happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,044
|
Post by happyhoix on Apr 6, 2023 14:41:24 GMT -5
This is apparently back firing a bit because the three rowdy Dems are collecting a bunch of donations to run for reelection and if they win, they can’t be kicked out twice for the same infraction.
So they get back in the House anyway, and the thuggish GOP that kicks them out gets bad press and, probably, loses some votes with crazy moderates and Dems who think the voters ought to be able to pick their rep.
You know, the reason why we’re stuck with the Moon Pie Queen MTG in the US House.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,617
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 6, 2023 17:02:14 GMT -5
This is apparently back firing a bit because the three rowdy Dems are collecting a bunch of donations to run for reelection and if they win, they can’t be kicked out twice for the same infraction. So they get back in the House anyway, and the thuggish GOP that kicks them out gets bad press and, probably, loses some votes with crazy moderates and Dems who think the voters ought to be able to pick their rep. You know, the reason why we’re stuck with the Moon Pie Queen MTG in the US House. Can't imagine the voters who voted them in the fist place wouldn't send them back. Hopefully they will have learned not to cross a line or will be out again.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,754
|
Post by Tennesseer on Apr 6, 2023 17:14:31 GMT -5
This is apparently back firing a bit because the three rowdy Dems are collecting a bunch of donations to run for reelection and if they win, they can’t be kicked out twice for the same infraction. So they get back in the House anyway, and the thuggish GOP that kicks them out gets bad press and, probably, loses some votes with crazy moderates and Dems who think the voters ought to be able to pick their rep. You know, the reason why we’re stuck with the Moon Pie Queen MTG in the US House. Can't imagine the voters who voted them in the fist place wouldn't send them back. Hopefully they will have learned not to cross a line or will be out again. The three are from historically Democratic areas. Meanwhile, a history of expulsions of Tennessee house and senate members. Tennessee legislative expulsions: From sexual misconduct to opposing rights of former slaves
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,754
|
Post by Tennesseer on Apr 6, 2023 17:30:27 GMT -5
Gloria Johnson of Knoxville was not expelled. Vote did not meet two-thirds majority to expel. Johnson is a white woman.
Justin Jones of Nashville (was expelled) and Justin Pearson of Memphis, a vote not taken yet, are both Black. Interesting to see if Pearson will be expelled.
|
|
grumpyhermit
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jul 12, 2012 12:04:00 GMT -5
Posts: 1,432
|
Post by grumpyhermit on Apr 6, 2023 17:32:56 GMT -5
Gloria Johnson of Knoxville was not expelled. Vote did not meet two-thirds majority to expel. Johnson is a white woman. Justin Jones of Nashville (was expelled) and Justin Pearson of Memphis, a vote not taken yet, are both Black. Interesting to see if Pearson will be expelled. Did all three speak? I know all three approached the well, but the few pics I have seen show Jones with the bullhorn and the sign. It wasn't clear to me if the other two also spoke or were just standing with him.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,754
|
Post by Tennesseer on Apr 6, 2023 17:35:16 GMT -5
Gloria Johnson of Knoxville was not expelled. Vote did not meet two-thirds majority to expel. Johnson is a white woman. Justin Jones of Nashville (was expelled) and Justin Pearson of Memphis, a vote not taken yet, are both Black. Interesting to see if Pearson will be expelled. Did all three speak? I know all three approached the well, but the few pics I have seen show Jones with the bullhorn and the sign. It wasn't clear to me if the other two also spoke or were just standing with him. Not sure. Will see what the vote against Pearson is.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,617
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 6, 2023 17:48:29 GMT -5
Did all three speak? I know all three approached the well, but the few pics I have seen show Jones with the bullhorn and the sign. It wasn't clear to me if the other two also spoke or were just standing with him. Not sure. Will see what the vote against Pearson is. Read two are in first term and one first elected in 2019. Don't remember which was which. Might make a difference if it was "experienced should know better".
|
|
grumpyhermit
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jul 12, 2012 12:04:00 GMT -5
Posts: 1,432
|
Post by grumpyhermit on Apr 6, 2023 18:00:37 GMT -5
Not sure. Will see what the vote against Pearson is. Read two are in first term and one first elected in 2019. Don't remember which was which. Might make a difference if it was "experienced should know better". Per this article, Gloria Johnson is the member with the most experience in the House, so they weren't basing it on that. Me thinks it may have more to do with this: "Jones was first elected to the House last year. Previously, he was a frequent presence in and around the Capitol as a protester and organizer. In 2019, he was banned from the Capitol after he was accused of throwing a cup at then-House Speaker Glen Casada during a chaotic protest over a bust honoring Confederate general and KKK founder Nathan Bedford Forrest. Jones said he filed a police report after an altercation with Rep. Justin Lafferty (R-Knoxville) following the House earlier this week agreeing to consider the expulsion efforts. source
Which makes me even more interested in how the vote on Pearson goes.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,754
|
Post by Tennesseer on Apr 6, 2023 18:05:46 GMT -5
In reply # 32 is a history of those expelled in the past. Other than those not ratifying the 14th amendment, all other expulsions have been for criminal behavior which none of the three under the gun today committed.
|
|
grumpyhermit
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jul 12, 2012 12:04:00 GMT -5
Posts: 1,432
|
Post by grumpyhermit on Apr 6, 2023 18:09:40 GMT -5
Regardless of the "reason" they give, it's clear this is just partisan retaliation. If there is one thing you can rely on the GOP for, it's to actually do what they accuse of the Democrats of doing.
Even stripping the committee assignments seems to harsh a rebuke for the offense committed.
I hope this stunt comes back to bite the TN GOP squarely in the ass.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,617
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 6, 2023 18:15:36 GMT -5
In reply # 32 is a history of those expelled in the past. Other than those not ratifying the 14th amendment, all other expulsions have been for criminal behavior which none of the three under the gun today committed. Wonder if there have been members who engaged in similar behavior in the past and (obviously) not expelled. If others haven't so (mis)behaved, this being the first person expelled for such isn't really a big deal.
|
|
grumpyhermit
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jul 12, 2012 12:04:00 GMT -5
Posts: 1,432
|
Post by grumpyhermit on Apr 6, 2023 18:36:58 GMT -5
Watching the C-Span coverage of the TN floor. Pearson is an impressive speaker, and even if these twits expel him, I expect he's going to have bright future in politics.
|
|
grumpyhermit
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jul 12, 2012 12:04:00 GMT -5
Posts: 1,432
|
Post by grumpyhermit on Apr 6, 2023 19:02:44 GMT -5
They voted to expel Pearson. What a fucking look for the TN GOP.
|
|
NastyWoman
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 20:50:37 GMT -5
Posts: 14,531
|
Post by NastyWoman on Apr 6, 2023 19:13:43 GMT -5
Their justification wasn’t the same. The J6 crowd wanted to remove Pence to prevent him from certifying the 2020 election so that another set of fake electors could be brought in and throw the election to Trump, circumventing a democratic election. The (mostly) school kids in Nashville wanted the House to have a legitimate debate on gun control/school safe, and when they were ignored they shouted through a bullhorn, disrupting the floor discussion. Apples and bazookas J6 also felt ignored so they acted. I have no issue with the protesters. I have an issue with elected officials disrupting the legislative session. According to Wikipedia at least 63 lawsuits were filed regarding the election. That is NOT a question of not being heard that is throwing a tantrum because you did not get your way. Refusing to let elected officials speak = not being heard. The actions of J6 were breaking the law! But why not claim that decorum is as important as, if not more so, than breaking the law if it fits your narrative. SMH.
|
|
Pink Cashmere
Senior Member
Joined: Sept 24, 2022 16:18:40 GMT -5
Posts: 4,759
|
Post by Pink Cashmere on Apr 6, 2023 19:32:14 GMT -5
As far as I can tell from people willing to comment about it online, this is not going over well with the public. I specifically remember one comment from a man that said that he doesn’t consider himself a Democrat or a Republican, and antics like this make people like him feel like Republicans need to get their shit together if they want their votes.
From what I’ve read, it seems like a lot of people are on the Democrats’ side because of what they were standing up for, solutions to try to keep our children safe from nuts with guns. And people are mocking Tennesseans for being more concerned with drag queens than trying to address the problem with people shooting our children and educators in schools, and passing laws to make it even easier for unstable and untrained people to legally carry firearms instead.
It’s not a coincidence that people in the state are so passionate about wanting the state lawmakers to take this seriously and address it, given the recent school shooting in Nashville.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,617
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 6, 2023 19:42:00 GMT -5
J6 also felt ignored so they acted. I have no issue with the protesters. I have an issue with elected officials disrupting the legislative session. According to Wikipedia at least 63 lawsuits were filed regarding the election. That is NOT a question of not being heard that is throwing a tantrum because you did not get your way. Refusing to let elected officials speak = not being heard. The actions of J6 were breaking the law! But why not claim that decorum is as important as, if not more so, than breaking the law if it fits your narrative. SMH. Disrupting legislative procedures=disrupting legislative procedures.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,617
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 6, 2023 19:51:14 GMT -5
J6 also felt ignored so they acted. I have no issue with the protesters. I have an issue with elected officials disrupting the legislative session. According to Wikipedia at least 63 lawsuits were filed regarding the election. That is NOT a question of not being heard that is throwing a tantrum because you did not get your way. Refusing to let elected officials speak = not being heard. The actions of J6 were breaking the law! But why not claim that decorum is as important as, if not more so, than breaking the law if it fits your narrative. SMH. Grabbing a bullhorn and verbally taking over the floor of the Tennessee House because the controlling leadership didn't let you speak sounds to me like a tantrum as well.
|
|
grumpyhermit
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jul 12, 2012 12:04:00 GMT -5
Posts: 1,432
|
Post by grumpyhermit on Apr 6, 2023 20:11:37 GMT -5
According to Wikipedia at least 63 lawsuits were filed regarding the election. That is NOT a question of not being heard that is throwing a tantrum because you did not get your way. Refusing to let elected officials speak = not being heard. The actions of J6 were breaking the law! But why not claim that decorum is as important as, if not more so, than breaking the law if it fits your narrative. SMH. Grabbing a bullhorn and verbally taking over the floor of the Tennessee House because the controlling leadership didn't let you speak sounds to me like a tantrum as well. But not a crime. You are the one that wanted to conflate this with J6, and it simply isn't the same thing. Did the reps deserve rebuke or censure from the body? Sure. Expulsion? No. This is a blatant partisan power play and the Republicans in the TN hows should be ashamed. Doubly so since they only censured the black men involved.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 15, 2024 0:13:05 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 6, 2023 20:19:08 GMT -5
We watched it unfold today. I never thought this would be happening in 2023. We are old, but feel strongly that this is a critical moment, a turning point, perhaps as one commentator said tonight, a new civil rights movement. We did not participate in the first one, and our bodies will limit what we can do now in a physical sense. But we are going to explore what we can do. This is our last chance to do what’s right
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,617
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 6, 2023 20:50:52 GMT -5
Grabbing a bullhorn and verbally taking over the floor of the Tennessee House because the controlling leadership didn't let you speak sounds to me like a tantrum as well. But not a crime. You are the one that wanted to conflate this with J6, and it simply isn't the same thing. Did the reps deserve rebuke or censure from the body? Sure. Expulsion? No. This is a blatant partisan power play and the Republicans in the TN hows should be ashamed. Doubly so since they only censured the black men involved. Isn't this along the lines of what Republican politicians have been doing right along- being disruptive, pushing their own misinformation agenda, etc? This was substantial disruption of the orderly conduct of a legislative session by elected members of that body. The closest I can come up with on the Republican side is the shouts done at the State of the Union address and those were very brief, not preventing from Biden from proceeding. Plus to me that doesn't matter. What they did was wrong and deserving of sanctions. Expelled seems extreme unless there is more history I an not aware. What is it we disagree on?
|
|
NastyWoman
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 20:50:37 GMT -5
Posts: 14,531
|
Post by NastyWoman on Apr 6, 2023 21:54:01 GMT -5
According to Wikipedia at least 63 lawsuits were filed regarding the election. That is NOT a question of not being heard that is throwing a tantrum because you did not get your way. Refusing to let elected officials speak = not being heard. The actions of J6 were breaking the law! But why not claim that decorum is as important as, if not more so, than breaking the law if it fits your narrative. SMH. Disrupting legislative procedures=disrupting legislative procedures. Using weapons and in the process of disrupting causing physical harm to those protecting the elected members v. shouting is most certainly not the same thing. This is like saying stealing a brownie is the same as robbing a bank. After all in both cases you are taking something that is not yours. I am sad you can't see the difference.
|
|
Pink Cashmere
Senior Member
Joined: Sept 24, 2022 16:18:40 GMT -5
Posts: 4,759
|
Post by Pink Cashmere on Apr 6, 2023 21:54:52 GMT -5
We watched it unfold today. I never thought this would be happening in 2023. We are old, but feel strongly that this is a critical moment, a turning point, perhaps as one commentator said tonight, a new civil rights movement. We did not participate in the first one, and our bodies will limit what we can do now in a physical sense. But we are going to explore what we can do. This is our last chance to do what’s right What I hope and pray for is that the young people that showed up to try to have their voices heard about how important it is to them to have changes in the laws to at least try to protect our children from being the victims of gun violence, show up in elections and persuade their peers to do the same. I have taken advantage of the right to bear arms myself, but if it meant our children and innocent citizens just going about their daily life were safe from the threat of a crazy person with a gun, I would be all for cooperating to make that happen. Unfortunately, I don’t think it’s that simple, because even if I gave up my right to have firearms to try to make things better, criminals by definition, would not cooperate and/or play fair and surrender their weapons too. Whatever it might say about me, I am not willing to give up my right to bear arms to protect me and mine as I see fit, if the bad guys will still have their weapons. That horse is out of the barnyard and running wild and free, and no matter how much I think about it and try to figure out a way to move forward in a peaceful way, I can’t figure out what to realistically do about the fact that so many Americans already own firearms, and even the kinds that we (and I) believe should be outlawed again.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,617
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 6, 2023 22:02:28 GMT -5
Disrupting legislative procedures=disrupting legislative procedures. Using weapons and in the process of disrupting causing physical harm to those protecting the elected members v. shouting is most certainly not the same thing. This is like saying stealing a brownie is the same as robbing a bank. After all in both cases you are taking something that is not yours. I am sad you can't see the difference. Because someone robbed a bank, it is okay to steal brownies? It is my opinion both are wrong.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,617
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 6, 2023 22:26:47 GMT -5
We watched it unfold today. I never thought this would be happening in 2023. We are old, but feel strongly that this is a critical moment, a turning point, perhaps as one commentator said tonight, a new civil rights movement. We did not participate in the first one, and our bodies will limit what we can do now in a physical sense. But we are going to explore what we can do. This is our last chance to do what’s right What I hope and pray for is that the young people that showed up to try to have their voices heard about how important it is to them to have changes in the laws to at least try to protect our children from being the victims of gun violence, show up in elections and persuade their peers to do the same. I have taken advantage of the right to bear arms myself, but if it meant our children and innocent citizens just going about their daily life were safe from the threat of a crazy person with a gun, I would be all for cooperating to make that happen. Unfortunately, I don’t think it’s that simple, because even if I gave up my right to have firearms to try to make things better, criminals by definition, would not cooperate and/or play fair and surrender their weapons too. Whatever it might say about me, I am not willing to give up my right to bear arms to protect me and mine as I see fit, if the bad guys will still have their weapons. That horse is out of the barnyard and running wild and free, and no matter how much I think about it and try to figure out a way to move forward in a peaceful way, I can’t figure out what to realistically do about the fact that so many Americans already own firearms, and even the kinds that we (and I) believe should be outlawed again. I think we need to start by replacing the right to bear arms with the opportunity to bear arms. The right to bear arms implies the right to use those arms. In a society which worships individual freedom, we will continue to have individuals who make usage decisions we don't like.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,252
|
Post by tallguy on Apr 6, 2023 23:36:02 GMT -5
Using weapons and in the process of disrupting causing physical harm to those protecting the elected members v. shouting is most certainly not the same thing. This is like saying stealing a brownie is the same as robbing a bank. After all in both cases you are taking something that is not yours. I am sad you can't see the difference. Because someone robbed a bank, it is okay to steal brownies? It is my opinion both are wrong. Of course they are both wrong, and nobody has proffered any different reasoning. The difference lies in the seriousness of the offense and in how they are prosecuted and punished. But you knew that.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,617
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 6, 2023 23:58:08 GMT -5
Because someone robbed a bank, it is okay to steal brownies? It is my opinion both are wrong. Of course they are both wrong, and nobody has proffered any different reasoning. The difference lies in the seriousness of the offense and in how they are prosecuted and punished. But you knew that. Of course I do. I just questioned using the same justification to "steal brownies" as the insurrectionists used to "rob banks".
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,252
|
Post by tallguy on Apr 7, 2023 0:29:16 GMT -5
We watched it unfold today. I never thought this would be happening in 2023. We are old, but feel strongly that this is a critical moment, a turning point, perhaps as one commentator said tonight, a new civil rights movement. We did not participate in the first one, and our bodies will limit what we can do now in a physical sense. But we are going to explore what we can do. This is our last chance to do what’s right What I hope and pray for is that the young people that showed up to try to have their voices heard about how important it is to them to have changes in the laws to at least try to protect our children from being the victims of gun violence, show up in elections and persuade their peers to do the same. I have taken advantage of the right to bear arms myself, but if it meant our children and innocent citizens just going about their daily life were safe from the threat of a crazy person with a gun, I would be all for cooperating to make that happen. Unfortunately, I don’t think it’s that simple, because even if I gave up my right to have firearms to try to make things better, criminals by definition, would not cooperate and/or play fair and surrender their weapons too. Whatever it might say about me, I am not willing to give up my right to bear arms to protect me and mine as I see fit, if the bad guys will still have their weapons. That horse is out of the barnyard and running wild and free, and no matter how much I think about it and try to figure out a way to move forward in a peaceful way, I can’t figure out what to realistically do about the fact that so many Americans already own firearms, and even the kinds that we (and I) believe should be outlawed again.Do everything you can to ensure that neither you nor anyone you know ever vote Republican again? 'It's worth it': Charlie Kirk calls school shootings 'a prudent deal' to protect the Second Amendment
There is a lot of nonsense coming from Mr. Kirk in the article. Rather than quoting him, I'd rather quote a different part of it, where the Washington Post refuted Mr. Kirk's contentions: No solution to the problems of guns and gun violence will ever come from Republicans. They are far too invested in denying facts that disagree with their preferred narrative. They are also far too dependent on the campaign cash and votes that come from catering to the crazies on the issue.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,403
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 7, 2023 10:47:59 GMT -5
J6 also felt ignored so they acted. I have no issue with the protesters. I have an issue with elected officials disrupting the legislative session. According to Wikipedia at least 63 lawsuits were filed regarding the election. That is NOT a question of not being heard that is throwing a tantrum because you did not get your way. Refusing to let elected officials speak = not being heard. The actions of J6 were breaking the law! But why not claim that decorum is as important as, if not more so, than breaking the law if it fits your narrative. SMH. if the J6 folks had their way, the MAJORITY of US voters would "not have been heard". being heard means having equal say in your governance. that is what MAGA has. in fact, i would assert that it disproportionately favors THEM. but of course, they are spoiled as all hell. so, they can't settle for just being heard. they have to run things. like their neo-facist leadership. they are a menace.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,403
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 7, 2023 10:49:56 GMT -5
Grabbing a bullhorn and verbally taking over the floor of the Tennessee House because the controlling leadership didn't let you speak sounds to me like a tantrum as well. But not a crime. You are the one that wanted to conflate this with J6, and it simply isn't the same thing. Did the reps deserve rebuke or censure from the body? Sure. Expulsion? No. This is a blatant partisan power play and the Republicans in the TN hows should be ashamed. Doubly so since they only censured the black men involved. they should be more than ashamed. this undermines the fabric of democracy. they should be admonished endlessly, and run out of office.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,403
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 7, 2023 10:57:45 GMT -5
What I hope and pray for is that the young people that showed up to try to have their voices heard about how important it is to them to have changes in the laws to at least try to protect our children from being the victims of gun violence, show up in elections and persuade their peers to do the same. I have taken advantage of the right to bear arms myself, but if it meant our children and innocent citizens just going about their daily life were safe from the threat of a crazy person with a gun, I would be all for cooperating to make that happen. Unfortunately, I don’t think it’s that simple, because even if I gave up my right to have firearms to try to make things better, criminals by definition, would not cooperate and/or play fair and surrender their weapons too. Whatever it might say about me, I am not willing to give up my right to bear arms to protect me and mine as I see fit, if the bad guys will still have their weapons. That horse is out of the barnyard and running wild and free, and no matter how much I think about it and try to figure out a way to move forward in a peaceful way, I can’t figure out what to realistically do about the fact that so many Americans already own firearms, and even the kinds that we (and I) believe should be outlawed again.Do everything you can to ensure that neither you nor anyone you know ever vote Republican again? 'It's worth it': Charlie Kirk calls school shootings 'a prudent deal' to protect the Second Amendment
There is a lot of nonsense coming from Mr. Kirk in the article. Rather than quoting him, I'd rather quote a different part of it, where the Washington Post refuted Mr. Kirk's contentions: No solution to the problems of guns and gun violence will ever come from Republicans. They are far too invested in denying facts that disagree with their preferred narrative. They are also far too dependent on the campaign cash and votes that come from catering to the crazies on the issue. simply laying out point number two is insufficient. people need to understand WHY they (or specifically, Jefferson) felt this way. Jefferson felt that standing armies were a danger to a "free state". if you read the second amendment with this in mind, it makes rock solid sense why it is there. but you can also explore WHY he felt that way. and there were several reasons. one is that federal armies are almost universally used to CAUSE trouble rather than prevent it. another is that it drains resources from "protecting the general welfare". but finally, standing armies are OFTEN deployed AGAINST citizens. what the US did under Wilson forever undermined our safety as citizens. so long as our leaders had the public interest in mind, it works out fine. as soon as you have someone in the WH that has his OWN interests in mind, no matter what the impact on the public, standing armies are a menace to everyone OTHER than that leader. this is what Jefferson feared. and it was staring us right in the face on or around January 6th 2021. but rather than having a robust debate about it and highlighting the danger, we have not even discussed it. these are perilous times for the US.
|
|