Probably not. They allowed slavery. Some of them would probably be envious.
Melania movie Jan 30
- Thread starter Candleicious Ghost
- Start date
Probably not. They allowed slavery. Some of them would probably be envious.
Which ones?
Dude, I’m high. Not in a mood for 20 questions.
Ok chill dude
.webp)
Liberty Hypocrites: The Founding Fathers Who Owned Slaves
Learn about the founding fathers who owned slaves. Why despite expressing reservations about slavery, they did not take decisive action to abolish it.
www.historyoasis.com
You could build a house with all the bricks they'd be shitting. And not a tiny house either!
The big problem is that you have someone in office who sees himself above reproach, who thinks the law doesn't apply to them. He's been impeached (twice) and indicted, but he wears those like a badge of honor, and he's shown quite clearly that the usual rules don't work on him. He considers them mere suggestions. So, what happens when lawmakers try to hold the line and then the line keeps getting crossed? Unfortunately, there's no real precedent to what's happening, which may be why the opposition is struggling so much to pin him down. Even the worst Presidents knew their limits and knew when they were beaten, but this is a guy who scoffs at the Constitution and drags allies down into his circle of hell. Unfortunately, the usual mechanisms aren't working.
It's startling that someone who was convicted was even allowed to run. If that isn't a law, it should be.
Liberty Hypocrites: The Founding Fathers Who Owned Slaves
Learn about the founding fathers who owned slaves. Why despite expressing reservations about slavery, they did not take decisive action to abolish it.
Well there you go that is disappointing, very, very disappointing
If the majority of the electorate believed that, then they wouldn't have voted for him in the first place. Accordingly, it's actually been tested that this is an undemocratic principle.
More fundamentally, the US Constitution lists three requirements to be President: a natural born citizen, at least 35 years of age, and be a resident of the US for 14 years.
Adding a “no felons” clause would require a Constitutional amendment, which in this day and age would be all but impossible.
The 14th Amendment bars people from holding office if they have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the U.S. after taking an oath to support the Constitution, but we all saw how well that worked…
Now Rotten Tomatoes has issued a statement saying that it contacted all 1000+ individuals who reviewed the movie and posted on their website to confirm that they in fact purchased a ticket and watched the movie.
If you could be the worst prick about this, and define 14 years of residency as someone who has not left American soil for the last 14 years, you could probably disqualify the billionaire class entirely from running.
Last edited:
What I'm about to say isn't just about the US, but the 2020s are a shitty period for the world. First, there's COVID, the events in the Middle East, the ICE events in the US that almost caused a civil war, social media, especially Twitter, becoming a completely messed-up place, and the Epstein files that are shaking the world. If the names hidden in the correspondence are revealed at some point, things will get really messy. It would be a real disappointment for me if it turns out that some famous names in Hollywood are definitely involved in this criminal network. I really miss the world 10-20 years ago, before it was such a dirty place, especially Turkey.
It definitely is. They are trying times. And those in politics are probably trying to grapple with what they can do, and it's not exactly easy to know what to do when everything is unprecedented, and the goal posts keep moving. I worry about what that sets up for future generations.
And when did this term "post truth world" become a thing? It's wrong on so many levels that people just accept it
While no one's denying the 2020s suck, most of the stuff you mention did not spring into existence from a vacuum this decade. There's always been trouble in the Middle East in nearly every period of history. Social media/Twitter have been a cesspool ever since their formation nearly twenty years ago while the Epstein files cover things going back twenty to thirty years. Sure the modern world does suck, but let's not pretend we were living in any sort of a utopia in prior decades.
Well if you speak truth to the post-truth people they punish you. The other option is putting up with it.
Yes. And they also would shit bricks over stuff we think are no biggie or good ideas.
You would think many would, especially given that supporters are often described as cult followers (though some have very mixed feeling about all his wealth). But yeah this seemed like just vanity project and particularly disingenuous, uninteresting self-promotion at that.
Streaming has and will push a lot of people who are mildly interested in something but it gets bad reviews to think theater is way too expensive and not worth it, just waiting for the streaming soon.
An on the other hand when a few people do vote Green they tend to be denounced as disloyal, even treasonous, and there were a reasonable/growing size of Libertarian supporters (also denounced as dangerously treasonous but still reasonable size) until they stopped growing, started declining, tended to lose interest and support for that party probably because Covid pushed some former supporters to the center and others to further extremes.
I did think it was funny that people often complain that US presidential elections are too long (and too much focused on individual candidate rather than party), then 2024 election a lot of people complained that it was too short, of course Kamala Harris couldn't win without enough time for her herself to campaign, make herself known as candidate.
Similar threads
