PERSONS. It says explicitly that everyone who is born in the USA while subject to US law is a citizen, and so is everyone who is naturalized. The only exception is those not subject to US law, i.e. those with diplomatic immunity, members of invading armies, and “Indians not taxed”, which is a category that no longer exists because all Indians are now taxed and subject to US law.
It does NOT say that citizenship can be inherited, or that a person’s parents have anything to do with their citizenship, just as it does NOT say that people born in Puerto Rico are citizens. Both of those are citizenship granted by statute, and thus at the whim of Congress. Congress can stop granting citizenship to Puerto Ricans, or to children born abroad; it can’t do anything about children born here.
. Where you’ve asked, Milhouse, in the phrase, clause for president—> natural born citizen qualification.
The 14th was not written as immigration law.
Ex Slaves and native Americans were not immigrants.
By descent, inherited as in natural born. The place becomes irrelevant.
Way it is , Milhouse, now let’s listen to SCOTUS with its estrogen poisoning.
Everyone knows that even the clever people. I think you’re kidding me.
You are an ignorant moron. The presidential qualifications clause has nothing to do with the topic. The topic is US citizenship, not qualification to be president. So that clause is irrelevant.
But if you MUST talk about “natural born citizenship”, that has nothing to do with ancestry either. A person is a natural born citizen if he is born a US citizen. It makes absolutely no difference who his parents are.
The 14th amendment has nothing to do with immigration. It is about CITIZENSHIP, not immigration. It says who is a citizen, and it says it has nothing to do with who the parents are. That’s IN THE TEXT. Citizenship is not inherited, it is acquired by birth in the USA or by naturalization. Congress can grant citizenship to other people, on any basis it chooses, but it can’t take away the citizenship of those who have it by right of the 14A.
The Law of Nations is the only text and reference in human history describing the phrase “natural born CITIZEN,” which requires “parents” and a “father” who were citizens at the time of birth of the candidate.
Ben Franklin wrote to Charles Dumas that the Law of Nations “has been continually in the hands of the members of our congress, now sitting,….”
Letter Ben Franklin to Charles Dumas, 1775:
I am much obliged by the kind present you have made us of your edition of Vattel. It came to us in good season, when the circumstances of a rising state make it necessary frequently to consult the law of nations. Accordingly, that copy which I kept, (after depositing one in our own public library here, and sending the other to the college of Massachusetts Bay, as you directed3) has been continually in the hands of the members of our congress, now sitting, who are much pleased with your notes and preface, and have entertained a high and just esteem for their author.
1. The term “natural born citizen” is completely irrelevant to this topic. Nobody has even mentioned it till just now when you pulled it out of your rear end like a perverted magician producing a gerbil.
2. There is little evidence that Vattel had any influence at all over the delegates in Philadelphia who proposed the constitution in 1787, and still less on the delegates to the ratifying conventions who adopted it in 1787-1790. Franklin’s letter from 1775 is of course completely irrelevant, referring as it does to one copy that Franklin says he has lent to a few members of the Continental Congress in Philadelphia.
3. The term as used once in the constitution more obviously derives from Blackstone’s discussion of “natural born subject”.
In any case its irrelevant to the topic, and certainly to the 14th amendment. By 1868 no one was reading Vattel.
Tsk tsk , I did over and over in other words. 😂
No, you did not mention it at all until you wrote that comment at 7:29 PM on the 8th. It’s irrelevant to the topic. And it’s also not inherited.
. Milhouse, ever had an inheritance? Maybe just locket from your mother or a keepsake? It’s precious isn’t it. The older it is the more precious it becomes.
The Constitution is an inheritance and it’s precious and it’s old. My pappy gave me an inheritance. He held it precious and his father before that and back even more until it became quite lovely.
Citizenship goes back to the founders and they gave us a gift. We hold that gift as precious. It’s a valuable inheritance and they thought of us even then.
Perhaps, Milhouse, it’s just an address for you and a worn out piece of old paper to be given away to just anyone, after all it’s just an old piece of paper anyone can steal nowadays. Maybe it’s just a game of tag.
Happy 250!
“We the People of the United States…secure the Blessings of Liberty TO OURSELVES AND OUR POSTERITY,….”
– Preamble, Constitution of the United States of America, 1789
Completely irrelevant. The constitution says explicitly that it protects every single human being who exists in the USA.
US citizenship is NOT an inheritance. The constitution says so.
And the constitution is not an inheritance either. It is the supreme law of the land, and thus belongs to ALL its citizens, and indeed to all people who are in the USA, since it protects them all. And it says that citizenship comes about through birth or naturalization, not through inheritance. All inherited citizenship exists only by the grace of Congress and not by the constitution.
. We’ll soon hear the opinion of the estrogen poisoned SCOTUS. A baby born in the US with 2 unauthorized present parents is a citizen for as long as the baby, child, adult is in the US? Parents leave for whatever reason. Child returns, age 28. Citizen? Why not. Are there any cases that modify that?
Ridiculously complicated.
The constitution says explicitly that that child is a US citizen FOR LIFE, no matter how soon after birth the parents leave. Pregnant tourist arrives on Sunday, goes into sudden labor and gives birth on Monday, and goes home with the baby as soon as it’s out of NICU and cleared for travel. That baby is a US citizen for life.
No case CAN modify that, because it’s right there in the constitution’s text. And of course no case has.
(I know someone who was born in South Africa in exactly those circumstances. His parents decided to take a vacation before the baby would arrive and tie them down. Unfortunately the baby had plans of his own and they spent their vacation in and around a hospital, and came back to the USA as soon as the baby was medically cleared. If South Africa had our constitution and laws, my friend would have been a South African citizen. He isn’t, because their laws are different.)
Oh my, Milhouse. Oh my. The 14th became what it is not.
DJT made an error addressing permanent resident, also, so that’ll be set aside.
The 14th’s text is very clear. You are contradicting it.
. Milhouse, we do agree a child born to 2 United States citizens is also a citizen at birth? We do agree a child born to 1 US citizen is also a citizen? Is it true the child is a citizen by descent, inheritance? That we know.
Milhouse, we do agree a child born to 2 United States citizens is also a citizen at birth?
Not by constitutional right. Such a child, born abroad to one or two (it makes no difference) US citizens is a US citizen only by gift of Congress, just like children born in Puerto Rico. The constitution knows nothing of such citizenship, and Congress can change its mind whenever the mood strikes it.
Mood? Hopefully not. 😂
Yes, mood. Congress is entitled to make whatever laws it likes granting citizenship to those not automatically entitled to it by the 14A. Those laws last for as long as Congress wants them to last. Tomorrow morning Congress could repeal all those laws and go back to the basic 14a.
. Milhouse, the 14th amendment isn’t immigration law.
Nice talking to you.
No, the 14th amendment has nothing to do with immigration. But it does prescribe who is a US citizen. And it says US citizenship has absolutely nothing to do with who your parents were, or anything else. If you were born here, and you were subject at the time to US law, you are a citizen. If you were properly naturalized (according to the laws made by Congress at that time) then you are a US citizen. In neither case can Congress make any law that would take away your citizenship without your consent. That is all.
Congress can and has granted citizenship to people who do not have it by constitutional right. I have no opinion on whether it can then take it away from them, but it can certainly change its laws to stop granting it to similarly situated people in the future. For instance it can decide that from this date being born in PR no longer makes you a citizen. Or that from this date being born abroad to citizen parents, even both of them, no longer makes you a citizen. But it can’t touch the citizenship of those who are citizens by right of the 14th amendment, i.e. those born here and those already validly naturalized.
Can someone please verify if the Russian Hookers that gave Bill Gates (and his wife) an STD are the same Russian Hookers (Svetlana and Natasha) that Hunter Biden hooked up with? Maybe Hunter gave Bill the STDs via the Russian Hookers?
Personally I wouldn’t even sit my derriere on the same Toilet Seat after Hunter used it.
You’re assuming facts that are very much not in evidence. Epstein’s emails are not evidence of anything except the state of his own mind.
Where ID’s may be needed: Office buildings, Smoke Shops, Liquor Stores, Pot Dispensaries, Commercial transportation including bus, train, boat, airplane, and through third party verification Uber, Lyft, City-County-State-Federal Buildings, Insurance-Life-Health-Property, Legal Gambling, Gin Joints, Banks, Stock Brokerage, Credit Cards, (bank paper and credit cards accepted at the discretion of the merchants policies), most k-12 schools, Universities/Colleges (our should I day communist breeding grounds), Pharmacies, Doctors Offices, Medical Labs, Hospitals and last but surely not the least (Employer):
Where are ID’s not needed: {At the Voting Booth}.
A good chunk of those are false. You don’t need ID to fly, boat, bus, Uber, Lyft, county government buildings, pharmacies, doctor’s offices, medial labs and hospitals.
Yes, you do, in most cases.
The American Founders denied the vote to all but those who were male, European, 21, and worth 50 lbs. Sterling, or 50 acres.
The vote was severely limited and restricted since the inception of democracy in Greece and its perpetuation in Rome and the West.
Every act of Lincoln and his successors, subsequent to Lincoln’s illicit and unconstitutional denial of secession by southern states, was similarly unconstitutional by extension and must be struck down as was Roe v. Wade after it held precedent and prevailed for 50 years.
The “Reconstruction Acts” and 19th Amendment of Karl Marx have destroyed the U.S. Constitution and American freedom.
The vote must be restricted to capable and successful people who are vested in the nation while all citizens enjoy the rights, freedoms, privileges, and immunities of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
If men have a duty to fight their nation’s wars, women have a duty to engender and educate their nation’s children in numbers sufficient to protect and grow that nation.
The nature of elected leadership is not to follow but to lead.
The nature of the Constitution and Bill of Rights is not to provide all that is desired but to provide the Freedom that allows Self-Reliance.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
“the people are nothing but a great beast…
I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value.”
– Alexander Hamilton
_________________________
“The true reason (says Blackstone) of requiring any qualification, with regard to property in voters, is to exclude such persons, as are in so mean a situation, that they are esteemed to have no will of their own.”
“If it were probable that every man would give his vote freely, and without influence of any kind, then, upon the true theory and genuine principles of liberty, every member of the community, however poor, should have a vote… But since that can hardly be expected, in persons of indigent fortunes, or such as are under the immediate dominion of others, all popular states have been obliged to establish certain qualifications, whereby, some who are suspected to have no will of their own, are excluded from voting; in order to set other individuals, whose wills may be supposed independent, more thoroughly upon a level with each other.”
– Alexander Hamilton, The Farmer Refuted, 1775
______________________________________________________
“[We gave you] a [restricted-vote] republic, if you can keep it.”
– Ben Franklin, 1787
“Depend upon it, sir, it is dangerous to open So fruitfull a Source of Controversy and Altercation, as would be opened by attempting to alter the Qualifications of Voters. There will be no End of it. New Claims will arise. Women will demand a Vote. Lads from 12 to 21 will think their Rights not enough attended to, and every Man, who has not a Farthing, will demand an equal Voice with any other in all Acts of State. It tends to confound and destroy all Distinctions, and prostrate all Ranks, to one common Levell. I am &c.”
– John Adams to James Sullivan, 26 May 1776
“The Founders intended to establish a “Stakeholder Republic” modeled after classical antiquity, where the franchise was a restricted privilege reserved for those with the “independent will” provided by property ownership. They shared the modern Chinese premise that a stable state must be managed by a qualified, vested elite rather than a direct democracy of the masses. By failing to “hold the line” on property requirements, as John Adams predicted, the U.S. transitioned from a fiscally restrained republic of producers to a mass democracy of consumers. From this perspective, the current $35+ trillion debt and the expansion of the welfare state are the direct results of allowing those without a financial “stake in society” to vote themselves the property of others, ultimately fulfilling the Framers’ deepest fears of democratic collapse.”
– Gemini (Google)
“But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”
– Declaration of Independence, 1776
The founders intended constitutional amendments and the expansion of voting rights through the following amendments (and the Voting Rights Act of 1965) should be celebrated: 15, 17, 19, 23, 24, and 26. https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/amendments-11-27
And Lincoln did just that, not by any constitutional process but by placing a gun to America’s head.
Just what the Constitution prescribes, right, Einstein?
Everything Lincoln did was illicit and unconstitutional, starting with his unconstitutional denial of fully constitutional secession.
Try reading; every act of Lincoln and his successors subsequent to his unconstitutional forcible imposition of martial law, his unconstitutional denial of secession, his unconstitutional commencement of war against a sovereign foreign nation et al. is similarly unconstitutional, including the “Reconstruction Amendments” of Lincoln’s fellow traveler, Karl Marx.
“Depend upon it, sir, it is dangerous to open So fruitfull a Source of Controversy and Altercation, as would be opened by attempting to alter the Qualifications of Voters. There will be no End of it. New Claims will arise. Women will demand a Vote. Lads from 12 to 21 will think their Rights not enough attended to, and every Man, who has not a Farthing, will demand an equal Voice with any other in all Acts of State. It tends to confound and destroy all Distinctions, and prostrate all Ranks, to one common Levell. I am &c.”
– John Adams to James Sullivan, 26 May 1776
“Depend upon it, sir, it is dangerous to open So fruitfull a Source of Controversy and Altercation, as would be opened by attempting to alter the Qualifications of Voters. There will be no End of it. New Claims will arise. Women will demand a Vote. Lads from 12 to 21 will think their Rights not enough attended to, and every Man, who has not a Farthing, will demand an equal Voice with any other in all Acts of State. It tends to confound and destroy all Distinctions, and prostrate all Ranks, to one common Levell. I am &c.”
– John Adams to James Sullivan, 26 May 1776
Interesting email in the latest Epstein file dump.
Email from Epstein to author Michael Wolf says:
“some at dinner wtih donald last night , were concerned about dementia. tons of makeup. did not recognize
old friends.”
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00934981.pdf
Wait a minute. I thought the subject of the column was the SAVE Act.
The subject of the column is the RESTRICTED VOTE that the American Founders began this country with in order to keep it rational and coherent in its fundamental charge of the elimination of dictatorship, including that of the monarchy and the “dictatorship of the majority,” which is one-man, one-vote democrazy, and the provision of freedom.
I am In sales. All of my customers know me by my first name. I cannot remember the names of half of them.
Chill. You are stuck with rebuilding for a brighter future that is not on China’s terms.
Your customers are not old friends.
Epstein said Trump did not recognize “OLD FRIENDS”.
Epstein said a lot of things. So what? He wasn’t even at this alleged dinner. And it’s impossible that Trump was showing dementia 8 years ago, and yet is where he is now. We’ve all seen so much of him in the intervening 8 years that it could not be hidden.
That e-mail was in 2017. Epstein was not at that dinner. The e-mail is Epstein saying that some of his friends were at a dinner with Trump and that those friends are concerned that he has dementia. The person he was e-mail is a guy writing a book about Trump. Given that it is well known that Epstein and Trump despised each other (Epstein, in fact, had been on the ban list of Trump properties for a decade and a half at that point), I don’t think it’s absurd that Epstein was simply making up gossip and feeding it to a guy who could publish it.
Moreover, the dementia angle with Trump is ridiculous. Love him or hate him, Trump is remarkably vigorous for his age and ran campaigns where he would makes hours long speeches quite regularly. You can accuse of narcissism. You can accuse him of lying. You can accuse him of having bad policies. But accusations of infirmity are simply absurd.
First of all, Epstein did NOT have dinner with Trump in December 2017. That is long after Trump banned him from Mar a Lago and from his life.
Second, the idea that Trump was experiencing dementia in 2017 is so completely ludicrous that it discredits everything else this guy wrote. In the 8 years since then Trump has been seen and heard speaking in public non-stop. Biden’s dementia could be hidden by keeping him undercover almost all the time, and carefully controlling when he could be seen and heard. If Trump had dementia by 2017, we’d all have seen proof of it. We haven’t, so it’s nonsense, and with it everything else from the same source.
Raskin himself is a violation of the Constitution.
I’m not sure how that’s possible, but if there’s a way for it to be true then it wouldn’t surprise me if he found it.
Congressman Salud Carbajal, 24th District, CA, is an illegal alien with no immigration documentation.
He claims to have been naturalized in 1990, and I see no reason to doubt it.
At first the Dems told us that voter ID was racists against black people now they are saying it is sexist against women. Which is it?
Schumer is yelling Jim Crow 2.0 while Raskin is saying women will be disenfranchised.
And X, the moron, goes back and forth supporting both inane arguments.
PS. The last time we heard Jim Crow 2.0 was with the GA voting Rights Bill which ended up being as phony as this will turn out to be. In GA black voting went up after the new law and then the Dems never mentioned it again. Of course they lost the MLB All Star game and it may have cost Stacey Abrams the governorship because she supported the boycott.
HullBobby,
Well said.
According to them, minorities and women are just not smart enough to get copies of birth certificates or divorce decrees. Not in this day and age of the internet. I noted I looked it up about getting a copy of by birth certificate from my home state. Can be done, online in about five minutes for $21. It is not hard. It is not rocket science. Dont need a college degree.
Bull Hobby, were the American Founders aporophobists, racists, and sexists?
Yes?
Then there was and remains a rational basis for such voting restrictions as those implemented by the very men who changed the world for the better, introducing good and effective and rational self-governance—as did the Greeks, Romans et al.
After the vote, all citizens enjoy all rights, freedoms, privileges, and immunities conferred by the Constitution and Bill of Rights, which one might conjecture causes the vote to be essentially moot.
Hullbobby, it’s patently clear that you have no ability to understand the issue. You keep conflating two issues into things that are not part of the discussion. You think you understand things when you clearly don’t.
That’s Bull Hobby alright.
So we have this Leftist objection:
To register to vote, a person will have to take a birth certificate or passport to a physical location (and might have to ride a bus!). And (gasp) they might have to bring a marriage certificate.
How do those who can’t handle all that complexity and burden figure out how to vote?
Sam,
Yep! And us hillbilly’s out here in dem dar sticks, we sur as heck fire do know nuttin about dem dar interwebs!!!
Sam, it’s very easy to mock the process when YOU don’t have to deal with it or have never have had the misfortune of experiencing it first hand.
Voting is the easy part. Republicans want to make the ability to register more complicated and onerous for political advantage.
Nice ad hominem. Next time, try an argument.
John Say has taken a break from watching Youtube videos featuring online cranks to post yet another screed of of his psychotic verbal diarrhea in his usual stream of consciousness, and pressure of speech style, further confirming his gravely serious mental illnesses of bipolar disorder and schizophrenia.
His compulsive expression of every disconnected, irrelevant and nonsensical thought that flitters through his impaired mind is becoming increasingly bizarre in ever more lengthy and discursive diatribes of irrational gibberish and gobbledegook .
Does anyone here actually bother to read this complete nonsense that he spews here on a daily basis ????
He clearly has absolutely no life outside of this pitifully miserable excuse for a legal blog, except for watching Youtube videos from cranks with whackadoodle conspiracy theories, which he posts here on a regular basis as “evidence” that he is correct in his delusional pyschotic thinking.
I read John Say’s comments.
They may be long, but they are pretty good. Especially his take downs of the slow and dumb one.
Unfortunately, the fact that you read the psychotic ramblings of John Say says more about your delusional state of mind, than that of the “slow and dumb one” as you put it.
They are long because he has a tendency to meander and rant instead of sticking to the point. His “take downs” are nothing but fact-less assumptions.
John Say is a paid MAGA apologist–part of the MAGA propaganda effort to attack anyone who tells the truth about Trump.
Sometimes I suspect that John Say is really a poorly programmed Russian bot.
I have noticed that he takes EVERY sentence of someone else’s comment and then tries to rebut every single sentence. This is more likely to be the behavior of a very poorly programmed bot.
Alternatively, he just as likely could be a Russian KBG troll being paid by the word for his ridiculous diatribes. The poor grammar, punctuation and spelling speak to this hypothesis.
Yes, I’m sure there is AI for this, just like Indeed has AI to improve composing messages to employers.
It’s called fisking.
John Say, he has a point. You might consider tightening it up and abbreviating a bit to the point of being succinct. Remember the economy of words. Remember the:
“The Fog Factor”
By Nirmaldasan
The fog factor is the average number of polysyllabic words (excluding personal names) per sentence in a sample of 200 words. I came across this simple formula in Jyoti Sanyal’s Indlish. Here is the scoring system in Sanyal’s own words:
Clear writing has a fog factor of between 2 & 3.
Below 2 may be childishly simple.
Above 3 may be rather FOGGY!
____________________________________
Remember not to exceed a rational number of “polysentence” or “overdeveloped” paragraphs in a post.