Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "The Problem With Amy Coney Barrett And 'Originalism'" video.

@Venom_9390 it is the process, checks and balances. If democrats had control of the Senate they would have had the ability to block ACB. They did not have the Senate though.
3
There is a method to change the Constitution, and the process is hard for a reason.
3
@danicabrice4205 republicans controlled the senate at the time. So they had the ability to stop Obama. That is how the checks and balance system works.
2
@Venom_9390 how are they going to take away your healthcare? Also, a lot lost their healthcare when democrat governors decided to go into lock down and remain locked down despite low cases. Along with that, many in nursing homes are saying they rather die from covid than being alone, but democrat governors are preventing visitors from seeing them.
2
@danicabrice4205 both sides have hypocritical moments. Welcome to politics. Also, this election is going to be very contested and will go to the courts. We will most likely not know the results until January as this election is going to be Gore v Bush on steroids with many states as opposed to just one. Thus, an odd number of justices is needed.
2
Money is speech.
2
@Zunile03scape what is the difference between me placing a sign up supporting a candidate or donating money to them so they can use it to create an ad? What is the difference between someone like Kyle giving certain politicians free advertisement as opposed to him giving them money to use it to create ads? Or pay for people to put those stupid advertisements on my door handle? People have different ways of supporting candidates. Some donate money for their cause. It isn't quid pro quo. Sure, if I donate money to a politician it would be because I support some of their policies, but how is that different than if I were to, without costing those politicians a dime, put a sign up in my yard? There isn't any difference. In both cases I am not directly gaining anything from it.
2
@J4535-b9p Uh, you again. It is not an idiotic comparison. Unless someone is receiving direct favors from a donation, no law is broken. Take away the money aspect, someone like Kyle or Cenk of TYT have larger voices than I do. Should we limit how much air time they get? Many in the media will say certain things, politically, in favor of certain politicians. Do you not think they are doing so to profit off of it? That is the fine line. Unless there is quid pro quo nothing illegal is happening. Yes, the rich will donate money to politicians whose policies they agree with the most. But unless they receive some personal kick back from it, no laws are broken. No different than when some volunteer their time to go door to door putting advertisements on door handles in support of a certain candidate. They have nothing directly given to them. "A youtube channel is NOT the same as giving money to a candidate. Neither is putting a sign outside. If this is to hard for you to understand, let me explain." They are the same. Candidates need money to pay for advertisements. "Giving millions of dollars to try the best to lobby for deals for yourself which influences candidates do make a huge difference demonstrated by papers and voting records." Except, it isn't lobbying. It is a donation so they can have money to place adds, create signs for people to place in their yards, to pay for people to campaign for them. You seem confused. Knowing you through previous conversations, I am not surprised. You are confusing someone giving money to a politician so they can campaign to giving money to a politician to do special favors for them. The latter is quid pro quo. The former is legal and is no different than if I were to wear my Trump 2020 mask. They use that money to advertise, to pay to hold rallies, etc. You know, air time for ads cost money, traveling to hold rallies cost money, holding rallies in general cost money. Where does that money come from? Donors. Money is speech. But say instead of me donating millions to a candidate, I use that millions to give free advertisement of that candidate. How is that any different? It isn't. Or say instead of giving them money, say someone uses their private plane to fly that candidate to their next rally for free. How is that different? This is the problem with far leftists like yourself. You cannot see the little things and thus you make these grand standing arguments thinking you sound smart, but you aren't. So ban campaign donations. The rich will always find another loophole.
2
@TheBighatter the founders were arguably fascist. Many were slave owners. Also, not every colonists supporting going to war with the British nor supporting separating from them and becoming an independent nation. So basically they were forcing their will on people in the Colonies that did not want what they wanted.
2
That is the problem, the left cannot take the L. Ever since Trump was elected all they done is cry. I said that if Trump loses this election it will basically be people saying "fine, give the crying baby their damn rattle so they shut up and we can get our lives back". The democrats have been crying. Thus, we can have Biden win, let those career politicians continue to succeed for doing nothing, and let the rest of the population go back to sporting events, bars, night clubs, etc.
1
There is a method to change the Constitution. Also, judges are there to interpret the Constitution.
1
@Zunile03scape that is quid pro quo which has always been illegal. There is a difference between that as opposed to donating to a campaign so they can use that money to ads, or travel, etc. It is a fine line but that is that is meant by money being speech. As Ben Shapiro said to Cenk, what would Bernie rather have? Money from Cenk or an entire youtube channel kissing his ass everyday? Both are the same. What is the difference between me placing a sign in my yard or giving money to a politician I like that they end up using to create an ad? Nothing.
1
@adamdavis1648 whether you put up a sign in your yard or you donate money, chances are you support that person's policies. The situation is if you are directly gaining from it. That is where quid pro quo comes it. Someone can donate millions to a politician but as along as they are not directly gaining anything from it than no laws are broken. And when I say directly gaining, I mean that certain politician creates laws catered directly to that individual. You say some people's voice are a whisper. OK, who has a larger voice in politics, you and I, or people like Kyle and Cenk? The latter two have youtube channels that get a decent amount of views. Their voices are way larger than us. So should we limit how much air time they get?
1
@Zunile03scape they are not paying them to change policy. They are donating money to them because they agree with their policy. That is the point. It is not quid pro quo. If a rich person was giving money directly to a politician that ended up changing their policies that gave kick backs to that rich person then yes, that is a problem. But that is not what is happening. If you want to go down the route you do then zero donations should be allowed. That means all the people that donated $20 to Bernie Sanders should not be allowed. Do you agree with that?
1
@J4535-b9p are they getting direct benefits? If so, that is quid pro quo which is illegal. The fact is they aren't. Yes, a rich person or a company, or even unions donating money to a politician is doing so because they agree with their policies. But they are not directly getting some benefits. That is the law. I know complex things like the law are a struggle for you, but that is how it works. "Again you keep making these moronic comparisons even though they aren't the same. Speaking on YouTube, the street or volunteering is not giving to the candidate. You are attempting to speak to the population with literal free speech. You are literally using the 1st amendment in its totality to speak to the population. You aren't paying the politician a dime and you are actually using your own time to speak to people. " It is the same. Say I run some major news source, or a youtube channel that gets millions of views. Instead of charging a candidate money to have them place an ad on my show, I just support them. That will be millions dollars worth of free advertisements. Economics is a hard subject for you, I know. But when you see a political ad, guess what, it wasn't free. It cost that candidate money. But I know far leftists like you feel everything is free. Guess what, it isn't. Please learn the law and what quid pro quo actually is. Cheers
1
@J4535-b9p learn economics bud, and the law. If a rich person gives money to politician to help them out with their campaign that is not illegal as there is no quid pro quo. I know complex things are challenging for you but you have to understand this. 'Jesus how can you be this dense? If you choose to openly support the candidate and use your airtime to support them, that is completely fine. This is because everyone literally has the ability to go on youtube or other sources to speak openly. " Yeah, just like people can ignore adds by politicians. You are desperate. Unless there is direct benefits being done, which is quid pro quo, there is nothing illegal. So I I were to donate a million dollars to a politician for them to use to create ads or pay for campaigning, or if I were to use that million dollars, instead, to give free advertisement to that politician, what is the difference? Nothing I know these things are very complex and hard for you to understand, but trust me, you are out of your league here bud. Go back to pretending you are a medical student, despite the fact that your girlfriend could not understand Colorado law, and despite the fact that you do not understand basic research in the medical field, and let the big boys handle this. Cheers.
1
@J4535-b9p I am responding. You simply do not understand the law. Sorry that law, like healthcare, are difficult concepts for you to understand. Unless there is quid pro quo there is nothing illegal going on. If you donate $10 to a politician whose policies you agree with, that is no different than putting a sign out in your yard Just like if you were to donate a few thousand dollars to them or commit an entire youtube channel to them. Both are the same. Please learn the law. I know it is complex and challenging, but please, try. No wonder you could not make it through medical school. Cheers.
1
@J4535-b9p I am not avoiding studies. With any law there is a thin line. So if I donated 20 dollars to a politician am I influencing their policies? Based on your standards I am. But in reality, I am one of many people donating to a politician whose policies I agree with. And with that money they can do ads, travel, etc. all things that cost money. Again, economics is a challenging topic for you, I get it. But you cannot get things for free just because you are a politician. Ads still cost money.
1
@adamdavis1648 if you do not limit airtime but limit donations guess what rich people will do? They will just give out free air time for politicians. You guys are crazy at this point in that you are going vague rules that rich people are going to find a way to exploit in one way or another. When will you learn?
1
@KarlEriksenopinion if you get money out of politics a politician like Bernie Sanders will never have a chance. You do know that, right? And rich people will find other ways to help out politicians such as giving them free airtime or letting them use their private plane. This is another example of the left trying to attack people much smarter than them.
1
@J4535-b9p we have had many conversations where you have proven that you, like most far leftists, are simply trying to take on people who are way smarter than you can ever dream of becoming. Ok, stop the donations. The rich will find another way such as giving politicians free airtime or letting them use their own person private plane to travel. Just like the minimum wage, while the idea is to help poor people, business owners find a way to avoid the extra cost. Leftists are trying so hard to get ahead but they are taking on people much smarter than them. No wonder your girlfriend could not understand the Colorado healthcare law, and no wonder you failed med school.
1
@KarlEriksenopinion so small politicians like Bernie Sanders cannot receive any donations?
1
@adamdavis1648 " Anyone can put as much content on YouTube as they want" Not true. Kyle and Cenk have established channels on youtube. If I were to create my own youtube channel my views would be far less than TYT or what Kyle gets.
1
@J4535-b9p so you have given up, just like your girlfriend, and you, cannot read and understand the Colorado healthcare bill. And just like you failed med school. Yes, someone giving ten dollars is the same as someone giving 50 million dollars. You have to be consistent. I know far leftists like yourself do not understand this, but if you make vague rules what ends up happening are loopholes. So a $10 donation is OK. So a rich person makes a million $10 donations, there is the loophole. Instead of one big donation, they make many small donations. When are you guys going to learn you are battling people much smarter than you. No wonder you failed med school and no wonder your and your girlfriend could not read the Colorado law and understand it.
1
@adamdavis1648 I can start with the amount of money I have now but then eventually become rich. I goes both ways. The rich has as much influence as they do because people decide to buy their product. So there is that.
1
@KarlEriksenopinion define a "large donation". I, personally, cannot donate a dime as I am in debt due to student loans. You say $100, why not limit it to $5?
1
@J4535-b9p love how you showed, in the past, that you do not understand basic laws, that you had to change you name on youtube, and yet still failed med school Cheers
1
@KarlEriksenopinion you concept of the $100 limit is the same as the min. wage. In the end the people with money will find a way to find loopholes. If you limit donations to $100 rich people will find loopholes just like business owners will find loopholes in the min. wage. You are making vague laws with a lot of wiggle room. That is the problem.
1
@J4535-b9p you see, you claim you be in the medical field (you aren't), but I am a PhD candidate in physical chemistry. I am also an MBA student and I am required to be diverse and read a lot of material from many experts. In one of my current course we are reading Switch by Chip and Dan Heath. One thing they bring up is the concept of wiggle room. One issue I see with the far left, like you, is the "wiggle room". You have vague laws to try to stop certain things but your laws are so vague it creates loopholes (which is also discussed in that book). I am going to be blunt with you, and this is for your own good, be honest with yourself. You are not a medical student. You are not as smart as you think you are. Sorry that I, who reads essentially a book a day, and can analyze experts, is much more intelligent than you. But for your own mental health, stop being delusional. As soon as you realize that you will be much happier.
1
Prophet I have other things to do. I was recently hospitalized to take care of an issue I have to deal with personally. After that I had to catch up on my class work along with my actual job. You know, I have actual responsibilities in life.
1
Prophet Also, cases are down.
1
@J4535-b9p this is where Jonathan hides as he always does just like he did in med school, which he failed
1
Prophet nothing I say has been debunked. That is why you resort to copying and pasting the same comment you do. I do have other things in my life. Cases are still low in those states. You are desperate as a corona bro. Come March no one will be talking about this virus anymore. I will remind you of that showing how foolish you are.
1
Prophet actually, lately, I have not been debating people. I have been busy. And cases are low.
1
@J4535-b9p sorry you failed med school. That is not my fault. I gave you advice to stop being delusional. The sooner you stop being being that the bettter.
1
@J4535-b9p I love how you have no actual rebuttal. Again, sorry you failed out of the school you went to. I know it is challenging. I am a semester away from getting my degrees. Not everyone has that ability though. Again, my advice, stop being delusional.
1
Prophet this has been recent. Look around two or three weeks ago, I was not around. Why? I was in the hospital and was not allowed to have access to my phone/computer. Cases are down in states like FL, TX, and GA. Why? They reached herd immunity. Also, deaths are low as well which was the original goal. Why are you only concerned about cases? If cases are high but people are not dying there is no problem.
1
@KarlEriksenopinion a couple of issues. One, if you limit the amount of money rich people will find another way. As I said, they donate their private plane for travel, or donate some of their land for a rally. Consider what happened recently in NJ. The gym owners who tried to open up their gym finally were able to when a politician labeled it as one of his campaign offices, as the law was that gyms cannot be open but campaigning sites can be. They simply changed what their company was. Next, a lot of times it is not worth going after someone who breaks the law. Have you seen the movie "Liar Liar" with Jim Carey? There is one scene where he gets his car from the impound and there is a huge scratch in it. When asked what he was going to do about it he simply said nothing because he would end up taking the company to a small claims court, where they most likely won't show up, spend all day there and get nothing. I ran into the same situation with a car dealership. I tried to exchange my car but on the title my dad was listed as TOD, transferable on death. They claimed he had to be there to sign the paper work as well (he did not according to all laws in every state). I could have took them to court saying they violated the paper work I signed, but for $200 (what they were offering me for my car) is not worth it. I took the car to a company called Pick and Pull that took it off my hands for a hundred dollars in a matter of minutes. So instead of fighting a company that would have taken hours, I just moved on. The same is with police and the DA, at times you learn some hills are not worth dying on.
1
@custos3249 the colonists were paying less taxes than the British were. And again, many were against the war.
1