I think I understand your point and there is no end of evidence to support it. And the hypocrisy. ie Jim Crow voter registration literacy tests. Registration is supposed to facilitate voting but White Supremacists used it to deny Black persons their constitutional right to equal representation.
I think I understand your point and there is no end of evidence to support it. And the hypocrisy. ie Jim Crow voter registration literacy tests. Registration is supposed to facilitate voting but White Supremacists used it to deny Black persons their constitutional right to equal representation.
But laws cannot be written so as to effectively legislate and adjudicate all existing circumstances, let alone potential circumstances. I think The Founders translated The Scientific Method into an agreed legal framework for good governance. The laws as hypotheses to be tested, observed, and revised. I think they were sincere in their aspirations.
I think the Republican Party has become entirely insincere. Since at least Newt Gingrich's emphasis on rhetoric unmoored from reality. And with the advent of such as Rand Paul and Taylor Greene, the party has become dangerously frivolous. Using the protocols of government, only to obstruct government.
Leonard Leo's Becket Law speech and William Barr's Notre Dame speech exemplify the fallacious rhetoric of American religious extremism. And the extremists working to repurpose a democratic republic as a clerical fascist state.
Lin, this is a good point, and I appreciate you making it. It is easy to fall into cynicism about the vagueness of rule making. A component of rule making is that the parties are intended to act in good faith. Yet humans fall into goalpost-moving behavior when they are not acting in good faith, but righteously insist they are. We, again, are in such a moment.
I think I understand your point and there is no end of evidence to support it. And the hypocrisy. ie Jim Crow voter registration literacy tests. Registration is supposed to facilitate voting but White Supremacists used it to deny Black persons their constitutional right to equal representation.
But laws cannot be written so as to effectively legislate and adjudicate all existing circumstances, let alone potential circumstances. I think The Founders translated The Scientific Method into an agreed legal framework for good governance. The laws as hypotheses to be tested, observed, and revised. I think they were sincere in their aspirations.
I think the Republican Party has become entirely insincere. Since at least Newt Gingrich's emphasis on rhetoric unmoored from reality. And with the advent of such as Rand Paul and Taylor Greene, the party has become dangerously frivolous. Using the protocols of government, only to obstruct government.
Leonard Leo's Becket Law speech and William Barr's Notre Dame speech exemplify the fallacious rhetoric of American religious extremism. And the extremists working to repurpose a democratic republic as a clerical fascist state.
https://www.becketlaw.org/leonard-leo-speech-2017-canterbury-medal-gala/
https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/attorney-general-william-p-barr-delivers-remarks-law-school-and-de-nicola-center-ethics
Lin, this is a good point, and I appreciate you making it. It is easy to fall into cynicism about the vagueness of rule making. A component of rule making is that the parties are intended to act in good faith. Yet humans fall into goalpost-moving behavior when they are not acting in good faith, but righteously insist they are. We, again, are in such a moment.