New Tactical Cycling Maneuver

On 9/30/2020 5:53 PM, jbeattie wrote:

To an Originalist intellectual such as yourself, the plain language is what should matter and not the writings of a man who did not draft the Constitution. Jefferson's writings do not even constitute legislative history because he was in France at the time. He wrote to Madison, but the two did not see eye-to-eye on many things, including the need for a Bill of Rights. The Second Amendment also smells a lot like the Virginia Constitution of 1776, but Jefferson didn't write that either.

Moreover, read up -- the Second Amendment applies to the states via the 14th Amendment. The justices just made up the conclusion that it was a "fundamental right" protected by the 14th Amendment's Due Process clause. Jury trials are in the Bill of Rights, but the right to a jury trial is not a "fundamental right" according to the Supreme Court.

There is no exhibit or appendix to the 14th Amendment listing "fundamental rights." The Supreme Court can just pick and choose what is a fundamental right. Activist judges! Liberals! COMMUNISTS [unless we like the ruling -- but if it involves women or homosexuals its COMMUNIST]. Non-textual, non-originalist opinions are fine for conservatives so long as they are the "right" opinion.

I agree, intellectual consistency is a rarity among conservatives. Not
totally absent, mind you - there are some conservative thinkers I really
respect - but the rank and file seem to swallow any party line.

Tom is an extreme example. If I want to learn Tom's view on any issue at
all, I can just tune into Fox or Rush. There's not an independent
synapse in his head.

And he proves that by repeatedly accusing me of views I don't have or
promote.

--
- Frank Krygowski