That's ridiculous and ignorant.
US Capitol Breached
- Thread starter Cheetah
- Start date
- Status
That's ridiculous and ignorant.
More ridiculous and ignorant than the opposite?
What?
So in the Australian Capital Territory, where about 1/3rd of the workforce is federal public servants, we very consistently elect Labor members of federal parliament, and an ACT Government made up of Labor and Greens members.
The question of who is governing the country as a whole (Liberals for most of the last quarter century) has basically no influence on that. Why would it? Like everyone else, we vote our beliefs.
Not sure why you think I am talking about Australia.
It is the identical situation. Federal capital district, lots of public sector workers. The reason I know your suggestion is insane is because I live in the exact circumstances.
DC is heavily Democrat leaning, they are also not going to vote Republican just because the Republicans are in federal government.
It's not an identical situation; why do you think the US created an artificial capital with different rules?
States can decide various things on their own. However a protest (not this one, any protest) to the capital is about the federal government and shouldn't be state-blocked imo.
That's the same thing Australia did? Federal capital with its own district, governed as a territory rather than a state
^See edit. Australia just isn't realistically comparable to the US in any crucial way.
It can also be put in a different way: if DC has state rights of this type, and blocks protests from other states/marches etc, the union will be dissolved in the future. After all, the marches aren't to the state, they are specifically to the seat of national government.
It can also be put in a different way: if DC has state rights of this type, and blocks protests from other states/marches etc, the union will be dissolved in the future. After all, the marches aren't to the state, they are specifically to the seat of national government.
It didn't make any sense man.
You said nobody in DC should get to have political representation because some of them work for the federal civil service, I've just pointed out how silly that is. They should get to vote like everyone else, just like I do.
You said nobody in DC should get to have political representation because some of them work for the federal civil service, I've just pointed out how silly that is. They should get to vote like everyone else, just like I do.
Berzerker
Deity
Why is it a lie? Do you deny citing MLK on the subject of riots?
I was of the view we were talking about DC having state right to decide stuff like not allowing marches to there from other states. If you meant some other thing, such as simply representation in parliament, why exactly is this even relevant to this thread? :/
Huh? Mate are you even reading?
I just said people in the territories should get political representation. You're the one who started up on federal employees and the like.
And why would even the capital being in a state or having its own statehood, prevent political protests? Do they not have protests in, say, Ottawa?
I just said people in the territories should get political representation. You're the one who started up on federal employees and the like.
And why would even the capital being in a state or having its own statehood, prevent political protests? Do they not have protests in, say, Ottawa?
You may have noticed the US constitution was mentioned. I have to suppose the intent there wasn't to prevent democracy, but to disable unilateral state (DC) decisions when the issue is of national interest, such as marches to there.
Once again, I am not sure why you think the more general democratic rights are relevant in the context of a thread on a riotous march and breach to the capitol.
If it helps put it to rest, though, let me say that, sure, I am not against people who live in DC taking part in democracy. . .
The political status of DC is actually very material here, given the suggestions the federal government blocked the DC government from properly securing things.
The idea that these arseholes got to create havoc in a place where the locals can't even vote is pretty galling too, tbh.
And of course giving voting rights to the millions of disenfranchised territory residents should be part of repairing a heavily Republican slanted US democracy.
Anyway, I don't like this. Cause in my view it should be clear that no one is against people's rights in their home state. But it is poignant that the march wasn't to see tourist sites in some random state, but go there because it has the seat of federal government. That isn't about DC - it just happens to be in DC - so some state rights cannot be given to the state which hosts the federal seat of government.
Not that I can do anything about this, so no need to attack me. Maybe full state rights should be given to DC. I think this will only make dissolution of the union come closer to becoming reality, but I dislike the role of Laocon, tbh - I am allergic to snakes sent by Poseidon.
mitsho
Deity
Interesting times. I'm just too bored with these fights to take part. I guess I should. Those are the times to increase one's follower count on Social Media. I guess I've become a cynic.
Let's hope that there will be a thourough investigation, Trump banned from Politics and that this can serve as an impetus for some reforms (mainly procedural, but also institutional).
Let's hope that there will be a thourough investigation, Trump banned from Politics and that this can serve as an impetus for some reforms (mainly procedural, but also institutional).
You won't ever see a viral youtube video about fights in CFC OT ^_^
I don't use FB for posting anything even remotely political & don't even have a twitter account.
mitsho
Deity
I'm sorry, I'm not following what you are trying to tell me.
Also, post-thought: what will happen if Trump issues a pardon for these protesters/terrorists? Might propel a constitutional amendment abolishing (or reforming) those pardons.
Evie
Pronounced like Eevee
Debatable. While the Constitution grants Congress authority over governing the Federal District, what it doesn't do is define the Federal District (or set a minimum size for it - only a maximum). That has always been up to Congress to define.
We have them and I've marched in them. The idea that somehow a capital being under provincial or state authority would prevent people from political protests is downright laughable.
The same federal constitutional rights that protect people's right to protest (freedom of assembly and freedom of speech) - non-violently - would apply exactly the same in a state or province as they do in a federal district. That's what let people protest freely, not some ridiculously daft notion that the federal government has to let people protest...somehow but a state governnment wouldn't need to. That's a wild flight of fancy of Kyriakos, unrelated to any of the reasons the actual writers of the Constitution gave to justify a federal district.
Its a lie because you're a liar and you're intentionally saying things that aren't true in self-service to your dishonest positions... Klan/nazi/fascist defending, for example.
So stop asking me to prove a negative, you liar. Yes I deny it, and I say again, that you're an effing liar, and you shame the dignity of MLK by mentioning his name... you liar. You are defending the people who attempted a coup, because you find common cause with them. They lost... you lost... and now you are desperate to deflect the discussion away from that. The bottom line... again... is... do you support the cause of the Jan 6 Capitol protesters or not?
Go ahead and squirm... you worm... the fact that you can't actually proudly claim your convictions just demonstrates cowardice. I support BLM, proudly. Do you support MAGA? Are you willing to at least put that in digital writing, you coward?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
