Skip to comments.America Betrays Her Revolution
Posted on 04/07/2014 5:06:12 AM PDT by Jacquerie
To Freepers, our statist government is a daily fingernails across the chalkboard experience. Why is Obama able to sweep judicial, and legislative powers into the executive? Why did our national government morph from one designed to protect our freedoms into one of increasing political and social oppression? Why did the federal government generally remain within its Constitutional bounds prior to WWI and not thereafter?
Thank the 17th Amendment. Tomorrow is its one hundred and one year anniversary.
It fundamentally altered the Constitution; it pulled the keystone from the arch of our Framers structure. The structure upon which our freedoms depend is not a Bill of Rights. It was and remains separation of powers. That separation began with a division of power between the States and Federal government, not with the division of legislative, judicial and executive departments within the Federal government.
In Federalist 51, James Madison contrasted the structure of ancient, simple republics and our new compound republic. As opposed to simple republics, in which the people granted power to a single government, in our Constitution power was first divided between the States and Federal governments. To quote Madison, Hence a double security arises to the rights of the people. The different governments will control each other, at the same that each will be controlled by itself. By different governments, Madison meant the States and new federal government.
Republican freedoms are not only threatened by oppression from rulers; the greater threat resides within the people themselves. Madison described this democracy as the tyranny of the majority: If a majority be united by a common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure. One method to combat majoritarian tyranny was by creating a will in the community independent of the majority . . . A Senate representing the States provided Madisons independent will. Our current Senate structure merely invites a republic destroying majoritarianism which, from their study of history, our Framers sought to avoid.
Consider the guarantees in our Bill of Rights. How many remain in force? When did the national (it has not been federal for 101 years) government gather its full steam assault on them? It began when the structural protection previously provided by the States was removed. Without the institutional means to secure our rights, provided by the States, the Bill of Rights became but unenforceable parchment barriers to consolidated government made possible by the 17th.
Obama has gathered tyrannical powers about the executive branch. No election can return them. The only way to possibly turn back our progressive march into a one party, one state hell, is to return the countervailing force of the states back to the senate. That can only be accomplished through a state convention to propose constitutional amendments.
Our state legislators have a positive duty to secure our freedoms. We have the positive duty to compel them. Article V.
CAN WE POST articles (excerpts) from the New York Times?
Democracy is mob rule.
The senate is known as 100 little kings, there is a reason for that.
We need to repeal this amendment and several others.
Two wolves and a sheep voting on the dinner menu.
Did this come from there?
Another good article, thanks!
For Mrs.: You can produce no evidence of plagiarism.
The Feral government no longer represents the interests of state legislatures.
On a strict “one-man, one-vote” basis, the representation by the Senate is badly skewed. Each Senator has vastly more clout while representing Alaska, than while representing California. And in fact, Senators end up representing not so much their respective states, as representing whoever happens to have financed their most recent campaign.
When the Senator was subject to recall by the respective State legislature, there was a great deal more attention paid to what the people of THAT STATE wanted from their representation in Washington. Now, that responsibility is greatly blurred, if it exists at all any more.
I don’t see any chance of ever returning to the way things were nor am I sure we should. We might be able to eliminate the popular vote for senators within the states.
Maybe electing them by congressional districts won.
Mrs is away from the keys, so I will have to speculate. I do not believe she was insinuating plagiarism. I have no idea why she would have asked about posting from the NY Times on this thread. It's not among her interests.
She may have posted on the wrong thread.
To answer her question: Yes, we may post excerpts from the NY Times.
That’s all nice and good but you’re NEVER EVER going to convince the people to give up their vote for senators. We might actually stand a chance of electing senators according to districts won.
Frankly I don’t trust state legislatures any more than I trust the clowns in DC.
Our republic is at that stage. The democrat party, the courts, the administrative state have spent these past 101 years amending the constitution into a freedom destroying monster.
In order to possibly return to freedom, the 17th must go. Our options are to fight or accept slavery. No election alone can reverse our situation. An Article V convention is the last peaceful means we have.
In other words, screw reality.
I apologize for my mispost.
congress can already take action to check the executive branch.... but chooses not to... after all, obama is “special” and if you oppose him you are “racist”... aside from his inexperience, commie agenda (he is a member of the New Socialist party of chicago/ commie party to which he has sworn an oath in direct conflict with the presidential oath to support and defend the constitution), his concealed identity, his support to a declared enemy during war (treason) namely the al queda and muslim brotherhood... both enemies and both financially and militarily supported and fostered by obama circumventing congress (benghazi is about sending guns and money to al queda) So do we need a contitutional convention or rather DO WE NEED ENFORCEMENT OF THE LAWS WE ALREADY HAVE??????? The DOJ is run by a criminal in contempt of congress, the IRS is in contempt of congress, the EPA is criminal in experimenting on humans..... LETS STRAIGHTEN THESE ISSUES OUT BERFORE WE AMEND THE CONSTITUTION... Lets protect the bill of rights that the executive branch is usurping... I quesiton the competency of today’s politicians across the board. They are fully focused on enriching themselves, with a few exceptions, to the detriment of those represented... I dont think a contitutional convention will solve anything.... the Founding Fathers had it figured out .... now just execute their plan...
Okay. I understand.
Well, I wish you had read my post before responding.
The uber Yankee speaketh BS.
Your reality is to continue to lick the bottom of the Federal boot. What a pissant you are.
I thought he was banned.
Inanity = Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome.
If we can ditch the 16th at the same time, we got a deal.
I get a private email from him every so often.
When are these naysayers going to finish their treatise in praise of the 17th amendment?
I get sick of the federal boot lickers club invading your well thought out thread. It is disgusting. Where is their thread on how well it has been going since the 17th passed? They are progressives, all of them.
Go find another thread to pollute with your progressive stance on the Constitution.
Agree. The 16th is the 17th’s evil sister.
There really is little time to stop our headlong leap into totalitarianism.