Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

This is a work in progress I expect will evolve.
1 posted on 06/25/2013 4:12:11 PM PDT by Chris Shugart Uncommon Sense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Chris Shugart Uncommon Sense
One thing to study it and design interesting graphics.

Another thing to make it go away.

2 posted on 06/25/2013 4:14:51 PM PDT by elkfersupper ( Member of the Original Defiant Class)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Chris Shugart Uncommon Sense

It is too large; so much so that if we were to go to strict constitutionalism tomorrow in excess of 95% of FedGov employees would be without a job.


3 posted on 06/25/2013 4:15:52 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Chris Shugart Uncommon Sense

Where does the traditional conservative American Christian fit on your graph?

The kind of people that believed in small government but highly moral law and who would lynch someone calling for abortion and homosexuality, especially in marriage and George Washington’s Army?


4 posted on 06/25/2013 4:29:39 PM PDT by ansel12 (Libertarians, Gays = in all marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Chris Shugart Uncommon Sense
The question, framed by James Madison, was how to frame a government strong enough to serve its legitimate objects, yet not violate our rights. The Constitution did that.

At the Virginia ratification convention, Madison responded to Patrick Henry’s charge that the Constitution’s enumerated powers would be usurped and our freedoms destroyed by a national government that would quickly seize all power.

Madison: “If the general government were wholly independent of the governments of the particular states, then, indeed, usurpation might be expected to the fullest extent. But, sir, on whom does this general government depend? It derives its authority from these governments, and from the same sources from which their authority is derived.”

5 posted on 06/25/2013 4:32:54 PM PDT by Jacquerie (To restore the 10th Amendment, repeal the 17th.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Chris Shugart Uncommon Sense
Unfortunately, this analysis shows either ignorance or complicity with the issue of most importance to our founders and framers. Federalist Papers 2 through 5 all address “Dangers from Foreign Force and Influence.”The same theme is addressed a number of other times, but its ordering in the Federalist Papers is no accident, nor was John Jay's letter to Washington reminding him to require our president to be born to parents whose sole allegiance was to our nation, born to citizens, and born on our sovereign soil. Those are the well and often documented requirements, common-law, for who are natural born citizens.

Our current White House occupant told us honestly that he is a naturalized citizen, born a British subject and born to a British subject, whose allegiance was necessarily to the Crown. Both parties kept their silence but our founding documents, even as they are avoided and references to them scrubbed in the digital media, remain. Obama never lied. He told us he believes our Constitution needed a new bill of rights, and was antiquated. He told us he believed in global governance. He told us he is a naturalized citizen, and wrote books about his Muslim father, who was a British subject, and his uncle educated by the KGB in East Germany. was also a Sunni Muslim. Most all of his relatives are Muslim, and actively supporting Jihad for the Muslim Brotherhood. Obama was not born to parents who communicated allegiance in our nation of laws to his son, as required by our Constitution.

Obama, if he has any clear allegiance, is beholden to his patron, Alwaleed bin-Talal’s Wahhabi Sharia legal system. He is supporting Sharia's blasphemy dictum, in direct contradiction with freedom of speech and the press, aided by fellow Wahhabi, converted in the late 1990s, now CIA Director John Brennan, who agreed with ISNA and CAIR, and coordinated, before he had official authority, the purging of our military, State Department, and intelligence agencies of terms like Jihadi, Islamic Terrorism, Muslim Terrorism, and had thousands of pages of military and intelligence manuals scrubbed of inferences to Islamic terrorism.

Both of our major parties are thoroughly penetrated, a glaring example being the support by a director of CPAC, the Conservative Political Action Committee, Grover Norquist, of unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trials, exposing support of terrorist organizations by presumed charity groups, Suhail Khan, as a director of CPAC, along with his activities for CAIR and ISNA and dozens of other Muslim Brotherhood groups. Norquist's activities involve almost every presumed conservative in the Republican party, as Norquist was Jack Abramoff’s associate for many years - and Abramoff is an orthodox Jew!.

Until we open our eyes to the remarkable penetration of all branches of government that has condoned that election of a presumably naturalized (some question Obama’s naturalization after having been a British/Kenyan and then an Indonesian citizen) citizen to the office requiring a natural born citizen - the only office (now including the Vice Presidency) in our government requiring a natural born citizen. Our trouble was anticipated by John Jay's concern, foreign influence. Our Constitution intentionally has no definitions (just a restriction on “Treason”), because, as Madison pointed out, wisely, the meanings of words changes over time. As Chief Justice Waite, in Minor v. Happersett explained:

At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens

11 posted on 06/25/2013 5:05:48 PM PDT by Spaulding
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Chris Shugart Uncommon Sense

Re: “In one sense, Republicans and Democrats are nearly the same......[They create] an impenetrable bureaucracy that’s expensive to run and difficult to control.”

Unfortunately, all government bureaucracies, and most of the people they employ, are instinctively Leftist.

That is the eternal trump card of the Democrat Party.

Even when the Republicans are in power, the bureaucracy relentlessly pulls government to the Left.


13 posted on 06/25/2013 5:11:08 PM PDT by zeestephen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Chris Shugart Uncommon Sense

America is definitely on its second distinct form of government. The constitutionally based limited government the founders created has been replaced by a totalitarian system where the government frequently rules against its own people (privacy violations, property violations, amnesty for illegal non-citizens, etc.).


21 posted on 06/25/2013 6:59:10 PM PDT by justa-hairyape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson