Yes, because it is a living document, in both sense of the word.
As I said, interpretation of the Constitution is the job of SCOTUS.
Election 2020 Election Fraud: Let's face it, this year will be a shitshow
- Thread starter MelancholicMechanicus
- Start date
As I said, interpretation of the Constitution is the job of SCOTUS.
Doomsought
Well-known member
No it is not. The constitution has a well defined process for amendments and any attempts to change it through wordplay are acts of usurpation.
Yes, it is open for Amendments, and the actual language already in place is subject to interpretation by SCOTUS; this is nothing new.
DarthOne
☦️
WOOOSH!
I have to be entirely honest: If this passes and is actually implemented, I'm pretty sure the path to civil war will be set. I know I know, everyone says this, but this is huge. They get away with this? No election will ever be secure again.
Eh, I still don't think there's enough will or organization for a civil war: I think freedom will be won politically, or we'll live in tyranny until the tyrants give up.
Actual organizers of armed resistance wouldn't use social media to plan it out. At least not overtly. And let's be honest: As Afghanistan and Iraq have demonstrated, all you need is enough armed resistance to humiliate and outlast the occupiers and you can win.
I am not looking forward to it. I hope it doesn't happen. But that may be the only means of freedom.
ACW 2.0 probably not going to happen, for the simple reason that 99% of any attempts to create an organized resistance is going to get infil'd by CI's and undereovers that it will be busted up before it actually becomes a threat to those with power.
At most, we may see a state or two end up having skirmishes with the Feds using MG vs reg troops, if things get really nasty.
But as long as DC has the nuke codes and control over the nuclear triad, most thoughts of effective violent resistance is...well a pipe dream.
Don't mistake the Taliban's situation for something that can be pulled off on American soil, and do not think that the gov is not well prepared to handle this sort of shit, either.
Humiliating the powers that be through social media, through civil disobedience ala MLK, and through not complying with their narratives is the most effective means to fight back in this generation, not force of arms.
We don't need another George Washington, we need a Laughing Man.
At most, we may see a state or two end up having skirmishes with the Feds using MG vs reg troops, if things get really nasty.
But as long as DC has the nuke codes and control over the nuclear triad, most thoughts of effective violent resistance is...well a pipe dream.
Don't mistake the Taliban's situation for something that can be pulled off on American soil, and do not think that the gov is not well prepared to handle this sort of shit, either.
Humiliating the powers that be through social media, through civil disobedience ala MLK, and through not complying with their narratives is the most effective means to fight back in this generation, not force of arms.
We don't need another George Washington, we need a Laughing Man.
Doomsought
Well-known member
Actually I disagree. Republicans are too placid to fight unless the states are involved. What will happen is that the federal government will go one way, and republican states will refuse. The powderkeg will stay that way for a few weeks until a spark is available, then things will set off.
For people whose supporters don't have as many guns as we do, the Democrats sure talk a lot of shit. I'm hoping they're not seriously stupid enough to push for all out gun grabs and other actions that would cause civil war but... Wishing for them to not be stupid would also involve wishing they weren't evil, incompetent, greedy, projecting, self serving hypocritical assholes.
Sobek
Disgusting Scalie
Nukes are a complete non-entity in a Civil War. Any government willing to nuke itselt loses all legitimacy, and ruling over a pile of radioactive ash helps no one. That ash isn't going to pay taxes or consume product.
A 2ACW is perfectly possible and likely. You wanna know what it would look like? Picture Northern Ireland, at the worst time of The Trouble, but the size of a continent. It will come down to that. Once a certain threshold is reached of how many people are rising up at once or how many neighborhoods you need to keep permanent NG presence in is reached it will devolve really fast. Either the government will blink and arrange for actual talks, or we see true insanity start.
At the risk of placing myself on a watch list (Not that I care, fuck you whoever you are Fed Boy reading this), the fact is once you start getting to the level where people start actively taking potshots at politicians it will quickly escalate into hell. You saw how shit scared the D.C. elite was when a bunch of boomers with no plan and no real intention to do harm broke into their sacred little building in January? How absolutely panicked they were at the idea of interacting with actual americans angry at them? It will get much worse. If people start treating ATF and FBI agents the same as they are doing the politican elite (which I am seeing on the more hardcore gamer side of things) it will escalate to the point where they do not feel safe at all going anywhere. When every fed demands a police escort to do anything outside 100% compliant territory like D.C. any chance peace will be gone.
Northern Ireland. Continent sized.
The USA is held together by spit, sweat, duct tape, and the willpower of the Department of Transportation. And sometimes there isn't enough duct tape to go around. We saw what happened when some dude decided to be a gamer in December and blow up a van next to a ISP nexus. He knocked the internet down for a few minutes and coverage was spotty for a few days after. Imagine how bad it would be if that had been done with a team and or with a mob breaking in or something. How quickly the system collapses.
TyrantTriumphant
Well-known member
I'm pretty sure there's already a civil war thread. This is the election fraud thread.
Speaking of which, I wonder what the likelihood of the HR 4 bill passing the Senate is? Do the Democrats need 60 votes or just 50?
Speaking of which, I wonder what the likelihood of the HR 4 bill passing the Senate is? Do the Democrats need 60 votes or just 50?
Sobek
Disgusting Scalie
If the mods wanna move the 2ACW comments they can.
HR1 failed but given the recent history of RINOs putting up token resistance to progressive policies only to agree on slightly less progressive ones as a "compromise" with nothing in return the prognostic is not very good.
HR1 failed but given the recent history of RINOs putting up token resistance to progressive policies only to agree on slightly less progressive ones as a "compromise" with nothing in return the prognostic is not very good.
Highly doubt, as multiple dems have also gone out against it. Like the first one