China Joe Biden is the enemy of the constitution

““Nothing I’m about to recommend in any way impinges on the Second Amendment,” Biden said. “They’re phony arguments suggesting that these are Second Amendment rights in what we’re talking about.”

Biden added that “no amendment to the Constitution is absolute. You can’t yell ‘fire’ in a crowded movie theater and call it freedom of speech. From the very beginning, you couldn’t own any weapon you wanted to own. From the very beginning of the Second Amendment existed, certain people weren’t allowed to have weapons.”

Every part of his statement is utterly absurd.” Harsanyi

Comment: It is now clear that Joe Biden is an enemy of the federal system of government in the United States. He seeks dictatorial power and intends, if allowed, to make subjects of us all rather than citizens of a country of limited government and divided sovereignty, a sovereignty divided among; the federal government, the states and the citizenry.

He is, IMO, deliberately flooding the country with illegal immigrants in the belief that when given the vote they will be so ignorant as to to cede power to a one party dictatorship reminiscent of all the worst features of the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany. The Soviet Union was a tyranny of the “woke” and Nazi Germany was an unholy alliance between adventurist militarism and big capital. How significant is his senility in this determination to form such a tyranny? None can tell at this point, but as Bill Bennett stated yesterday on the TeeVee China Joe’s open hostility to Georgia, Florida and Texas demonstrates his long history of hatred for the American Southland. As a preliminary to his desired consolidation of power he seeks to disarm the citizenry. Chairman Mao would have been proud of him. pl

This entry was posted in government, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to China Joe Biden is the enemy of the constitution

  1. Warlord says:

    Dear Col. Lang,

    Have you read anything by Wesley Yang? I feel like conservatism is in a bad place right now due to the same old issues, but coupled with the new issues of social media manipulation and globalization.

    Yang posted an interesting theory to Twitter regarding Ivy League admissions, which I think explains how academia contributes to the on-going divide-and-conquer war on American identity:

    “People who understand the social construction of race are engineering a new elite ethnogenesis: assortative mating at Ivies will create racially mixed elite overclass as remaining legacy and athlete whites mate with “POC” majority.”

    It’s become apparent that elite institutions are preventing the social mobility of the top performing students on the basis of race, while simultaneously admitting underperformers based on race.

    People network and couple in college. These elite institutions especially produce the leaders of tomorrow, who go on to occupy roles in Hollywood, the media, government, etc.

    This represents meaningful evidence of a not-so subtle attempt to fragment the population in favor of this establishment Left agenda.

    I say ‘establishment’ because these folks are still pro-Israel, pro-corporation, etc. They’re not progressives. They want performative wokeness, not real change.

    Promoting decisiveness along racial lines is important to them to consolidate power.

    Yang argues:

    “Now, is the Princeton admissions office consciously on board with executing this vision? No, of course not. But it is no accident that the institutions most explicitly aligned with anti-racist doctrine of the sort written above are accepting 68 percent non-whites.”

    That is from an Asian-American man who writes for The Tablet, a liberal Zionist publication.

    This frank discussion on race and power relations in America is being had by minorities now. Things some White academics were saying in the 90s are being said now by people on the mainstream Left/Center-Left.

    30 years ago, if he were White, he’d have been called a racist for this though.

  2. Ed Lindgren says:

    Ol’ Dementia Joe probably forgot that Delaware, while remaining in the Union, was a slave state throughout the entire Civil War.

    • Fred says:


      Joe means that all his other Executive Orders overide the 14th Amendment not just the second. Kamala, the lawyer and prosecutor, is notably silent on the matter.

  3. dsrcwt says:

    I’ve always disliked the notion that the 2nd Amendment “grants” the right to bear arms. I’ve always felt that it acknowledges it, or codifies it, but that the right is inherent in free peoples. Otherwise it would grant a privilege not a right. Americans have the right to bear arms because they are willing to use violence to keep the right, not because the government deigns to give them the right.

    • Bill H. says:

      Well put. The constitution is not about what the people may do (i.e. what rights they have), it is about what the government may not do (i.e. take those rights away from the people)..

  4. Mark says:

    The hostility,contempt,hate of many of our “leaders”for our republic,which has been so good to us all,is no longer hardly even disguised. The rural county that I live in is pretty sheltered,but when I go into Madison the change is marked.It gets to the point of having a shared need for O2,but nothing else in common,Thx Mark

  5. blue peacock says:

    The slow evisceration of the constitutional protections afforded citizens began a long time ago. The 4th & 14th amendments protected citizens from authoritarian government through “due process” that protected individual liberty through prohibition of unreasonable search and seizure and due process. These constitutional principles have been systematically diluted through civil forfeiture, the Patriot Act, FISA, prosecutorial misconduct, state secrets as the tool to hide government misconduct and generally the acquiescence of the judiciary to claims by the government. The War on Drugs and then the War on Terror accelerated the growth of authoritarian government and a fearful population went along with it.

    Joe is not the first president nor is this the first Congress that has over the years moved to deprive citizens of their inalienable rights to life & liberty. Both Democrats & Republicans have worked together to create the authoritarian national security state that acts with impunity.

    We are now at the point where the Party of Davos have control of all levers of power.

    • Sam says:


      Due process is typically what gets shafted first. All in the name of safety. I recall Dubya stating that his first priority was “safety” of the American people. It was the Republicans who pushed the War on Drugs, that was a big theme during the Reagan administration and when the War on Terror came it was a completely bi-partisan affair. A single senator, Democrat Russ Feingold voted against the Patriot Act.

      Once the national security apparatus gets unchecked power and has the cloak of state secrets, the republic is gone. It’s been gone for sometime now and what we’re witnessing is the fuck you stage. We can do whatever we want and no one can check us. They have even got away with a coup attempt on a duly elected president. Heck, the president that got screwed over even hired them to run his administration. What more needs to be said?

  6. J says:

    China Joe is pushing the limits with those who would help us in a China confrontation, namely slapping India in the face. Is Biden doing this just to India off, or is he doing it to ‘undo’ the progresses that Trump made in the South Pacific out of spite?

    As US Warship Enters Indian Waters Sans Consent, is Biden Sending ‘Unpleasant Message’ Over S-400s?

  7. J says:


    On a related note regarding China Joe as an enemy of the Constitution, I don’t see that the OSD Austin is any better. Austin talks and sends decrees and memos citing ‘extremism’ as his excuse to violate the Constitutional Rights of current and future members of the Armed Forces. Austin is exhibiting ‘extremism’ with his potentate style Unconstitutional edicts.

    IMHO OSD Austin needs to be removed for his ‘extremism’ and ‘violations of the Constitution’.

Comments are closed.