Posted on 11/28/2013 2:52:40 PM PST by Kaslin
The first on the list would be 1000 babies being aborted every single day.
Roe v. Wade and Obamacare were not based on the Constitution at all. The former invented a “right to privacy” that just doesn’t exist and the latter deemed the power to tax to apply to the act of breathing. The 17th Amendment came about due to significant corruption in the selection of senators by state legislatures.
Maybe an imperfect solution, but it sure as hell wasn’t crammed down anyone’s throats.
Anti 17 = the need for Einsatzgruppen; these are the idiots waiting for Old Country Buffet to open so they can hurry home to “catch the Lawrence Welk program”.
17th Amendment—founders wanted “States”to be represented. The people had “Congress”. The direct election process for senators was pushed by the “socialists”, “progressives”,of the time. Really early “communists”
Let’s do away with the “electoral college” system, also. Then we are NO longer a “REPUBLIC”. We become a European “Parliamentary” system, Changing Gov’ts at will. Italy’s had over 100 since WWII
Please provide or point me to the proof.
You keep using terms such as “unworkable” and “not working”. Please provide an example or two of that being the case at the time the 17th was ratified. The modern-day situations that you keep citing are quite possibly effects of having ratified it rather than reasons for doing so in the first place.
And, yes, in answer to your earlier question, I’m well aware of the amendment process. The ability to repeal mistakes is the reason that we don’t have Prohibition today. One amendment repealed an earlier mistaken one.
The loss of states rights would be appalling.
If you can’t see the stupidity of the 17th amendment then God help you. Seek help.
Bob’s wrong. Better to a have few fascist senators than a whole cabal of them.
You are not a conservative. It is a NATIONAL legislature. You may live in tyranny, but not everyone lives in a hell hole.
Too bad the field marshal wasn’t around to help right the original Constitution. / sarc
Does anyone see the irony arguing against the repeal of the 17th amendment on a web site dedicated to a Free Republic?
Worth repeating a million times in a million places.
If I have to choose between the founders and progressives like you, I will pick the founders.
Now we’ve found the nugget of your misperception, that Senators were invented to represent you. Under the original Constitution, they were to represent the states in order to be a source of further balance of power. I’d recommend a read of Mark Levin’s latest book.
ISTR the 17th was pushed by the early progressives and that it was designed to weaken state powers (T-Bird’s “they were to represent the states in order to be a source of further balance of power”) and centralize power at the federal level.
There is a “cluster” of amendments passed in the early 20th century by progressives flexing their muscles. And that has led to where we are now — a strong fedgov that is leading to a Chavez-like elected (wannabe) dictator.
Yeah, that was posted somewhere on here recently. Noticed they didn’t name the little pyromaniac thug. If I was that lady, I’d get out of the public school teaching biz tout de suite.
That’s a twisted mind to set someone on fire.
Animal.
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.