Posted on 12/23/2003 3:59:28 PM PST by Federalist 78
and the right's Free Republic, once described by Jonah Goldberg of National Review Online as "knuckle-scrapers," suggesting a picture of ape-like creatures walking with one hand brushing the ground and the other holding up a political placard.
each party must lean toward the center
If the future of politics in America is to swing back and forth between Freepers and MoveOn'ers, then I fear that we really will turn into Weimar Germany.
These goals would be opposed by Nazi goon squads, knuckleheads like the pseudo-conservative Goldberg and the author, Colonel Kling. Which goals would the 'center', according to Kling, find repugnant?
What is our mission? Free Republic is dedicated to reversing the trend of unconstitutional government expansion and is advocating a complete restoration of our constitutional republic. Listed below are some of the issues we feel strongly about.
Basically, we believe that the Founders designed our system of government in the form of a constitutionally limited republic, with maximum freedom intended for the people and minimum government control or interference into our personal lives and business affairs.
The united states of America was intended to be a federation of sovereign states, each with its own constitution and state government. Governments at all levels -- federal, state and local -- were to be controlled by the people. Our Constitution explicitly restricts the power of our federal government; and our Bill of Rights guarantees that NO government may infringe upon our God given unalienable rights. This is to ensure that the real power remains close to home, with the states, the local governments and always in the hands of the people.
We the People have granted our federal government limited powers to oversee certain things, such as national defense, interstate commerce, the postal service, the coining of money, and the operation of a court system. Most other powers now in the hands of the federal government were illegally usurped from the states and from the people.
Somehow, over the years, our guiding principles of law, as set forth in the Constitution, have been eroded to the point that the federal government now has total control -- leaving the states impotent and the people as captive servants to the federal government. This must be reversed if we are to survive as a free Republic and a free people.
We at Free Republic are determined to return the Constitution to its rightful place as the Supreme Law of the land as the Founders intended.
It is not necessary for everyone to hold the same views to be members of Free Republic, however, many of us do share many of the following as common beliefs and goals:
The preservation and complete restoration of our Constitution and Bill of Rights with special emphasis on the first, second, fourth, fifth, sixth, ninth and tenth amendments and, of course, our right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness -- free of government intervention.
We call for the repeal of the 17th amendment, which will reverse the independence of the Senate and reestablish the Senate as a representative of the State governments, as intended by the Founding Fathers. This arrangement was intended to be a critical check against illegal federal expansion over the States, and the people residing in the various States, and will act to return the powers not granted to the federal government, as enumerated in the Constitution, to the states.
We call for the repeal of the 16th amendment and to abolish the income tax and the IRS. Revenues to the federal government should come from excise taxes and tariffs.
We call for the repeal of the Emergency and War Powers Acts, an end to all national emergencies and a ban on the unilateral creation of law by Presidential edict. We are also working for the repeal all laws created by unconstitutional and extraconstitutional devices, such as Executive Order or Presidential Directive.
Repeal of the war and emergency powers acts and the various states of national emergencies will allow the abolishing of all unconstitutional federal law, agencies and departments. This will return us to a Federalist system of government and return many responsibilities to the States and personal rights to the citizens.
A return to a strictly Constitutional form of federal government will automatically repeal and abolish all unconstitutional federal involvement in states issues such as: crime, health, education, welfare and the environment. The Tenth Amendment will again be in effect, which will bar all federal attempts at legislating social issues. This will also require that social programs such as Social Security, welfare and Medicare be repealed. So too, will most federal subsidies.
We further call for the rescinding of all treaties and/or International Agreements which are not in perfect agreement with the federal government's Constitutionally mandated task of protecting the rights of the people.
We believe that the United States should disassociate itself from the U.N. and that the U.N. should be forced to leave the United States. Furthermore, we demand that the federal government refrain from meddling in the business and squabbles of foreign nations, unless there is an imminent threat to the people of the United States.
We also call for the strengthening of our military and defenses; the effective control over illegal immigration and smuggling; the paying down the national debt; and strict control over federal agencies like the CIA and the FBI.
NOTE: Free Republic does NOT condone bigotry or violence and does NOT advocate an overthrow of the government.
Instead, what has happened is, the government and the corporate media have created, through regulation and policy a liberal propaganda machine whose goal is to continue the expansion of a collective state and to control every aspect of our lives and fortunes. Dissenting views are stifled by selective interpretation of copyright law and unfair litigation leveled at whistleblowers and those who would attempt to use the news media's own copyrighted "news" stories to expose the lies, spin and half truths therein.
We, on Free Republic, are determined to speak out against this illegal alliance and to peaceably work toward reestablishing the Constitution as the supreme law of the land as our Founders intended, and to petition our representatives to force the government to operate within its Constitutional limits. We are determined to stand up for our Constitutional rights, for liberty, truth, justice, and the rule of law.
We, the People, are exercising our Constitutional right to freedom of speech and peaceable assembly to demand that our elected representatives fulfill their Constitutional duty. ~~ Jim Robinson, March 1999
What happened, did they lose Ralph Nader's phone number?
The Internet serves one purpose in Howard Dean's campaign: Creating and maintaining a mailing list of useful idiots willing to hand over immense amounts of cash. Dean became the presumptive nominee (and let's not forget it's almost a month before the first primary, so he hasn't won yet) for one reason and one reason only: The war in Iraq. If it wasn't for Operation Iraqi Freedom and its overwhelming success, he would have had nowhere to focus his anger and rage, and would be about as popular today as Carol Moseley Braun.
I think the author is correct in ascertaining that the leftist online movement found Dean (for his anti-war comments - remember the other candidates had already voted for the war) and not the other way around (Dean building an internet following).
Oddly, Bush isn't the hard right candidate (nobody adds new, unconstitutional entitlements and signs spending increases that go through the roof can be considered hard right to me). I'd expect something more akin to Barry Goldwater being a better representation of the average Freeper. But most Americans don't want that. Liberty and independence aren't what they want from government. Checks are what they want from government.
The whole "knuckle-scrapers" slur against Free Republic is nonsense. The people engaged in political discourse on that website are by and large highly well informed, educated, and more than passably literate. Active participants at FR populate the vanguard of American politics, not some backwater. The same can probably be said for most of the folks at MoveOn.It the sign of a weak argument (and often a weak mind) that a sweeping, way over-the-top generalization is needed to hold the argument up. In short, your fears of "mobocracy" generated in an Internet insurgency reflect your own discomfort with change, not with any inherent merit in the argument. U of Chicago law professor Cass Sunstein wrote a book along the same lines a few years back called Republic.com. He was laughed out of court at the time. You deserve the same fate.
Kling can be reached here:
As far as FreeRepublic and MoveOn destroying the American government, what is that all about? If FR and MoveOn replaced the Republicans and Democrats, we'd still have two parties. So what if there's less common ground for us to work from, it'll make the moves towards victory or defeat all the more obvious.
Oddly, Bush isn't the hard right candidate (nobody adds new, unconstitutional entitlements and signs spending increases that go through the roof can be considered hard right to me). I'd expect something more akin to Barry Goldwater being a better representation of the average Freeper. But most Americans don't want that. Liberty and independence aren't what they want from government. Checks are what they want from government.
You have described Kling's 'missing middle.' It is the present government of the middle, by the RNC and for the DNC.
Texas Straight Talk: An Interview With Ron Paul - Sierra Times. ...
Q. Sir, on May 6th, on the floor of the house you asked the question: "Are the American people determined they still wish to have a Constitutional Republic." How would you answer that question, Sir?
A. A growing number of Americans want it, but a minority, and that is why we are losing this fight in Washington at the moment. That isn't as discouraging as it sounds, because if you had asked me that in 1976 when I first came to Washington, I would have said there were a lot fewer who wanted it then. We have drifted along and, although we have still enjoyed a lot of prosperity in the last twenty-five years, we have further undermined the principles of the Constitution and private property market economy. Therefore, I think we have to continue to do what we are doing to get a larger number. But if we took a vote in this country and told them what it meant to live in a Constitutional Republic and what it would mean if you had a Congress dedicated to the Constitution they would probably reject it. It reminds me of a statement by Walter Williams when he said that if you had two candidates for office, one running on the programs of Stalin and the other running on the programs of Jefferson the American people would probably vote for the candidate who represented the programs of Stalin. If you didn't put the name on it and just looked at the programs, they would say, Oh yeah, we believe in national health care and we believe in free education for everybody and we believe we should have gun control. Therefore, the majority of the people would probably reject Thomas Jefferson. So that describes the difficulty, but then again, we have to look at some of the positive things which means that we just need more people dedicated to the rule of law. Otherwise, there will be nothing left here within a short time.
I've noticed what I think is a lean toward the left by many so called right wing web sites in the last year.
The 'I feel your pain types' seem to be growing in the Conservative groups as well.
The road to socialism is paved with "compassionate conservatism."
Will Goldberg jonahnro@aol.com confirm or deny?
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.