Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

WATCH: Dem House Majority Whip [James Clyburn] 'Isn't Too Sure' Bill Of Rights Would Pass Today
freebeacon ^ | Sep 09, 2019 | Beth Baumann

Posted on 09/10/2019 12:04:07 PM PDT by MarvinStinson

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-59 next last
To: taxcontrol

I wouldn’t doubt that, but the comment still stands.

How can you ‘protect and defend’ if you haven’t the slightest grasp of these issues?

This guy is fundamentally ignorant on these matters.


21 posted on 09/10/2019 12:24:47 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (This space for rent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: MarvinStinson

“You know what, I really believe sincerely that the climate we’re in today, if the Bill of Rights the first 10 Amendments of the United States Constitution, were put before the public today, I’m not too sure we’d hold onto the Bill of Rights,” Clyburn said. “Especially when I see what people are doing with the Second Amendment. No telling what they’d do with the First Amendment.”


Whatever this guy’s politics are, I’m sure that he’s correct here.

Which is Reasons #1-1,000,000 why we do NOT want a convention of the states. Not now, not EVER until we are certain that we will not have a bunch of statist, inside-the-Beltway scumbags remove the protection of our most basic rights from the Constitution.


22 posted on 09/10/2019 12:25:10 PM PDT by Ancesthntr ("The right to buy weapons is the right to be free." A. E. van Vogt, The Weapons Shops of Isher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MarvinStinson
Then there wouldn't be a United States.
The convention produced a model for forming a collective government. The citizenry of the individual sovereign states refused to join.

The convention then amended the model of proposed government and the States United into the United states.

So, if the Congress today had been in charge, and had refused to insert the bill of rights then it would never have become possible to form the United States.

23 posted on 09/10/2019 12:27:03 PM PDT by MrEdd (Caveat Emptor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MarvinStinson

“.... her experience of fleeing violence in Somalia is “more personal” than Jews whose parents survived the Holocaust.

And “more personal” than African-Americans whose ancestors were slaves, right Jimmy??


24 posted on 09/10/2019 12:28:45 PM PDT by NCcatdaddy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

I agree and lay the blame at our education system that is run by liberals.


25 posted on 09/10/2019 12:29:08 PM PDT by taxcontrol (Stupid should hurt - dad's wisdom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

I was sucked into Clyburn’s gerrymandered Sixth district like the night before Election Day. The Republican I normally voted for, Rep. Joe Wilson (”You lie!!”) was off the ballot.

Clyburn is an entitled leftwing idiot and racist to boot. If you’re white, forget about writing to him.

And if you do write to disagree with anything he says, he will probably add you to his list of citizens to be Red Flagged should such laws pass.

South Carolina is a gun friendly red state but its representation in Congress by both parties truly sucks.


26 posted on 09/10/2019 12:29:59 PM PDT by elcid1970 ("The Second Amendment is more important than Islam.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: MarvinStinson
... arguing that her experience of fleeing violence in Somalia is “more personal” than Jews whose parents survived the Holocaust."

Is there some connection between fleeing violence in Somalia and anti-semitism? I don't get it.

27 posted on 09/10/2019 12:32:57 PM PDT by William Tell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

“Damn right it would pass today.”


With respect, I strongly disagree. Please don’t confuse your hopes with the facts.

Clyburn, for whatever else he is, was at least being honest. We are NOT living in the same environment that we did in 1789-91:

1) We have a lot of pissed off minorities with voting power and representation. Now, they deserve representation - but that doesn’t mean that they’d vote for the BOR.

2) We haven’t just been through a war to gain our freedom. In fact, we have schools teaching our children and grandchildren to have contempt for our rights. Hell, even in law school - where they’re supposed to teach, you know, THE LAW - they have been glossing over the 2nd Amendment for decades.

3) We do not share the same morality (as a percentage of the population - of course individuals do) that the Founding Generation did.

NONE of those factors mitigates toward the BOR being re-ratified if they were put up for a vote, no matter how much you and I would like that to occur, nor how much or how well we could argue for any or all of its provisions.

Fully 1/3 of the population would literally enslave the rest of us, if not just exterminate them outright...and you think that they’d want the BOR re-ratified?


28 posted on 09/10/2019 12:33:49 PM PDT by Ancesthntr ("The right to buy weapons is the right to be free." A. E. van Vogt, The Weapons Shops of Isher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: lee martell
Too many opinions are now based on apparent feelings of the peer group, vs conclusions of the individual.

I have been arguing with idiots today, because someone asked why it was easier to purchase a gun than a car and why they are different. Of course, they argued that just because one is a "right" and the other is a privilege was just an excuse. An excuse for what they never said.

Today, many Americans are willing to give up their basic rights, for some perceived protection from a violent gun-related death, which happens to be less likely than being killed by LIGHTENING STRIKES!

They said that I was missing the point and wanted to know why purchasing a deadly weapon was so easy, compared to buying a car. So I pointed out that more Americans are killed with bats and hammers, each year. I asked them if they were advocating for background checks on purchases of those deadly items - of course, it became a name-calling session from their side.

Lastly, I asked them if they think the Holocaust, the Soviet gulags or the killing fields could happen in America. Of course they answered, "No." I asked who is to stop them, if most Americans are disarmed or placed on some Government generated "do not allow to exercise their rights" list?
29 posted on 09/10/2019 12:34:46 PM PDT by ExTxMarine (Diversity is tolerance; diverse points of views will not be tolerated.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Yaelle

“She’s so busy screwing guys in and out of her family that she doesn’t know how to make a decent point.”


Well, actually she seems to make a decent point when she’s screwing others, but its a different point than the one to which you were referring. :>)


30 posted on 09/10/2019 12:35:19 PM PDT by Ancesthntr ("The right to buy weapons is the right to be free." A. E. van Vogt, The Weapons Shops of Isher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: MarvinStinson
"You know what, I really believe sincerely that the climate we're in today, if the Bill of Rights the first 10 Amendments of the United States Constitution, were put before the public today, I'm not too sure we'd hold onto the Bill of Rights," Clyburn said. "Especially when I see what people are doing with the Second Amendment. No telling what they'd do with the First Amendment."
He and his ilk would not ever approve of them. Which is exactly why we should never have a Convention of States (COS) or a Constitutional Convention.

What ever you want to call it, would be a recipe for disaster...guaranteed.

31 posted on 09/10/2019 12:41:07 PM PDT by lewislynn (STOP SUPPORTING CHINA! DO IT NOW!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MarvinStinson

That says it all about the Democrat Party now doesn’t it.


32 posted on 09/10/2019 12:41:37 PM PDT by Vaquero ( Don't pick a fight with an old guy. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

That would apply to 99 percent of the Democrats in Congress today, and, to some Republicans


33 posted on 09/10/2019 12:44:40 PM PDT by falcon99 (qu)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MarvinStinson

Dems would vote against the US Constitution if they had a chance..they absolutely despise this country


34 posted on 09/10/2019 12:52:52 PM PDT by Sarah Barracuda
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MarvinStinson

“I’ll tell you I run into people every day who would like to see so much of those guarantees uprooted.””

I hope he said this about his fellow Democrats with concern.

Or maybe he can start considering the other amendments afer 10 that he would not be too keen on being eroded?


35 posted on 09/10/2019 12:56:23 PM PDT by VanDeKoik ( In heap big peace pipe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

Agreed, but then we allow that.

There’s no push-back whatsoever.


36 posted on 09/10/2019 12:59:47 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (This space for rent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: elcid1970

Sorry to hear that.


37 posted on 09/10/2019 1:00:31 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (This space for rent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: MrEdd; MarvinStinson

“So, if the Congress today had been in charge, and had refused to insert the bill of rights then it would never have become possible to form the United States.”


Yes, that’s true...and irrelevant.

We already HAVE the United States and its form of government, and have had it for 232 years since the Constitution was ratified. What Clyburn is saying is that today’s Congress would never re-pass it and/or today’s states would never re-ratify it. That, vs. the situation back then, is a completely different thing.

Today’s environment is way different from that of 232 years ago. People are much less well-educated and experienced in matters of government, economics, the nature of human beings (especially as related to power) and (most importantly) history. Oh, and at least 1/3 of the population is infected with the bacillus of socialism, which teaches and expounds the idea of group “rights” (really, power) trumping the rights of individuals. You think that those people and their representatives would vote for the BOR? But even so, that’s irrelevant - we already have our government, and lots of people like it just fine (and not always for the best reasons, either). If we had a Convention of the States, and that convention eliminated some or all of the BOR, I’m just not sure that things would blow up. We simply don’t know the exact events that would occur to get the Convention called in the first place, nor who would be appointed to it, nor the composition of the state legislatures. Given the utter hatred of the 1st and 2nd Amendment by the Left, and the Left’s completely unchecked-by-morality drive for power, there’s not a single person who could predict what would happen.

As an aside, you are incorrect about the Constitutional Convention amending the document - they did NOT do so. What happened is that when the Constitution was sent out to the state legislatures for ratification, so much opposition was encountered to the lack of controls on the government (in the form of a BOR) that the Federalists advocating for passage promised to pass a BOR and send it out to the states for ratification during the First Congress. Here’s a link to verify this: https://www.history.com/topics/united-states-constitution/bill-of-rights

The point of all of this is simple: THEN the pols promised something, and they actually delivered. Do you think that people who debate the meaning of the word “is,” or who can go in front of Congress and claim no memory about a whole host of things - and then go write their memoirs for several million dollars, are even 1% as trustworthy? I don’t, and since they already regularly (and many times proudly) violate the Constitution, what in the world makes you think that they’d give a rat’s ass about preserving the BOR? If they ignore the Constitution now, why would they abide by a further amended one in a few years?


38 posted on 09/10/2019 1:02:31 PM PDT by Ancesthntr ("The right to buy weapons is the right to be free." A. E. van Vogt, The Weapons Shops of Isher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ExTxMarine

“I asked who is to stop them, if most Americans are disarmed or placed on some Government generated “do not allow to exercise their rights” list?”


And what did the shitheels answer?


39 posted on 09/10/2019 1:05:31 PM PDT by Ancesthntr ("The right to buy weapons is the right to be free." A. E. van Vogt, The Weapons Shops of Isher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: falcon99

Agreed...


40 posted on 09/10/2019 1:05:33 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (This space for rent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-59 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson