Passing Your “Political License” Exam

[PoliticalChic]

Or… the two terms you must understand.

GEORGE ORWELL ONCE SAID: “Sometimes the first duty of intelligent men is the restatement of the obvious.”

And Senator Sasse, in the opening session of the Barrett hearing did just that. I’ll quote the Senator.



1.Correctly understanding just two terms will command a vote against Democrat candidates. The two terms are “civics,” and “politics.” They are distinct, and mutually exclusive. Unfortunately, for the Democrat candidates, only one exists.
A political novice spoke at the Barrett Hearings, Nebraska (R) Senator Sasse said the things that every Senator should know, and every citizen as well.

Senator Sasse opened his remarks at the Judge Barrett hearings, as follows.



2. “It would do a civics service to 8th graders to teach them what a President runs for, what a Senator runs for, and why Judge Barrett is sitting before us today.
I’d like to distinguish between civics and politics. There was a time when people as different as Ruth Bader-Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia could both go before the Senate and both get votes of 95 or 98. What happened between then and now is that we decided to forget what civics are and allow politics to swallow everything.

3. Civics is the stuff we’re all supposed to agree on regardless of our policy differences views. Civics is a way to talk about the rules of the road. Civics 101 is the stuff like ‘Congress writes laws. The Executive Branch enforces laws. Courts apply them. None of that should be different if you’re a Republican or a Democrat or a Libertarian or a Green Party member. This is basics.

Civics is the stuff that all Americans should agree on, like religious liberty is essential. People should be able to fire the folks who write the laws, and we can’t fire the judges. Judges should be impartial.


Politics is the stuff that happens underneath civics, the less important stuff that we differ about.

Civics doesn’t change every 18 to 24 months because the electoral winds change or because polling changes. I think it’s important that we help our kids understand that politics is the legitimate stuff we fight about and civics is the places where we pull back and say, wait a minute, we have things that are in common.”


“…before we fight again about politics, let’s reaffirm some of our civics."



If one of the two parties does not, any longer, agree that America is America due to basic, unalienable rights, such as religious liberty,…
…..can that party claim to be American?

 

[JoeB131]

Or… the two terms you must understand.

GEORGE ORWELL ONCE SAID: “Sometimes the first duty of intelligent men is the restatement of the obvious.”

Will they let you cut and paste your answers to the test?

 

[Moonglow]

Or… the two terms you must understand.

GEORGE ORWELL ONCE SAID: “Sometimes the first duty of intelligent men is the restatement of the obvious.”

And Senator Sasse, in the opening session of the Barrett hearing did just that. I’ll quote the Senator.



1.Correctly understanding just two terms will command a vote against Democrat candidates. The two terms are “civics,” and “politics.” They are distinct, and mutually exclusive. Unfortunately, for the Democrat candidates, only one exists.
A political novice spoke at the Barrett Hearings, Nebraska (R) Senator Sasse said the things that every Senator should know, and every citizen as well.

Senator Sasse opened his remarks at the Judge Barrett hearings, as follows.



2. “It would do a civics service to 8th graders to teach them what a President runs for, what a Senator runs for, and why Judge Barrett is sitting before us today.
I’d like to distinguish between civics and politics. There was a time when people as different as Ruth Bader-Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia could both go before the Senate and both get votes of 95 or 98. What happened between then and now is that we decided to forget what civics are and allow politics to swallow everything.

3. Civics is the stuff we’re all supposed to agree on regardless of our policy differences views. Civics is a way to talk about the rules of the road. Civics 101 is the stuff like ‘Congress writes laws. The Executive Branch enforces laws. Courts apply them. None of that should be different if you’re a Republican or a Democrat or a Libertarian or a Green Party member. This is basics.

Civics is the stuff that all Americans should agree on, like religious liberty is essential. People should be able to fire the folks who write the laws, and we can’t fire the judges. Judges should be impartial.


Politics is the stuff that happens underneath civics, the less important stuff that we differ about.

Civics doesn’t change every 18 to 24 months because the electoral winds change or because polling changes. I think it’s important that we help our kids understand that politics is the legitimate stuff we fight about and civics is the places where we pull back and say, wait a minute, we have things that are in common.”


“…before we fight again about politics, let’s reaffirm some of our civics."



If one of the two parties does not, any longer, agree that America is America due to basic, unalienable rights, such as religious liberty,…
…..can that party claim to be American?

Religious liberty=Legal discrimination

 

[rightwinger]

Antonin Scalia could both go before the Senate and both get votes of 95 or 98. What happened between then and now is that we decided to forget what civics are and allow politics to swallow everything.

What happened was Mitch McConnell.

He made stocking the court with young, unqualified conservatives his mission as GOP lead in the Senate.

In the minority, he abused filibuster protocols to block Obama from filling seats.

In the majority, he refused to allow Obama to fill a seat and rammed through Trump appointments right up to the election.

Sadly, the Senate will never be the same and neither will the courts. The days of nominating moderate judges are gone.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Senator Sasse continued:

4. “First, a positive, grand, unifying truth about America, and that is religious liberty. Religious liberty is the basic idea that how you worship is none of the government’s business. Government can wage wars, government can write parking tickets, but government cannot save souls. Government is really important. War is important. Parking tickets are important. But your soul is something that the government can’t touch. So, whether you worship in a mosque, or a synagogue, your faith, or your lack of faith, is none of the government’s business. It’s your business, and your family’s, and your neighbor’s and all sorts of places where people break bread together and argue, but it’s not about power, it’s not about force, it’s not about the government.”




5. The choice of one’s religion ineluctably follows, either the Judeo-Christian faith of Western Civilization, or the Militant Secularism of Rousseau, Hegel and Marx. The former represents America, and the latter, a foreign doctrine.

A clear example of the denying religious choice is the Democrat’s forbidding of religious freedom to The Little Sisters of the Poor.



“ In August 2011, not long after [Obama] had repeatedly vowed not to use his health care law to violate religious liberty, his administration announced that it would require all employers to pay for and provide insurance coverage for everything from sterilization to Plan B, a drug whose own FDA label warns can destroy life.”
Obama's War on the Little Sisters of the Poor | RealClearPolitics!



“Joe Biden Promises to Force Little Sisters of the Poor to Fund Abortions”
Joe Biden Promises to Force Little Sisters of the Poor to Fund Abortions
Abortion activists were livid yesterday that the Supreme Court protected the Little Sisters of the Poor from having to fund abortions. But presidential candidate.....
www.lifenews.com

 

[rightwinger]

require all employers to pay for and provide insurance coverage for everything from sterilization to Plan B, a drug whose own FDA label warns can destroy life.”

It is none of an employers business whether you choose to use birth control or get sterilized

 

[PoliticalChic]

6. “This is the fundamental American belief. Religious liberty is one of those five great freedoms clustered in the First Amendment -- Religion, Speech, Press, Assembly and Protest -- these five freedoms that hang together, that are the basic pre-governmental rights, are sort of Civics 101 we all agree on well before we get to anything as relatively inconsequential as tax policy.

And contrary to the belief of some activists, religious liberty is not an exception. You don’t need the government’s permission to have religious liberty.”

Can the Democrat Party claim to stand for “ those five great freedoms clustered in the First Amendment”?




Obama put an anti-free speech judge on the Supreme Court, and here is the Democrat house organ demanding an end to free speech:

“Why America needs a hate speech law

…as a government official traveling around the world championing the virtues of free speech, I came to see how our First Amendment standard is an outlier. Even the most sophisticated Arab diplomats that I dealt with did not understand why the First Amendment allows someone to burn a Koran. Why, they asked me, would you ever want to protect that?

Yes, the First Amendment protects the “thought that we hate,” but it should not protect hateful speech that can cause violence by one group against another. “

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/10/29/why-america-needs-hate-speech-law/

The Democrat Party.....the antithesis of American values.

 

[Gdjjr]

Oh horse shit- the "gentleman" from across the aisle needs a dictionary- and a course in *comprehension*

The Executive (POTUS) is to "execute": carry out or put into effect (a plan, order, or course of action).

That says absolutely 0 about enFORCE-
Parking tickets are NOT "necessary", they are merely hidden taxes intended to make a criminal action out of no harmful action-
"War" is necessary ONLY in self defense.

This country is so screwed when the so-called cream of the crop make such stupid public announcements and pronounce themselves as arbiters of anything- never mind civics, or politics- Empty Suits are just that, full of only themselves and hot air wasting space that productive people could put to much better use.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Oh horse shit- the "gentleman" from across the aisle needs a dictionary- and a course in *comprehension*

The Executive (POTUS) is to "execute": carry out or put into effect (a plan, order, or course of action).

That says absolutely 0 about enFORCE-
Parking tickets are NOT "necessary", they are merely hidden taxes intended to make a criminal action out of no harmful action-
"War" is necessary ONLY in self defense.

This country is so screwed when the so-called cream of the crop make such stupid public announcements and pronounce themselves as arbiters of anything- never mind civics, or politics- Empty Suits are just that, full of only themselves and hot air wasting space that productive people could put to much better use.

Pretty vapid post.

I'm surprised at you.

 

[PoliticalChic]

7. Democrats have attacked candidates because of their religious belief….those the very same beliefs of America’s Founders.

“Religious liberty is the default assumption of our entire system, and because religious liberty is the fundamental 101 rule in American life, we don’t have religious tests. This committee isn’t in the business of deciding whether the dogma lives too loudly within someone. This committee isn’t in the business of deciding which religious beliefs are good and which religious beliefs are bad and which religious beliefs are weird.

… yet there are places where this committee has acted like it’s the job of the committee to delve into people’s religious communities.

That’s a violation of our basic civics. That’s a violation of what all of us believe together. This is not a Republican idea. It is not a Democrat idea. … it’s an American idea. … in this committee, and in this Congress, and in this constitutional structure, religious liberty is the basic truth. And whatever you, or I or Judge Barrett believe about God isn’t any of the government’s business.” Ben Sasse

 

[PoliticalChic]

 

[PoliticalChic]

8. Especially pertinent to our judicial system, a momentous difference between the two parties:


“Now a couple of terms that all of our eight-graders should know as things we should reject in common. And again, shared rejection, not Republican versus Democrat or Democrat versus Republican, but a shared American rejection. And the first is this: judicial activism. Judicial activism is the idea that judges get to advocate for or advance policies, even though they don’t have to stand for election before the voters and even though have lifetime tenure.



Judicial activism is the really bad idea that tries to convince the American people to view the judiciary as a block of progressive votes and conservative votes, Republican justices and Democratic justices. This is the confused idea that the Supreme Court is just another arena for politics. When politicians try to demand that judicial nominees, who are supposed to be fair and impartial, when politicians try to get judicial nominees to give their views on cases or to give their views on policies, to try to get them to pre-commit to certain outcomes in future court cases, we are politicizing the courts and that is wrong.

That is a violation of our oath to the Constitution. Likewise, when politicians refuse to give answers to the pretty basic question of whether or not they want to try to change the number of justices in the court, which is what court packing actually is. When they want to try to change the outcomes of what courts do in the future by trying to change the size and composition of the Court: that is a bad idea that politicizes the judiciary and reduces public trust.”
Sasse Remarks on Civics, Jackwagons, and Judges

 

[hadit]

require all employers to pay for and provide insurance coverage for everything from sterilization to Plan B, a drug whose own FDA label warns can destroy life.”

It is none of an employers business whether you choose to use birth control or get sterilized

Of course not. You want to do that, go pay somebody to do it, but don't demand that your employer has to pay for it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

require all employers to pay for and provide insurance coverage for everything from sterilization to Plan B, a drug whose own FDA label warns can destroy life.”

It is none of an employers business whether you choose to use birth control or get sterilized

Of course not. You want to do that, go pay somebody to do it, but don't demand that your employer has to pay for it.

Or find another job.

 

[PoliticalChic]

9. “You don’t like the policies in America? Great, elect different people in the House and in the Senate and in the presidency. Fire the politicians at the next election, but voters don’t have the freedom to fire the judges; therefore, we should not view judges, and we should not encourage the judges or public to view them, as ultimately politicians who hide behind their robes. The antidote to judicial activism is originalism.


Originalism, also known as textualism, is basically the old idea from eighth grade civics that judges don’t get to make laws. Judges just apply them. An originalist comes to the court with a fundamental humility and modesty about what the job is that they are there to do. An originalist doesn’t think of herself as a super legislator whose opinions will be read by angels from stone tablets in heaven.



Judicial activism, on the other hand, is the bad idea that judges’ black robes are just fake, and truthfully they are wearing red or blue partisan jerseys under there.

We should reject all such judges, and so today, when we have a nominee before us, we should be asking her questions that are not about trying to predetermine how certain cases will be judged.”
Sen. Sasse (R-NE) on Civics and Politics

Sasse Remarks on Civics, Jackwagons, and Judges

 

[Gdjjr]

Pretty vapid post.

vapid: offering nothing that is stimulating or challenging.

Look at yourself-

 

[PoliticalChic]

Pretty vapid post.

vapid: offering nothing that is stimulating or challenging.

Look at yourself-

See.....I made you learn a new word.


And, if my post was vapid.....you wouldn't be here.

Do a better job tomorrow.

 

[PoliticalChic]

8. Especially pertinent to our judicial system, a momentous difference between the two parties:


“Now a couple of terms that all of our eight-graders should know as things we should reject in common. And again, shared rejection, not Republican versus Democrat or Democrat versus Republican, but a shared American rejection. And the first is this: judicial activism. Judicial activism is the idea that judges get to advocate for or advance policies, even though they don’t have to stand for election before the voters and even though have lifetime tenure.



Judicial activism is the really bad idea that tries to convince the American people to view the judiciary as a block of progressive votes and conservative votes, Republican justices and Democratic justices. This is the confused idea that the Supreme Court is just another arena for politics. When politicians try to demand that judicial nominees, who are supposed to be fair and impartial, when politicians try to get judicial nominees to give their views on cases or to give their views on policies, to try to get them to pre-commit to certain outcomes in future court cases, we are politicizing the courts and that is wrong.

That is a violation of our oath to the Constitution. Likewise, when politicians refuse to give answers to the pretty basic question of whether or not they want to try to change the number of justices in the court, which is what court packing actually is. When they want to try to change the outcomes of what courts do in the future by trying to change the size and composition of the Court: that is a bad idea that politicizes the judiciary and reduces public trust.”
Sasse Remarks on Civics, Jackwagons, and Judges