Nadeau: The Bills Might Suck But How Dare Congress Intervene

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with her. If this is the crime bill I don’t support it bit Congress has no business meddling in it.

Except for this a thing called the US Constitution. Article I. Section 8. Clause 17.

“To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;”

The Constitution is a shitty, antiquated document in desperate need of being modernized

There is a process for changing it. You just need to convince the states.

[Anonymous]

The constitution used to say that black folks only counted as 3/5 of white folks and that women couldn’t vote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The constitution used to say that black folks only counted as 3/5 of white folks and that women couldn’t vote.

That’s not what the constitution says about black folks. That’s what you’ve been told it says. Educate yourself please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The constitution used to say that black folks only counted as 3/5 of white folks and that women couldn’t vote.

That’s not what the constitution says about black folks. That’s what you’ve been told it says. Educate yourself please.

DP. It did say that enslaved folks only counted as 3/5 as a person. It's just that this was a compromise that favored slaveholding states. Enslaved folks should have counted as 0/5 of a person, for the purpose of apportionment in the House of Representatives, because they were considered property, not people.

Then, after Reconstruction was ended, black folks counted as 5/5 of a person, which still favored slaveholding states, which did not allow black folks to vote.

White women also counted as 5/5 of a person but could not vote.

In any case, there is no need to worship the founding fathers.

[Anonymous]

Her position is pure inflammatory demagoguery. She doesn’t have the law, the facts or anything else on her side. It’s almost what Trump does with his base. Despicable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The constitution used to say that black folks only counted as 3/5 of white folks and that women couldn’t vote.

That’s not what the constitution says about black folks. That’s what you’ve been told it says. Educate yourself please.

DP. It did say that enslaved folks only counted as 3/5 as a person. It's just that this was a compromise that favored slaveholding states. Enslaved folks should have counted as 0/5 of a person, for the purpose of apportionment in the House of Representatives, because they were considered property, not people.

Then, after Reconstruction was ended, black folks counted as 5/5 of a person, which still favored slaveholding states, which did not allow black folks to vote.

White women also counted as 5/5 of a person but could not vote.

In any case, there is no need to worship the founding fathers.

Some reasons. They didn’t get everything right or everything wrong. They DID provide for a means to make changes to the document. Shut up and change it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with her. If this is the crime bill I don’t support it bit Congress has no business meddling in it.

Except for this a thing called the US Constitution. Article I. Section 8. Clause 17.

“To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;”

The Constitution is a shitty, antiquated document in desperate need of being modernized

You sounds like a Trumper Dumper.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Her position is pure inflammatory demagoguery. She doesn’t have the law, the facts or anything else on her side. It’s almost what Trump does with his base. Despicable.

Agree. Except corrupt for the smallest little benefit. Trump is corrupt on a grand scale which is almost better.

[Anonymous]

Ward 1 is plagued by extremely loud illegal vehicles and street illegal speakers; guns, crime, pollution, dirt, bad schools. What are you doing No-Do?

[Anonymous]

What the hell does this dunce mean? She’s looking at her iPad mini while constituents talk?! Not listening? What?!

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

It’s a parody but it’s apparently spot on, like the South Park on Harry and Meghan.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

The core of the problem is that this is a lady that refuses to listen to people.