Re: Marjorie Taylor Greene "likes" the Mossad-did-it Theory

On Friday, April 2, 2021 at 8:14:21 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
> On Saturday, March 27, 2021 at 8:33:16 PM UTC-5, John Corbett wrote: 
> > On Saturday, March 27, 2021 at 4:01:51 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote: 
> > > On Wednesday, March 3, 2021 at 10:45:01 PM UTC-6, John Corbett wrote: 
> > > > On Wednesday, March 3, 2021 at 9:18:19 PM UTC-5, ajohnstone wrote: 
> > > > > Election fraud found...oops, it was by operatives of the Republican Party 
> > > > > 
> > > > > https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/four-people-including-justice-of-the-peace-arrested-on-150-counts-of-voter-fraud/ar-BB1dZivx 
> > > > > 
> > > > > But the electoral system's safeguards appear to work 
> > > > The problem with that argument is we don't know how many people didn't get 
> > > > caught. 
> > > 
> > > So, you think a reasonable way to proceed forward is to create voting 
> > > "protections" to solve a problem that has not been identified? 
> > > 
> > My house has never been burglarized but that's no reason to leave my doors 
> > unlocked. I've never had a house fire but I carry homeowner's insurance. 
> > I've never faced a deadly attack but I carry a gun in case I do. The idea 
> > is to create safeguards before something bad happens, not after.
> These new restrictive laws may stop a few cases of isolated fraud (which 
> tend to always occur, anyway), but they dramatically reduce the number of 
> people who will be able to vote - mostly tailoring the restrictions to 
> target communities of low-income minorities. 
> 

These laws don't prevent anyone from voting. They are reasonable measures 
to ensure that the people who are voting are entitled to do so. If people 
don't vote because they don't want to do the few simple things that are 
necessary, that's on them. They have no one to blame but themselves.

> In Arizona, they are actually trying to make a law that the legislators 
> can simply overrule the results of the election and select their own set 
> of electors. 

The Constitution already empowers the state legislatures to do just that. 
It is not a constitutional requirement that a popular vote even be 
conducted. In the earliest days of the republic, it often wasn't. In 2000, 
the Florida legislature was prepared to award the state's electors to Bush 
if the courts hadn't resolved the matter in time for the Electoral College 
voting. They were up against a hard deadline and Florida could have been 
left out of the voting in that event.

> 
> You say your house has never been burglarized; yet, you still lock the 
> doors. These new laws are somewhat Draconian, however. It's not simply 
> "locking the doors." It would be a better comparison if you said, "My 
> house has never been burglarized, but I still want the police to drive by 
> my house every hour on the hour to make sure everything is OK. My house 
> has never been on fire, but I still want the fire department to have a 
> truck in my neighborhood, 24/7." The protection does more widespread harm 
> than good because it depletes resources putting many OTHER houses in 
> danger. Sure, it's great for YOUR house but it would not serve the greater 
> good. 
> 

What is Draconian about the laws being considered or that have already 
been passed?