
AGCS President / “Soft Left Gay for State Terror” / MHFA / #NeverKissedAWhig / Gallienite & Cassandrist
Guernsey
Joined February 2011
- Tweets13.1K
- Following1.2K
- Followers354
- Likes71.2K
Pinned Tweet
The Labour Party is 120 years old today, I thought I’d do a thread of some of its greatest achievements for which we can all be proud
It has become impossible to have reasonable discourse with leftists. They purposeful misunderstand and reject conversational context so they can make political grandstanding statements
Eliot retweeted
נתניהו הפסיד. אני יודע לספור עד 120. 65 זה יותר מ-55. ככה עובדת הדמוקרטיה הישראלית. נקודה.
תמונת המציאות חייבת ללמד אותנו לקח אחד מהדהד: אין לנו עתיד כאן אם לא נפסיק לפחד. ואם לא נפסיק עם הגזענות. אסור לנו לקבל יותר את החלוקה הגזענית של נתניהו בין קולות יהודיים לקולות ערביים.
הקול של אזרח ישראלי שמצביע בטירה שווה בדיוק כמו הקול של אזרח ישראלי שמצביע בגבעת שמואל. לא פחות. לא בערך. בדיוק.
מי שמנסה למחוק את הקולות של האזרחים הערבים, נכנע לנתניהו ומוותר על ישראל.
ועכשיו בואו נדבר על ציונות.
בגוש של נתניהו יושבים 16 חברי כנסת ממפלגות חרדיות לא ציוניות, שמקדמות השתמטות המונית בזמן שהילדים שלנו נלחמים ונהרגים.
אם נתניהו מתעקש לספור רק רוב ציוני, שיגרע קודם כול מהגוש שלו את 16 חברי הכנסת של המפלגות החרדיות הלא־ציוניות.
הם לא יטיפו לנו על ציונות.
לגוש השינוי יש רוב ציוני: 49 מול 39.
לגוש השינוי יש רוב ישראלי: 65 מול 55.
יש לנו רוב. יש לנו אחריות. ויש לנו הזדמנות להקים ממשלת שינוי בשותפות עם אזרחי ישראל הערבים. ממשלה שתשרת את כל אזרחי ישראל.
עכשיו צריך אומץ. צריך מנהיגות. צריך להפסיק לפחד ולהתחיל לפעול.
ממשלת שינוי עכשיו!
No consensus was built by royal commission.
Attlee and Thatcher left legacies because they implemented reform and let the results justify themselves
I don’t understand why people are surprised by all of this. One is a competent politician the other was a floundering technocrat
Yeah I think the person sharing not knowing geography almost certainly doesn’t excuse the actions of the rioters
The problem with these early election takes is they ignore the visible trend of the Tories sharp growth. An election campaign shifts voting patterns as decisions actualise. During the last election labours lead fell by 10ptp
It’s the rule of “and what are you gonna do about it?”. Wins every time - even if the courts rule something you just ignore them
Everyone thinks it's Article V allowing the Constitution to be amended, but in reality it's Article III.
Theoretically, nothing stops a party with a majority in Congress and the White House from abolishing all lower courts, establishing new courts in their place, doubling the size of the Supreme Court, and, in doing so, gaining absolute control over the Judiciary at all levels of government and thus eliminating any opposition to whatever policies they'd like to impose.
You want to sue Congress when it grants sweeping powers to the President? The lower courts don't even stay the law.
You appeal to the packed Supreme Court? They refuse to hear the case.
You complain that the President and Congress have overstayed their term in office? The courts rule that the Constitution does not mandate Federal elections every two years during a state of emergency.
You take to the streets and protest? The President declares a state of rebellion and Congress suspends habeas corpus.
Any political party sufficiently united in its desire to completely destroy the political system, and having obtained even the slimmest majorities in both the legislative and executive branches, can essentially overthrow any republican system of government.
All of this is procedurally allowed. There is no constitutional order, including our own, that can ultimately guarantee its own continuation through constitutional procedures alone.
Land value and general wealth aside. Presenting an influencer couple’s home as “a construction worker” and comparing with an conceptualised Spaniard is just nonsense
TCPA47 obsessives are such a larp. They refuse to acknowledge the majority of their disdain originates from subsequent legislative changes
The first option isn’t using the US constitution to become a dictatorship is it effectively using the constitution to amend itself into a different constitution
It is in fact exactly what we have had in Westminster for well over a decade and is frankly the exact opposite of what we need
Except she’s a minister responsible to parliament. Major policy announcements like this occur in parliament so they can be followed by parliamentary questions. This is the foundation of the accountability in our system of government



















