“You know, we don’t live in a democracy because a democracy is two wolves and a lamb deciding what’s for dinner. OK? It’s not just majority rule. It’s a constitutional republic. The founders set that up because they followed the biblical admonition of what a civil society is supposed to look like. W...
This “not a democracy, a republic” crap is becoming more and more popular on the right. They’re not even trying to hide the authoritarianism and fascism any more. They’re now openly saying they don’t support democracy.
This is great, call it the Patriot Party or something and talk about how government waste has turned "Citizens On Patrol" into a bunch of lazy, freedom-suppressing, union members.
No, republic just means that the role of head of state isn't hereditary. Lots of dictatorships are republics, some democracies are as well. The actual political system of the USA is representative democracy (in theory at least).
The fact that these terms are so muddled in the minds of the average American is completely deliberate, because it makes it so much easier for them to subvert US democracy when people have been told that the US is not one.
I think what they're getting at is that majority does not neccesarily rule in the US. You can have an election where a majority of voters go one way but the electoral college (your representation) goes another.
Idk why they want to harp on that right now but whatever.
Well, we're both. But if you had to pick just one, Republic is probably more informative than Democracy since citizens rarely actually vote for laws and usually just vote for representatives. The correct term is a combination of the two: democratic republic. Wikipedia uses the term "Federal presidential constitutional republic," which I think conveys it pretty well, though I'd prefer the term "democratic" somewhere in that word salad.
If the American electorate was slightly less stupid, I’d be ecstatic, because he made himself effectively kryptonite to reasonable, intelligent people with that statement.
Unfortunately, the American electorate is, on average, that stupid.
What's worse is that the average is weighted further toward stupid by gerrymandering. They're right that the game is rigged, it's just not rigged against them.
He said it in 2016 though and has still been re-elected and elected speaker of the house regardless. Hopefully this has an effect on the republican party at large though now. It might fly where he's from, but it won't in the US at large. We just need to make sure people know what they're voting for.
They treat the Constitution like they do their bible.
They don’t read it.
If they do read it, they just read the bits they agree with.
If they read the parts that don’t fit their desired narrative, they engage in mental gymnastics to reinterpret what was written to fit their desires.
Edit:
Jefferson's reply did not address their concerns about problems with state establishment of religion — only of establishment on the national level. The letter contains the phrase "wall of separation between church and state," which led to the short-hand for the Establishment Clause that we use today: "Separation of church and state."
Which led to the Establishment Clause…
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion...
And also The point of Article 6 wherein no religious test is to be given to hold office.
"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executige and judicial officers, both of the united states and of the several states, shall be bound by oath of affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."
It literally couldn't be any clearer.
I guess he's the shittiest constitutional lawyer ever.
But nobody will care. They eat up his arguing from authority fallacy bullshit
He's either a pedo or dogfucker, there was some statement from him about how homosexuality was bad because it makes people want to have sex with their dog.
I don't want to be that guy, but in fairness, ol' boy didn't actually say "biblical republic" (He just wheeled out the old "constitutional Republic" bit).
Doesn't make this any better, but I want to be sure we criticize with facts.
So this is the alternative history they want to write eh?
Clown, it was called the "Enlightenment Age" for a reason, people started breaking the chains of organized religion. Yes they were Christians, but they knew enough to not trust religion as a form of government.
Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in the material world are some of the founding principles, not "death, misery and suffering but maybe get lucky choosing the right god and you'll be rewarded with eternal paradise..."
If they founded the country on the Bible, we'd live in a theocracy with no elections and no opposition parties.
Of course, he's from Louisiana... The south always was the worst part of American, even in colonial times. The US might have abolished slavery much earlier if not for them. There was even a draft of the Declaration of Independence that critiqued the British slave trade as one of the moral failure of the empire and grounds for independence.
Christians always try to re-history the world in their favor. They are the most dishonest hypocritical fascists.
Then again, they stole most of what their religion allegedly stands for.
Yeah. I think what these people mean usually is that the phrase "separation of church and state" isn't in the Constitution, which is true. They heard that somewhere and repeat it. Maybe that West Wing episode where Charlie does a bit about it.
Nearly every federal legislator is Christian and votes that way. Some states still (symbolically, since they're unenforceable) ban atheists from holding public office too, not that you'd even have a chance of winning public office being openly atheist.
In what way do legislators "vote Christian"? Most of them have never read a bible, and even if they did, the bible is wildly contradictory with itself and is full of cruelty.
This is literally frightening to read that any American politician would think this. I don't see how any moderate R could support this train of thought.
Lots of them think it. The more frightening aspect is the willingness to say it out loud.
Remember when Cheetoh-Man said things out loud and they loved him for it. Eight years later, they feel emboldened to do all kinds of shit that wouldn't have been on the radar back then. We're in trouble.
Separation of church and state is both the first amendment and a clause in article six of the constitution:
First Amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof
article six
no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
Thomas Jefferson's use of the words "separation of church and state" was to explain the purpose of the first amendment specifically but the actual legal text of the constitution is worded broadly enough to cover not only separation of church and state but separation of mosque/synagogue/ect and state rather than singling out Christianity.
No, that is not what he's doing. He's pretending to be the will of some magical sky fairy, and he is anything but that. He claims to "hear" this imaginary person "telling him what to do". That is not the same thing as a god - that is a charlatan using the snake oil of an imaginary sky fairy to con the poorly educated.
What I want is god, I don't care which one (they're all imaginary) put on the ballot and voted for. This would be decisive two ways... First, how does one get on a ballot? (they have to prove they are a real live human being, among other tests). And the second doesn't matter, because an imaginary thing can't be on a ballot.
I see this nutjob has no idea what he's talking about and cannot fulfill the duties of his oath of office, so he should simply be removed from office, right? Right guys?
His job isn't to last, it's tonflog whatever the Russians are paying him to do. Which will almost certainly be to jam up the government so it can't function, and to kill any Ukraine spending bills. If he can cause a civil war or constitutional crisis all the better.
People keep saying this but I've been around since Reagan and with every election cycle things get noticeably worse. The Democrats never keep their promises and continue to cede ground. The Republicans continue ramping up their antics. People said they had enough in 88, in 92, in 96, in 2000, etc etc.
Every time the American people fell for whatever was being peddled in front of them. As someone who is almost 40, I can tell you the only time I ever thought there might be positive change and people standing up for themselves and their communities at large was during the 2020 protests and pandemic. Surely, I thought this would be the beginning of something new.
But the media began to ignore things, social media algos quickly adjusted to bury protests and boost disinfo actors. Now I have to wonder just how much worse things will get if this is what we put up with. What will it take to get people to fight for their rights. If we wait until the government makes us (LGBTQ, etc) illegal it will be too late to act.
I honestly doubt most people will be moved to do anything to defend our rights, they don't even care about their own until the police show up for them.
Americans don't learn on their own faults, do they... After electing a complete idiot and criminal for a president, they give the house majority to the same party that chose Trump as their candidate (twice!)
It's absolutely not surprising to me that the party that had Trump as its candidate twice, now appointed this moron as a speaker. But Americans could learn on their own faults...
"Americans dont learn on their faults do they". Every single one? You really believe 100% of americans are voting for this shit? Do you see our current president???
I’m seeing lots of ‘New Speaker is [insert whatever you want that’s against humans in general] (maybe a slight over-exaggeration, but it doesn’t feel like it)
But can anyone ELI5 how you all ended up in this state, and how you get back out?
What’s the impact of this individual being Speaker?
How we ended up here: Following Trump, an increasingly aggressive, authoritarian, what you might call fascist far right coalition has started causing problems in the house (ironically, they're called the Freedom Caucus). The Republicans are divided, but they technically have the majority along registered party lines. Because of this, the Freedom Caucus can choose to force them to do things because, without them, they can't do anything at all without crossing the aisle.
What effect it have: Mostly nothing. Democrats have a majority in the senate and hold the presidency. The house alone can't pass anything. They can vote on things and pass it on to the senate where it will die if it's bad, but that's it. They can also choose to not allow a vote on bills with bipartisan support that would pass if they didn't have control.
The largest effect will hopefully be in the elections. Hopefully people see this shit and choose to vote for something else. There's no way to know though. This could empower them potentially by allowing them to grandstand and maybe force the senate to vote against things that are poisoned to make then look bad.
I've read somewhere else a book recommendation, and after having read it I can recommend it to you:
"Christian Nation" is an alternate history novel by Frederick Rich about the USA turned into a wholly fanatical theocracy with the necessary amendments to the constitution for it to be lawful and everything else.
From the description in one of those online book-selling websites:
"They said what they would do, and we did not listen. Then they did what they said they would do."
So ends the first chapter of this brilliantly readable counterfactual novel, reminding us that America’s Christian fundamentalists have been consistently clear about their vision for a "Christian Nation" and dead serious about acquiring the political power to achieve it. When President McCain dies and Sarah Palin becomes president, the reader, along with the nation, stumbles down a terrifyingly credible path toward theocracy, realizing too late that the Christian right meant precisely what it said.
In the spirit of Philip Roth’s The Plot Against America, one of America’s foremost lawyers lays out in chilling detail what such a future might look like: constitutional protections dismantled; all aspects of life dominated by an authoritarian law called "The Blessing," enforced by a totally integrated digital world known as the "Purity Web." Readers will find themselves haunted by the questions the narrator struggles to answer in this fictional memoir: "What happened, why did it happen, how could it have happened?"
Nope. It's a different novel, by a different author, in a different way. Margaret Atwood is a much better writer, in my opinion, but Frederick Rich's book is, nonetheless, a real page-turner in a way that if you start reading it in the evening, get ready for a sleepless night.
He's busy Implementing his version of the will of God that just so coincidentally is exactly in line with the sick shit that he likes to do. Perfect match, that's why God put him in this place.
I'll leave it up to you to figure out if I'm serious or sarcastic
Assuming you're not American and are unfamiliar with our bicameral legislature: Mitch McConnell is a Republican senator from Kentucky who served as the Senate Majority Leader when Republicans held a majority in the Senate. Mike Johnson, on the other hand, is a Republican representative in the House of Representatives--the other half of Congress--who was elected to the position of Speaker by a majority of House Republicans. The Speaker is second in line to the Presidency and actually be held by anyone. However, at no time has Mitch McConnell been Speaker of the House.
If you are American: Jesus Christ go back to civics class.
Actually I am American I was just mistaken about the role Mitch McConnell played in the government I just know that he stepped down and this guy stepped back on, so I assumed this was Mitch McConnell's successor. Obviously that was an error on my part
I better get my gay gangbang desires out of the way before this guy gets to say anything about it. I gotta ask my wife first. She said no. Again. Well I will ask her once more and if she says no again we'll see who gets the last laugh. She said no again. Either way, I'm going to keep voting for liberals. Because someone in this country must keep the gangbang lifestyle moving forward. More gay gangbang and less war!