Posted on 07/01/2021 4:25:01 AM PDT by MtnClimber
Exquisitely amusing...like the abandonment of all hope in the American Justice System.
Actually IMO, gaslighting is a potent term more powerful & precise than any other succinct description of one of the left’s most powerful weapons á la 1984.
“Gaslighting is an insidious form of manipulation and psychological control. Victims of gaslighting are deliberately and systematically fed false information that leads them to question what they know to be true, often about themselves. They may end up doubting their memory, their perception, and even their sanity. Over time, a gaslighter’s manipulations can grow more complex and potent, making it increasingly difficult for the victim to see the truth.”
Gaslighting is the perfect term.
Supreme Court:
Obama care isn’t a tax
Except when it is
That Supreme Court ( jesters) ?
There is a false premise that persists throughout discussions of SC “political balance”:
Namely, that the spectrum of political leanings on the court ranges between sincere Leftward and Rightward interpretations of the Constitution, with the Right more protective of individual rights, and the Left more protective of the collective rights.
The truth is that the Right is the only side sincerely attempting to follow the Constitution, while the Left seeks to undermine it.
The Constitution was designed to protect individuals from the tyranny of the collective. So, the Left is not one side of a legitimate political spectrum. The Left is the natural enemy of the Constitution, and seeks to destroy it.
Until we understand that only Thomas and Alito are consistently fulfilling their proper roles as protectors and interpreters of the Constitution, and that the others are mostly saboteurs, all discussions of “balance” on the SC are disingenuous.
Yep! It’s non-intuitive and contrived; so much so in that, after it’s used, some dope inevitably feels the need to bore us with its definition. It’s utter cake-bakery! (... my contrived word of the day.)
SCOTUS.
Bought and paid for with Communist Chinese money.
Just like the Congress and the White House.
The Court stood down when told to, declining to look at The Steal. Pretty much says it all.
The crooks that ordinary, low-information citizens unthinkingly elect to the Senate have effectively nullified 10th Amendment-protected state sovereignty by routinely bypassing the Constitution's Article V to unconstitutinally expand the already unconstitutionally big federal government's powers.
After all, career senators not only help the likewise corrupt House to pass bills that steal state powers and uniquely associated state revenues, but then confirm activist Supreme Court justices who declare the unconstitutonal laws that Congress passes to be “constitutional.”
“Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added]." —United States v. Butler, 1936.
The 17A ought to be known as the self-inflicted social Darwinism (national religion?) amendment. It has effectively repealed constitutional limits on the federal government's powers imo.
Compare 17A to people shooting their feet off as an example of exercising their 2nd Amendment rights.
Insights welcome.
I like “Cake-Bakery” as an expression.
That’s the active verb phrase I still use, or allude to; (B.S-ing)
Everyone knows what it means even when they don’t wish to know.
Ignorance by some does not constitute the measure of how well a term expresses a unique & useful meaning.
Your implied premise taken to a logical conclusion would mean we must all converge at the level of greatest ignorance, where the slowest person in the room can instinctively understand what is meant.
Rather than resenting the amount of thought needed to utilize terms properly one should rise to the occasion & dig in.
The term “gaslighting” can be traced back to a 1938 play. British playwright Patrick Hamilton created “Gas Light,” a mystery/thriller that premiered in London and played there for six months. But most folks familiar with the history of the term think back to the 1944 film adaptation of the play, “Gaslight.”
The movie stars Charles Boyer and Ingrid Bergman. They play a married couple, Paula and Gregory. Throughout the film, abusive husband Gregory manipulates Paula to make her feel as if she has gone mad. He leads her to believe she’s stealing things without realizing it and hearing noises that aren’t really there. Paula begins to question her reality.
https://www.pri.org/stories/2016-10-14/heres-where-gaslighting-got-its-name
As I mentioned in my prior post, I am already familiar with the intricate background of that term.
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.