WHY IS BIDEN NOT FORCED TO STAND DOWN UNDER 25th AMENDMENT??

D

Dachshund

Verified User
Every sane person in America can see that Joe Biden is mentally incapacitated to the point where he is totally unable to personally discharge the duties and responsibilities of a President of the United States in a competent manner. Right? No one in the US needs to be a physician to see this.


So why are his doctors allowed to get away with continuing to issue Biden bogus health certificates ?


The way we see it on the news in Australia is: "F**k (!) Look at this... the Americans have got a complete and utter psychiatric zombie rattling around in the White House. Why are they letting it go on (?) - it's scary !Why aren't they doing anything ?!


Well, why aren't you ?! The situation is beyond dangerous - it's bloody terrifying ! I mean, do ANY of you Yanks know who exactly is running your country ? Is it Pocahontas and "The Squad"? Is it the OBAMAS? Is it the CLINTONS? Is it "Porky Pig"?


You Yanks need to clean your act up and at least get a President who can count past 3 !




Dachshund - the WONDER HOUND

DLM....Dachshund Lives Matter !!
 
Last edited:
Dachshund said:
Every sane person in America can see that Joe Biden is mentally incapacitated to the point where he is totally unable to personally discharge the duties and responsibilities of a President of the United States in a competent manner. Right? No one in the US needs to be a physician to see this.


So why are his doctors allowed to get away with continuing to issue Biden bogus health certificates ?


The way we see it on the news in Australia is: "F**k (!) Look at this... the Americans have got a complete and utter psychiatric zombie rattling around in the White House. Why are they letting it go on (?) - it's scary !Why aren't they doing anything ?!


Well, why aren't you ?! The situation is beyond dangerous - it's bloody terrifying ! I mean, do ANY of you Yanks know who exactly is running your country ? Is it Pocahontas and "The Squad"? Is it the OBAMAS? Is it the CLINTONS? Is it "Porky Pig"?


You Yanks need to clean your act up and at least get a President who can count past 3 !




Dachshund - the WONDER HOUND

DLM....Dachshund Lives Matter !!
Click to expand...

You are by far the goddam stupidest person on the forum.
 
Doc Dutch said:
You Down Under dumbasses gave up your guns. :rofl2:
Click to expand...


We don't have kids schools getting shot up by maniacs every month.



We don't have ANY gun crime ( well, put it this way- it is EXTREMELY rare) - people here are not afraid to walk the streets of their cities.



We don't have "Shooting Galleries" like, Chicago, where there is so much f**king stray lead in the air decent people can't walk safely in their public parks. (A US journalist was, in fact, recently hit and wounded by a stray bullet while strolling through a public park in Chicago with a colleague, so I am not making this up !).



The Founders who wrote your Second Amendment were ABSOLUTELY NOT[/B ] thinking about anything to do with allowing Joe Six-Pack (i.e. the average, ordinary US citizen) "the Right" to own/bear firearms for personal, self-defence (that thought would NOT have even crossed their minds at the time they were drafting the 2nd Amendment). Rather, they were thinking about the issue of organising decentralised STATE MILITIAS for defending the republic against any invading foreign enemies in the future (because they were TERRIFIED of the idea of allowing their federal/(central) government to build up a big, standing army).



Consider, as well....In 1791, when the 2nd Amendment was ratified, America was still a largely rural/agrarian society. Of course, "Farmer Brown" has a musket on his property - he always had done. America was still in the process of being settled and many people lived on the land. People like farmers had always owned firearms because theyNEEDED them to hunt for food, to defend themselves from wild animal and ward off attacks by Red Injuns. So, every bastard in America owned a musket/firearm of some kind, in 1971, because it was taken for granted that they were a basic necessity of life - and no doubt they were. That's why the Founders who drafted the Second Amendment were focussed at all on the idea of formalising of a Contitutional right for the everyday, ordinary, American "Charlie Brown" to possess and bear firearm/s. Because "Charlie Browns" ALREADY DID "possess and bear" their own firearm/s - OF COURSE they did - they always had done since 1619. And no one gave a flying f**k about it - IT WASN'T AN ISSUE because everyone in America at the time agreed that he'd be crazy NOT to own and have a good, reliable firearm at hand. Right?



Also, in 1791, there was a vast expanse of territory beyond the (former) Colonies in the East that was still untamed, virgin land, and ALREADY lots of Americans who had been settled in the former colonies were beginning to head out into the "Wild West" to seek their fortune. It was wild, virgin land and life on the Western Frontier could be very dangerous; naturally, everyman on the Frontier had his own muskets/rifes/handguns with him to hunt food and to protect his family from grizzly bears and poisonous snakes, from thieves and other criminals, and wild tribes of Red Injuns who hated Whities and whatever other dangers he might encounter as he drove his wagon Westward into the unknown. There was no Police Force to protect the pioneers as they struggled Westward across the North American continent. The drafters of the 2nd Amendment weren't creating it to make sure that Joe Six-Pack could own a firearm for his self-defence BECAUSE in 1791 - OF COURSE JOE F**KING SIX-PACK WAS ALLOWED TO OWN A FIREARM FOR SELF DEFENCE They wouldn't be writing an Amendment to the Constitution in order to state the obvious. No, the 2nd Amendment was PURELY to do with the issue of organising (decentralised) MILITIA for the purpose of providing defense agaist any future invasion of the republic by a hostile, armed, foreign enemy.



To continue....



You idiot !! Do you HONESTLY think the Founders wanted US citizens of the future to be able to purchase automatic weapons (like AK-47s or ArmaLite M-16s) for self-defence (??!!) - or even ArmaLite AR-15 semi-automatics (rifles that have such an incredible muzzle velocity, any human being hit by a round at any distance to 400m from where it was fired, has his/his guts turned to "Jello" instantly). Please tell me why the average, everyday, American - the ordinary "Charlie Brown" - who lives in the 'burbs or in his home town is able to purchase an automatic firearm like an AK-47? or an ArmaLite M-16 ? What POSSIBLE use could he have for weapons like these ? I'd be very interested to know.



The Founders/Framers did NOT envision a future republic that would be saturated with countless millions of "loose" f**king fire-arms. They were Enlightenment thinkers - men of reason - they did not believe violence was an appropriate way for ordinary, everyday people to go about resolving their disputes. They understood that some human beings were criminally insane and would intentionally murder innocent persons with firearms they owned. But when that happened and the perpetrator, was apprehended and found guilty the authorities, the gunman would be "hanged by the neck until dead" or thrown behind bars for life - where life meant life ( i.e. for the term of the killer's natural life)


In short, the American Founders would all be horrified and deeply disappointed at the problem with gun violence/crime in the US today.


I've got no idea how America could tackle the serious problem it's got with gun violence (e.g. homicides) today, in 2023. The way I see it, it is a very, very complex/multifaceted/pervasive problem. For example in America Blacks commit a hugely disproportionate number of gunshot murders/homicides. The reason is that the average Black in America has an IQ of 85, which is too low (and not just in my opinion, but that of experts in clinical psychology, etc) for them to be able to own and use firearms unsupervised, a in safe and responsible manner. But there's NO WAY any American politician would ever dare to say we are going to permanently disarm all Blacks with a measured IQ score of under 85 points. Can you imagine the response to a policy proposal like this ???? The entire American left and all of America's liberals would go off their F**king tits and probably start dancing naked fandangos down every Main Street in the USA.




Anyhoo, a [I}genuinely[/I] CIVILIZED Western society like Australia{/B], does not have its citizens armed to the f**king teeth with deadly firearms - it's antisocial. Thats the kind of thing you see in primitive, hairy-assed, sub-Saharan African states like the Congo. Which reminds me, when it's White flight time comes for all you Whitey Yanks - (and it's coming fast) - you are welcome to resettle in Australia, but you will NOT be allowed to bring your guns with you. Got it ?



And do you get it, Uncle ? That is, becoming a happy nation in the modern World isn't supposed to be a game where the countries that have got the most guns in circulation in their societies are the winners.




Dachshund - the Wonder Hound

DLM....Dachshund Lives Matter !!
 
Last edited:
Your mistake, and most foreigners do this, is thinking the founders were unified in everything.

Many founders, almost half were against the bill of rights altogether

The absolutely only thing they ever agreed on unanimously was the term of the president
 
Tinkerpeach said:
Your mistake, and most foreigners do this, is thinking the founders were unified in everything.

Many founders, almost half were against the bill of rights altogether

The absolutely only thing they ever agreed on unanimously was the term of the president
Click to expand...



Yes, but when you are committed to democratic principles of government, you can never expect to get 100% agreement on any issue or policy. In any case, Democracy is a far from perfect system of government.

The "Bill of Rights" (i.e. the first 10 Amendments to the Constitution) had a rough ride, but it did ultimately win majority support. If it didn't it would not have been ratified in 1791. Right?

I just think the 2nd Amendment was VERY sloppily written, which surprises me because the framers were eloquent wordsmiths. Anyhow, the imprecision and sloppy ambiguity of the wording in the 2nd Amendment has ended up causing a tremendous amount of trouble and grief in America today - 232 years after the 2nd was ratified (!!)


PS: It was James Madison who "physically" wrote down the 2nd Amendment. Today it can be technically interpreted - especially by legal shysters- as giving all Americans the RIGHT to own and bear arms. I think in the late 18th century when Madison wrote the 2nd Amendment, its meaning must have been clear and unequivocal to his contemporaries? That is, it must have seemed obvious to those who read it, Madison was referring {B}SOLEY[/B] to the issue of ensuring local armed militia could be organised for the defence of the republic if it were invaded by a foreign enemy force.



IMO, the problem with the 2 nd Amendment today is that educated people in America spoke differently in 1791 to the way we do now. I mean, in the 1790s, Americans like the Founders expressed themselves very differently - you know, like, in an "old - fashioned" way. They often used different kinds of common phrases, different word orders in simple sentences and different syntax compared to what modern-day, native English-speakers like you and I generally use now to communicate the same kind of ideas. Even simple, plain, English words that everyday Americans used in the Founding era often had "somewhat different" meanings to what they do now in the US in 2023. I mean, if you were magically transported back in time to America, to the year 1788, to have Sunday dinner with Benjamin Franklin and his family at his home, you would have to be careful what you said. And telling jokes from 2023 would probably not be a good idea. Also, how would you explain such 2023 US politics to Ben as: LGBTQAAI+ identity politics, or the outcry/controversy re "transgender kids" or the Woke movement, (or Hunter Biden:whoa: ) over dinner ?



Dachshund - the WONDER HOUND

DLM....Dachshund Lives Matter !!
 
Last edited:
Dachshund said:
Yes, but when you are committed to democratic principles of government, you can never expect to get 100% agreement on any issue or policy. In any case, Democracy is a far from perfect system of government.

The "Bill of Rights" (i.e. the first 10 Amendments to the Constitution) did ultimately win majority support. If it didn't it would not have been ratified in 1791. Right?

I just think the 2nd Amendment was VERY sloppily written, which surprises me because the framers were very eloquent wordsmiths. Anyhow the imprecision and sloppy ambiguity of the 2nd Amendment has ended up causing a tremendous amount of trouble and grief in America today - 232 years after it was ratified (!!)



Dachshund - the WONDER HOUND

DLM....Dachshund Lives Matter !!
Click to expand...

Fuck democracy. We aren't a democracy.
 
Guille said:
We never have been. We are not and never have been a democracy. North Korea is though, maybe you should move there.
Click to expand...

America is a Democratic Republic country so yes it's a form of democracy. Maybe it's YOU who should move to North Korea?
 
Guille said:
No.

Well...right now it is because your vote doesn't matter and that should bother you but that has no bearing on the point you were trying to make.
Click to expand...

Like I said in post #12. And yes it does bother me.

We are supposed to be a form of democracy where our votes matter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top