Dismembered: Native Disenrollment and the Battle for Human Rights — David E. Wilkins, Shelly Hulse Wilkins
Fine sentiment. However, even Russia has a constitution that sounds reasonably fair, and yet they are among the least free people in the world.
The U.S. Constitution focuses heavily on principles & ideals — although there are plenty of detailed specifics as well.
There are specific injunctions against foreign interference in American affairs and emoluments for public officials. We seem to be ignoring them lately.
What good would it do to change the Constitution to something else we might or might not actually adhere to? First things first. Stick to the rule of law already established. The courts routinely give modern interpretation to Constitutional principles. Our job is to vote in public servants that will enforce the law. There is no document or ideal that will do it for us.
Trump is escalating his craziness on a daily basis, and 99%+ of us have yet to vote for who will represent us in November.
I guess we’re gonna see which ship comes in and which one sinks.
Russia is slavery [slav] — bondage to the state /leader has always been the one constant for them.
America‘s last 17 presidents helped the free world resist Russian slavery, one of whom is arguably the greatest president ever. Nine of them were Republicans. Two presidents were crazy-liberal, two presidents were crazy-conservative, and the rest were moderates.
And then there is Trump…
• Building a new Berlin Wall across the U.S. border.
• Publicly inviting Russian, Chinese, and Ukrainian election interference.
• Legitimatizing Russia’s nuclear terrorist client state North Korea.
• Retreat on all fronts with Russia, including in active combat zones.
America and Freedom should be synonymous. We are not there yet, but freedom of choice always remains our ideal. America is free to choose a new president this year. And will.
Others, including the candidates themselves could go negative at any time. Mutually Assured Destruction
Leave us not talk falsely — I’m saying we should never go negative. Doesn’t matter who else does, it is wrong.
Good show. We should all be so involved in the positive promotion of our preferred candidate.
One sure way to spread division and discord amongst voters is to argue why another candidate is less electable than the one you happen to prefer. Maybe you are correct in that assesment — maybe not. Either way ‘your candidate’ has lost another friend because of the trash talk.
Tell me why I should vote for candidate 1 — not why I shouldn’t vote for candidate 2, especially as negative vibes in primary season will linger into November.
@DD Wiz & @Wyneaux •
Why don’t we vote on it?
This is the year 2020, and relying on what happened in past elections to guide us now is problematic at best.
All of the top 5 candidates running for the Democratic nomination are far better choices than Trump.
Again, why argue? Let every person vote their opinion and then it’s on to November.
Chairman of the Conservative Political Action Conference Matt Schlapp told Greta Van Susteren on ‘Full Court Press’, “We won’t credential him as a conservative. I suppose if he wants to come as a non-conservative and debate an issue with us, maybe in the future we would have him come.”
He added: “This year, I would actually be afraid for his physical safety, people are so mad at him.”
The suggestion of potential violence stuck out even in an onslaught of criticism of Romney, drawing rebukes. “Closer and closer to saying the quiet part loud.” — Rick Wilson, prominent “Never Trump” Republican and media consultant.
@Baslim the Beggar •
Well said, and btw it’s hard not to notice that every comment here seems to side-step the point Signe is clearly making — stop doing the damage.
I suppose we have become a purely argumentative culture that cannot see the forest for the trees, ie your “restoring” referred to as “re-creating”.
A bipartisan group of senators is sponsoring Savanna’s Act, named for Savanna LaFontaine-Greywind, a young pregnant woman who was abducted and killed in Fargo, North Dakota, in 2017.
The bill would increase coordination between federal and tribal agencies, improving tribal access to law enforcement databases and mandating that the attorney general and Interior secretary consult with tribes on how to further develop these databases.
“We cannot allow this bill to be buried in the majority leader’s so-called ‘legislative graveyard.’ " – Senator Tom Udall – [D] New Mexico, referring to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s vow not to even consider progressive legislation that passed in the House.