Posted on 10/06/2022 8:22:23 PM PDT by bitt
I’d kindly suggest to KBJ to look at a calendar closely. She might notice the year is 2022.
She could compare this to the year slavery ended. Compare it to the date various legislation was passed to enable and restore persons affected by racism.
She might ask herself what exactly are non-black people supposed to do. None have been slave owners, none have a living family member that was, and none owe anyone reparations. Some may be racist, just like in any population there is good and bad.
Kindly suggest to KBJ that she inspire black people to take full advantage of the American dream. It can be realized. It does take work. And no one is holding anyone back. There is a long list of black business leaders, doctors, justices, etc. Rehashing the past, promoting divisive CRT, inspiring victimhood - is what is really enslaving.
Repulicans cannot win statewide elections in Illinois anymore. The dems will just run more people as they won’t have to worry about small districts being red.
One section of the 14 amendment states that: "The United States nor any State shall assume or pay ... any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void." The 15th Amendment to the United States Constitution was ratified on February 3, 1870. The amendment reads, “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.”
The 15th Amendment guaranteed African-American men the right to vote. In addition, the right to vote could not be denied to anyone in the future based on a person's race.
What is Jackson's problem? What does she want? She is ignorant if she doesn't understand that the 14th & 15th amendments were ratified to help remedy race related injustices. If she's suggesting that the amendment writers could have remedied race injustices without referencing race is just ludicrous.
God help us!
None of us are promised tomorrow. Jackson could live to be 100 or she could die tomorrow.
One thing is sure - bitterness and unforgiveness will not extend your life.
Leftist, black women live in a world where their life is controlled by a sinister parade of conspiracy theories, some dating back to ancient Rome.
-PJ
That strategy would actually work AGAINST Democrats. If there are 17 House seats and the Democrats run exactly 17 candidates, how do you ensure that the ones at the bottom of the list (say, #11 through #17) will garner more votes than the top Republican candidates? And if the party runs more than 17 candidates, that simply dilutes the support among more candidates and makes it less likely that some of them will get enough votes to be in the top 17.
What really happens in an at-large voting process with multiple seats at stake is that political party affiliation becomes less important. That's because a minor party candidate like one from the Libertarian Party or Green Party doesn't have a chance in hell of winning a statewide election for governor or U.S. Senator, but could easily get enough votes to be ranked among the top 17 contenders among dozens of candidates.
That last point is important. I came across some voter registration information for Illinois that breaks the party affiliation down as follows: Democratic (48%), Republican (33%), and unaffiliated (19%). If candidates ran in a free-for-all election in Illinois with the top 17 candidates are all winners, then this would roughly translate to Democrats (8 seats), Republicans (6 seats) and Others (3 seats). Right now, the current Illinois delegation is split 13-5 in favor of the Democrats (the state currently has 18 seats but will lose one starting with the 2022 election). What the hell do the Republican Party and its supporters have to lose if the system was changed the way I described?
It shouldn’t be so complicated. Laws should mean what the legislators who wrote them and voted for them meant for them to mean. If they don’t, then they’re meaningless.
If you don’t like the laws, then change them, in a legal way. For Constitutional laws, the legal way is the Amendment process, not legislation from the bench.
She’ll be hard to ignore while she’s voting radical Marxist on cases for the next 35-40 years.
The reason she had to drill down is that the authors of the Fourteenth Amendment were very careful to eliminate racial considerations from the amendment. All lives matter.
Might work for South Dakota or Kansas. I’m in Oregon. Much different. Things often break along mountains or river drainage boundaries.
The history of the GOP+Manchin and Simema voting to avoid a tie that Kamala could break to kill the filibuster has held up so far. So losing the senate, or even a 50-50 result, in them midterms, would be unfortunate.
I thought this article was about the moronic press secretary. Unfortunately, it is about the new, moronic Justice.
The original idea was to give the Federal Government limited and specific powers. The individual states would run the rest. An example of just how powerful the states were was slavery. States could literally have slaves under the Federal system. Not very consistent with a nation conceived in liberty but very consistent with limited powers.
The evil system of black slavery has ended . Under the Amendments added all of America is slowly being enslaved under Socialism. I prefer the original Constitution back.
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.