Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Not Going to Take It Anymore
FreeRepublic ^ | 4/01/02 | Ben A. Conservative

Posted on 04/01/2002 5:42:41 AM PST by B. A. Conservative

How many times have you heard this statement? Have you used this phrase yourself? Is FreeRepublic just a support group (form of group therapy) for burned-out or recovering conservatives much like the function served by AA for alcoholics?

I have a list of questions to which I don't have the answers, but believe that these are questions that deserve answers. If you have asked yourself more than a few of these questions or even entertained the thoughts that these questions express, then I am inviting you to participate in an exchange of ideas. I hope that enough Freepers will provide their thoughts in order that we can use your answers to end and reverse the damage that is being done to our country and our way of life by Democrats and other liberals.

I intend to provide the complete list as part of this post. I am going to post each question one at a time for its own thread. Each posting of a question will be several days apart to allow time for those willing to participate. I hope that anyone willing to participate will hold their replies to specific questions until each question is asked as a topic of its own with the first question to be posted on Thursday. I am hoping that you will use replies to this post as a means of attracting Freepers whom you know might have an interest in this discussion and the direction in which it goes. Here is the List:

  1. Is the United States broken?
  2. If it is broken, can it be fixed?
  3. If it can be fixed, how long will it take?
  4. Who will fix it?
  5. Will there be opposition to fixing it?
  6. Can the opposition be defeated within a reasonable period of time?
  7. How long is reasonable?
  8. How realistic are your expectations about whether it can be fixed?
  9. How realistic are your expectations with regard to time?
  10. If it can't be fixed, have you considered other solutions regarding your disappointment with the present state of affairs in the United States?
  11. Could other countries offer the freedom you seek?
  12. Are there other existing countries that offer more freedom than what is currently offered in the United States?
  13. If one state were to secede and offer a Constitutional Republic like the one we had, would you consider living there?
  14. How would the United States respond to one state's elective and voluntary peaceable declaration of its own independence from the United States?
  15. Would the United States be willing to use military action including the killing of peaceful secessionists?
  16. If a Boris Yeltsin took a stand in the state capitol, would the United States send in the tanks and kill him and/or his compatriots?
  17. If the United States were actually willing to use force to surpress a state's secession, would you still want to live in the United States?
  18. Would that be the final straw proving to any "doubting Thomas"es that the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States are now empty meaningless words that no longer have validity as ideas?
  19. Would this be the proof to some that the United States is now no different from any other form of tyranny?
  20. If one state successfully and peaceably seceded, would others follow?
  21. Would we see groups of states organizing as regional republics competeing for citizens by offering more freedom than their neighboring nation/states?
  22. Could our freedoms and liberties be restored more certainly and more quickly by forcing governments to compete with one another in an effort to please its citizens and/or prospective citizens?
  23. Does the United States have a monopoly on government?
  24. Is the military superiority that the United States possesses over the rest of the world sufficient reason for its citizens to sacrifice their freedoms in the interests of security?
  25. Could the military strength and superiority of the United States be obtained through the equivalent of a North American Nato?
  26. How can we restore our freedoms without secession?

    I suspect most Freepers share my frustrations, but have not let their thinking run as far afield as I have let mine. Quite frankly, I am not at all happy with my answers to these questions. And while this may prove to be a fool's errand, I assure you it is not intended as an April Fools. As is so common on this site, feel free to Freep This Poll.



TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism
KEYWORDS: freedom; liberty
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-104 next last
I don't think the United States can be returned to living under the Constitution. I think we are going to lose more freedoms, not recover the ones we have lost. I think government at every level is past the point of no return and completely out of control. I don't see an acceptable alternative country that presently exists anywhere in the world. I think the United States has become a tyrannical dinosaur, and its extinction should be brought about peacefully and quickly. If the United States is willing to murder its own citizens to prevent them from excercising their unalienable right of self determination in choosing their own form of government through the democratic process, then I know I am right.
1 posted on 04/01/2002 5:42:41 AM PST by B. A. Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: B. A. Conservative
Sadly I agree, the system is beyond repair by the ballot box, and even that option is being taken away with CFR and the new computerized voting machines.

We continue down this road to an authoritarian marxist/fascist coalition ran for the benefit of the statists or they kill us

2 posted on 04/01/2002 5:51:22 AM PST by steve50
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: B. A. Conservative
The United States as a nation-state following a mission statement written 200 plus years ago, is finished. It has simply out lived its purpose.

The Civil War was fought, in the megapolitcal sense, as a cultural clash between the powers of the old economy agrarians and the new economy industrialists. 500,000 plus died.

Freerepublic and its frequenters recognize that the Industrial Age is coming to an end (accept the paleo-cons who think somehow a third party candidacy will save the day)in favor of a borderless Information Society.

Many of us are no longer nationalists, even though we remain patriots in the true sense: we love the land of our fathers. We favor policies and politicians that will make the transition to a new age as violence free as possible, hoping to avoid the cultural divide that caused a war of horrific proportions in the 1860s. We see a land splitting apart, on a way course to a violent clash that we will not be able to control in any sense.

The other piece to the puzzle requires a historical reference. In the 1920s, many a judge in Germany had an opportunity to put Hitler and his Nazi Party in jail for numerous frauds and thefts, let alone political murders that numbered in the hundreds. The names of these judges have been lost to history even though as the interpreters of the law, they were suppose to be the bulwark against the will of the people.

However, in this age, for the sake of history, we work to name the names of the corrupt seawards of power and in a book yet to be written a hundred years from now, let their names be the villains to a peaceful and Judeo-Christian sense of liberty.

IMO

3 posted on 04/01/2002 5:56:36 AM PST by JohnGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: B. A. Conservative
Probably the best indicator of the odds against restoring Constitutional governance is the extraordinary length to which the government will go to keep its citizens disarmed. Waco. Ruby Ridge.

The absurdities of a few deconstructionists notwithstanding, there's nothing at all unclear about the Second Amendment. Yet government's minions turn ghostly pale at the suggestion that a private citizen has a perfect right to obtain and carry any weapon an Army soldier is issued. Inasmuch as the point of the Second Amendment was to guarantee that the citizenry could rise up and depose the State when it deemed that the time had come to do so, there can be only one reason for this.

Secession, the only remedy for usurpation of authority beyond that granted by the Constitution, has been rendered too dangerous to contemplate by the disarming of the citizenry. In all probability, Washington wouldn't order a nuclear bombardment of a seceding state. It wouldn't have to. How many of your neighbors own tanks, rocket launchers, or fully automatic weapons?

"Paper constitutions raise smiles on the faces of those who have observed their results." -- Herbert Spencer.

Freedom, Wealth, and Peace,
Francis W. Porretto
Visit The Palace Of Reason: http://palaceofreason.com

4 posted on 04/01/2002 6:03:48 AM PST by fporretto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: B. A. Conservative
BUMP???
5 posted on 04/01/2002 6:05:51 AM PST by George Frm Br00klyn Park
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: B. A. Conservative

"America is at that awkward stage.
It's too late to work within the system,
but too early to shoot the bastards."

- Che Guevara

Anyone who believes these seditious, murderous, hopeless words has no business being on FreeRepublic, IMHO.

6 posted on 04/01/2002 6:12:41 AM PST by Cultural Jihad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cultural Jihad
I see that the trolls have begun to trickle in.
7 posted on 04/01/2002 6:15:51 AM PST by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Cultural Jihad
Why are you attributing quotes by Claire Wolfe to Che Guevera?
8 posted on 04/01/2002 6:16:55 AM PST by tacticalogic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: B. A. Conservative
I'm still a member here, but I don't frequent it nearly as much as I used to.

To be honest, I was devastated by the sentiments expressed by an overwhelming number of people post-9/11. I couldn't believe these were the same people who earlier were preaching against a coercive State and claimed to be promoters of Liberty.

The word "fascist" kept coming to mind as the cheers for "lock up anyone who disagrees with Bush" got louder.

I've come to believe that the vast majority of people here use FR to let off steam ... and they like to hear themselves sound "patriotic." I've also discovered that many here who call themselves conservative really are nothing of the sort. They are neo-conservatives.

As far as America being too far gone to be salvaged, I believe you are right. Garet Garrett thought it was too far gone over fifty years ago. And things have only gotten worse since then:

There are those who still think they are holding the pass against a revolution that may be coming up the road. But they are gazing in the wrong direction. The revolution is behind them. It went by in the Night of Depression, singing songs to freedom.

There are those who have never ceased to say very earnestly, "Something is going to happen to the American form of government if we don't watch out." These were the innocent disarmers. Their trust was in words. They had forgotten their Aristotle. More than 2,000 years ago he wrote of what can happen within the form, when "one thing takes the place of another, so that the ancient laws will remain, while the power will be in the hands of those who have brought about revolution in the state."

Worse outwitted were those who kept trying to make sense of the New Deal from the point of view of all that was implicit in the American scheme, charging it therefore with contradiction, fallacy, economic ignorance, and general incompetence to govern.

But it could not be so embarrassed and all that line was wasted, because, in the first place, it never intended to make that kind of sense, and secondly, it took off from nothing that was implicit in the American scheme. It took off from a revolutionary base. The design was European. Regarded from the point of view of revolutionary technic it made perfect sense. Its meaning was revolutionary and it had no other. For what it meant to do it was from the beginning consistent in principle, resourceful, intelligent, masterly in workmanship, and it made not one mistake.

The test came in the first one hundred days...


9 posted on 04/01/2002 6:20:32 AM PST by VoodooEconomist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: steve-b

I didn't read anywhere in the mission statement which says FreeRepublic is a group therapy session for hopeless conservatives who think all is lost to fascism and socialism and nothing can be done to get our freedoms back short of a bloodbath. The ones being trolls are those who promulgate and proselytize wacko militia nutcase ideologies.

10 posted on 04/01/2002 6:24:52 AM PST by Cultural Jihad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic

I stand corrected. I knew it had belonged to an ideologue, though.

11 posted on 04/01/2002 6:26:33 AM PST by Cultural Jihad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: steve-b, B.A. Conservative
Most folks aren't looking for freedom, that would mean others are doing things they don't like. They just want a tyranny to their liking.
12 posted on 04/01/2002 6:28:22 AM PST by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: George Frm Br00klyn Park
Yes, bump.

foreverfree

13 posted on 04/01/2002 6:28:32 AM PST by foreverfree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
Why ask why? It's rather like the old question that would come up here every so often: "Is Clinton knowingly and wilfully lying, or his he so self-deluded that he believes his own propaganda?"
14 posted on 04/01/2002 6:33:53 AM PST by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: B. A. Conservative
It's broken, and it can't be fixed.
15 posted on 04/01/2002 6:36:39 AM PST by carton253
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: B. A. Conservative
I would be happy to participate in this discussion thread, it sounds very constrictive. My thoughts are similar to many, the issue we face is fundamentally “what are we”, what is the nature of our culture and our country, what do we stand for and how should we live. The calls for us to destroy the “enemy” are fine, but until we know what we are, this “destruction” of the enemy risks getting profoundly out of control.

That is not to say we should not defend ourselves, nor work to prevent further attacks. But at the same time we need to answer these questions. I have heard it said that you define your self by your enemy, defining yourself by what you are not.

If I might make a few suggestions:

1. Group the questions into logical topics so a discussion of the topic can address all aspects

2. Focus the discussion on the positive, if it just turns about to be a complaining session, then interest will wane.

I think we are to change direction, each individual; needs to make a contribution. Let’s use this forum to determine what those actions might be.

16 posted on 04/01/2002 6:41:58 AM PST by schu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt
#3, Excellent analogies, nailed to the wall.
17 posted on 04/01/2002 6:52:25 AM PST by Rebelbase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: schu
I'm all for action.

First and foremost, you have to convince welfare recipients that giving up their welfare and actually working for a living is good for them. Win that battle, and all may not be lost.

As long as politicians support taking money from the some to give to others, they won't be voted out of office... and the downward slide will continue.

18 posted on 04/01/2002 6:57:49 AM PST by carton253
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Cultural Jihad
I stand corrected. I knew it had belonged to an ideologue, though.

But you don't recognize the differences in their ideologies to have known there was something very wrong with that attribution before you posted it?

19 posted on 04/01/2002 7:06:50 AM PST by tacticalogic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: B. A. Conservative
25. How can we restore our freedoms without secession?

The powers not granted to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the People.

If the Tenth Amendment were obeyed, this country could have 50 Republics governing in 50 unique and diverse ways, all within the protection and constraints of the Constitution.

20 posted on 04/01/2002 7:41:35 AM PST by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: B. A. Conservative
BTW, if you plan to create a ping list for these threads, please attach me. Thanks very much.
21 posted on 04/01/2002 8:21:17 AM PST by schu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic;Cultural Jihad
Reading CJ's postings always leaves me with the creepy feeling that there is something to Ickes' hypothesis about lizard creatures from other dimensions inhabiting human forms.
22 posted on 04/01/2002 8:31:39 AM PST by headsonpikes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt
Who are you?
23 posted on 04/01/2002 8:41:01 AM PST by Notforprophet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: headsonpikes
I usually find his stuff has a kind of "Naked Lunch" quality to it.
24 posted on 04/01/2002 9:13:16 AM PST by tacticalogic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt
This discussion is hopefully headed toward finding and defining Galt's Gulch. Those that have not read Atlas Shrugged, should.
25 posted on 04/01/2002 12:54:31 PM PST by B. A. Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: B. A. Conservative
But there are two (actually three) distinctly different groups on this site:

Libertarians, true Conservatives, and "neo-Conservatives."

Libertarians are will to sacrifice the nation-state to save the culture. Paleo-Conservatives wish to conserve the culture to save the nation-state. And neo-Cons just don't agree with the Democrats this year, but aren't really interested in metaphysically "conserving" anything.

In the context of my post in regards to political issues, the libertarian wing would be interested in making access to capital cheaper; reducing trade barriers;....

A (paleo)Conservative wishes to promote policy that help conserve the culture and reduce 'change.' Protectionist policies to keep factories open and workers of a community from being displaced are perfectly sound ideas for the end-result they wish to achieve.

Neo-cons have no coherent metaphysical political thoughts, however, they are extremely pragmatic political thinkers in understand the issues of the day. Libertarians and (paleo) Conservatives find the neo-Cons almost perverse fixation that American Exceptionalism will save us all to be not only intellectually un-satisfying but also contrary to the basic tenants of liberty at the root of the American tradition..

We can all work together to smoke out corrupt members of the power elite, but it is our efforts to find common ground that gives us a coherent political agenda and defines us culturally with in these interesting times.

26 posted on 04/02/2002 12:17:41 PM PST by JohnGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Cultural Jihad
Current Article

Favorablilty - Allowing regular roadblocks to search vehicles?
Favor 50.3 Oppose 46.8 NS 2.9 Total 100.0

Favorablilty - Allowing your mail to be searched at random?
Favor 36.4 Oppose 62.4 NS 1.2 Total 100.0

Favorablilty - Allowing your car to be searched at random?
Favor 48.2 Oppose 51.0 NS .7 Total 100.0

In the Congressional race in 2002, for which party's candidate do you intend to vote - Democrat or Republican?
Dem 31.4 Rep 32.5 Neither 4.6 NS 31.5 Total 100.0

Polling data supposedly based on a representative cross section of America provides clear evidence that we are anything but "United" in our beliefs about what constitutes freedom. Based on this survey, at least one third, and maybe as much as one half would repeal the Bill of Rights. Are these the people you want to call friends, neighbors, and to have a major say about how you are going to live your life?

Without listing the evidence, there is substantial and credible evidence that the government of the United States poses a significant threat to the safety, well-being, health, and personal security of its citizens. There is substantial direct and indirect credible evidence that for any individual that their own government poses a greater threat to their lives and liberty than any foreign power or terrorist group. And there are those like Cultural Jihad who seem to consider freedom seekers the threat.

27 posted on 04/03/2002 4:52:01 AM PST by B. A. Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: B. A. Conservative
I think we have been beyond the point of "no return" for quite some time. However, the Constitutional Conservative and traditionally valued patriot can not roll over and give up. Our resistance will serve to delay the time when we are totally consumed by liberal socialism. Now the question becomes how is resistance defined?

I don't believe in a violent resistance. This change that has been occurring over the last 40 plus years has come as a result from the "will" of the American people, either through apathy or active participation. And it has happened at the ballot box. Violence will not slow the slide into Godless socialism, but, in my opinion, only serve to hasten it.

Therefore our resistance must be at the ballot box. It is difficult to accept the "will of the people" when it so obviously is swinging to the left, where no one has to be responsible, and Big Brother will take care of us all.

So, I am still left with the question; Given that we can't return to the Republic we once were, what is the conservatives course of action?

I have my "steel pot" on as I can almost feel the tenor of what many of the replies to this thread will take.

28 posted on 04/03/2002 5:57:23 AM PST by ImpBill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt
Your #3 is extremely well said. Thank you.
29 posted on 04/03/2002 6:07:55 AM PST by ImpBill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: B. A. Conservative
I think I realized the United States was "broken" when I realized that the 2nd Amendment should still mean something. Before, in my youthful "liberal" days (hehe) I used to subscribe to the idea that "The concept behind the 2nd Amendment is outdated. We don't need guns in every house anymore, this is the 20th century!" This is, of course, a very popular view today.

As it should not be popular! The whole point of having a "well armed militia" of course was not to simply aid in the common defense, but to protect us from any tyranical government, any tyranical government. That includes our own, if need be!

So when I realized that the second amendment was FAR from "out dated", and realized that most people were thinking the opposite, I realized there is something seriously wrong with this country.

As far as fixing it goes, I'm not sure if we'll ever return to pure "constitutionalism", but I'll be damned before I see the second amendment taken away.

30 posted on 04/03/2002 6:29:03 AM PST by FourtySeven
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: B. A. Conservative
What do you mean by 'broken'?
31 posted on 04/03/2002 6:30:59 AM PST by stuartcr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt
What is a 'Judeo-Christian sense of liberty'?
32 posted on 04/03/2002 6:33:37 AM PST by stuartcr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: VoodooEconomist
Are you implying that the European base was "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs." Kipling wrote in the "Gods of the Copybook Headings" about robbing the collective Peters to pay the collective Pauls, and Ayn Rand in her fable of the 20th Century Motor Co. wrote about what happened when everyone owed their livelihood to everyone else. I think of these examples when I hear on the news that the upper half of wage earners pay most of the taxes these days. Just how long will they take it before they shrug?
33 posted on 04/03/2002 6:54:41 AM PST by The Westerner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr
I would answer, the Ten Commandments as the whole of the law and the New Testament Golden rule, 'love' your neighbor as you love yourself.

This concept of liberty has nothing to do with compelling charity, correcting 'economic injustice', or punishing 'consentual crimes.'

34 posted on 04/03/2002 8:41:34 AM PST by JohnGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt
OK, I think I know what you mean.
35 posted on 04/03/2002 8:52:37 AM PST by stuartcr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: B. A. Conservative
Important points, but our original War of Independence never had the obvert support of more than 1/3 of the Colonists. 1/3rd were Tories, remaining loyal to King George III until the end (we now call the Canadians). 1/3 could of cared less. Righteousness and preseverance can still overcome raw numbers.

Bottom line, I hate polls and don't care what some numb sheep thinks. Win or lose, the fight is damn well worth it.

36 posted on 04/03/2002 9:03:29 AM PST by Alas Babylon!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: ImpBill
what is the conservatives course of action

Identify the things that are worth 'conserving' and don't rely on outside institutions to conserve them. In the end, is an arbitrary government ruling, an arbitrary land with arbitrary borders worth conserving, or is the English language, the Christmas/Thanksgiving/Easter Holidays, American football, and the Christian ethic more worthy of our conservation efforts?

He who defends everything, defends nothing.

Frederick the Great

37 posted on 04/03/2002 9:05:02 AM PST by JohnGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt; Jim Robinson; A navy Vet; Snow Bunny; Trueblackman; dcwusmc; Neil E. Wright; B4Ranch...
You all can START fighting from here, especially if your a Veteran. Veterans' for Constitutional Restoration is a new organization dedicated to educating our young people about the Bill of Rights, and review legislation at the federal, state, and local levels for Constitutional correctness.

We need help and members, in any case. Please visit our site!

38 posted on 04/03/2002 9:23:49 AM PST by Alas Babylon!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt
Thanks again. I really like the clarity of the logic you share. Proving once again we are never finished learning, even us old farts.
39 posted on 04/03/2002 10:14:51 AM PST by ImpBill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Alas Babylon!;BA Conservative
Thanks for the ping. Will be reading this series often.
40 posted on 04/03/2002 10:54:01 AM PST by dcwusmc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt
He who defends everything, defends nothing.-- Frederick the Great

Nothing ventured, nothing lost-- frederick the adequate

41 posted on 04/03/2002 6:26:09 PM PST by teeman8r
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt
neo-cons have no coherent metapyhsical ideological framework. You mean like Pragmatism?
42 posted on 04/04/2002 8:56:30 AM PST by ffusco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: ffusco
Pragmatism with a capital P? You must be joking.

Pragmatism, the philosophy, looked to avoid the politicizing of the language which neo-Cons have no problem doing, backing wars in foreign lands without the Congress declaring war.

Neo-Cons back the New Deal (socialism) in spirit.

Should we go on about other anti-intellectual arguments the neo-Cons put forward?

43 posted on 04/04/2002 9:05:14 AM PST by JohnGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: B. A. Conservative
Is the United States broken?
Yes
If it is broken, can it be fixed?
Yes
If it can be fixed, how long will it take?
4 years
Who will fix it?
Those who believe in the Constitution
Will there be opposition to fixing it?
Yes
Can the opposition be defeated within a reasonable period of time?
Yes
How long is reasonable?
4 years
How realistic are your expectations about whether it can be fixed?
Sadly, not very....
How realistic are your expectations with regard to time?
Sadly, not very....
If it can't be fixed, have you considered other solutions regarding your disappointment with the present state of affairs in the United States?
Yes
Could other countries offer the freedom you seek?
No
Are there other existing countries that offer more freedom than what is currently offered in the United States?
No
If one state were to secede and offer a Constitutional Republic like the one we had, would you consider living there?
I'd leave today.
How would the United States respond to one state's elective and voluntary peaceable declaration of its own independence from the United States?
Remember the Civil War?
Would the United States be willing to use military action including the killing of peaceful secessionists?
See above
If a Boris Yeltsin took a stand in the state capitol, would the United States send in the tanks and kill him and/or his compatriots?
Yes, Remember Waco?
If the United States were actually willing to use force to surpress a state's secession, would you still want to live in the United States?
No
Would that be the final straw proving to any "doubting Thomas"es that the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States are now empty meaningless words that no longer have validity as ideas?
Yes
Would this be the proof to some that the United States is now no different from any other form of tyranny?
I already suspect this to be the case
If one state successfully and peaceably seceded, would others follow?
Absolutely
Would we see groups of states organizing as regional republics competeing for citizens by offering more freedom than their neighboring nation/states?
Perhaps, not a bad idea....
Could our freedoms and liberties be restored more certainly and more quickly by forcing governments to compete with one another in an effort to please its citizens and/or prospective citizens?
Yes, That is the whole point of Amendment X - (largely ignored)
Does the United States have a monopoly on government?
No
Is the military superiority that the United States possesses over the rest of the world sufficient reason for its citizens to sacrifice their freedoms in the interests of security?
No
Could the military strength and superiority of the United States be obtained through the equivalent of a North American Nato?
Maybe?....
How can we restore our freedoms without secession?
Not as long as we continue to "elect" leaders who do not follow the constitution.
44 posted on 04/04/2002 9:23:14 AM PST by WhiteGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: B. A. Conservative
Not sure how I found this thread, but I am glad I did since there seem to be some great minds at work here. Sadly, my verbal skills are average compared to my analytical skills, and I avoided reading books until I got out of college. With that disclaimer out of the way, I think that the sad truth is that the politicians we rag on so much are mostly a mirror image of the people they represent. I know it sounds trite, but we need to do a real thorough self inspection and fix ourselves first. In a kind of ironic, and wasteful way, 9/11 has served as a partial catalyst for this in my opinion. As far as what we can do politically, I am even more pessimistic. Sometimes I think that this is just the natural cycle of all political systems, and we are powerless to stop it. One thing I do know is that this republic was turned into a democracy in 1913 when the 17th Amendment was ratified, and it didn't take too long for Ben Franklin's warning to come to fruition. Congress was pretty busy that year, they also ratified the income tax amendment.
45 posted on 04/04/2002 2:40:22 PM PST by sixmil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WhiteGuy
"Would we see groups of states organizing as regional republics competing for citizens by offering more freedom than their neighboring nation/states? "

Actually the state doesn't & can't offer anyone anything pertaining to "freedom". Everyone is born free, its man that enslaves man. Everyone on this planet has God given unalienable rights. In these united States we are supposed to have a Federal Constitution that restricts the powers of that Federal government.
A lot of people don't seem to understand one thing, the Constitution for the United States was never meant to be for each individual state. That's why each state has its own constitution that's supposed to secure the rights of the people, not restrict them.

"The Constitution was ordained and established by the people of the U nited States forthemselves, for their own government, and not for the government of the individual States. Each State established a constitution for itself, and in that constitution provided such limitations and restrictions on the powers of its particular government as its judgment dictated. The people of the U nited S tates framed such a government for the U nited S tates as they supposed best adapted to their situation, and best calculated to promote their interests ."

This quote was taken from a book called
"DOCUMENTS AND READINGS IN AMERICAN GOVERNMENT. NATION, STATE, AND LOCAL."
By
John Mabry Mathews
professor of political science in the university of illinois

And

Clarence Arthur Berdahl
Assistant professor of political science in the university of illinois.
1928. Page 79

So one sees the Federal Constitution has nothing to do with the states and the Federal government hasn't the power to force the people of the individual states to do anything, unless the people (by their own ignorance) allow it.

"If one state were to secede and offer a Constitutional Republic like the one we had, would you consider living there?"

Save a small chunk of land for me.

46 posted on 04/04/2002 3:36:37 PM PST by Mikey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Alas Babylon!
As long as a hundred of us remain alive we will never be subject to tyrannical domination, because it is not for glory or for riches or honours that we fight, but for freedom alone which no worthy man loses except with his life. Taken from the “Declaration of Arbroath” 1320
47 posted on 04/04/2002 3:49:41 PM PST by thrcanbonly1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Gov'tMule
bump
48 posted on 04/05/2002 4:52:49 AM PST by JohnGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: B. A. Conservative
Wow! Bookmarked Bump. [Thank you!]
49 posted on 04/05/2002 5:59:16 AM PST by Brian Allen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: B. A. Conservative
Bump!
50 posted on 04/05/2002 9:23:50 AM PST by JavaTheHutt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-104 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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