Reviewing What Was Reviewed
Being told what to do blows. Everyone should agree. Sure, there are a couple laws that are probably wise to punish fraudsters and participants in unsavory violence against things and others. But an era where governors issue unilateral orders that lead to gleeful submission has rendered autonomy controversial. Diktats have helped our health except for the health part. Please notice the precedent.
Begging for protection from life’s challenges is as understandable as it is idiotic. Avoiding adulting is no more appealing when it’s attempted to be achieved by law. Overreach makes everyday nuisances worse in one of those cruel ironies voters never learn from or cherish. Don’t you like being surprised?
A quick overview of federal operations might help those who’ve forgotten or never learned. Take how the Senate is supposed to chill out, which is a surprise to those who continually elect shrieking hotheads. The ostensibly dignified wing is not just at-large long-term congressmen. Representing states is important if anyone’s confused why they don’t see lines like on the map while driving. It’s so mean how Wyoming gets two senators, as if each subdivision was important in our system or something.
The collection should bend to the will of the people, bitch those who want to impose policies that would ruin same people’s lives. Constitutional scorners don’t like the idea of Texas vying with New York any more than they want prices to drop with competition.
Proclamations are supposed to be a way around needing pesky legislation, at least if you tire of this endless procedure of approval. As for opinions on another division, deciding if the Supreme Court is awesome depends if it’s infringing properly.
The antidemocratic cabal is viewed as horrid if it reaffirms individuals possess natural rights. Or, the guardians of humanity receive accolades if they discover an insurance mandate in a document dedicated to limited federal power. Wish good luck to the self-professed selfless who adore or loathe an institution based on if it does what they want.
Those who live here and hate everything here is about are either disingenuous or honest about how ignorant they are. For a clear example, there’s a debate what packing means even though there’s no debate. It’s a specific term involving adding Supreme Court justices, not keeping the same quantity and adding to them as prescribed by the Constitution. Anyone using the phrase otherwise is at best ignorant, which would explain everything.
The real case is against checks and balances for those looking to streamline authority. Those looking to expand membership lust after getting their way with force that circumvents limits, which at least makes them consistent. Those upset that they lost by the rules naturally try to change them.
Super America fans don’t care for the Constitution or what’s been added. The amendments they don’t particularly like coincidentally show the same attitude toward this nation’s principles and human autonomy. Liberals would loathe the Tenth if they knew what it said.
First Amendment loathers found a way to shut down speech: they just had to control conglomerates they allegedly despise. Monolithic ether applications get to decide whether or not you can broadcast your ideas. Every notion that Hoxha believed is permitted. You can still say anything that comes to mind, silly: it’ll just be to yourself. Businesses are diabolical unless they’re banning Gina Carano.
I’ve got bad news about criminals disobeying the law. Trusting people to be armed is impossible for those who can’t imagine guns being used for good. Sure, the diabolical will get weapons regardless of the rules, so it’s best to let their intended prey discourage attacks. And regular people owning guns is just how this country went independent. But that’s just so old white rich male slaveholders could exploit everyone else.
Violating rights for the common good is uncommonly bad. Infiltration is philosophically and practically disastrous. The pernicious framing that force is cool if it only saves one life serves as a constant excuse for confiscating rights. Disposing of the need for a warrant would result in seizing many illegal goods. I shouldn’t give our overlords ideas.
Letting people sort it out themselves frightens planners even more than executive pay. The overarching principle leads to negotiating wages and prices, which works out for both sides. Similarly, trusting the virtuous to defend themselves instead of thinking paperwork between them and rights will keep criminals from acquiring weapons.
A snotty reply to anyone calling America a democracy about living in a republic nonetheless is valuable beyond pedantic triumph. Our government is designed to balancing representation with the realization that majority rules would mean voting for robbing rich jerks.
Those who claim they’re deeply into caring about the people sure love imposing alleged solutions on same people. Proclaiming that free humans are compelled to buy garbage insurance hasn’t helped heal any more than allegedly free college makes enrollees smarter. If you seek something universal, check awful results from deciding a government limited by nature should get to make your choices.
Bitching that the nation is designed to be oppressive is awfully peculiar for one with a Constitution that imposes strict limits. They’re on government and not us, for the record. This is the one place in the world with specific tasks permitted for those reluctantly granted power. Its shrillest critics then do everything to confiscate liberty. A self-fulfilling prophecy is the only thing horrid meddlers can make come true.
