Tuesday, April 05, 2016

Where's Your Constitution Now

One more bold step towards formalized one party rule. The Supreme Court ruled against a challenge of using illegal immigrants and non-citizens in drawing the election districts around the nation. This decision was hailed as "one person, one vote". This decision was based in constitutional law of some sort. This is your precious Constitution at work conservakins. Post some more American eagle in front of an American flag pictures today as offering to your dead gods.

Look at how the Supreme Court voted. All justices unanimously supported this. All of them, even Justice Thomas! The rationale is that all people within a district must be entitled to representation. The non-citizens who technically are temporarily here on different visas or green cards need to be represented. The illegal immigrants, technically law breakers who should not be here at all, are entitled to representation. This was their rationale.

This will speed up the destruction of different red states that do great work gerrymandering like their blue state counterparts. This will also give incentives for cities and states to invite legal and illegal immigrants for more political power in their city. This could push more cities to become sanctuary cities. Move to the left quicker cities, political power and the right to transfer wealth awaits you! This is all constitutional faithful GOPers!

Your government does not work for you. We might as well move to formal global government now and rule the other nations as proper provinces with the same benefits and legal protection as in America. That is what this ruling means. Your American elected officials need to represent transient or illegal individuals in your country. How ridiculous does it reach for a low. Does an individual on a student visa need representation? A tourist visa need representation? Where does it end.

It doesn't.

21 comments:

sth_txs said...

Pretty much everything the anti-Federalist said would happen has happened.

SC is not representing the American citizen that's for sure.SC rubber stamps whatever statist nonsense is written into law by either party.



Anonymous said...

Begs the question: How can you count someone who legally speaking, doesn't exist? If they have no legal status, what numbers are they counting?

And if we are officially counting them, but aren't deporting them, then amnesty is essentially already official policy.

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

Americans have lost their country--and still they sleep.

Anonymous said...

The Supreme Court was asked if the maps drawn by the State of Texas based on population were unconstitutional, and the Supreme Court said that states can redistrict based on population. The Supreme Court did not say that states must base their districts on population (as opposed to registered voters, citizens of voting age, etc.).

Toddy Cat said...


"And if we are officially counting them, but aren't deporting them, then amnesty is essentially already official policy."

Well, yeah, hence the anger of Trump supporters.

Tiny Duck said...

No one is illegal.

The problem with white people is that we have no empathy for People of Color and refuse to deal in fact.

This is a great article on the ignorance of white people

http://verysmartbrothas.com/10-ways-slavery-wasnt-all-that-bad-at-least-according-to-some-white-people/

Anonymous said...

Sorry Tiny Duck. If you break the law and enter the country illegally, then you ARE ILLEGAL! If has nothing to do with race. It has to do with whether you follow the law. I have no empathy for anyone that breaks the law, regardless of color or race.

Anonymous said...

When I fill out my Census, I will make sure to count the 10 Chinese tourists who stayed at my house for that day. And then I will send them to your house, and you can count them on your census form.

Glengarry said...

I'm listening to Bill Simmons podcast, ep 84 with Keith Olberman. It appears the Republicans are crazy, clownish, stupid and also unreasonable, while things were altogether better in the old days before social media. The interesting part is ... he's going on and on about civil war and the impossibility of compromise. Things are starting to simmer, eh?

Toddy Cat said...

Great parody, Tiny Duck! You managed to score more ignorant, fact-free, white-guilt clich├ęs in just a few lines than I would have thought possible. I mean, "No one is illegal"! By what standard? According to who? Talk about an empty-headed statement, it's a perfect parody of the thoughtless, content-free leftist babble in action.

Not to mention decrying racial stereotypes while engaging in stereotypical statements about what "whites" are like, misuse of the word "empathy", and quoting semi-literate black people who have no idea what slavery was or wasn't like, when a cursory reading of the Slave Narratives, or "Roll, Jordan, Roll" would give you some actual information about slavery. Your parody comment is as perfect in its own minimalist way as a haiku by Buson.

Wait a minute, this was parody comment, right?

peterike said...

That I have been called, by all the Newspapers, a 'free man' will avail me little, if my pilgrimage have ended in death and wreck. -- Thomas Carlyle

Portlander said...

Here's a pretty cool one for the SJW's over-reach files:

Eric S. Raymond (famous Open Source, anti-MSFT advocate)

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

Civil war would be a good thing. Bring it on.

Anonymous said...

I used to read Bill Simmons before my awakening.

Son of Brock Landers said...

Civil War now will be a helluva lot better than in 15-20 years when the numbers game is worse (not just white but all on all) and then add in robotics in 15-20 years.

Simeon Shapiro said...

Civil War would be a disaster for you guys.

It would basically be a bunch of angry white men that weren't good enough to be successful versus everyone else.

It wouldn't be a war. More like a thrashing.

Alexandros HoMegas said...

Shut it down!

sykes.1 said...

How is this different from counting slaves pre civil war?

Glengarry said...

Bill Simmons is such a terrible Hollywood leftoid entity these days. He did come up with "Women ruin everything" in his earlier, funnier work. His only redeeming feature in recent years is that he has sounded more excited about Trump than is appropriate. Not that he's diverging from the party line but I suppose he too in his heart of hearts gets bored with Clinton and the rest.

Anyway, he's persistent though not very good when he wants to do culture, I mostly skip those, but you occasionally get to listen to these slick media/politico lib snakes that remind you where things are going. This was one of those cases.

Oh right, Olberman's thesis was that civil war hadn't happened yet because the factions were geographically too mixed to build up any real power. Is there any sense in that?

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

Civil war would be awesome for our side. Massive defections among White serving personnel. Afro-mestizos are basically incompetent. Undefended synagogues, mosques, universities, and MSM
stations. Undefended property interests, families of regime personnel and bureaucrats. Add in a huge number of guns, righteous rage, and plenty of scores to settle, and you've got the makings of a nice civil war. Let's bring it on.

Glengarry said...

White people don't think about it much, but we're pretty much naturals at collective warfare. Other peoples get upset and form a mob to riot and loot their side of town or as the next step beyond, a guerilla force that does hit-and-run atrocities and gallops away. Yet rile up even a backwater like Yugoslavia and all of a sudden there sprouts multiple combined arms forces with serious logistics tussling with each other.