Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Algernon Moncrieff

Algernon Moncrieff's Journal
Algernon Moncrieff's Journal
May 24, 2022

Repeal and replace the second amendment

We didn't do anything after Newtown, Columbine, Va. Tech, Parkland, Mandalay Bay, or countless other mass shootings. We won't do anything now.

The only way is to play a long game:repeal and replace the second amendment.

The second amendment gives the right to keep and bear arms but does so in the context of the need for a well-regulated militia. Somehow, "well-regulated" has been lost in translation.

The founding fathers considered enslaved Black people to be 3/5 of a person; did not grant suffrage to women; tolerated slavery; and thought that whoever came in second in the election should be Vice President. They made mistakes. They weren't perfect. The Constitution was not graven on stone tablets by the hand of God, nor was it ever designed to be a suicide pact. It needs to be changed.

Modifying the second amendment to regulate firearms sales and ownership makes sense in modern society. I would point to the Pro-Life/Pro-Forced Birth movement that has made itself a persistent, constant pain in the ass for 50 years. This issue can be won with the same level of commitment. It's a national security issue; a crime issue; a terrorism issue; a suicide issue; a domestic violence issue; an education issue. Mostly, it's a life issue. I've lost a family member and a coworker to gun violence. If America can tell a woman she's not free to use her uterus as she pleases, and America can tell us we can't say "gay", then America can damn well tell people they don't have the God-given right to blow children's heads off.

Thank you for reading this. Pray for our nation.

May 11, 2022

Fox News deals in Kremlin propaganda. So why not freeze Rupert Murdoch's assets?

The Guardian

If the west could find the courage, it would order an immediate freeze of Rupert Murdoch’s assets. His Fox News presenters and Russia’s propagandists are so intermeshed that separating the two is as impossible as unbaking a cake.

On Russian state news, as on Fox, bawling ideologues scream threats then whine about their victimhood as they incite anger and self-pity in equal measures. Its arguments range from the appropriation of anti-fascism by Greater Russian imperialists – the 40 countries supporting Ukraine were “today’s collective Hitler”, viewers were told last week – to the apocalyptic delirium of the boss of RT (Russia Today) Margarita Simonyan. Nuclear war is my “horror”, she shuddered, “but we will go to heaven, while they will simply croak”.

Russia would never give genuine western journalists airtime. But it can always find a slot for its favourite quisling: Fox News’s Tucker Carlson. He pushes out Russian propaganda lines or perhaps creates his own lies for Russia to use. Ukraine, not Russia, is the real tyranny. Nato provoked poor Vladimir Putin. The west is plotting to use biological weapons. Last week, he floated the theory that the war was not the result of an unprovoked invasion by a colonialist dictatorship but of the Biden administration’s desire to avenge Donald Trump’s victory in 2016.

It was a big hit in Moscow, reported BuzzFeed’s Julia Davis. “State TV propagandists loved it so much, Russia’s 60 Minutes included it not once, but twice in their evening broadcast – neatly bookended by the Kremlin’s war propaganda.”

Profile Information

Member since: Sun Apr 20, 2014, 12:49 AM
Number of posts: 5,790
Latest Discussions»Algernon Moncrieff's Journal