Things That Amaze Me: Constitutional Ignorance, Part 3

 

I thought I was done with talking about how much people in general - and the libtards on the far left in particular - don't understand the US Constitution.  Then I read the latest posts on my Facebook feed this morning and was immediately proven wrong.

The last time I wrote about this was about how people thought that the First Amendment gives the press the Constitutional right to attend press briefings at the White House, and how Trump couldn't bar them from entering.  Today's topic of utter ignorance is gonna blow your mind.  

I was reading a thread about how somebody suggested we demolish all of the Islamic mosques in the country and ban Islam (which I'm all in favor of, by the way) when out of the blue some misinformed poster stated that "the Constitution gives us the right to safety in numbers."

Now that's a new one, I must admit.  

I wish I could say this poster was a libtard, but I don't think he is.  If he was, he'd be talking about how the Constitution prohibits us from banning any religion.  But this statement was made in support of the original post about demolishing the mosques and banning Islam, so that leads me to believe that the poster was a conservative.  Of course I asked the poster to show me exactly where in the Constitution the "right to safety in numbers" is mentioned, but of course I won't get a reply - not one that makes any sense, anyway.

For the record, I'll call out ignorance and political misinformation coming from both sides without hesitation.  Also for the record, the Constitution does mention "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," but NOWHERE does it mention "safety in numbers."  A simple Google search will prove this.  The Constitution DOES use the word "safety," but it's only used ONCE in Article I, Section 9, Clause 2 (the Suspension Clause) which allows the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus "when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it." And that's it.  Nowhere else is the word "safety" used in the Constitution.

(So how many of you just did a Google search to learn what "suspension of habeas corpus" means, or what habeas corpus actually is?) 

I guess the lesson learned here is that Constitutional ignorance is present on both sides of the political aisle, but I have to admit that I was hoping that the conservatives would have at least a little bit more knowledge of the Constitution than what this clown demonstrated, or at least not be as vocal about showing their ignorance.

In a perfect world, maybe, but surely not in this one.

Such is life, I guess.

Deo Vindice
IHC 

 

 

 

Hypocrisy, Thy Name Is Liberal

So now that the US Army has announced that the execution of the Islamic terrorist Nidal Hasan will be carried out by firing squad (which is one of the two ways that the US military carries out death penalty executions, the other being by hanging) and that the execution will be livestreamed, the loonies on the liberal left are losing their minds.  But then again, we should have expected that, huh?  At least I did.

First, let's address the elephant in the room.  Do I agree with livestreaming the execution?  Yes.  I mean, why not?  It's just like when public hangings were conducted in the early days of this country - if you wanted to see it, you showed up and watched.  If you didn't want to see it, then you stayed away.  Same thing here - if you want to see the execution, then watch it.  If you don't, then don't watch it.  Simple as that.

But then again, 'simple' isn't a word that's in the libtard dictionary (along with 'common sense').  Not when it comes to something that they disagree with, that is, and that's ANYTHING that the other side does.

To me, the outcry from the liberal left is the absolute height of hypocrisy.  The outcry is coming from the same people who:

- Celebrated the shooting of Donald Trump on live TV and then re-broadcast the footage for weeks to continue the celebration

- Celebrated the assassination of Charlie Kirk and then re-broadcast the footage for weeks to continue the celebration

- Cheered the mistrial of Lindsay Clancy even though she admitted to brutally murdering her three children 

- Protest in favor of murdering unborn children while still in the womb (and right up until birth, actually)

So where were all of these life-loving protesters when Hasan murdered 13 innocent people and wounded 32 others, all while shouting "Allahu Akbar"?  Why weren't they protesting then?  Why weren't they protesting for the three children murdered by their own mother?

One of the things I will never understand is why the liberal left always chooses to support the evil things in this world, up to and including murder and the murder of the unborn.  (And don't throw that bullshit 'healthcare' argument at me 'cuz that don't won't hunt.)  They'll protest against ICE deporting violent illegal immigrant criminals, yet they won't protest in favor of the American citizens that these illegals kill.  

Someone make it make sense, if that's possible.

I firmly believe that the two greatest threats to our nation in this day and age are the ongoing Islamic invasion of our country (and yes, it's an invasion) and the Demoncratic party.  And the really sad thing is that the Demoncratic party is now supporting Islam, welcoming these murderers into our country.  Then again, they also support socialism, so I shouldn't be surprised.

And if the conservatives don't get off their asses and start voting, the bad guys are gonna win.

Deo Vindice

IHC