Excellent analysis. The only issue we should be discussing is “due process,” and it appears these so called constitutional experts haven’t even read the constitution, or they are pulling a Robert’s (out of his arse); manufacturing a clause in the constitution that never existed (immunity), or just disguising their other manufactured claim of “originalism,” as a way to twist themselves into judicial knots, trying to defend the indefensible.
Either way, these dishonest intellectuals haven’t had an original thought in years; if at all. I guess authoritarianism has already taken hold in the Conservative Movement, and like the Republican Congress; they all just fell in line, like the good SHEEPLE they are….:)
Thanks for doing what you do, keep it up. I'm sharing your stuff as far and wide as I can with my (limited) network. We need you and your insight. 🙏👍♥️
I think the word, “pusillanimity” is a good synonym for the intellectual cowardice you discuss. That and “pusillanimous” (the adjective) should be used more often. There are two advantages to using either of these words. Firstly, they both have a slight tinge of disgust about them - which is entirely appropriate, in view of current circumstances. And, as single words, they can be prefixed with a “#” to facilitate further dissemination on social media.
National Review along with its conga line of fake "constitutional conservatives," transphobic nut glazers and holier than thou trad rads is a pathetic joke that sacrificed its claim to credibility on the Trump/MAGA altar a long time ago. National Review is irrelevant and not even worth paying attention to.
I’m shocked, shocked, I say, to learn that partisan and “partisanish” news and opinion mongers try to justify things on their side that they would quickly call out on the other side. The examples are too many to count, but my favorite recent one is Jake Tapper having the stones to lend his name to a book calling out the media for covering for Biden’s senility, even while knowing that there were numerous clips showing him doing just that.
This is the worst written argument on an issue or in response to someone's view on an issue that I have ever seen. This is a great example of how someone can try being a "good writer" without actually saying something. I see no objective rebuttal or alternative viewpoint whatsoever here, only an armchair-coffee-session-style exhalation of air. Just wow.
In the end, folks like Rich Lowry and the WSJ Editorial Board have revealed their supposed, conservative ideology to be a cheap costume. I assume, and hope, that their acrobatic justifications for authoritarianism are psychologically painful.
Omg I need a cigarette.
🚬🍻
Excellent analysis. The only issue we should be discussing is “due process,” and it appears these so called constitutional experts haven’t even read the constitution, or they are pulling a Robert’s (out of his arse); manufacturing a clause in the constitution that never existed (immunity), or just disguising their other manufactured claim of “originalism,” as a way to twist themselves into judicial knots, trying to defend the indefensible.
Either way, these dishonest intellectuals haven’t had an original thought in years; if at all. I guess authoritarianism has already taken hold in the Conservative Movement, and like the Republican Congress; they all just fell in line, like the good SHEEPLE they are….:)
Thanks for doing what you do, keep it up. I'm sharing your stuff as far and wide as I can with my (limited) network. We need you and your insight. 🙏👍♥️
You made it into a sermon at my church recently because of my pastor reading a post of yours that I shared. 😁👍
I think the word, “pusillanimity” is a good synonym for the intellectual cowardice you discuss. That and “pusillanimous” (the adjective) should be used more often. There are two advantages to using either of these words. Firstly, they both have a slight tinge of disgust about them - which is entirely appropriate, in view of current circumstances. And, as single words, they can be prefixed with a “#” to facilitate further dissemination on social media.
The rot has extended very deep. Cut it off, and let the remnant fight for what’s left of our republic.
National Review along with its conga line of fake "constitutional conservatives," transphobic nut glazers and holier than thou trad rads is a pathetic joke that sacrificed its claim to credibility on the Trump/MAGA altar a long time ago. National Review is irrelevant and not even worth paying attention to.
In summary, they are desperately trying to hang on to position and power, and are willing to sacrifice their principles and our country to do it.
I’m shocked, shocked, I say, to learn that partisan and “partisanish” news and opinion mongers try to justify things on their side that they would quickly call out on the other side. The examples are too many to count, but my favorite recent one is Jake Tapper having the stones to lend his name to a book calling out the media for covering for Biden’s senility, even while knowing that there were numerous clips showing him doing just that.
Fuck them. They deserve the short drop when the dust settles and the side of good wins against evil.
This is the worst written argument on an issue or in response to someone's view on an issue that I have ever seen. This is a great example of how someone can try being a "good writer" without actually saying something. I see no objective rebuttal or alternative viewpoint whatsoever here, only an armchair-coffee-session-style exhalation of air. Just wow.
In the end, folks like Rich Lowry and the WSJ Editorial Board have revealed their supposed, conservative ideology to be a cheap costume. I assume, and hope, that their acrobatic justifications for authoritarianism are psychologically painful.