Pennsylvania state representative and Democratic Socialist Chris Rabb is the latest Democrat to reaffirm his alliance with virulent antisemite Hasan Piker. What is most notable, however, is his attack on establishment Democrats as “institutionalists,” a new label reflecting the radical agenda for changing our constitutional system. It is a term that is now in vogue on the far left by those who want to tear down our institutions and scrap our Constitution.
Across the country, attacks are growing on Democrats and independents who are viewed as insufficiently radical. Those of us who continue to celebrate the Madisonian democracy as creating the most successful and stable republic in history are now “cultists” and “institutionalists” who are trapped in “nostalgia.”
The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) have drawn support from many who want a literal revolution. DSA Steering Committee member Cliff Connolly declared on one podcast that they are “famous for” “Our hatred of the United States Constitution.”
Even those who are not joining the DSA are denouncing the system and lashing out at those who want to preserve it.
On the web, radicals denounce institutionalists who “want us to defend and support the institutions we already have.”
At The Atlantic, Sarada Peri, the former senior speechwriter for President Barack Obama, referred to institutionalists as “peculiar creatures” inhabiting Washington.
She added that:
“Many institutionalists simply have a reflexive distaste for change, preferring the enduring, if ossified, conventions that offer them inherited credibility. But perhaps in part because they are mostly old, white men, institutionalists are afforded significant deference by the media and the general public.”
Rabb joined his chorus of radicals opposing institutionalists in their party. He is the Democratic nominee for Pennsylvania’s 3rd Congressional District and is now virtually assured of being a member of Congress. He is also emerging as a dominant voice on the far left. He has established his bona fides with a growing radical movement within the Democratic Party, denouncing the Declaration of Independence, calling our constitutional system “the beast” to be slayed, and bizarrely claiming that the Framers had no notion of what “policing” means.
On Friday, Rabb tweeted “This is what the institutionalists are focusing their efforts on now: Disavowing Hasan Piker.” He added “Not White Christian nationalists? Not the broligarchs? Not the AI overlords? Nope, the guy encouraging young people to use their collective political power for good. F— that noise.”
Of course, Piker rose to national prominence after other Democratic Socialists and radicals brought him to their states to campaign against establishment figures. Much like the left’s focus on figures who associate with Nicholas Fuentes, Piker has outraged many with claims that America deserved 9/11, American Jews are asking to be attacked by supporting Israel, and mocking the murder of figures like Charlie Kirk.
Putting aside the fact that Rabb still supports this notorious hatemonger as someone organizing “young people to use their collective political power for good,” he notably denounces those opposing Piker as “institutionalists.”
It is an important reveal, highlighting the radical agenda to trash the Constitution and tear down our core institutions, including the Supreme Court. Rabb has been one of those voices in calling the system “the beast” and denouncing our own revolution.
In my book Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution, I discuss the French Revolution and its decline into what the Framers called a mobocracy. In France, “The Terror” began not with the working class, but with educated lawyers, journalists, and even aristocrats as part of the Jacobin movement. Eventually, after the mob had finished off the aristocrats, clergy, and merchants, they turned on their fellow Jacobins in a bloodletting that claimed the lives of thousands.
Even law professors and deans joined this movement in calling for the rejection of our Constitution on the 250th anniversary of our Revolution.
Mainstream figures such as Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of UC Berkeley Law School, have published books such as “No Democracy Lasts Forever: How the Constitution Threatens the United States.”
The media eagerly publishes these radical views, such as the New York Times column, “The Constitution Is Broken and Should Not Be Reclaimed,” in which Ryan D. Doerfler of Harvard and Samuel Moyn of Yale call for the nation to “reclaim America from constitutionalism.”
Brown University’s Corey Brettschneider called the Constitution a “dangerous document” that is driving this “threat to democracy.”
George Washington law professor Mary Anne Franks condemned the “cult of the Constitution” that has been defended to advance “white male supremacy.”
Now, to support our constitutional system is to be an “institutionalist,” a pejorative term that is as bad as being an “oligarch” in the new revolutionary lexicon.
Even establishment candidates like former Vice President Kamala Harris and California Gov. Gavin Newsom are trying to pander to the mob by calling fealty to our traditions and institutions mere “nostalgia.”
It is a familiar strategy. After Yuri Bezmenov, a KGB agent who defected in 1970, revealed the four stages by which the Soviets hoped to bring about revolutionary change in the U.S., it began with undermining our institutions and values, with the help of journalists and academics.
The success of this counter-constitutional movement is reflected in the growing list of establishment figures like Kamala Harris and Pete Buttigieg throwing the Supreme Court to the mob. The problem with leading the mob is that you have to stay in front of it or be devoured by it. Packing the court is unlikely to be enough. After they come for the institutionalists, they will come for the incrementalists.
It appears that, if you are not campaigning with Piker, you could be next for the pike. El-Sayed declared in his campaign that moderates like Democratic Senator John Fetterman should have their heads cut off and put on pikes like ogres.
So much for the “Big Tent party.” For institutionalists, the message is clear. Lose your constitutional “nostalgia” or your political heads.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the New York Times bestselling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
How sad that we as a society do not learn from history, ie, French Revolution. Same thing going on right now with those calling for Lindsay Clancy to be burned at the stake – did we not learn one thing from Andrea Yates?
Counter-Constitutionalists seem merely to be a bunch of snot-nosed nihilists who crave attention. But they are a threat to our constitutional republic and are no respecters of a functioning democracy.
“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 best explanation I have ever heard for the children of the Left who are seduced by these communist ideas is not over education but mis-education of too many Americans who have useless degrees in unmarketable subjects who have latched on to the wrong explanations. Too many dissatisfied people with degrees in subjects that, on the basis of having any degree get them only 60,000 a year when they were expecting more. In some cases, a Masters Degree in Social subjects will only make you half of what the average journeyman electrician or plumber regularly take home. I have a daughter with a Masters in Women’s Studies who can barely make 75 K working two jobs, one at a major University. Time to talk the kids into more practical goals.
The best explanation I have ever heard for the children of the Left who are seduced by these communist ideas is not over education but mis-education of too many Americans who have useless degrees in unmarketable subjects who have latched on to the wrong explanations
I wish that were true but it is not. On this forum alone, David B. Benson, a leftist, is a very educated scientist and trained under the tutelage of Linus Pauling. Frankly that’s pretty impressive, though don’t tell him I said that.
Abdul El-Sayed earned a PhD degree from Oxford in Public Health, and an MD degree from Columbia University. Again, very impressive. However, he never underwent training as a physician so he is not a physician. He’s just an arrogant, condescending, midget of a prick who lives off of his wife’s psychiatry practice and family wealth. I do not believe Benson is a midget but I could be wrong on that.
Fidel Castro graduated from law school with a law degree and alas attended my Jesuit high school in Cuba. So no, having a great education does not prevent becoming an infidel. Look at Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Laurence Tribe and many more
Estovir, I had one lecture from Linus Pauling. That’s it. And no, I’m not a ‘midget’ but a retired professor with an adequate retirement fund.
David, almost everyone here is Estovir. I’ve been keeping close track. There are less real people on these threads than at any time in many years.
troll harder. you really suck at it
Estovir, you ruined this forum. Almost no real people here. Just this Freddy Krueger type who goes by a hundred names. And Johnathan Turley could be the victim of mischief.
Why does this matter to you ?
It doesn’t matter to him. His only purpose is to sow discord and chaos. Lying, manipulating, fabricating, copying/pasting ad nauseam worthless info, all achieve the same purpose. He has no rules, abides by no norms, employs sadism and Machiavellianism with gusto, and is a perfect reflection of the Democrat Party – by any means necessary. Engaging them is a waste of time since they have no desire to engage in thoughtful, intelligent exchange of ideas. Every comment he posts is for pure narcissistic enjoyment, and nothing less.
Caveat lector applies
Internet Trolls Are Narcissists
Trolls will lie, exaggerate, and offend to get a response.
* An Internet troll is someone who enters an online discussion and posts comments designed to upset or disrupt the conversation.
* “Dark Tetrad” personality traits include narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and sadism.
* In a study of 1200 people, Dark Tetrad scores were highest among people who said trolling was their favorite Internet activity.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/your-online-secrets/201409/internet-trolls-are-narcissists-psychopaths-and-sadists
Internet Troll Psychology: Unveiling the Minds Behind Online Provocateurs
* Trolling behavior correlates most strongly with sadism and psychopathy, not just poor social skills or misplaced humor.
* Anonymity and physical distance from targets amplify aggressive online behavior through a well-documented psychological process called disinhibition.
* The same personality traits that predict trolling on forums also predict it on dating apps, suggesting a stable trait rather than a platform quirk.
* Victims of persistent trolling show elevated rates of anxiety, depression, and social withdrawal, mirroring patterns seen in cyberbullying research.
* Effective responses combine individual strategies like non-engagement with structural fixes like moderation and identity verification.
https://neurolaunch.com/psychology-of-internet-trolls/
David B Benson
What is the curriculum captured under Engineering Sciences and did you ever practice engineering as a Registered Professional Engineer?
Estovir,
Well, I personally know of two women who got degrees in Women’s Studies, and got zilch for jobs. One became a cabinet maker, is quite happy with the job, and work is good. The other never really found gainful employment, and went into a different field, non-profits.
Then again, I have known a number of highly educated people who are very good in their fields.
But cannot change a tire, barely boil water, or know how to use their own washing machine.
Hey, Upstate, don’t knock the nonprofits. It is now becoming apparent, as we are seeing in Minnesota and California, thar it can be very profitable to work in a nonprofit.
And Castro duped his fellow Cubans to support his revolution that he claimed would restore democracy and freedom to Cubans after Batista was gone. He duped CBS (no surprise there) to airing a flattering interview on the Ed Sullivan show and duped millions of U.S. viewers of the legitimacy of the revolution, with the psychotic murderer Che Guevara at his side. Lenin rose to power by committing to decentralized “Soviet democracy” that purportedly would extend political and economic power to the masses. And the useful idiots believed him. Mao’s “Great Leap Forward” economically set back China at least a century, if not more. Each of them, via their respective revolutions, went on to kill or imprison millions of their people and ultimately destroy their country while the party leaders enriched themselves. The major question for Americans today is, who are the useful idiots now?
Your daughter has a father who failed her.
Clearly you taught her to overpay for a product.
You should have taught her Graham.
_________________________________________
“Buy cheap and sell dear.”
– Benjamin Graham
_______________________
Oh, and be frugal.
You do that a whole bunch, next thing you know, you’re rich.
The left’s current embrace of communism is explained with one word: Trump.
They are getting desperate because Trump has turned their cushy world upside down.
Desperate people always do desperate things. Like call for the destruction of our superior form of government that denies them control.
Dirty murderous commies are just desperate control freaks. The constitution sweeps the floor with them, as designed.
Americans, just let the Constitution do the heavy lifting on this one, it’s been defeating communism for 250 years!
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”
If they can’t take the oath, they should be barred from serving in Congress.
“If they can’t take the oath, they should be barred from serving in Congress.”
I will take that one step further. All serving Federal politicians and any other functionaries who were required to take that oath to assume their office or position should be required to reaffirm it. If they refuse to do so, they should be considered to have thereby invalidated the oath they swore previously, and be dealt with as harshly as the law allows: be removed from office; impeached[ and/or prosecuted, depending on the position they hold and the attendant legalities thereof.
Do you not think leftists do not, and will not, consciously lie to achieve their objectives when swearing to an oath of allegiance? History has, or should have, taught us otherwise. Believe them at your peril.
I don’t see a problem with congressional candidates proposing legislation and constitutional amendments that would make significant changes to our society and then taking the oath and serving after they win their election.
Nor do I. Except that’s not what’s happening.
So what congressional candidates do you think are going beyond what you and I agree on?
There is a simple question to ask any of these radicals when they say to erase an institution of governance:
“What do you plan to replace it with?”
This question requires more than unhinged anger….it requires constructive thought, responsibility-taking. And there you’ll find the cupboard completely empty.
The choice exists as (1) the Communist Manifesto or (2) the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
And there is no choice for sane people.
The communists must be compassionately deported to avoid more severe penalties.
I think it will work better to mock them as idiots. Taking them seriously is a mental mistake, and shows you don’t trust the sanity of your fellow Americans. The correct response is to hold the middle and marginalize the fringes.
Right on, pbinca!
Everyone in my orbit is a red-blooded American. I never see this fringe that makes headlines and I live in a very blue city!
Every morning I wake up in this engineered and defended freedom and thank the founders for it.
pbinca,
I think we have to take them seriously as a possible threat.
But mocking them as idiots is good too. Have to mock those who enable them too, like many Democrats who think they can pander to the socialists, communists, DSA like Schumer and his Big Tent party idea.
You stupid fool shutup.
I actually try to NOT mock the left, but their ideas are just so stupid I can’t help it.
Dumb people apparently cannot determine just how smart smart people can be.
There’s no choice. the Constitution already won the argument 250 years ago and Communism is outlawed BY that Constitution.
No one has explained how commies plan to get past that, because it’s impossible. Americans have always been willing to fight for it and as long as there’s ONE American with that love in their heart, commies are gonna have a tough fight, in fact it would take them winning a war. And what are THEY fighting for? An ideology designed to destroy human freedom. Not very motivating.
Come at me commie! and find out how much the Constitution is beloved.
The only way for the commies to get past our Constitution is violence, and if they do that we will lock em up and throw away the key. bye bye commie.
Not if they can gain political power first and that is their plan. To get enough communist and Islamist elected to take over the government. The radical judges will support them so it comes down to whom the military supports. It’s why they hate Hegseth and why Biden tried to sissy up the military. The civilian Militia will support the patriots in the military, which is why they want to ban guns.
You’re aggrandizing a threat. The military and police swear allegiance to the Constitution, not to political figures.
These radicals get media coverage way in excess of their numbers. They won’t have the votes in a general election. We don’t need armed militias to face down these losers. We simply out-vote them. Speak to more of your fellow Americans, ignore the media alarmism, and you’ll realize most Americans think like you and I do about keeping our governing blueprint intact.
“The military and police swear allegiance to the Constitution…”
…and secession was not prohibited and was fully constitutional. Everything Lincoln did was unconstitutional, beginning with his commencement of an undeclared and unconstitutional war against a sovereign, foreign nation. All Lincoln and his allies and apologists had to do was pass laws in Congress that abrogated slavery. Period. No harm, no foul, no war. He couldn’t, so he shredded the Constitution as a criminal enemy of the United States and started killing Americans.
By your reckoning, the military turned on Lincoln and threw him in prison for crimes of high office and misdemeanors against the state.
This is clearly not the United States of America of the British Colonist Revolutionaries and the American Founders.
If secession ever became a normal, accepted practice, what Lincoln said was correct: There is no way to preserve any government under those terms. Rather it is a recipe for ongoing anarchy and disorder.
One possibility not ever considered is to form a government (Constitution) with a fixed duration which will expire by the calendar, and processes for designing a replacement governing system before the clock strikes. The danger is that the work won’t get done on time.
Wackjob here. The American Founders created the greatest model for successful self-governance known to man. Lincoln was wrong on all fronts. Lincoln acted arbitrarily, illegally, and unconstitutionally as a dictator – some said tyrant. Freedom is the freedom to disunite that which has been united. If the Founders meant no secession, they would have written that. They did not. Trust me, they were high-functioning intellectuals and they knew what they wanted to do and what they were doing. They created a democratic republic. Lincoln didn’t like the fact that he failed totally in Congress so he started killing people. The CSA would have inevitably failed and reunited.
IF a state succeeds, they are succeeding from the Constitution.
Meaning they are no longer protected by it. And those once-protected resident citizens are declared unprotected too.The Constitution demands that their rights be protected as that is what the Constitution DOES. If a state succeeds, expect war.
Lincoln rightly said “if you’re not with us, you’re against us”
paraphrasing.
What SCOTUS ruled that succession was legal? Lincoln was upholding the integrity of a legitimately elected govt. There are things he did that were unconstitutional but the union didnt fire the first shot.
There is no common sense for dissolving government over disagreements. We are immersed in disagreements perpetually. US Government is a plan to maintain an orderly process of conflict resolution.
The dysfunction of Congress stands out as a threat to this process. The Founders “checks and balances” were put there assuming leaders brimming with ambitions, not leaders abdicating their responsibilities.
Lincoln illegally and unconstitutionally deployed a military force inside the territory of a sovereign foreign nation.
The sole and only legal course for Lincoln was withdrawal, which he failed to do.
He was a criminal of high office who must have been impeached and convicted before hostilities commenced.
The CSA would have sued for repatriation and reunification once its inexorable failure took place.
All would have been well if “Crazy Abe” had simply obeyed American fundamental law, the Constitution.
The Constitution simply protects the rights of those individuals in those succeeding states with the force of law.
That’s what it does. it protects individual rights with FORCE. If anyone tries to take away that protection, they are gonna get the force of that law. The Constitution can leave no US citizen unprotected, that’s how it works. It worked pretty good and was the success of Republicans defending our republican form of government.
These same daily comments about Lincoln sound like Lincoln Derangement Syndrome to me.
I think the point is, states can TRY to succeed as that is in the Constitution, but then, they are no longer protected by our Constitution and have become it’s enemy. War is inevitable, as the citizen’s once enjoying protection by the Constitution in those succeeding state(s) are having that protection taken from them and the Constitution defends their individual right to keep those protections with the force of law and war. The same thing as if a foreign power tried to conquer our lands, the Constitution would defend them. Once your not under the Constitution, you are a foreign power. If you’re under and enjoying the protection of the Constitution your loyalty to maintain it’s protection is implied. That’s why Americans can be drafted to protect it. A nation of laws not whims.
still wouldn’t get them past the Constitution. AND once they try, what do you think will happen?
They cannot get past our Constitution and this is all just the revenge of the theater kids. We won’t even be talking about it by next year.
Americans have defended the Constitution just fine and it’s defense of humans is acclaimed worldwide. The WORLD would not allow the USA to fall to communism. The idea is laughable.
Ask yourself this, how many of these ‘new insurrectionists’ do you personally know? Now, how many people do you know who would be against it.
All the hubbub is because the left is losing and desperate. Same reason they HAD open borders and pander to ‘groups’.
The top crisis in 2026 is $40 trillion in debt. America is bankrupt!
Social Security and Medicare are unconstitutional.
Slash them out of existence!
The American Thesis is Freedom and Self-Reliance…
…not the redistribution of other people’s money in the Communist Manifesto.
When they are “slashed out of existence”, will the past FICA contributions taken from citizens be paid back?”
Words like “slash” evoke indifference toward such crucial details.
Are the completely legal Trump Tariffs being paid back?
Participants would be required to earn money and pay premiums, boohoo!
Privatization means liquidating, making those vested whole again, and carrying on the programs in the private sector.
How many investment houses would take on that task?
A thousand in about two shakes of a lamb’s tail?
Call Vanguard and ask them.
Democrats strongly support Social Security and Medicare so If Republicans, Conservatives, and Libertarians want to run on slashing those programs out of existence in 2026 and 2028, then be my guest.
Typical lefty, has no plan to govern the system THEY created.
Thought experiment: If I instead invested all my contributions since 1979, How rich would I be now?
Now that we’re stuck with a failing system, your response is insufficient to defend your position.
Now defend the failing obummercare we are stuck with next.
Concerned? I don’t think you are.
Trump is about as anti-Constitution as it gets.
In less than 24 hours on his first day, after making a promise to GOD to follow the U.S. Constitution (which includes the 14th Amendment).
The same day Trump made that promise to GOD with his Oath of Office, he attempted to subvert the 14th Amendment with an illegal Executive Order.
Like 2nd Amendment gun rights, presidents don’t have the authority to overturn the 14th Amendment. That can only be done with a constitutional amendment.
Then he assassinated foreign leaders and started a war without permission from Congress. He wanted to make Canada the 51st state and annex Greenland.
He refuses to follow the laws and funding of Congress, authority no president has ever had. Now he wants to run for a 3rd term!
Trump sets up test cases on debatable aspects of the Constitution. Once the Supreme Court rules, he obeys that ruling even while complaining about it.. There is nothing unconstitutional about that. Biden, by contrast, said he knew what the Supreme Court ruled on student loans, but he was going to disobey the Supreme Court. Biden also embedded government agents in private social media companies to perform censorship. That’s not debatable, it’s a clear 1A violation.
OldManFromKS,
Well said.
Anonymous, this is a blog. Stump training is down the hall.
What is your favorite Kool-aid flavor?
Are you talking about a 14th Amendment interpretation that bears no resemblance to what every American living in 1969 knew it meant?
How come we didn’t see immigrant parents in 1869 demanding their newborns get Citizenship at the time of birth?
Why were they content to await their own Naturalization, and their children become Citizens by Derivation at that time? Yes, Citizenship by Derivation, as passed by Congress in 1790, and practiced throughout the 19th century without question (until 1898 Wong Kim Ark case).
And you still claim that:
The 14th established a new citizenship process for babies of non-citizen immigrants starting in 1869 ?
No it didn’t, but the words stripped of their historical meaning are free to re-interpret as we like in 2026
(this is how we can change the Constitution without any public support + Ratification process!)
OK, so you are OK with violating Article V to get the result you want?
Secession was fully constitutional, and everything Lincoln did was unconstitutional, including the “Reconstruction Amendments” of Karl Marx, Lincoln’s fellow communist traveler.
The abortion of Roe v. Wade was struck down retroactively by 50 years; Lincoln must be struck down retroactively by 150 years.
No, secession finds its justification in the Declaration of Independence. There is no provision for secession in the Constitution. Having one would weaken it disastrously.
Why would anybody put in the sweat to form a new government knowing that it could fizzle out almost immediately by disagreements dealt with by secession? You’d end up with chopped liver — no stability in any govt. That is why Lincoln fought against the secessionists — to preserve the union, and the principle of stable, enduring govt. which survives controversies.
So true. Lincoln shredded and nullified the Constitution and must have been impeached and convicted and thrown out of office and into prison—a lenient sentence considering his savage, barbaric, and monumental crime against the U.S. and the humanity therein. All “Crazy Abe” ever had to do was pass legislation in Congress to abrogate slavery. Alas, he could not, and that’s what is called a democratic republic. Lincoln was the most egregious criminal in American history.
Daily Lincoln garbage from ANON! LDS
Nope! the Constitution protected the INDIVIDUALS in those suceeding states from having those protections and their private property taken from them. The point is states cannot do that to individuals without the force of law coming down upon them. The same thing happens whenever a state violates any individuals protected rights today. The law comes down on them.
Your reading of the 14th is flawed. It doesn’t mean whatever YOU want it to mean, it means what it says.
Trump taking ownership in companies is also “Socialist” and practiced by Communist regimes. Maybe a Fair & Balanced reporting would have more credibility?
The government is allowed to invest in private companies. Its stock ownership accounts for only a minority position, there is no private company in which the US government holds a majority share. That is not socialism.
Congress has no power to tax for that. What is the legal basis?
The way these destroyers come to power, if they’re smart, is by hiding their true intentions until it’s too late. In contrast, these modern revolutionaries can’t keep their mouths shut for one minute. Yes, their are a few places such as New York City, the NY Times newsroom, and many prestigious universities, where such ideas are welcomed but I doubt very much that they’re supported by anything like a majority.
Let them keep talking. We’re not buyimg what they’re selling.
“The way these destroyers come to power, if they’re smart, is by hiding their true intentions until it’s too late.”
Those destroyers appeared to hide their true intentions until quite recently. And your implication that it is not already “too late” is a debatable assumption. We can fervently hope that is true (I do), but the outcome has yet to be determined.
Coincided with the ‘deep state’ also being exposed and unable to keep their traitorous mouths shut. Coincidence?
PUPPET WATCH
Incredibly this thread consists almost entirely of puppets; all of whom are ESTOVIR.
Estovir is obviously a professional activist who generates comments here all day every day. The only question is, ‘WHO pays Estovir for this work?’ It’s not Johnathan Turley!
The following are all Estovir:
Cultivating Man
The Quiet Man
Sam
Cliff Jackson
Stephen B. Benisch Esq.
Kirk
Vicente
Diogenes
Unadulterated0263034d80
Sally
Gdonaldallen
Michael Crognale
Suezappa
Whimsical Mama
Hullbobby
James
You continue to insult me by leaving me off the list. I warned you about that earlier today, but perhaps you just forgot. Please include me next time.
LOL!
Congrats Diogenes, you made the list this time 🎉🍾🎊
I’m rooting for you, Kansas. There are thousands of us out there, defying the Empire with “I am Estovir!” 🙂
Oh for crying out loud!
I might as well have some fun with this
Three educated old men meet in the comment section of Jonathan Turley’s blog.
oldmanfromkansas: “I’m Jewish, and I believe in constitutional government.”
Diogenes: “I’m Muslim, and I believe in constitutional government.”
Estovir: “I’m a devout Roman Catholic, and I believe in constitutional government.”
They pause.
oldmanfromkansas: “Different faiths. Different backgrounds. Same commitment to reason and the rule of law.”
Diogenes: “How refreshing.”
Estovir: “Indeed. Perhaps we can discuss ideas without assuming everyone who disagrees with us is part of an international conspiracy.”
Just then, an Anonymous commenter appears:
Anonymous: “YOU’RE ALL PUPPETS OF ESTOVIR!”
The three men stare at the screen.
oldmanfromkansas: “I knew I liked that fellow.”
Diogenes: “Apparently I am Estovir too.”
Estovir: “Gentlemen, this is quite an honor. I have apparently become a demographic.”
oldmanfromkansas: “A Jewish Estovir?”
Diogenes: “A Muslim Estovir?”
Estovir: “And I, apparently, am the Catholic Estovir.”
They contemplate this remarkable theological development.
Diogenes: “Perhaps we should form a committee.”
oldmanfromkansas: “What should we call it?”
Estovir: “The Council of Estovirs.”
A fourth comment suddenly appears:
Anonymous: “ALL AND THE SAME PUPPET PARADE BY ESTOVIR!”
The three men look at one another.
Diogenes: “He’s onto us.”
oldmanfromkansas: “Quick—someone tell the Vatican.”
Estovir: “Too late. They already think I’m you.”
And thus, for the first time in history, three men of different religions achieved perfect interfaith unity:
They were all Estovir.
—Written with assistance from ChatGPT
NB: for those who do not know, the word estovir is Latin for “be a man”. It is a phrase used in Jesuit circles: “be a man of Christ”.
frankly I consider it a win that the psychotic-sociopath TDS troll repeats “be a man” daily multiple times. Now if only he could be one!!
🤠💪🏽🕺🏽
Estovir – I like it. So we are now the Council of Estovir, the council of commenters willing to be a man. I realize I put that in the singular, whereas you had added an ‘s’. Either way is fine with me. Regardless, next time the TDS patient says, “So and so is Estovir,” he will unwittingly be telling the truth.
#weareestovir
*It seems appropriate that of all the screen names, the name that most got under the TDS patient’s skin is the one containing an imperative, and more than that, imploring the listener to be a true man.
So we are now the Council of Estovir, the council of commenters willing to be a man.
Well you did graduate from Harvard Law, and Diogenes had his heart touched by Dr Michael DeBakey, so that makes you both sacred relics.
A relic is a physical object connected to a saint, their body (1st class), clothing or possessions (2nd class), or an object touched to a relic (3rd class). Catholics venerate relics to honor saints and seek their intercession, a practice rooted in Scripture since the time of the apostles.
A relic is a physical object that has a direct connection to a saint or holy person. The word comes from the Latin reliquiae, meaning “remains.” The practice of venerating relics is deeply rooted in Scripture and has been part of Christian worship for over 2,000 years.
In Acts 19:11-12, we read: “God did extraordinary miracles through Paul, so that even handkerchiefs and aprons that had touched him were taken to the sick, and their illnesses were cured.” This is perhaps the earliest biblical precedent for the veneration of objects connected to holy people.
Similarly, in 2 Kings 13:21, a dead man was restored to life when his body touched the bones of the prophet Elisha. The veneration of relics isn’t a medieval invention, it’s woven into the fabric of salvation history.
https://www.catholically.com/blogs/news/the-complete-guide-to-catholic-relics-1st-2nd-and-3rd-class-explained
Just goes to show that a psychotic-sociopath TDS troll with a 5th grade vocabulary, can try to usurp the comment boxes on an internet forum and think he’s creating chaos, but real men rise above and restore the natural order. Well done to the two of you.
Oremus!
I appreciate it. Just to clarify, Harvard College. I went to law school elsewhere.
Estovir,
Excellent! And well done!
As the person of non-faith, just attending college now, can I be the token Estovir on the council?
To all men of good will, I hereby proclaim UpstateFarmer and Dustoff to be members of the Council of Estovir, as established by Oldmanfromkansas, with all of the rights and privileges therein. No password necessary
Old man
_____________
Estovir – I like it. So we are now the Council of Estovir,
Hey now, how do I join this great group?
Whats the password. I promise not to tell anyone. (-:
DustOff,
If I may propose a The Council of Estovir by-law: Most annonys are useless human beings, not amounting to much in life or offer anything of interest on PT blog. While the good professor is a believer in the 1stA and allows for the useless annonys to post useless comments, we shall point out annony’s useless comments, low IQ and failure to launch by mocking and ridiculing the annony when appropriate.
Aw, Estovir just learned about “NB” a few weeks ago. Now he can’t get enough use of it!
HAHAHAH me too Old man.
(-:
MORON ANON should be in a PSYCH WARD!
This wackjob is incoherent.
BAN FOR LIFE!
ANON MORON wackjob is incoherent.
And kirk the jerk knows incoherent.
MORON ANON wacks off 15 times per day. I’m surprised he can still type his posts in between jack offs. PSYCHO
While MORON ANON screams Estovir Estovir Estovir!! ha ha ha
This wackjob is incoherent.
BAN FOR LIFE!
Jezzzzzzzz You left me out of the list you jerk! (Ano)
Now I’m pissed.
LOL
Christian minister Martin Luther King, Jr was also apparently an “Institutionalist”.
MLK used the “rulebook” (constitutional rule of law system) to advance rights for African-Africans. More importantly MLK forced subversive-Americans (racists) to follow the rulebook and forced DOJ/FBI to enforce those rules.
Interracial-marriage and same sex-marriage was a result of “Institutionalists” litigating the rulebook (U.S. Constitution) in court.
Women’s voting rights happened when “Institutionalists” used the rulebook to grant women more rights and ultimately a constitutional amendment.
Good points. MLK would not be welcome in today’s Democrat party. His dream of his children being judged not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character, is anathema to today’s Democrats, for whom skin color is all-important.
Truth be known, this was a GRAND FRAUD who persisted against his family, church congregations, the public, universities, and all humanity. He was a duplicitous and deceptive charlatan. Ask his best friend, Ralph Abernathy. He egregiously plagiarized to falsely obtain a doctorate degree, which was not rescinded because the college board was communistically liberal and terrified of the similarly fraudulent black sacred cows.
Thou Shalt Not Covet
Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness
Thou Shalt Not Steal
Thank you so much, Marty.
Actually it was WWI and how women had to take up “men jobs” during the war that brought the issue of women’s voting rights to a crescendo. Women were always more capable than men assumed.
Women became men and stopped making Americans.
Why do you think the Deep Deep State allows the invasion of the unwashed masses of heterogeneous, unassimilable foreign parasite invaders?
They could care less about America and Americans; they need consumers and workers, and they don’t care who they are or where they come from.
I don’t know why Congress would ever swear in an avowed enemy of the constitution like Rabb or other DSA members who get elected when they have openly denouced the very constitution they must swear to preserve and protect? Seems like very good reason to deny them a seat.
It’s almost cute that we pretend there is a ‘far left’. Nope. Just the modern left. You vote for one, you are voting for all of them. Period.
Yes! The Monolithic Left. unified in tyranny.
Some things are not worth fighting about. The Socialists are going to be put out faster than one thinks. When they do not deliver on promises, raise taxes, or just plain go to far, they will be done. The long term solution is the teach civics again and make it mandatory in school. This is history circling around again. Mao’s Little Red book was waived at one point in America. it went away too. We need to be vigilant, but not overly worried.
Good point! What communist things has Mamdani gotten away with? not much communism allowed, even as an experiment.
I think we are just gonna end up with a bunch of disappointed communists. They’re used to it.
The smear of “institutionalist” is not a debate over tactics inside one party. It is an attack on the written Constitution itself, and for anyone who takes the Second Amendment seriously that attack is existential. The same voices who call the document “the beast,” a “dangerous document,” or a relic of “white male supremacy” have spent years treating the right to keep and bear arms as the most inconvenient clause of all. They do not merely want different judges or different statutes; they want the underlying compact discarded so that “collective political power” can override enumerated limits. An armed citizenry was never an afterthought for the Framers. It was the structural check they placed on the very concentration of force that today’s radicals now celebrate as liberation.
When Rabb and his allies sneer at “nostalgia” for Madisonian institutions, they are asking Americans to forget why the Second Amendment exists: not as a hunting license, but as a permanent reminder that government power is delegated and therefore limited. The French example is instructive. Once the old legal order is declared illegitimate, the new order has no reason to stop at packing courts or redefining “policing.” It proceeds to the people who still insist that rights pre-exist the latest majority. Gun owners have watched this sequence before, I.e., first the institutions are delegitimized, then the right that makes those institutions accountable is treated as the last obstacle. Defending the Constitution is not cultish. It is the only reliable way to keep the pike from becoming policy.
If these anti-Constitution people prevail in the next couple election cycles, it could easily lead to a civil war – a shooting war, not merely a political one. I sure hope not, but that seems possible. Such a crisis could be the “fourth turning” predicted by William Strauss and Neil Howe. It’s been 81 years since the end of the last crisis phase, so if their theory is correct we’re overdue. I’m not certain it’s correct, but it could be.
AI Overview
The four turnings in the Strauss-Howe generational theory [each lasting approximately 20 years] are The High, The Awakening, The Unraveling, and The Crisis.
– The High (First Turning): A post-crisis period when institutions are strong and individualism is weak, marked by a confident and upbeat society.
– The Awakening (Second Turning): A time of cultural and spiritual renewal where people rebel against established institutional authority to seek personal autonomy.
– The Unraveling (Third Turning): An era when individualism peaks, public trust fades, and institutions begin to weaken or lose authority.
– The Crisis (Fourth Turning): A final period of severe upheaval, institutional collapse, and societal rebirth that reshapes the social order before a new cycle begins.
Communism can only be unleashed upon uninformed dopes. While we have a lot of them, but not that many.
How many people could even read in pre-communist Russia or China?
Times have changed and I don’t know anybody who doesn’t want their own ‘stuff’.
Ironically, it’s perfectly legal here to start your own commune, as long as the participants agree to it, and if it grows into a desirable community, it will draw more participants and become a choice standard like a HOA community.
How come those supporting communism don’t live in communes and share all their stuff with their comrades? Isn’t that bourgeois?
off with their heads i guess.
Karl Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto 59 years after the adoption of the Constitution because none of the principles of the Communist Manifesto were in the Constitution. Had the principles of the Communist Manifesto been in the Constitution, Karl Marx would have had no reason to write the Communist Manifesto. The principles of the Communist Manifesto were not in the Constitution then, and the principles of the Communist Manifesto are not in the Constitution now.
These communists are unassimilable, anti-American, anti-Constitution invaders intent on conquest.
These communists are direct and mortal enemies of the American thesis of freedom and self-reliance, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, actual Americans, and America.
These communists must be detained and deported with extreme prejudice for subversion, sedition, insurrection, and treason.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Article 3, Section 3
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.
Communism is the opposite of our system of individual rights.
Communal rights but no individual rights.
Get rid of the Constitution? This alone shows the futility of their logic. Several years ago while I was on staff at a state military college a civilian employee asked one of the leaders. “Could they ever see a circumstance where U.S. military leadership decided that the direction of the nation was anathema to the will of the people? Would they ever turn on the leadership?” The answer was no, because as soon as that happened, there would be no Constitution. By our Constitution, the military is subordinate to the civilian leaders. Destroy the Constitution, and you have destroyed the single greatest bulwark against a military take over. Short sighted is an understatement.