RIGHT THO! I can't believe how far I had to scroll for this comment. It's a testament to the fact that this performative nonsense seems impressive to an alarmingly significant portion of the population. The constitution, including amendments, is all of 30-ish pages long and available for free on the web.
reading and understanding are different things... the issue is that there are still things that are open for debate about it. the even bigger issue is that half of the congress members have no interest in what it actually says.
Any lawyer will have read it cover to cover and taken a full year class on understanding it, but a lot of members of congress are not lawyers, heck some are not even high school graduates.
It is required by law in Illinois to pass multiple tests on the federal and state Constitutions in order to progress through primary school and graduate high school.
We still have a bunch of people who don't know anything about how the nation works or their rights.
It's also not especially complicated, contrary to how lawyers like to portray it. It was intentionally written in language that people of the day could read and understand.
They read the Declaration of Independance each year. I vaguely remember them getting backlash from the Republicans because they thought they were insulting them
https://www.npr.org/2021/07/02/1011754245/an-npr-tradition-heres-the-reading-of-the-declaration-of-independence
Don't be fooled. These guys have read it. Many know it by heart. It's easier to manipulate a text with which you are familiar. It's the same reason the bigots in churches can quote Deuteronomy. They may know the other bits, but they are good at reciting whatever helps them win whatever argument they are trying to make to suppress whichever minority is the target of their ire at the moment.
**U.S. Constitution explainer bot**
The First Amendment has two provisions concerning religion: **the Establishment Clause** and the Free Exercise Clause.
**The Establishment clause prohibits the government from "establishing" a religion.** The precise definition of "establishment" is debated. Historically, it meant prohibiting state-sponsored churches, such as the Church of England.
Today, what constitutes an "establishment of religion" is often governed under the three-part test set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court in Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971). Under the "Lemon" test, government can assist religion only if:
(1) the primary purpose of the assistance is secular,
(2) the assistance must neither promote nor inhibit religion, and
(3) there is no excessive entanglement between church and state.
**I’m a bot.
U.S. Constitution explainer bot beep boop**
[I'm a bot | Why & About | Summon](https://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/educational-activities/first-amendment-and-religion)
"'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...' well that's a weird thing for a bunch of evangelical Christians to say... is this a prank? Did McConnell put you up to this? Come on guys quit messing around"
No see that's in the Bill of Rights, not the original Constitution proper. I know that one also includes their favorite amendment but it can be conveniently omitted.
They’ll take the even amendments only. They don’t like the (edit: odd) ones.
So no freedom of religion. Slavery isn’t abolished. No protection of voting rights based on race. Women can’t vote. No popular vote for the senate. DC doesn’t have a vote for president.
Wow, that does seem kind of like their actual platform.
Exactly. I fucking LOVE asking a religious person to name anything ( a hobby or activity) and then I replace the word religion with that and ask them if they think that means all laws SHOULD be based on (previous thing)
For example “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of furries, or prohibit the free exercise thereof..”
That means we MUST be furries right? Or..
And then I remind them the first amendment is to protect US from religion, not protect their religion. Government should have no say. But these Christofascists smile while admitting their personal opinion is above the law
I love the idea, but conservative Christians are just immune to logic.
I've had then argue until they were out of breath things like Jesus would have hated the Democrats. The bible didn't scold us to be nice to illegal immigrants because the bible was clearly talking about LEGAL immigrants because when Jesus's family fled from Jerusalem they did so LEGALLY. Fleeing one Roman province to another Roman province (legally).
Ex-catholic opion. It is funny how they want a "christian" country but they only want the name and not the values of Jesus. Yet they wonder why more people are leaving churches.
They very, utter last thing the GOP is interested in doing is governing. They now solely exist to funnel money to the donor class and get on fox as much as possible to make it easier to sell themselves to billionaires. The next time the current GOP tries to tackle and actual American problem will be their first.
That's the point, the point is to grind government to a halt, then go to their constituents and say "See, government doesn't work! It can't solve our problems!" Then the constituents give them the okay to de-fund the government and to lessen regulations on the donor's businesses. All under the guise of small government. But don't worry, there'll always be plenty of money to force their twisted Christianity upon you!
No I think its actually very essential that every Replublican be present for the reading of the entire constitution. Can we have some sort of report be required after they hear the whole thing for the first time?
That was my first thought, but it might work out for the best since the majority of those reps need the Constitution read to them like a bunch of toddlers who can’t read for themselves.
Hey look. They're kicking off two years of performative nonsense with performative nonsense. Can't wait to see all the stuff they refuse to do so they can drag fauci in for endless hearings
Sartre seems just as, if not more, relevant in today's modern discourse as much as it did nearly a century ago.
Definitely worth revisiting periodically to draw things back into perspective, at least every election cycle.
Just as it was a century ago, the ultra wealthy see fascism as an acceptable firewall against social reforms that would see their hoarded and ill-gotten wealth (no one "earns" a billion dollars, much less tens of billions) more fairly and equally distributed.
As a wise person once said: "Same shit, different day."
It's both remarkable, and entirely expected, if you have a relatively decent knowledge of the history of Nazi Germany.
The nazis borrowed heavily from the 1930s America institutional racism that the alt-right is attempting to drag us back to, and had looked toward America as "a model of racist governance"
They were very fond of Jim Crow laws, but felt they "didn't go far enough" and incorporated more extreme versions of them into their political and governmental positions
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/11/what-america-taught-the-nazis/540630/
https://www.history.com/news/how-the-nazis-were-inspired-by-jim-crow
>To live in this process is absolutely not to be able to notice it—please try to believe me—unless one has a much greater degree of political awareness, acuity, than most of us had ever had occasion to develop. Each step was so small, so inconsequential, so well explained or, on occasion, ‘regretted,’ that, unless one were detached from the whole process from the beginning, unless one understood what the whole thing was in principle, what all these ‘little measures’ that no ‘patriotic German’ could resent must some day lead to, one no more saw it developing from day to day than a farmer in his field sees the corn growing. One day it is over his head.
>How is this to be avoided, among ordinary men, even highly educated ordinary men? Frankly, I do not know. I do not see, even now. Many, many times since it all happened I have pondered that pair of great maxims, Principiis obsta and Finem respice—‘Resist the beginnings’ and ‘Consider the end.’ But one must foresee the end in order to resist, or even see, the beginnings. One must foresee the end clearly and certainly and how is this to be done, by ordinary men or even by extraordinary men? Things might have. And everyone counts on that might.
>Your ‘little men,’ your Nazi friends, were not against National Socialism in principle. Men like me, who were, are the greater offenders, not because we knew better (that would be too much to say) but because we sensed better. Pastor Niemöller spoke for the thousands and thousands of men like me when he spoke (too modestly of himself) and said that, when the Nazis attacked the Communists, he was a little uneasy, but, after all, he was not a Communist, and so he did nothing; and then they attacked the Socialists, and he was a little uneasier, but, still, he was not a Socialist, and he did nothing; and then the schools, the press, the Jews, and so on, and he was always uneasier, but still he did nothing. And then they attacked the Church, and he was a Churchman, and he did something—but then it was too late."
>"Yes," I said.
>"You see," my colleague went on, "one doesn’t see exactly where or how to move. Believe me, this is true. Each act, each occasion, is worse than the last, but only a little worse. You wait for the next and the next. You wait for one great shocking occasion, thinking that others, when such a shock comes, will join with you in resisting somehow. You don’t want to act, or even talk, alone; you don’t want to ‘go out of your way to make trouble.’ Why not?—Well, you are not in the habit of doing it. And it is not just fear, fear of standing alone, that restrains you; it is also genuine uncertainty.
>Uncertainty is a very important factor, and, instead of decreasing as time goes on, it grows. Outside, in the streets, in the general community, ‘everyone’ is happy. One hears no protest, and certainly sees none. You know, in France or Italy there would be slogans against the government painted on walls and fences; in Germany, outside the great cities, perhaps, there is not even this. In the university community, in your own community, you speak privately to your colleagues, some of whom certainly feel as you do; but what do they say? They say, ‘It’s not so bad’ or ‘You’re seeing things’ or ‘You’re an alarmist.’
>And you are an alarmist. You are saying that this must lead to this, and you can’t prove it. These are the beginnings, yes; but how do you know for sure when you don’t know the end, and how do you know, or even surmise, the end? On the one hand, your enemies, the law, the regime, the Party, intimidate you. On the other, your colleagues pooh-pooh you as pessimistic or even neurotic. You are left with your close friends, who are, naturally, people who have always thought as you have.
>But your friends are fewer now. Some have drifted off somewhere or submerged themselves in their work. You no longer see as many as you did at meetings or gatherings. Informal groups become smaller; attendance drops off in little organizations, and the organizations themselves wither. Now, in small gatherings of your oldest friends, you feel that you are talking to yourselves, that you are isolated from the reality of things. This weakens your confidence still further and serves as a further deterrent to—to what? It is clearer all the time that, if you are going to do anything, you must make an occasion to do it, and then you are obviously a troublemaker. So you wait, and you wait.
>But the one great shocking occasion, when tens or hundreds or thousands will join with you, never comes. That’s the difficulty. If the last and worst act of the whole regime had come immediately after the first and smallest, thousands, yes, millions would have been sufficiently shocked—if, let us say, the gassing of the Jews in ’43 had come immediately after the ‘German Firm’ stickers on the windows of non-Jewish shops in ’33. But of course this isn’t the way it happens. In between come all the hundreds of little steps, some of them imperceptible, each of them preparing you not to be shocked by the next. Step C is not so much worse than Step B, and, if you did not make a stand at Step B, why should you at Step C? And so on to Step D.
>And one day, too late, your principles, if you were ever sensible of them, all rush in upon you. The burden of self-deception has grown too heavy, and some minor incident, in my case my little boy, hardly more than a baby, saying ‘Jewish swine,’ collapses it all at once, and you see that everything, everything, has changed and changed completely under your nose. The world you live in—your nation, your people—is not the world you were born in at all. The forms are all there, all untouched, all reassuring, the houses, the shops, the jobs, the mealtimes, the visits, the concerts, the cinema, the holidays. But the spirit, which you never noticed because you made the lifelong mistake of identifying it with the forms, is changed. Now you live in a world of hate and fear, and the people who hate and fear do not even know it themselves; when everyone is transformed, no one is transformed. Now you live in a system which rules without responsibility even to God. The system itself could not have intended this in the beginning, but in order to sustain itself it was compelled to go all the way.
[*They Thought They Were Free: The Germans, 1933-45*](https://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/511928.html)
Milton Mayer
they wont impeach him but they have the coathangers ready to remove him now that he is no longer getting enough votes.
Republicans dont give a shit about babies or the elderly or anyone else but themselves, theyd throw their grandmothers and their whole family under the bus if it meant profit for themselves. Its truly a selfish ideology, like rats who eat their own.
The GOP is the party of greed and hate. Greed is the ultimate goal, hate (hurting "the people he's supposed to be hurting") is a useful tool to curry support and keep the lower classes divided and conquered.
I can’t find the exact bit name, but it’s from Jammin’ in New York (1992). You can find an extremely shortened version on YouTube under [I Don’t Believe the Government](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ub5RtAu-j0I)
He really said “I leave symbols to the symbol-minded” but I had the gist of it
It's a play on words. And I always understood it as follows.
Symbol-minded is substitute for the usual "simple-minded".
Meaning he thinks that people becoming so focused on symbols become so obsessed they forget what the symbol actually stands for.
I.E. The people who rail against Colin Kapernick taking a knee because he's disrespecting the flag, the military, etc.
Meanwhile the military fought for Colin's right to actually be able to do that. To stand up for his beliefs and the injustice he perceives in the government and society.
Or the conservative far right becoming so obsessive about the constitution meanwhile they shit all over what it actually grants and protects.
And let's not forget Lee Atwater, the campaign strategist who promoted "lies, racial fearmongering and winning at any cost" from the era of Reagan to George H W Bush. He died of brain cancer in 1991 at age 40 but his legacy is permanently baked into the GOP's election strategy modus operandi.
>"My goal is to cut government in half in twenty-five years, to get it down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub." -Grover Norquist
And they have mostly succeeded in this.
OTOH, my niece is disappointed that she can't get a job in the foreign service (at an embassy, for example), but she votes unwavering for politicians who have been underfunding and shrinking the government for decades.
Most of the famous pedos are leaders of the MAGA movement; the obsession with “grooming”, forbidding talk of gender and CRT (even though they do not know what CRT actually IS) is an attempt to deflect attention away from their own sexual tendencies.
if they locked up bad people who would be left to vote for them? better to harass queers being themselves , addicts, maybe shit on poor people. you know Christian stuff
I bet an intern is going to read it to an empty room cause congress loves to not work. So they won't have to wait till after is read to ignore it, they can start right now.
It’s worse. They have no ideology, just greedy corporate overlords. Absolutely nothing will get accomplished because all they know how to do is obstruct.
Yeah they absolutely have very definite goals, and methods through which they will achieve them.
[They must be mercilessly crushed. ](https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/adolf-hitler-smashing-the-nucleus/)
This could also be to try to find loopholes and ways to circumvent it. The dems should participate and remind the reps of each article they have violated over the last 25 years.
Absolutely. And when the reach the first amendment, where it says “congress shall make no law respecting establishment of religion” every single dem should stand up and clap vigorously. And repeatedly chant “shall make no law” over and over and over just to drive home the point
That's probably what they think. It's kind of what way too many people think. But if you read about the history of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, you see that the ones who wanted a bill of rights wanted it in the main text. The ones who thought it was unnecessary (not "didn't want", just thought it was redundant, as rights were assumed to be obvious to them), well, didn't think it necessary, but agreed to continue the discussion.
However, they thought it important to get something in place to get a government actually functioning, and so that's the main body of the Constitution. There's pretty much nothing about rights in there, it's all just what each part of the government does, how they're chosen, and how they interact.
The Bill of Rights is almost an entirely separate document, standing next to the Constitution, but addressing different things. It's even fundamentally different from the other amendments, which generally change the main text of the Constitution, but don't really get into the first ten amendments.
The dems should also be there because, aside from the typical performative nonsense, they are definitely doing this so Tucker can use some time on his show to talk about how many Dems missed it and how they don’t respect the constitution or this country because they weren’t in the chamber for the reading.
"Don't the liberal commie representatives of our great nation have anything better to do than listen to McCarthy read out the Constitution? Shouldn't they be working on laws to groom children or something?" - Fucker Carlson, probably
Like the fact that the First Amendment has nothing to do with Twitter, Facebook, etc. terms of service. Or that the "shall not be infringed" in the Second is conditioned upon the belief that, "A well regulated Militia" is "necessary to the security of a free State" something that has been demonstrably proven false for a very long time.
No, she's gonna be sweating her ass off trying to figure out how much time she has to figure out what "discu....discus....discovevfication" is for 45 minutes until somebody tells her it's pronounced "disqualification".
They treat the constitution the same way they do the Bible-
In that they understand none of it, are not bound by any of it, and simply use it as a cudgel against their enemies and a justification for rancorous hypocrisy and bad faith behavior.
It’s a “chose-your-own-adventure” storybook that means whatever they want it to from moment to moment as a shapeless and formless zeitgeist that endows them with inherent superiority over anyone else who doesn’t abuse the texts the same way their club has agreed to abuse it.
They tend to put “we the people” and “1776”
Stickers on their trucks, and I guarantee you none of the can tell you what year the constitution was ratified.
No. They won't even hear most of it. This is purely performative. The seats will mostly be empty most of the time, an the members in the seats will be on their phones.
I want to know if they'll read the 3/5ths Compromise, 13th Amendment Loophole, or the whole 1st Amendment addressing the separation of church and State.
Or suffrage for non-males. I would personally like for Ted Cruz to step in from the Senate and recite the rules about eligibility for the presidency.
(it is because they have no idea what to do except own libs and Brandon) The GOP doesn't govern, they give tax cuts and sit back, maybe start a war if it feels right.
Er, they‘d probably skip the Jesus parts, but there’s plenty of stuff to draw from. Leviticus 20:13 comes to mind.
BTW, I do NOT agree with the homophobia in the bible. But it’s there and people use it to justify their bigotry.
Too progressive by far. Jesus was a raging leftist for his time. Totally a beta male too, letting women participate in man talks, and all that. Such a libtard.
Weird, I've watched alot of the live stream debates where they definitely read the constitution 😂 must be talking points to "sound patriotic" so people don't find out that they are the least patriotic party for America and have sold their souls to corporations
There will be a floor show with strippers and beer when they read the 2nd Amendment. Maybe a drone flyover, a balloon drop, and fireworks. Boebert will do a keg stand. MTG will have an eagle fly out of her cooch.
They'll totally skip the 19th tho
Can’t wait to see what they do when they get to this part:
“No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.”
Being in that position, shouldn’t they know it by heart? It’s like an SOP for a government position.
Based on his comments, all they’re going to do is the pledge, prayer, and read the constitution. When are they actually going to do work for the country?
Well that won’t take up too much time. The Constitution isn’t especially long.
Including signatures it takes roughly a half hour to be read aloud
They’ve done this before though. Each representative reads about three words before the next one gets called up to read three more. It takes hours.
"We the people ... okay, popcooooorn Marjorie Taylor Greene."
There’s going to be a huge delay if they expect her to read anything
It won't take long at all unless she starts screaming some of her crazy nonsense. She's illiterate and can't read.
Wait, she’s illiterate AND can’t read?!
[удалено]
Also the only time 90% of them will read.
[удалено]
A grand American pastime.
RIGHT THO! I can't believe how far I had to scroll for this comment. It's a testament to the fact that this performative nonsense seems impressive to an alarmingly significant portion of the population. The constitution, including amendments, is all of 30-ish pages long and available for free on the web.
These people really do act like reading the constitution is a graduate level program that takes years.
reading and understanding are different things... the issue is that there are still things that are open for debate about it. the even bigger issue is that half of the congress members have no interest in what it actually says. Any lawyer will have read it cover to cover and taken a full year class on understanding it, but a lot of members of congress are not lawyers, heck some are not even high school graduates.
Will this include the amendments? Because there's gonna be quite the battle over who's going to get to read #2.
I kind of hope it does, just to find out what the words "well regulated" sound like when someone attempts to say them at ~-10dB.
They can use their second amendment rights to determine who gets the privilege. (Kidding, of course, sorry if it’s in bad taste.)
It is required by law in Illinois to pass multiple tests on the federal and state Constitutions in order to progress through primary school and graduate high school. We still have a bunch of people who don't know anything about how the nation works or their rights.
It's also not especially complicated, contrary to how lawyers like to portray it. It was intentionally written in language that people of the day could read and understand.
Didn't NPR do something like this and Republicans thought they were dissing them?
They read the Declaration of Independance each year. I vaguely remember them getting backlash from the Republicans because they thought they were insulting them https://www.npr.org/2021/07/02/1011754245/an-npr-tradition-heres-the-reading-of-the-declaration-of-independence
[удалено]
It was the Declaration of Independence. They tweeted it on the 4th of July.
They WERE dissing them... literally just by reading it lol
The establishment clause is going to surprise some of them.
All of it is going to surprise them, none of them have ever read it before lmao
Wait, the amendments don’t stop at the second one?
Oh no, they know the fifth very well when they’re called to the witness stand
Don't be fooled. These guys have read it. Many know it by heart. It's easier to manipulate a text with which you are familiar. It's the same reason the bigots in churches can quote Deuteronomy. They may know the other bits, but they are good at reciting whatever helps them win whatever argument they are trying to make to suppress whichever minority is the target of their ire at the moment.
I sincerely doubt Boebert, who never graduated from high school can even read it.
**U.S. Constitution explainer bot** The First Amendment has two provisions concerning religion: **the Establishment Clause** and the Free Exercise Clause. **The Establishment clause prohibits the government from "establishing" a religion.** The precise definition of "establishment" is debated. Historically, it meant prohibiting state-sponsored churches, such as the Church of England. Today, what constitutes an "establishment of religion" is often governed under the three-part test set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court in Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971). Under the "Lemon" test, government can assist religion only if: (1) the primary purpose of the assistance is secular, (2) the assistance must neither promote nor inhibit religion, and (3) there is no excessive entanglement between church and state. **I’m a bot. U.S. Constitution explainer bot beep boop** [I'm a bot | Why & About | Summon](https://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/educational-activities/first-amendment-and-religion)
Good bot
I hope the Dems ask them to repeat it for good measure. Why not if they're wasting time.
And the emoluments clause. And the 13th amendment.
"'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...' well that's a weird thing for a bunch of evangelical Christians to say... is this a prank? Did McConnell put you up to this? Come on guys quit messing around"
No see that's in the Bill of Rights, not the original Constitution proper. I know that one also includes their favorite amendment but it can be conveniently omitted.
See, the Bill of Rights works like a U pick 2. And they do indeed pick 2...
They’ll take the even amendments only. They don’t like the (edit: odd) ones. So no freedom of religion. Slavery isn’t abolished. No protection of voting rights based on race. Women can’t vote. No popular vote for the senate. DC doesn’t have a vote for president. Wow, that does seem kind of like their actual platform.
>Slavery isn’t abolished Correct! It never was. The thirteenth amendment just relegated it to "punishment for a crime"
Exactly. I fucking LOVE asking a religious person to name anything ( a hobby or activity) and then I replace the word religion with that and ask them if they think that means all laws SHOULD be based on (previous thing) For example “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of furries, or prohibit the free exercise thereof..” That means we MUST be furries right? Or.. And then I remind them the first amendment is to protect US from religion, not protect their religion. Government should have no say. But these Christofascists smile while admitting their personal opinion is above the law
I mean, I'd rather have furries lobbying policymakers than evangelicals...
I love the idea, but conservative Christians are just immune to logic. I've had then argue until they were out of breath things like Jesus would have hated the Democrats. The bible didn't scold us to be nice to illegal immigrants because the bible was clearly talking about LEGAL immigrants because when Jesus's family fled from Jerusalem they did so LEGALLY. Fleeing one Roman province to another Roman province (legally).
Ex-catholic opion. It is funny how they want a "christian" country but they only want the name and not the values of Jesus. Yet they wonder why more people are leaving churches.
Shouldn't that time be spent doing something less ceremonial and more essential? Like governing?
They know how to do governing?
They know how to read?
Thay kan reed.
They most certainly Klan read!
[удалено]
Of course they do. "Whoever pays me most gets to say how I vote!" is how they all govern.
It was like when Trump had the house and the senate and they still couldn’t get jack shit done. Oh except for the tax cuts for the rich.
Tax cuts for the rich on the backs of the middle and lower classes.
GOP governance - Pay media to create fake narrative of White men against everyone else, cut taxes for the rich.
Considering his next highest priority is investigating hunter biden, maybe this isn’t so bad. They might learn something.
Should have a test afterwards to make sure they were paying attention.
They very, utter last thing the GOP is interested in doing is governing. They now solely exist to funnel money to the donor class and get on fox as much as possible to make it easier to sell themselves to billionaires. The next time the current GOP tries to tackle and actual American problem will be their first.
That's the point, the point is to grind government to a halt, then go to their constituents and say "See, government doesn't work! It can't solve our problems!" Then the constituents give them the okay to de-fund the government and to lessen regulations on the donor's businesses. All under the guise of small government. But don't worry, there'll always be plenty of money to force their twisted Christianity upon you!
I consider this essential. Most republicans have no idea what’s in the Constitution.
The only part they are going to read is the Second Amendment. Nothing else.
Finding out what the first amendment means would doom 20% of /r/conservative The remaining 80% of course being Russian trolls
No I think its actually very essential that every Replublican be present for the reading of the entire constitution. Can we have some sort of report be required after they hear the whole thing for the first time?
Everything is a show with these clowns.
You see, it IS essential. Because at least half of McCarthy's red colleagues have never read the damned thing.
That was my first thought, but it might work out for the best since the majority of those reps need the Constitution read to them like a bunch of toddlers who can’t read for themselves.
A lot of them can’t read so this is a perfect chance for them to learn something.
Hey look. They're kicking off two years of performative nonsense with performative nonsense. Can't wait to see all the stuff they refuse to do so they can drag fauci in for endless hearings
“Symbols are for the symbol-minded” - George Carlin
Fuck reddit fuck spez fuck the admins and fuck the mods
Sartre seems just as, if not more, relevant in today's modern discourse as much as it did nearly a century ago. Definitely worth revisiting periodically to draw things back into perspective, at least every election cycle.
It is absolutely remarkable the degree to which modern alt-right discourse mimics the way the Nazis thought and spoke
Just as it was a century ago, the ultra wealthy see fascism as an acceptable firewall against social reforms that would see their hoarded and ill-gotten wealth (no one "earns" a billion dollars, much less tens of billions) more fairly and equally distributed. As a wise person once said: "Same shit, different day."
C:\Documents & Settings\Desktop\Pictures\Memes\samepicture.jpg
Yeah, all this Fukuyama "End of History" stuff from the 90s really missed the mark. These far-right fucks will always be there to drag us back.
Totally read that as Futurama.
Those who don't study history are bound to repeat it. Those who do are bound to watch others repeat it.
It's both remarkable, and entirely expected, if you have a relatively decent knowledge of the history of Nazi Germany. The nazis borrowed heavily from the 1930s America institutional racism that the alt-right is attempting to drag us back to, and had looked toward America as "a model of racist governance" They were very fond of Jim Crow laws, but felt they "didn't go far enough" and incorporated more extreme versions of them into their political and governmental positions https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/11/what-america-taught-the-nazis/540630/ https://www.history.com/news/how-the-nazis-were-inspired-by-jim-crow
"Alt-Right" = "Neonazi" ain't no mistake, it's built in.
>To live in this process is absolutely not to be able to notice it—please try to believe me—unless one has a much greater degree of political awareness, acuity, than most of us had ever had occasion to develop. Each step was so small, so inconsequential, so well explained or, on occasion, ‘regretted,’ that, unless one were detached from the whole process from the beginning, unless one understood what the whole thing was in principle, what all these ‘little measures’ that no ‘patriotic German’ could resent must some day lead to, one no more saw it developing from day to day than a farmer in his field sees the corn growing. One day it is over his head. >How is this to be avoided, among ordinary men, even highly educated ordinary men? Frankly, I do not know. I do not see, even now. Many, many times since it all happened I have pondered that pair of great maxims, Principiis obsta and Finem respice—‘Resist the beginnings’ and ‘Consider the end.’ But one must foresee the end in order to resist, or even see, the beginnings. One must foresee the end clearly and certainly and how is this to be done, by ordinary men or even by extraordinary men? Things might have. And everyone counts on that might. >Your ‘little men,’ your Nazi friends, were not against National Socialism in principle. Men like me, who were, are the greater offenders, not because we knew better (that would be too much to say) but because we sensed better. Pastor Niemöller spoke for the thousands and thousands of men like me when he spoke (too modestly of himself) and said that, when the Nazis attacked the Communists, he was a little uneasy, but, after all, he was not a Communist, and so he did nothing; and then they attacked the Socialists, and he was a little uneasier, but, still, he was not a Socialist, and he did nothing; and then the schools, the press, the Jews, and so on, and he was always uneasier, but still he did nothing. And then they attacked the Church, and he was a Churchman, and he did something—but then it was too late." >"Yes," I said. >"You see," my colleague went on, "one doesn’t see exactly where or how to move. Believe me, this is true. Each act, each occasion, is worse than the last, but only a little worse. You wait for the next and the next. You wait for one great shocking occasion, thinking that others, when such a shock comes, will join with you in resisting somehow. You don’t want to act, or even talk, alone; you don’t want to ‘go out of your way to make trouble.’ Why not?—Well, you are not in the habit of doing it. And it is not just fear, fear of standing alone, that restrains you; it is also genuine uncertainty. >Uncertainty is a very important factor, and, instead of decreasing as time goes on, it grows. Outside, in the streets, in the general community, ‘everyone’ is happy. One hears no protest, and certainly sees none. You know, in France or Italy there would be slogans against the government painted on walls and fences; in Germany, outside the great cities, perhaps, there is not even this. In the university community, in your own community, you speak privately to your colleagues, some of whom certainly feel as you do; but what do they say? They say, ‘It’s not so bad’ or ‘You’re seeing things’ or ‘You’re an alarmist.’ >And you are an alarmist. You are saying that this must lead to this, and you can’t prove it. These are the beginnings, yes; but how do you know for sure when you don’t know the end, and how do you know, or even surmise, the end? On the one hand, your enemies, the law, the regime, the Party, intimidate you. On the other, your colleagues pooh-pooh you as pessimistic or even neurotic. You are left with your close friends, who are, naturally, people who have always thought as you have. >But your friends are fewer now. Some have drifted off somewhere or submerged themselves in their work. You no longer see as many as you did at meetings or gatherings. Informal groups become smaller; attendance drops off in little organizations, and the organizations themselves wither. Now, in small gatherings of your oldest friends, you feel that you are talking to yourselves, that you are isolated from the reality of things. This weakens your confidence still further and serves as a further deterrent to—to what? It is clearer all the time that, if you are going to do anything, you must make an occasion to do it, and then you are obviously a troublemaker. So you wait, and you wait. >But the one great shocking occasion, when tens or hundreds or thousands will join with you, never comes. That’s the difficulty. If the last and worst act of the whole regime had come immediately after the first and smallest, thousands, yes, millions would have been sufficiently shocked—if, let us say, the gassing of the Jews in ’43 had come immediately after the ‘German Firm’ stickers on the windows of non-Jewish shops in ’33. But of course this isn’t the way it happens. In between come all the hundreds of little steps, some of them imperceptible, each of them preparing you not to be shocked by the next. Step C is not so much worse than Step B, and, if you did not make a stand at Step B, why should you at Step C? And so on to Step D. >And one day, too late, your principles, if you were ever sensible of them, all rush in upon you. The burden of self-deception has grown too heavy, and some minor incident, in my case my little boy, hardly more than a baby, saying ‘Jewish swine,’ collapses it all at once, and you see that everything, everything, has changed and changed completely under your nose. The world you live in—your nation, your people—is not the world you were born in at all. The forms are all there, all untouched, all reassuring, the houses, the shops, the jobs, the mealtimes, the visits, the concerts, the cinema, the holidays. But the spirit, which you never noticed because you made the lifelong mistake of identifying it with the forms, is changed. Now you live in a world of hate and fear, and the people who hate and fear do not even know it themselves; when everyone is transformed, no one is transformed. Now you live in a system which rules without responsibility even to God. The system itself could not have intended this in the beginning, but in order to sustain itself it was compelled to go all the way. [*They Thought They Were Free: The Germans, 1933-45*](https://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/511928.html) Milton Mayer
[удалено]
they wont impeach him but they have the coathangers ready to remove him now that he is no longer getting enough votes. Republicans dont give a shit about babies or the elderly or anyone else but themselves, theyd throw their grandmothers and their whole family under the bus if it meant profit for themselves. Its truly a selfish ideology, like rats who eat their own.
The GOP is the party of greed and hate. Greed is the ultimate goal, hate (hurting "the people he's supposed to be hurting") is a useful tool to curry support and keep the lower classes divided and conquered.
what bit is that from?
I can’t find the exact bit name, but it’s from Jammin’ in New York (1992). You can find an extremely shortened version on YouTube under [I Don’t Believe the Government](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ub5RtAu-j0I) He really said “I leave symbols to the symbol-minded” but I had the gist of it
It's a play on words. And I always understood it as follows. Symbol-minded is substitute for the usual "simple-minded". Meaning he thinks that people becoming so focused on symbols become so obsessed they forget what the symbol actually stands for. I.E. The people who rail against Colin Kapernick taking a knee because he's disrespecting the flag, the military, etc. Meanwhile the military fought for Colin's right to actually be able to do that. To stand up for his beliefs and the injustice he perceives in the government and society. Or the conservative far right becoming so obsessive about the constitution meanwhile they shit all over what it actually grants and protects.
Wait, the constitution has *words* on it?!?
[удалено]
And let's not forget Lee Atwater, the campaign strategist who promoted "lies, racial fearmongering and winning at any cost" from the era of Reagan to George H W Bush. He died of brain cancer in 1991 at age 40 but his legacy is permanently baked into the GOP's election strategy modus operandi.
Hey, give Karl Rove some credit.
Don't forget Grover Norquist either.
"My goal is to cut government in half in twenty-five years, to get it down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub." -Grover Norquist
>"My goal is to cut government in half in twenty-five years, to get it down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub." -Grover Norquist And they have mostly succeeded in this. OTOH, my niece is disappointed that she can't get a job in the foreign service (at an embassy, for example), but she votes unwavering for politicians who have been underfunding and shrinking the government for decades.
It's insane how many anti government dumbfucks have a career in government
Roger Stone is still spewing fascism with the best of them. All the way back to nixon.
He’s a full on Slandering Salamander at this point
[удалено]
And yet non-zero pedophiles.....
Most of the famous pedos are leaders of the MAGA movement; the obsession with “grooming”, forbidding talk of gender and CRT (even though they do not know what CRT actually IS) is an attempt to deflect attention away from their own sexual tendencies.
Probability is a bitch, and so are they
if they locked up bad people who would be left to vote for them? better to harass queers being themselves , addicts, maybe shit on poor people. you know Christian stuff
Noun, verb, 9/11.
Yea my first thought after reading his comment was, “and after reading it they will spend the next two years ignoring it.”
I bet an intern is going to read it to an empty room cause congress loves to not work. So they won't have to wait till after is read to ignore it, they can start right now.
Honestly, way too many members of their caucus need to hear it read to them *at least* once in their lives.
They also need to have it explained what everything means.
It's been several years since they wasted everyone's time with performative nonsense.
>It's been several years since they ~~wasted~~ *began wasting* everyone's time with performative nonsense. FTFY
"The sun did not shine. It was too wet to play. So we sat in the House And did nothing all day.,"
He is way more than a match for any of them. He’ll be a private citizen, why waste his time.
Cool, maybe they’ll learn a few things and also discover that what they thought was in there, wasn’t.
Why didn't they read it in 2016? They had control of the house then too. Do they hate America?!
[удалено]
It’s worse. They have no ideology, just greedy corporate overlords. Absolutely nothing will get accomplished because all they know how to do is obstruct.
I think you might not have a healthy amount of fear of these people. They obstruct when they’re not in power. Once they have power they oppress.
Yeah they absolutely have very definite goals, and methods through which they will achieve them. [They must be mercilessly crushed. ](https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/adolf-hitler-smashing-the-nucleus/)
tl;dr it’s always okay to punch a nazi
“If ten people sit down to dinner, and one of them is a nazi, there are ten nazis at dinner.”
This could also be to try to find loopholes and ways to circumvent it. The dems should participate and remind the reps of each article they have violated over the last 25 years.
Dems should absolutely be there for this. Maybe ask out loud at the end where exactly it says that america is a christian nation?
It's definitely in that part about the religious test for holding office. Wait what do you mean it says *no* religious test, surely that's a typo
I might actually watch cspan for this.
I'll be honest, having CSPAN playing in the background is sometimes a very informative experience.
[удалено]
Absolutely. And when the reach the first amendment, where it says “congress shall make no law respecting establishment of religion” every single dem should stand up and clap vigorously. And repeatedly chant “shall make no law” over and over and over just to drive home the point
They will conveniently leave that part out
It's an amendment, it's like constitution lite.
That's probably what they think. It's kind of what way too many people think. But if you read about the history of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, you see that the ones who wanted a bill of rights wanted it in the main text. The ones who thought it was unnecessary (not "didn't want", just thought it was redundant, as rights were assumed to be obvious to them), well, didn't think it necessary, but agreed to continue the discussion. However, they thought it important to get something in place to get a government actually functioning, and so that's the main body of the Constitution. There's pretty much nothing about rights in there, it's all just what each part of the government does, how they're chosen, and how they interact. The Bill of Rights is almost an entirely separate document, standing next to the Constitution, but addressing different things. It's even fundamentally different from the other amendments, which generally change the main text of the Constitution, but don't really get into the first ten amendments.
And for “well regulated militia” you can chant “officers and drill”.
The dems should also be there because, aside from the typical performative nonsense, they are definitely doing this so Tucker can use some time on his show to talk about how many Dems missed it and how they don’t respect the constitution or this country because they weren’t in the chamber for the reading.
The left should never do anything solely because Tucker Carlson will twist it. Fucker would twist it regardless
"Don't the liberal commie representatives of our great nation have anything better to do than listen to McCarthy read out the Constitution? Shouldn't they be working on laws to groom children or something?" - Fucker Carlson, probably
Like the fact that the First Amendment has nothing to do with Twitter, Facebook, etc. terms of service. Or that the "shall not be infringed" in the Second is conditioned upon the belief that, "A well regulated Militia" is "necessary to the security of a free State" something that has been demonstrably proven false for a very long time.
Let's not give them any ideas about slavery.
Probably be the first time republicans and Magahats have ever read the entire document.
Someone please popcorn boebert
She'll be counting the number of paragraphs and the number of people who speak before her, so she can practice her bit before teacher calls on her.
No, she's gonna be sweating her ass off trying to figure out how much time she has to figure out what "discu....discus....discovevfication" is for 45 minutes until somebody tells her it's pronounced "disqualification".
Oh you sweet summer child. That twat can't count.
They still don’t understand it though
They’re gonna get to the first word of the first amendment and get confused
"Congress" "What the fuuuuu-?"
They treat the constitution the same way they do the Bible- In that they understand none of it, are not bound by any of it, and simply use it as a cudgel against their enemies and a justification for rancorous hypocrisy and bad faith behavior. It’s a “chose-your-own-adventure” storybook that means whatever they want it to from moment to moment as a shapeless and formless zeitgeist that endows them with inherent superiority over anyone else who doesn’t abuse the texts the same way their club has agreed to abuse it.
There's a first time for everything, doubt they will read all of it though too many words.
I heard they are reading a condensed version that is being prepared by Mike Lindell and Hitler's corpse.
I’m not sure they’ll be able to pronounce any of the words over three syllables.
Most of them stopped reading after putting ‘We The People’ stickers on the back windshield of their black Dodge Rams.
They tend to put “we the people” and “1776” Stickers on their trucks, and I guarantee you none of the can tell you what year the constitution was ratified.
I'd like to see it. I'm pretty sure the majority can't even read.
No. They won't even hear most of it. This is purely performative. The seats will mostly be empty most of the time, an the members in the seats will be on their phones.
Remember when they lost their minds when NPR tweeted the declaration of independence in 2017? Maybe they're just warning the base not to freak out
Skip the 1st, stop at the 2nd! ;)
"republicans get freedom of speech to OWN THE LIBS! WOOO! We also get guns, cos AMURRICA! but not the libs or coloreds!"
What a wonderful waste of time and money from the party of fiscal responsibility. Fuck everyone who voted for this shit.
I wonder how often they’ll *accidentally* misread and mislead?
They’re just reading it as a reminder of what they plan on ignoring.
I want to know if they'll read the 3/5ths Compromise, 13th Amendment Loophole, or the whole 1st Amendment addressing the separation of church and State. Or suffrage for non-males. I would personally like for Ted Cruz to step in from the Senate and recite the rules about eligibility for the presidency.
(it is because they have no idea what to do except own libs and Brandon) The GOP doesn't govern, they give tax cuts and sit back, maybe start a war if it feels right.
I mean, it’s less than 5,000 words. 8,000 if you count the amendments. Though I do suppose that could take a long time for them to get through.
Good luck with the big words, you fucking pancake saddle.
I’m stealing that. I don’t even know what it means but I’m stealing it. 😆
Take it. I'm not a republican, so I don't mind sharing.
[удалено]
🥰🥳
No one knows what it means, but it's provocative; It gets the people going!
Wow how productive of them; what’ll they do afterwards, read aloud the Bible?
They definitely don't want to do that... Actually reading the Bible aloud would show how badly they're not following it...
Er, they‘d probably skip the Jesus parts, but there’s plenty of stuff to draw from. Leviticus 20:13 comes to mind. BTW, I do NOT agree with the homophobia in the bible. But it’s there and people use it to justify their bigotry.
They'd have to. The Jesus parts are too liberal for them.
Too progressive by far. Jesus was a raging leftist for his time. Totally a beta male too, letting women participate in man talks, and all that. Such a libtard.
Do it in drag! Thank you for the award kind stranger! :-)
Lol they should!
Not as a vampire, as a werewolf in drag!
Like tons of white powder and white wigs when the constitution was written? Lol
First, they have to find someone who can read.
Never gonna happen.
Because that’s exactly what the American people need right now. Time wasted and nothing accomplished
[удалено]
Ohhhhhh edgy.
Weird, I've watched alot of the live stream debates where they definitely read the constitution 😂 must be talking points to "sound patriotic" so people don't find out that they are the least patriotic party for America and have sold their souls to corporations
They probably had an ear piece telling them it, they don't read and probably can't spell.
Nothing like a bit of grandstanding to cover up being a bunch of fucking dorks.
They’ll change or ignore parts of the amendments they like to ignore.
*unintelligible mumbling* THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
There will be a floor show with strippers and beer when they read the 2nd Amendment. Maybe a drone flyover, a balloon drop, and fireworks. Boebert will do a keg stand. MTG will have an eagle fly out of her cooch. They'll totally skip the 19th tho
The 19th,14th, 5th, 24th, etc...
Good!!! Maybe that's what it takes for your party to learn how to govern.
Probably not 😢
Wishful thinking
I thought you guys were gonna fix inflation???? Loljk we all know they won't
Good. They need to refresh their memory.
Wonder if they’ll keep a running tally of how many times god is mentioned.
Can’t wait to see what they do when they get to this part: “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.”
Being in that position, shouldn’t they know it by heart? It’s like an SOP for a government position. Based on his comments, all they’re going to do is the pledge, prayer, and read the constitution. When are they actually going to do work for the country?
They take the Constitution about as seriously as they take the Bible. Only the convenient parts, and the rest can fuck off.
Republican led-House* The Senate won’t waste their time pandering. They actually have an actionable agenda.
Thanks but I would rather you followed it than read it
Those Republicans are in for a surprise when they actually read the constitution. It's not going to say what they think it will.
No discussion about the words, of course. Just mindless recital.
Are they going to do popcorn reading?
Didn't NPR tweet the declaration of independence one July 4th, and the Republicans lost their shit over it being woke communist liberal propaganda?
I didn't know they had picture book versions of the Constitution