Posted on 11/11/2014 8:15:13 AM PST by Arthur Wildfire! March
Keep me on your list.
I’m pinging Nathan Bedford for his opinion...
Please add me to Ping. I have no problem whatsoever with Pings.
Thank you for a good post.
I have 2 comments in reply.
1. Democrat senators will not vote for removal of Obama.
2. Blanket Amnesty has a precedence. Even though illegals problem is now much worse than during Reagan, that will not be enough for successful impeachment. Besides, Obama will not issue blanket amnesty. He is more likely to issue a selective amnesty, and it will not rouse enough ire to bring articles of impeachment.
Only event which will cause successful impeachment is smoking gun evidence of direct White House involvement in Benghazi, IRS scandal or Fast & Furious. I have not yet seen such evidence. Have you?
The execution is scattershot; the probabilities of success are near zero; the proposed solutions are easy marks for satire; the potential for witchhunts, vigilante-ism or Jacobean excess is too real to risk; the Constitution provides better path to a healthy Republic in Article V; and,
Keep working at it with the same fervor until we get it right, because if we don't get it right there might not be a second chance for our kids and our grandkids.
I wish to be on the ping
Please include me on your ping list.
Howdy, My Brother - Great poster!
Thank you, Publius.
The Utah Option would be an excellent tool for states to PUSH congress into taking safe borders, impeachment, and bold reforms seriously! That nuclear option could FORCE congress to actually take things seriously. Pulling the trigger could possibly backfire, but the mere threat could be enough.
We the People are SICK of wide open borders and of other scandalous outrages.
I’ve also been thinking of something else, and this works well in coordination with that. [Coming up.]
Thanks for the ping. Great thread. Discussions/solutions BUMP!
Please add me to your list. Thanks.
[A rebuttal to nathanbedford is coming very soon.]
Ideas for state empowerment keeps getting better!
UTAH OPTION.
Publius mentioned the powerful ‘Utah Option’ [post 39].
3/4 of states could completely DISSOLVE the entire federal government [judges included] and start from scratch. [So exciting it’s downright scary — the mother of all ‘nuclear options’.]
[Thank you very much, Publius!]
But of course it makes more sense for states to hold joint hearings to ‘laser-paint’ ‘smart bomb’ excoriations. Less scary for the uber-majority of voters and states [and me too].
... BUT ...
A nuclear option threat that acts as a ticking time bomb should crush congressional resistance. Congress members would have no choice — they would coordinate joint hearings with the states before there’s even an amendment!
That would give a joint hearing subpoena power, witnesses testimony under oath. More importantly: document seizures.
Once states are made aware of these ideas and work up the courage, we can turn Washington DC. on its head BEFORE there’s even a constitutional amendment! And then the ultimate consequences of an excoriation amendment fall on specific people for specific reasons.
[Elections would be called in 30 days after the Utah Option, and we haven’t even fixed voter fraud yet. So, ‘nuclear option’ to assist.]
With witness testimony and document seizures, this hydra can grow another head — a ‘Safe Border Amendment’ Hearing. [More on that later.]
A post coming up will offer a summary of the ‘Penny Plan’ Committee [or Committee of Common Sense] that perpetually trims spending, has veto power over new legislation, mandatory debate power, and so much more, all anti-central-power authority.
Either tomorrow or the next day I'll try to post another bold idea — a term-limited Committee of Common Sense [or ‘Penny Plan’ Committee if you prefer] that can mandate fair debates [no moderator, just a timer], unilaterally cut targeted spending by 1%, veto bad legislation, suggest repealing other legislation ...
[... catching breath ...]
... veto new treaties, participate in nomination competitions [such as supreme court justices and key executive branch officials], and suggest deeper cuts.
Combined with mandatory debates, even the committee's suggestions would be powerful axes to chop away at chunks of government waste and tyranny.
Note, all of that is ‘anti-power’ authority, an arrow that always points downward AGAINST centralized power. And the way they are elected is ‘anti-establishment’:
Another unique feature with this idea is the way this committee is elected. Two counties not adjacent to Washington DC are randomly selected to hold ‘county primaries’ instead of party-based primaries. Only people who spent most of their time actually living in those counties during the previous twelve months qualify, and only people who never worked [or who had an office] in or near Washington D.C.
[BTW, the excoriation hearings noted above can also deliberate restrictions of who could serve in any kind of political or judicial position.]
This is in the spirit of George Washington's desire to ‘not have’ political parties. This also is a ‘close and personal’ primary. Just as important, ambitious people who seek to be members of the Ruling Class concentrate in only a handful of counties, especially around D.C. [which is now the most expensive place in the US to live].
The FBI is allowed to carefully vet these primary candidates, and to avoid ticket splitting only a majority vote of all votes wins the county's primary [no party distinctions matter]. There might need to be some follow-up votes to weed out ‘longshot candidates’. The process will include mandatory town-hall-debate schedules.
Then there are only two candidates [one in each county] who run in an ANNUAL national election, each strictly restricted to campaign only in those two primary counties.
The mandatory campaign schedule should be grueling, and their non-family communications are automatically public online so that there is less time and opportunity for the Ruling Class to cozen the candidate.
During the campaign AND during service, the members of this committee have a constitutionally limited budget [could be incredibly small since they don't live near DC and could work from home], can accept volunteer assistance, and cannot set foot near Washington DC ... [... to help cloister them away from the corrosive beltway atmosphere.]
In fact, their paychecks and perks should be modest, not lures that attract people who are only ‘in it for the money’. But education for their children and health insurance could be generous since that is the kind of lure that would appeal to patriots.
Probably only three committee members [possibly five], term limited to one term — rotated so that there's only one committee election each year [probably the day after Tax Day] so that the nation can more easily focus on them.
[Of course the start-up special elections would be expedited.]
This idea will be posted in more detail tomorrow or the next, including every detail of just how counties are randomly selected.
“Keep working at it with the same fervor until we get it right...”
Absolutely. This is just preliminary discussion.
“The execution is scattershot...” — nathanbedford
‘Scattershot’ results from an instantaneous blast. A hearing that is convened by three fourths of the states is deliberation, not an explosion.
And yes, there will be ridicule. After all we’re talking about “The Ice Bucket Challenge on Steroids” here. I’m even hoping for an opposition smear campaign to help spread the word, even if it’s from our own side. It would be great if conservative talk-radio hosts poke a little light-hearted fun at these ideas. Once well-fed, the anti-central-power ‘hydra’ keeps growing more heads.
So yes, there will be ridicule, but only from people who live in glass houses. What RICHLY deserves ridicule is the entirety of our current mess: Ben Ghazi, our wide open borders, ‘student’ and ‘tourism’ ebola-VISAs, Fast and Furious, ACORN, voter fraud .... the list is endless. And last but not least — 0-care [aka ebola-care].
List of ‘ridicule’ examples:
The mockers leave themselves wide open when asked what ‘evil’ would 3/4 of the states try to ‘pull off’? Would they accuse 3/4 of states of turning racist? Would they claim that ‘persecuting’ the most radical of Islamics is ‘racist’? Would they claim that 3/4 of the states are trying to form a ‘dictatorship’? [We already have one BTW even if he is term-limited.] Should NAMBLA be protected from a little hazing?
It all goes back to the question I asked earlier — Who do you trust more? 3/4 of the states? Or the simple majority of congress? [Simple.]
Oh, the ‘springy switches’ — yeah, that’s ‘torture’. I remember the incredible support when a kid was caned in Singapore for vandalizing cars. Polling backs up ‘springy switches’. [But I would recommend taking it easy on people with high blood pressure BTW.]
So yes, it will all be ridiculed. I look forward to it.
Technical Side:
The first step is to deliberate. Then get the word out. And then ...
Legislatures from different states should INFORMALLY discuss excoriation and other possible amendments because conflicting amendment votes cause confusion. Also, once an amendment vote is made official by a state legislature, there’s a ‘ticking clock’ rule that can ‘expire’ an amendment.
BUT, all such rules can be suspended by congress if necessary.
A single state can make considerable headway starting off with informal web-conferencing discussions about what’s already public record [and inviting legislators from other states].
Thank you for ‘signing up’ on this once-a-day-at-most ping!
The anti-establishment ‘Penny Plan’ Committee idea is summarized on Post 53. Prior to that, I posted how the Utah Option can help empower states as a ‘nuclear option’. And I posted a rebuttal to a helpful critic.
It for now.
FRegards ....
Would you like to be on this [once-a-day-at-most] counterrevolution ping?
Some of you were outraged by President Ebola-VISA and are aware that ‘the fix is in’. But these are powerful ideas.
This thread starts off with excoriation hearings by the states [with teeth via a constitutional amendment] and the Utah Option to give the states ‘nuclear option’ clout over congress.
Then there’s the anti-establishment ‘Penny Plan’ Committee idea on post 53.
[As for others I apologize for the confusion and won’t bug you again if you don’t ask. I wasn’t clear if you wanted to be on the ‘once-a-day-at-most ping list or not.]
The ‘high’ in high crimes refers to those who commit them, such as the President and his ministers. The crimes they commit don't necessarily fit neatly into felony statutes, but consist of crimes against the people. When Obama rewrites laws, he asserts that he is above the law and us. When he violates clear clauses in the constitution, he commits a crime that no private person can commit. It is through high office that Obama, Lerner, Holder commit their assaults, their crimes on the American sovereign . . . us.
I agree. But the term ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ was one of the strongest defenses for Clinton during his obstruction-of-justice impeachment hearing in the House.
The intelligencia [led by Professor Tribe] has watered down the interpretation through belittling the Committe on Style and referring to the Constitution’s rough draft as ‘original intent’. [Detailed in earlier post.]
It would be more effective to exit that rat-maze debate and clearly define what is impeachable.
“Any constitution which trusts more than it needs to any man, or body of men, has a terrible flaw in it, and is big with the seeds of its own destruction.” No. 40 of Cato's Letter, 1721.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.