I HEAR SOME STATIST TOOL spouting about “reasonable regulation” of a civil right, I want to take to the streets or something. Lady, your reasonable regulation is my infringement. And the Constitution, at least, doesn’t allow for — scorn quotes — “reasonable regulation.”
“…the right of the people to … shall not be infringed…” means that nowhere within the boundaries of the United States shall any actor — public or private — attempt to circumscribe the exercise of that right.
Seems pretty clear to me: “reasonable regulation” in’t in it.
WHICH IS TO SAY I’m not now, which might be debatable… Back when I was poor, we used to drink a coffee substitute called Pero, which was a European affectation with roots back in wartime shortages and black markets and all that. It was made of roasted (read: burnt) bread crumbs and what-not, and is referred to worldwide as ersatz coffee.
First it was astroturf, now it’s ersatz kaffeeklatschen.
And neither the politicians nor their myrmidons get the fundamental … issue … with mendacious attempts to gen up a false appearance of support for their positions.
Prolly think they’re being clever.
YOU SAY, “Leave of absence.” I say, “Flight from prosecution.”
THAT THE STATES guarantee their citizens a republican form of government, and itself describes one in laying out the form of the Federal government.
So I have a question.
Does that make Democrats unconstitutional?
A MOVING POST about the Three Percent at Sipsey Street. Kinda reminds me of Heinlein’s story “Free Men.”